Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPreliminary Appraisal Report Hydroelectric Potential for 10 SE Villages 1977- ... - - - .. 621 PRELIMINARY APPRAISAL REPORT HYDROELECTR IC POTENTIAL ANGOON CRAIG HOONAH FOR HYDABURG KAKE KASAAN KLAWOCK f I ~<.--=-. ' -_ ~-. ,_;-f! L (-'-r:L.'1 f, KLUKWAN PELICAN YAKUTAT STATE OF ALASKA ALASKA POWER AUTHOR ITY 1977 prepared by LD t:l ROBERT w. RETHERFORD ASSOCIATES POST OFFICE BOX 6410 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502 ·YCO~Y PROPERTY OF: Alaska Power Authority 334 W. 5th Ave. Anchorage, Alaska 9 rz W )lROBERT W. RETHERFORD ASSOCIATES U D \J CONSULTING ENGINEERS TELEPHONE 344·2585 P.O. BOX 6410 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502 TELEX: 626-380 September 21, 1977 605-705 Alaska Power Authority c/o Division of Energy & Power Development 7th Floor, MacKay Building 338 Denali Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith are fifteen copies of the Preliminary Appraisal Report on the Hydroelectric Potential for the Villages of Angoon, Craig, Hoonah, Hydaburg, Kake, Kasaan, Klawock, Klukwan, Pelican and Yakutat. The Haines area was also included by the Engineer because of an interesting hydro potential that appeared suitable for the Haines - Kluk\"an area. This report contains an extensive review and analysis of several potential hydroelectric projects of a size within easy reach of the market area needs. A large portion of the work has been spent in carefully reviewing streamflow records, climatic records and orographic precipitation phenomenon in order to assign a realistic runnoff factor for each drainage basin studied in this report. Water supply is of first importance and means to confirm the Engineer's watershed quantities should be installed at the recommended project sites at an early date. All of the sites contained in the report received an onsite inspection, with the exception of the lake on the Chilkoot River Tributary. Four separate attempts were made to reach the lake by float plane, but dense fog and heavy rain pre- vented viewing the lake and its outlet. The writer has never encountered a more interesting or demanding project. The intriguing possibilities for development of the many sites studied were almost exasperating because the time frame did not permit a more thorough investigation. In viewing potential hydroelectric developments, the Engineer has endeavored to be aware of other uses of the waters involved and has included some comments regarding these uses. There is no doubt that some possible projects have been missed or passed by as not worthy of consideration at this time, which may require further attention in the future. Alaska Power Authority Page 2 September 21, 1977 605-705 I believe this report is timely and I earnestly hope it provides the sound basis needed to develop additional power from a renewable resource. Sincerely, ROBERT W. RETHERFORD ASSOCIATES G~/f(~ Carl H. Steeby, P.E. Principle Civil Engineer CHS:ng Encl. ACKNOWLEDGEI1ENT S \~ithout the splendid cooperation of all local people in the villages and the T-HREA personnel in Juneau, the job could not have been done during the time available. The whole- hearted support and interest of local officials and the enthusiasm of most local citizens regarding potential hydro- electric development were important factors in facilitating this report. Robert W. Retherford Associates therefore wishes to acknow- ledge gratefully the excellent cooperation tendered by Federal and State agencies and most particularly by those listed below: Robert Loescher, Juneau Robert Nartin, Juneau Lorena O'Conner, Juneau Robert Williams, Juneau Al Macasaet, Mayor, Klawock Marvin Yoder, Mayor, Craig Robert Sanderson, Mayor, Hydaburg Fireweed Lodge, Klawock Thomas Whitmarsh, Pelican Miles Murphy, Mayor, Hoonah Huna Totem, Hoonah Marvin Kadake, Kake Larry Powell, Mayor, Yakutat John Bremner, Yakutat Alex Brogel, Yakutat Yak-Tat Kwaan, Inc., Yakutat Tommy Katzeck, Haines Dick Hotch, Mayor, Klukwan LAB Flying Service, Juneau Ketchikan Air, Ketchikan Island Air, Petersburg Rocky, Angoon TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I: Introduction Authorization Scope of Services Section II: General Angoon Craig Hoonah Hydaburg Kake Kasaan Klawock Klukwan Pelican Yakutat Section III: Existing Systems Projected Power Requirements and Fuel Costs General • . . . . • . . References Consulted ...... . Fuel Costs • . . . . Projections . • . . . . . . . . . . • Section IV: Evaluation of Hydroelectric Resources General .•.•... Selected Projects Angoon Section V: Craig, Hydaburg and Klawock. Hoonah Kake Kasaan Klukwan Pelican Yakutat -Haines Preliminary Cost Estimates General Tributary . . . . . . . Thayer Creek Black Bear Lake Reynolds Creek Chilkoot River Gartina Creek Gunnuk Creek Pelican Creek . . . . ~ . . . . . . 1 1 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 6 7 8 8 9 17 18 18 23 30 33 38 38 42 46 47 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 Section VI: Recommendations General . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Angoon . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... Craig, Hydaburg and Klawock •.......•.. Haines and Klukwan . . . •. ... .... Hoonah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kasaan . . . Kake Pelican Yakutat . section VII: Appendix Pocket (contains "Location '& Isohyetal Map" of Southeast Alaska) 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 64 SECTION I Introduction 1. Authorization The work described in this report was authorized by the Alaska Power Authority by an agreement for Engineering Consulting services dated July 10, 1977. 2. Scope of Services The scope of services involves preparation of a Pre- liminary Appraisal Report on the hydroelectric potential for the Villages of Angoon, Craig, Hoonah, Hydaburg, Kake, Kasaan, Klawock, Klukwan, Pelican and Yakutat. The report would be the basis for the selection of future hydroelectric development projects. The specific engineering services performed for the report are as follows: a. Data Collection. (1) Utility operations. (2) Regional and site-specific studies. (3) Streamflow records and climatic records. (4) Environmental data. (5) Specific Contacts with interested agencies, private firms and individuals. b. Survey of Existing Systems. Examine existing facilities to establish dependable capacity and condition of system. c. Power Requirements Forecast. Prepare preliminary power requirements for the villages through 1995. d. Evaluation of ~ydroelectric Resources. (1) Review of collected data --determine hydrol- ogy, runoff, storage requirements, and geology. (2) Site reconnaissance --physical ~ite recon- naissance of selected hydroelectric project alternatives and related transmission systems. Layout of principal generation and trans- -1- mission systems. A general description of the project capacity. (3) Preliminary cost estimates. (4) Environmental concerns. e. Recommendations. Firm recommendations for the most favorable system generation development program for each village. -2- SECTION II Existing Systems 1. General The power needs of Angoon, Hoonah, Kake, Klawock and Kasaan are currently being served by the Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority. The power needs of Craig and Hydaburg are served by Alaska Power and Telephone, Pelican by Pelican Utility Company, and Yakutat by Yakutat Power, Inc.; all private firms. Klukwan is served by the City of Klukwan; a municipal system. with the exception of Pelican, all of the utilities are wholly dependent on diesel generation. The Pelican Utility Company operates a small hydroelectric plant located on Pelican Creek. 2. Angoon The existing diesel generation plant consists of one 300 kW and two 100 kW units. The T-HREA is replacing the two 100 kW units with another new 300 kW unit .. The firm installed capacity will be 300 kW. The distribution system is a 7.2/12.47 kV underground system that was improperly installed. Much of the underground cable is lying on the surface of the ground and in places is visible on street crossings. Many outages have occurred because of grader cutting the cable during street maintenance. The T-HREA has plans for installing a new overhead distribution system. 3. Craig The Alaska Power and Telephone Company was in the process of installing two new units in Craig and removing one 200 kW unit to be installed in Hydaburg. Upon completion of the work underway, Craig will have an installed capacity of 1015 kW in four units (2-200 kW, 1-300 kW, and 1-315 kW) and will have a firm capacity of 700 kW. The original plan was to install two new 300 kW and one 315 kW diesel units but one of the 300 kW units was damaged in shipment. Another 300 kW unit will be installed when a replacement is available. The complaints of frequent power fluctuations and the concerns of the City Council about reserve capacity should be alleviated upon completion of the construction. -3- 4. Hoonah The T-HREA is completely rebuilding the Hoonah generation and distribution system. A nearly completed powerhouse will contain two new 600 kw diesel units and the existing 500 kW unit now serving the city. The installed capacity of the plant will be 1700 kW and will have a firm capacity of 1100 kW. The new 7.2/12.47 kV distribution system is being constructed in accordance with REA construction standards. 5. Hydaburg The City of Hydaburg is provided with electric service by Alaska Power and Telephone. Numerous complaints were forthcoming from the citizens about frequent power outages due to overloading the generating facilities. The installed capacity in the AP&T plant was two 75 kW and one 90 kW diesel units. AP&T is removing one of the 200 k\v units in Craig and plans are to have it installed in Hydaburg to meet the winter "77-78" peak load. This new installation will result in an installed capacity 440 kW and a firm capacity of 240 kW. The Cooperative Cannery and Cold Storage provides its own generation needs with two 500 kW diesel units housed in a well maintained metal building. 6. Kake The City of Kake is provided with electric service by T-HREA. T-HREA presently have two 500 kw units installed in a new powerhouse and are installing two new 300 kW units for an installed capacity of 1600 kw and a firm capacity of 1100 kW. A complete new distribution system is being installed. The City of Kake will have a very reliable system upon completion of the work being performed by T-HREA. 7. Kasaan The T-HREA is installing an electrical system in the village of Kasaan. The installed capacity will be 180 kW in two 90 kw diesel units. The firm capacity will be 90 kW. A new 2400 kV underground distribution system is also being installed. 8. Klawock The City of Klawock is provided with electrical service by T-HREA. The installed generating capacity is 1000 kW in two 500 kw units. A third 300 k~v unit is being installed for a total of 1300 kW and a firm capacity of 800 kW. The distribution system of 7.2/12.47 kV has been upgraded to REA standards. -4-' 9. Klukwan The electrical service in Klukwan is provided by the municipality. Inspection of the powerplant revealed one 210 kW unit in operation, one 75 kW unit that looked as if it might run, one 75 kW unit that was junked and a new 400 kW unit still crated. The 210 kW unit was producing approximately 40 kW at 11:40 a.m. on July 19, 1977. It would appear that the new 400 kW unit is greatly oversized for the community. The condition of the generation and distribution facilities were described in a 1976 Power Requirement Study. "The powerhouse is a dilapidated wooden structure with dirt floor that could not by any stretch of the imagination be considered adequate ..•. Lines through the town are also in poor shape with undersized service drops and service entrances that do not meet code requirements. Line losses would be excessive and consumers suffer from low voltage. "The powerhouse was found unlocked, unattended and the only means of holding the entrance door closed was a big rock. Pools of oil were standing on the dirt floor, bare energized lines were in evidence and nearly the complete back wall of the powerhouse was knocked out. 10. Pelican The Pelican utility Company has an installed capacity of 1200 kW, 500 kW in hydro and 700 kW in diesel. The dependable installed capacity is 1055 kW and the firm capacity is 700 kW. The distribution system and diesel generation is in good condition. The hydroelectric plant equipment consists of a 20-inch 720 RPM, 700 horsepower turbine connected to a 625 kVA, 500 kW, 300 volt generator. The equipment was manufactured in 1907 and installed at Pelican Creek circa 1942. A timber crib dam 22 feet high and 135 feet long was constructed at the head of a falls approx- imately 1200 feet from tidewater creating a forebay with a surface area of 17.5 acres at the 130-foot elevation. The water is conveyed in an open wood flume 686-feet long and a tunnel 90 feet long to a wood intake box, and then through a 36" diameter wood-stave penstock 330 feet long to the powerhouse. The potable water supply for the City of Pelican is obtained from Pelican Creek and with the many leaks in the dam, there is insufficient water for electrical generation during four or five months each winter. The equipment appears to be in rather poor shape and according to the operator, maximum capability of the plant \vas about 100 amps at 2400 V. or approximately 355 kW. It was reported that at least one 200 kW diesel unit must be on line at all times. Estimated peak demand of 800 kyv was reported. -5- 11. Yakutat The Yakutat Power Inc. is the sole supplier of electrical power in the City of Yakutat and vicinity. The power- house contains four diesel electric generating units with a nameplate capacity of 2,025 kW consisting of one 250 kW unit, one 375 kW unit, one 600 kW unit and one 800 kW unit. Firm capacity of the plant is 1425 kW. The generation and distribution systems are generally in good condition. -6- SECTION III Projected Power Requirements and Fuel Costs 1. General In this section, the economic growth assumptions for the study area is combined with the intensity of elec- tricity use assumptions to produce the estimates of future electricity demands. Several things must be kept in mind while analyzing these projections. First, none of the projections can be considered the most likely to happen. Typically, in years past both nationally and within the study area, projections of electricity demand did very well by merely assuming a continuation of past trends. This is not adequate for this study for two reasons. The real price of elec- tricity relative to other goods has in recent years reversed its historic downward trend and can be expected to continue rising relative to other prices for several years. Thus, consumption patterns based upon low prices may not continue in periods of high prices. In addition, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act has changed the small but rapidly growing economy thus making the task of projecting the economic growth very difficult. Economic developments which could be absorbed in other areas without appreciably affecting the rate of economic growth have much more impact on these villages because of their size. The narrow base of the economy, centered upon natural resources, makes future projections particularly difficult. Growth in the villages studied is expected to be discontinous. Therefore, each village projection was made based on conservative estimates of growth demand in the long run. The estimates were not made to detect short-run changes, but to present a conservative consistent picture of development over a long period of time. Major projects which might occur and significantly impact economic development have not been included because to be thorough, a projection would need to be performed both including and excluding each project. Such a multiplicity of projections would result in a large amount of data of questionable value to this study. The projections presented here are felt to fairly represent reasonable bounds of future growth. -7- 2. References Consulted The references used in developing the projected power requirements are: a. Rural Electrifications Administration 1976 Power Requirement Studies for: (1) Angoon (2) Hoonah (3) Kake (4) Kasaan (5) Klawock (6) Klukwan b. Tlingit-Haida Regional Electric Authority REA Loan Application, 1976. c. R. W. Beck and Associates Economic Aspects of Acquisition of Yakutat Power, Inc. by Tlingit- Haida Regional Electrical Authority, 1976. d. Alaska Public Utilities Commission. e. Electric Power in Alaska, 1976-1995, Institute of Social and Economic Research, 1976. f. Alaska Electric Power Statistics, 1960-1976, Alaska Power Administration, 1977. g. Alaska Power and Telephone Company, Port Townsend, washington. 3. Fuel Costs The fuel costs are based on current prices at Angoon, craig, Hoonah, Hydaburg, Kake, Kasaan, Klawock, and Yakutat. The price of fuel for Pelican, Klukwan and Haines have been assumed for this study as they are not readily available to the writer. The fuel costs were escalated at 7% per year throughout the study period. Some economists prefer to use.an escalation rate of 10% to 1980 and thereafter to increase at the rate of 6 percent. If this rate of escalation were used, the cost of fuel would be higher until 1987 and lower through the remaining study period with a total fuel cost about equal. It would, however, give 'hydro devel-· opment a definite boost by increasing the annual costs of diesel generation in the years to 1987. -8- The fuel usage per kWh generated has been estimated by comparing past usage, size of units installed and to be installed and the kWh to be generated at each plant. A range from 8 kWh per gallon for Kasaan and Klukwan to 13 kWh per gallon for Haines has been used. 4. Projections The following tabulations are the projections for kW demand, kWh requirements, gallons of fuel required, cost of fuel per gallon, total fuel cost and the fuel cost per kWh for the ten villages in this study and for. the Haines Light and Power Company. -9- PROJECTED POWER AND FUEL REQUIREMENTS ANGOON kW kWh Gal. Fuel Cost of Total Fuel Cost Year Demand Requirement Required Fuel-Gal. Fuel Cost per kWh 1977 334 1,293,066 117,551 0.479 56,307 0.044 1978 404 1,564,440 142,222 0.513 72,960 0.047 1979 424 1,640,773 149,161 0.548 81,740 0.050 1980 442 1,709,200 155,382 0.587 91,209 0.053 1981 460 1, 778 t 213 161,656 0.628 101,520 0.057 1982 478 1,847,533 167,958 0.672 112,868 0.061 1983 497 1,918,760 174,433 0.719 125,417 0.065 1984 516 1,991,173 181,016 0.769 139,201 0.070 1985 536 2,065,000 187,727 0.823 154,499 0.075 1986 562 2,168,250 197,114 0.880 173,460 0.080 1987 590 2,276,663 206,969 0.942 194,965 0.086 1988 619 2,390,496 217,318 1.008 219,057 0.092 1989 650 2,510,020 228,184 1.079 246,211 0.098 1990 683 -2,635,521 239,593 1.154 276,490 0.105 1991 717 2,767,297 251,572 1. 235 310,691 0.112 1992 753 2,905,662 264,151 1. 321 348,943 0.120 1993 791 3,050,945 277,359 1. 414 392,186 0.129 1994 830 3,203,493 291,227 1. 513 440,626 0.138 1995 872 3,363,667 305,788 1.619 495,071 0.147 11 kWh/Gal. CRAIG 1977 427 1,650,286 150,026 0.439 65,861 0.040 1978 449 1,732,800 157,527 0.470 74,038 0.043 1979 471 1,819,440 165,404 0.503 83,198 0.046 1980 495 1,910,412 173,674 0.538 93,437 0.049 1981 520 2,005,933 182,358 0.575 104,856 0.052 1982 546 2,106,230 191,475 0.616 117,949 0.056 1983 573 2,211,541 201,049 0.659 132,491 0.060 1984 602 2,322,118 211,102 0.705 148,827 0.064 1985 632 2,438,224 221,657 0.754 167,129 0.068 1986 663 2,560,135 232,740 0.807 187,821 0.073 1987 697 2,688,142 244,377 0.864 211,141 0.079 1988 731 2,822,549 256,595 0.924 237,094 0.084 1989 768 2,963,677 269,425 0.989 266,462 0.090 1990 806 3,111,860 282,896 1. 058 299,369 0.096 1991 847 3,267,745 297,068 1.132 336,281 0.103 1992 889 3,430,826 311,893 1.211 377,703 0.110 1993 933 3,602,367 327,488 1. 296 424,424 0.118 1994 980 3,782,486 343,862 1. 387 476,937 0.126 1995 1,029 3,971,610 361,055 1.484; 535,$06 0.135 11 kWh/Gal. 1977 fuel costs escalated at 7% per year. -10- PROJECTED POWER AND FUEL REQUIREMENTS HOONAH kW kWh Gal. Fuel Cost of Total Fuel Cost Year Demand Requirement Required Fuel-Gal. Fuel Cost per kWh 1977 909 3,504,106 292,009 0.479 139,872 0.040 1978 956 3,683,560 306,963 0.513 157,472 0.043 1979 1011 3,899,026 324,919 0.548 178,056 0.046 1980 1106 4,262,733 355,228 0.587 208,519 0.049 1981 1152 4,440,707 370,059 0.628 232,397 0.052 1982 1199 4,619,800 384,983 0.672 258,709 0.056 1983 1247 4,807,693 400,641 0.719 288,001 0.060 1984 1297 4,999,587 416,632 0.769 320,527 0.064 1985 1348 5,197,880 433,157 0.823 356,488 0.069 1986 1401 5,405,795 450,483 0.880 396,425 0.073 1987 1457 5,622,027 468,502 0.942 441,329 0.078 1988 1515 5,846,908 487,242 1.008 491,140 0.084 1989 1576 6,080,784 506,732 1.079 546,764 0.090 1990 1639 6,324,016 527,001 1.154 608,159 0.096 1991 1704 6,576,976 548,081 1. 235 676,880 0.103 1992 1772 6,840,055 570,005 1. 321 752,977 0.110 1993 1844 7,113,658 592,805 1.414 838,226 0.118 1994 1917 7,398,204 616,517 1.513 932,790 0.126 1995 1994 7,694,132 641,178 1. 619 1,038,067 0.135 12 kWh/Gal. HYDABURG (without cannery and cold storage) 1977 262 1,148,167 114,817 0.429 49,256 0.043 1978 318 1,228,539 122,854 0.459 56,390 0.046 1979 341 1,314,537 131,454 0.491 64,544 0.049 1980 364 1,406,555 140,656 0.526 73,985 0.053 1981 386 1,490,948 149,095 0.562 83,791 0.056 1982 410 1,580,405 158,041 0.602 95,141 0.060 1983 434 1,675,230 167,523 0.644 107,885 0.064 1984 460 1,775,743 177,574 0.689 122,348 0.069 1985 488 1,882,288 188,229 0.737 138,725 0.074 1986 517 1,995,225 199,523 0.789 157,424 0.079 1987 548 2,114,939 211,494 0.844 178,501 0.084 1988 581 2,241,835 224,184 0.903 202,438 0.090 1989 616 2,376,345 237,635 0.966 229,555 0.097 1990 653 2,518,926 251,893 1. 034 260,457 0.103 1991 692 2,670,061 267,006 1.106 295,309 0.111 1992 733 2,830,265 283,027 1.184 335,104 0.118 1993 777 3,000,081 300,008 1. 266 379,810 0.127 1994 824 3,180,086 318,009 1. 355 430,902 0.136 1995 874 3,370,891 337,089 1.450 488,779 0.145 10 k\fu/Gal. 1977 fuel costs escalated at 7% per year. -11- PROJECTED POWER AND FUEL REQUIREMENTS KAKE kW kWh Gal. Fuel Cost of Total Fuel Cost Year Demand Requirement Required Fuel-Gal. Fuel cost per kWh 1977 990 3,816,680 346,971 0.440 152,667 0.040 1978 1040 4,010,430 364,585 0.471 171,720 0.043 1979 1085 4,182,960 380,269 0.504 191,656 0.046 1980 1129 4,351,570 395,597 0.539 213,227 0.049 1981 1165 4,490,100 408,191 0.577 235,526 0.052 1982 1202 4,631,600 421,055 0.617 259,791 0.056 1983 1240 4,777,300 434,300 0.660 286,638 0.060 1984 1278 4,927,300 447,936 0.707 316,691 0.064 1985 1318 5,081,600 461,964 0.756 349,245 0.069 1986 1383 5,335,680 485,062 0.809 392,415 0.074 1987 1452 5,602,464 09,315 0.866 441,067 0.079 1988 1524 5,882,587 534,781 0.926 495,207 0.084 1989 1601 6,176,717 561,520 0.991 556,466 0.090 1990 1681 6,485,552 589,596 1.060 624,971 0.096 1991 1765 6,809,830 619,075 1.135 702,651 0.103 1992 1853 7,150,322 650,029 1.214 789,136 0.110 1993 1946 7,507,838 682,531 1.299 886,607 0.118 1994 2043 7,883,229 716,657 1. 390 996,153 0.126 1995 2145 8,277,391 752,490 1.487 1,118,953 0.135 11 kWh/Gal. KASAAN 1977 56 215,530 26,941 0.615 16,569 0.077 1978 60 228,630 28,579 0.658 18,805 0.082 1979 63 242,390 30,299 0.704 21,330 0.088 1980 67 256,810 32,101 0.753 24,172 0.094 1981 71 271,900 33,988 0.806 27,394 0.101 1982 75 287,670 35,959 0.863 31,032 0.108 1983 79 304,100 38,013 0.923 35,086 0.115 1984 84 321,200 40,150 0.988 39,668 0.123 1985 88 338,950 42,369 1.057 44,784 0.132 1986 92 355,898 44,487 1.131 50,315 0.141 1987 97 373,692 46,712 1. 210 56,521 0.151 1988 102 392,377 49,047 1. 294 63,467 0.162 1989 107 411,996 51,500 1. 385 71,327 0.173 1990 112 432,596 54,075 1.482 80,138 0.185 1991 118 454,225 56,778 1. 586 90,050 0.198 1992 124 476,937 59,617 1. 697 101,170 0.212 1993 130 500,784 62,598 1. 816 113,678 0.227 1994 136 525,823 65,728 1.943 127,709 0.243 1995 143 552,114 69,014 2.079 143,481 0.260 8 kWh/Gal. 1977 fuel costs escalated at 7% per year. -12- Year 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 11 kW Demand 752 779 808 839 868 899 931 964 999 1036 1075 1116 1159 1204 1251 1301 1354 1409 1467 kWh/Gal. 1977 2335 1978 2451 1979 2574 1980 2703 1981 2838 1982 2980 1983 3129 1984 3285 1985 3449 1986 3622 1987 3803 1988 3955 1989 4113 1990 4278 1991 4449 1992 4627 1993 4812 1994 5004 1995 5204 13 kWh/Gal. PROJECTED POWER AND FUEL REQUIREMENTS HYDABURG (with cannery and cold storage) kWh Requirement 2,900,167 3,006,819 3,119,491 3,238,584 3,350,457 3,467,807 3,590,943 3,720,191 3,855,903 3,998,444 4,148,207 4,305,602 4,471,068 4,645,070 4,828,097 5,020,672 5,223,344 5,436,698 5,661,352 9,009,000 9,459,450 9,932,423 10,429,044 10,950,496 11,498,021 12,072,922 12,676,568 Gal. Fuel Required 263,652 273,347 283,590 294,417 304,587 315,255 326,449 338,199 350,537 363,495 377,110 391,418 406,461 422,279 438,918 456,425 474,849 494,245 514,668 HAINES 693,000 727,650 764,033 802,234 842,346 884,463 928,686 975,121 13,310,396 1,023,877 13,975,916 1,075,070 14,674,712 1,128,824 15,261,700 1,173,977 15,872,169 1,220,936 16,507,055 1,269,773 17,167,337 1,320,564 17,854,031 1,373,387 18,568,192 1,428,322 19,310,920 1,485,455 20,083,357 1,544,874 * Assumed 1977 fuel cost. Cost of Fuel-Gal. 0.429 0.459 0.491 0.526 0.562 0.602 0.644 0.689 0.737 0.789 0.844 0.903 0.966 1.034 1.106 1.184 1. 266 1. 355 1.450 0.400* 0.428 0.458 0.490 0.524 0.561 0.600 0.642 0.687 0.735 0.787 0.842 0.901 0.964 1. 031 1.104 1.181 1. 264 1.352 Total Fuel Cost 113,107 125,466 139,243 154,863 171,178 189,784 210,233 233,019. 258,346 286,797 318,281 353,451 392,641 436,637 485,443 540,407 601,159 669,702 746,269 277,200 311,434 349,927 393,095 441,389 496,184 557,212 626,027 703,403 790,177 888,384 988,489 1,100,063 1,224,062 1,361,502 1,516,219 1,686,849 1,877,616 2,088,669 NOTE: Recent information reveals that 705,626 gallons of fuel were consumed at the Haines Light and Power Company in 1976 and 7,514,969 kWh's were sold. Fuel costs from December 19, 1976 Fuel Cost per kWh 0.039 Q.O.42 0.045 0.048 0.051 Q.05.5. 0.059. 0 .• 0.63 0.067 0.072 0.077 0.082 0.088 0.094 0.101 0.108 0.115 0.123 0.132 0.031 0.033 0.035 0.038 0.040 0.043 0.046 0.049 0.053 0.057 0.061 0.065 0.069 0.074 0.079 0.085 0.091 0.097 0.104 to March 20, 1977 was $0.391 per gallon. (APUC, September 16, 1977) -13- PROJECTED POWER AND FUEL REQUIREMENTS KLAWOCK kW kWh Gal. Fuel Cost of Total Fuel Cost Year Demand Requirement Required Fuel-Gal. Fuel Cost per kWh 1977 586 2,259,133 205,375 0.479 98,375 0.044 1978 616 2,374,880 215,898 0.512 1l0,540 0.047 1979 636 2,451,067 222,824 0.548 122,108 0.050 1980 769 2,964,707 269,519 0.587 158,208 0.053 1981 796 3,067,947 278,904 0.628 175,152 0.057 1982 823 3,173,880 288,535 0.672 193,896 0.061 1983 852 3,282,453 298,405 0.719 214,553 0.065 1984 880 3,393,707 308,519 0.769 237,251 0.070 1985 910 3,507,627 318,875 0.823 262,434 0.075 1986 954 3,683,008 334,819 0.881 294,975 0.080 1987 1002 3,867,159 351,560 0.942 331,169 0.086 1988 1052 4,060,517 369,138 1. 008 372,091 0.092 1989 1105 4,263,543 387,595 1. 079 418,215 0.098 1990 1160 4,476,720 406,975 1.154 469,649 0.105 1991 1218 4,700,556 427,323 1. 235 527,744 0.112 1992 1279 4,935,583 448,689 1. 322 593,167 0.120 1993 1343 5,182,363 471,124 1.414 666,169 0.129 1994 1410 5,441,480 494,680 1. 513 748,451 0.138 1995 1481 5,713,555 519,414 1.619 840,931 0.147 11 kWh/GaL KLUKWAN 1977 104 398,190 49,774 0.500 24,887 0.063 1978 110 421,650 52,706 0.535 28,198 0.067 1979 116 445,650 55,706 0.572 31,864 0.072 1980 123 470,190 58,774 0.613 36,028 0.077 1981 129 495,250 61,906 0.655 40,549 0.082 1982 135 520,850 65,106 0.701 45,639 0.088 1983 143 547,000 68,375 0.750 51,281 0.094 1984 149 573,650 71,706 0.803 57,580 0.100 1985 156 600,850 75,106 0.859 64,516 0.107 1986 163 629,090 78,636 0.919 72,267 0.115 1987 171 658,657 82,332 0.984 81,015 0.123 1988 179 689,614 86,202 1.052 90,684 0.131 1989 187 722,026 90,253 1.126 101,625 0.141 1990 196 755,961 94,495 1. 205 113,867 0.151 1991 205 791,491 98,936 1. 289 127,529 0.161 1992 215 828,691 103,586 1.380 142,949 0.172 1993 225 867,640 108,455 1.476 160,080 0.185 1994 235 908,419 113,552 1.579 179,299 0.197 1995 246 951,115 118,889 1. 690 200,923 0.211 8 kWh/Gal. 1977 fuel costs escalated at 7% per year. -14- PROJECTED POWER AND FUEL REQUIREMENTS PELICAN kW kWh Gal. Fuel Cost of ',I'otal, ;Fuel, Cost. Year Demand Requirement Required* Fuel-Gal. Fuel Cost. per; kWh 1977 647 2,496,235 124,624 0.479 59 t 695 0.048 1978 673 2,596,084 134,608 0.513 69,054 0.051 1979 700 2,699,928 144,993 0.548 29,456 0.055 1980 728 2,807,925 155,793 0.587 91,450 0.059 1981 757 2,920,242 167,024 0.628 104,891 0.063 1982 787 3,037,052 178,705 0.672 120,090 0.067 1983 818 3,158,534 190,853 0.719 137,223 0.072 1984 851 3,284,875 203,488 0.769 156,482 0.077 1985 885 3,416,270 216,627 0.823 178,284 0.082 1986 921 3,552,921 230,292 0.880 202,657 0.088 1987 958 3,695,038 244,504 0.942 230,323 0.094 1988 996 3,842,839 259,284 1.008 261,358 0.101 1989 1,036 3,996,553 274,655 1.079 296,353 0.108 1990 1,077 4,156,415 290,642 1.154 335,401 0.115 1991 1,120 4,322,671 307,267 1. 235 379,475 0.124 1992 1,165 4,495,578 324,558 1. 321 428,741 0.132 1993 1,212 4,675,401 342,540 1.414 484,352 0.141 1994 1,260 4,862,417 361,242 1.513 546,559 0.151 1995 '1,310 5,056,914 380,691 1. 619 616,339 0.162 10 kWh/Gal. * Assumes 1,250,000 kWh from existing hydro. YAKUTAT 1977 1155 4,457,857 371,488 0.476 176,828 0.040 1978 1213 4,680,750 390,063 0.509 198,542 0.042 1979 1274 4,914,787 409,566 0.545 223,213 0.045 1980 1337 5,160,527 430,044 0.583 250,716 0.049 1981 1404 5,418,553 451,546 0.624 281,765 0.052 1982 1460 5,635,295 469,608 0.668 313,698 0.056 1983 1519 5,860,707 488,392 0.714 348,712 0.060 1984 1579 6,095,135 507,928 0.764 388,057 0.064 1985 1643 6,338,941 528,245 0.818 432,104 0.068 1986 1708 6,592,498 549,375 0.875 480,703 0.073 1987 1777 6,856,198 571,350 0.936 534,783 0.078 1988 1848 4,130,446 594,204 1.002 595,392 0.084 1989 1922 7,415,664 617,972 1.072 662,466 0.089 1990 1999 7,712,290 642,691 1.147 737,166 0.096 1991 2078 8,020,782 668,399 1.227 820,125 0.102 1992 2162 8,341,613 695,134 1.313 912,711 0.109 1993 2248 8,675,278 722,940 1.405 1,015,730 0.117 1994 2338 9,022,289 751,857 -1. 504 1,130,794 0.125 1995 2432 9,383,181 781,932 1. 609 1,258,128 0.134 12 kWh/Gal. 1977 fuel costs escalated at 7% per year. -15- ANNUAL FUEL COSTS CRAIG & CRAIG, KLAWOCK YEAR CRAIG KLAWOCK HYDABURG KLAWOCK & HYDABURG* 1977 65,861 98,375 113,107 164,236 277,343 1978 74,038 110,540 125,466 184,578 310,044 1979 83,198 122,108 139,243 205,306 344,549 1980 93,437 158,208 154,863 251,645 406,508 1981 104,856 175,152 171,178 280,008 451,186 1982 117,949 193,896 189,784 311,845 501,629 1983 132,491 214,553 210,233 347,044 557,277 1984 148,827 237,251 233,019 386,078 619,097 1985 167,129 262,434 258,346 429,563 687,909 1986 187,821 294,975 286,797 482,796 769,593 1987 211,141 331,169 318,281 542,310 860,591 1988 237,094 372,091 353,451 609,185 962,636 1989 266,462 418,215 392,641 684,677 1,077,318 1990 299,369 469,649 436,637 769,018 1,205,655 1991 336,281 527,744 485,443 864,025 1,349,468 1992 377,703 593,167 540,407 970,870 1,511,277 1993 424,424 666,169 601,159 1,090,593 1,691,752 1994 476,937 748,451 669,702 1,225,388 1,895,090 1995 535,806 840,931 746,269 1,376,737 2,123,006 MWH REQUIREMENTS 1977 1,650 2,260 2,900 3,910 6,810 1978 1,730 2,370 3,010 4,100 7,110 1979 1,820 2,450 3,120 4,270 7,390 1980 1,910 2,960 3,240 4,870 8,110 1981 2,010 3,070 3,350 5,080 8,430 1982 2,110 3,170 3,470 5,280 8,750 1983 2,210 3,280 3,590 5,490 9,080 1984 2,320 3,390 3,720 5,710 9,430 1985 2,440 3,510 3,860 5,950 9,810 1986 2,560 3,680 4,000 6,240 10,240 1987 2,690 3,870 4,150 6,560 10,710 1988 2,820 4,060 4,310 6,880 11,190 1989 2,960 4,260 4,470 7,220 11,690 1990 3,110 4,480 4,650 7,590 12240 1991 3,270 4,700 4,830 7,970 12,800 1992 3,430 4,940 5,020 8,370 13,390 1993 3,600 5,180 5,220 8,780 14,000 1994 3,780 5,440 5,440 9,220 14,660 1995 3,970 5,710 5,660 9,680 15,340 *Includes cannery and cold storage -16- SECTION IV Evaluation of Hydroelectric Resources 1. General Most of the villages in this study have the opportunity for reducing their dependence on expensive diesel fuel by developing hydroelectric sites. With the exception of Craig, Klawock and Hydaburg, there is little potential for transmission interties because of the great distances between load centers, the rugged mountainous terrain, and the numerous inland waterways. The villages with potential hydroelectric sites are expected to grow substantially over the time period encompassed in this study, but not sufficiently in all cases to alter the optimum mix of generating facilities, namely a combination of hydro and diesel. Within the period covered by this study, extending through 1995, selection of hydroelectric sites for development was made using the following criteria: a. Sites must be located within a technically and economically feasible transmission range of existing and projected load centers. This criterion was applied prior to the preparation of project cost estimates, using typical design criteria and an order-of-magnitude cost factor per unit of required transmission. As a result projects were selected within a relatively short radii of indicated load centers. b. The capacity of sites designated for development must be consistent with electricity demand of target load centers. It was recognized that unless project development cost is extremely low, the cost of electricity produced by most hydro projects would not be competitive if their capacity cannot be fully utilized within a 5 to lO-year load growth. c. Sites designated may not have previously identified or otherwise obvious adverse environmental impacts which would weigh against their benefits to the community. This criterion does not imply that the environmental impact of any project were measured in economic terms, or balanced dollar for dollar against the -17- economic value of electricity supply to the community. It is evident that these selection criteria provide that the designated projects are the most deserving of further study and planning as practical additions to the power systems. In preparing the project descriptions and order-of- magnitude cost estimates, a collection was made of USGS maps (scale 1:63,360) of each area, previous reports, Weather Bureau records, U.S.G.S. stream gaging records and other pertinent data. A map of Southeast Alaska was prepared showing the location of stream gaging stations and lines of equal average annual precipitation (isohyetal lines) along with a tabulation of the gaging stations showing the drainage area, years of record, average discharge and discharge per square mile. This map was used to estimate the runoff for sites selected with regard to their location and average basin elevation. Preliminary sites were selected from the USGS maps, drainage basin areas determined, storage requirements estimated, dam sites or natural reservoirs selected and the potential power available was calculated in accord- ance with the above listed criteria. Subsequent to the office selection, a reconnaissance of each site was made to verify the selection and to make a cursory inspection of the area in terms of geology, physical features, construction materials locally available, access, dock facilities, roads, environmental concerns and existing generating facilities. It is believed that the results of these investigations and analysis are a realistic rating of potential hydro- electric projects, offering a sound basis for a choice of development. 2. Selected Projects The following projects are listed alphabetically with the exception of the Craig-Hydaburg-Klawock area and the Haines-Klukwan area. A complete description of each project is made in this Section and an economic analysis of each project is found in Section V. A. Angoon Two potential sites were selected for the Angoon area. The first was a tidal power site in Kootzn~hoo Inlet. Since interest has been expressed in a small tidal power project, this site was selected as showing the most promise for such development. -18- Kootznahoo Inlet Kootznahoo Inlet, in latitude 57°30'N and longitude l34°35'W, is constricted to an approximate width of 1400 feet between the village of Angoon and Turn Point as shown on Plate 1. Although spring tides may run as high as 23 feet, the mean tidal range is only 10.6 feet. From preliminary calculations it appears that a total installation of 30 MW could be considered for this site. The installation of ten 3 MW units would be appropriate for this site. Each unit would be large in physical size due to the low operating head and would have a low rated capacity. These factors would result in very high equipment costs. Additional details on the requirements and information on the existing electrical system of Angoon are included in Sections II and III of this report. Although a cost estimate was not developed, it is evident that this 30 MW low head plant would not be economically attractive at this time. Since only a small part of one unit could be used in Angoon, a smaller project installation would result in even higher average power costs. Development of Kootznahoo Inlet for power generation is just too ambitious for the Angoon market. Thayer Creek The mouth of Thayer Creek, in latitude 57°35'N and longitude l34°37'W, enters Chatham Strait 5.4 miles north by water from Angoon. Thayer Lake with a surface area of 2784 acres provides considerable natural regu- lation to the flow in Thayer Creek. The creek has a total drainage area of 62 square miles to a dam site 0.2 miles upstream from the mouth. The dam site is at the head of a 50 foot waterfall in a narrow canyon. The mean discharge is estimated at 465 cubic feet per second based on an average discharge of 7.5 cfs per square mlle. The nominal discharge is estimated at 90 cfs due to some natural regulation in Thayer Lake. It is felt that only a small amount of regulation can be obtained from a forebay dam. A dam at the head of the falls 50 feet high with a crest of approximately 150 feet long would provide a mean effective head of 90 feet. A concrete arch dam is recommended for the site. Large quantities of excellent sand and gravel are available near the mouth of the creek. A tunnel approximately 350 feet in length would convey the water to a powerhouse located at the base of the falls on Thayer Creek and near the extreme high -19- tide line. The dam foundation and the tunnel would be in bedrock consisting of dolomite and green schist with veins of quartz. The power capacity is estimated at 575 kW primary with large quantities of secondary power. The installation of one 1000 kW unit would be capable of supplying the power needs of Angoon through the study period and the 600 kW diesel plant would provide firm capacity through 1987. In the event an unforeseen need for power should arise, there is another series of falls approximately 1.0 stream miles from the mouth of Thayer Creek. A dam at the head of the falls to elevation 300 feet and a tunnel approximately 800 feet in length through a ridge 0.4 miles S.E. of the dam and a 650 foot penstock would convey the water to Thayer Creek at the 100 foot eleva- tion. The power capacity of this site is estimated at 860 kW primary. This could be developed as a second stage Thayer Creek project. The primary capacity of both developments could be increased considerably by raising Thayer Lake a few feet. The lower site is recommended for development in the study period because of accessibility, of suitable size and less transmission distance. Transmission would be at the distribution voltage of 7.2/12.47 kV over a three phase line approximately six miles in length. Other than the proposed Wilderness designation for Admiralty Island, the environmental concerns would be nil. -20- , j i , I Ci:?:~ioH P: ~ee!:, L:S"-! C.aUr.H7lfCitn THAYER LAKE PRELIMI NARY LAYOUT PLATE I I i I I I I LEGEND .A DAM )---{TUNNEL D PWR HSE -PENSTOCK -X-X-TRANSMISSION THAYER CREEK PRELIMINARY LAYOUT' PLATE 2 B. Craig, Hydaburg and Klawock During the preliminary map investigation of the southern part of Prince of Wales Island, two sites stood out as potential hydroelectric sites. Further investigations and field reconnaissance verified the potential. Both Black Bear Lake and the Reynolds Creek system of lakes are viable hydro projects. Black Bear Lake Black Bear Lake, in latitude 56°33'N and longitude 132°52'W, discharges into a small stream flowing north- westerly a distance of five miles to the head of Big Salt Lake. The normal water surface of the lake is at elevation 1650. The water cascades from the lake outlet to elevation 200 in a distance of 0.6 miles. There are 2.25 square miles of drainage area into the lake. The mean discharge has been estimated at 22.5 cubic feet per second based on a discharge estimate of 10 cfs per square mile. Preliminary calculations indicate a dam 30 feet high will be required for complete regulation. Large quantities of excellent sand and gravel deposits in the valley below the lake leads to the recommendation of a concrete gravity -overflow dam. The dam foundation will be on a very resistant, but unidentified, bedrock. (The rock samples were lost but it is believed to be a plutonic rock, probably andesite.) A 24-inch diameter penstock 3300 feet in length would convey the water to a powerhouse at the 200 foot ele- vation. The power capacity is estimated at 2400 kW primary and average power. Access will require a road five miles in length from the powerhouse to the existing Klawock-Thorne Bay Road at the head of Big Salt Lake. Ample docks and crane facilities are available in Klawock. Transmission to Klawock would be 9.0 miles and an additional 6.5 miles to Craig. An additional 26.5 miles of transmission would be required to inter- connect Hydaburg to the system. Transmission is anti- cipated to be 14.4/24.9 kV with step-down substations to the respective distribution voltages. The instal- lation of bm 2,500 kW impulse turbine generator set would supply the needed power requirements of all three villages through the study period and the intertie would provide 3755 kW firm capacity in existing diesel units; (this includes the 1000 kW cannery and cold storage plant in Hydaburg.) -23- ~ i-t: :t' " I 25. .o' J I -I ~ ~ l ~ '" ~ ;~ ;i ~ ?, "!; :!J '( • \ j ~ 19 .' { t BLACK BEAR LAKE PRELIMINARY LAYOUT PLATE 3 I I I I I i ! I LEGEND A DAM r--{TUNNEL a PWR HSE -PENSTOCK -x-x-TRANSMISSION BLACK BEAR LAKE PRELIMI NARY LAYOUT Reynolds Creek The mouth of Reynolds Creek, in latitude 55°13'N, and longitude 132°36'W, discharges into Copper Harbor, 'an arm of Hetta Inlet, at the former town of Coppermount, 16 miles by water from Hydaburg. This creek drains an elaborate system of lakes, all at comparatively high altitudes. Lake Mellen, the lowest of the group, has an area of 168 acres at the 870 foot elevation. The outlet of this lake is 1.1 miles from tidewater. There is a pond below the outlet of Lake Mellen at the 865-foot ele- vation. There is a good site for a dam at the mouth of this pond which is only 4000 feet in a direct line to tidewater. Summit Lake has an area of 396 acres at the 1314-foot elevation. Its outlet is one mile from the head of Lake Mellen. Lake Marge has an area of 93 acres at the 1757-foot elevation. Its outlet is 0.5 miles from the south shore of Summit Lake. Lake Josephine has an area of 392 acres at the 1834-foot elevation and lies in an adjoining watershed. It is 0.43 miles from summit Lake and one mile from the head of Lake Mellon. There are 5.8 square miles in the drainage area of Reynolds Creek of which 1.10 square miles drain to Lake Marge, 3.5 square miles to Summit Lake, and 5.5 square miles to the dam site below Lake Mellen. The drainage area of Lake Josephine is 1.5 square miles and drains into the South Fork of Portage Creek, the adjoining watershed. A gaging station was maintained for 31 months during 1926 to 1929. The discharge at the mouth of Reynolds Creek on May 10, 1921 was 42 cubic feet per second, which was 11 percent of the discharge of 382 cfs of Karta River on the same day. The discharge of Reynolds Creek on July 14, 1915 was 90 cfs, which was 17 percent of the mean discharge of Karta River on the same day. The drainage area of Reynolds Creek is 11.7 percent of that of Karta River. The records of precipitation stations indicate a greater rainfall on the west slopes as compared to the east slopes of the island. Based on this data, the mean discharge is taken at 13 percent of the Karta River discharge, 61 cfs or 10.5 cfs per square mile. The mean discharge of the several lakes are taken proportionate to their drainage area. Lake Marge at 10.5 cfs, Summit Lake at 37 cfs, Lake Mellen dam site at 58 cfs and Lake Josephine at 16 cfs. If Lake Josephine is diverted to join Lake Mellen then the discharge of these combined will be 74 cfs. -26- Gage height readings indicate that the subnormal flow occurs in two periods of three months each. These periods are February to April and July to September, with two intervening months of heavy discharge. This is a characteristic common to all streams on the island, and results in a comparatively low storage requirement. Complete regulation would require a storage capacity of 12,000 acre-feet at Summit Lake, 5000 acre-feet at Lake Josephine and 7000 acre-feet at Lake Mellen. The dam site at the outlet of the pond below Lake Mellen has diorite exposed throughout the stream bed and on the right abutement. A dam 40 feet in height would have a crest 120 feet long at the 905-foot eleva- tion and only 20 feet wide at the base or 865-foot elevation. The water would be conveyed in a conduit 3700 feet long from the dam to the Powerhouse No.1, located at tide- water. The mean effective head would be 865 feet. Powerhouse No. 2 will be used by both the upper devel- opments for Summit Lake and Lake Josephine. The power- house would be located 1,200 feet upstream from the head of Lake Mellen at the 905-foot elevation. The water from Summit Lake would be conveyed by a tunnel 400 feet long and a penstock 4,000 feet long to Power- house No.2. The mean effective head would be 380 feet. The water from Lake Josephine would be conveyed by a tunnel 1600 feet long and a penstock 2,700 feet long to Powerhouse No.2. The mean effective head would be 915 feet. The power capacity is estimated at 4325 kW primary and average for Powerhouse No.1; at 895 kW primary and average for Summit Lake at Powerhouse No.2; at 970 kW primary and average from Lake Josephine at Powerhouse No.2; and make a total of 6,190 kW primary and average for ultimate development. The site has the disadvantages of access, being too large for the projected loads, and a transmission route over difficult terrain. Should there be an unforeseen need for a large block of additional power in the area, Reynolds Creek should definitely be considered. It would lend very well to stage development. Transmission would require a line 11 miles in length to Hydaburg, an additional 25 miles to Craig and still another 5.5 miles to serve Klawock for a total of 42.5 miles of serve all three villages. -27- I .. REYNOLDS CREEK PRELIMINARY LAYOUT PLATE 5 t:; .J ~ i I I LEGEND ~ DAM ~-~TUNNEL a PWR HSE -PENSTOCK -X-X-TRANSMI SSION REYNOLDS CREEK PRELIMI NARY LAYOUT C. Hoonah prelim~nary map investigations indicated an excellent hydro site on Game Creek. The narrow canyon at stream mile 3.0 with a dam to elevation 200 would create a large reservoir that would provide super-regulation of the stream. These narrow canyons often contain barriers to the passage of anadromous fish. Our hopes for a prime hydro development for Hoonah was in Game Creek. No other site within viable transmission distance that would provide reliable, year-around power was recog- nizable. Game Creek was the object of field investigation in Hoonah. Heavy fog prevented a cursory aerial survey. An overland trip through the canyon was made and thou- sands of salmon were observed upstream from the canyon in the broad valley above. In accordance with the criteria set forth, this fishery eliminated Game Creek from further consideration. If the fish problem could be overcome by construction of a hatchery or a fish ladder, Game Creek could be a viable hydro project. There are 41 square miles of drainage area above an excellent dam site. The dam would create a reservoir with a surface area of 1920 acres and completely regulate the average annual flow of 310 cfs. With a mean effec- tive head of 125 feet, the estimated power capacity is 1100 kW primary and average. Reports of an early attempt by the City of Hoonah to develop the hydro potential of the falls on Gartina Creek were investigated. It was reported that a water- wheel had been transported to the site and a log crib dam creating forebay regulation was constructed. The big Hoonah fire of 1944 destroyed most of the City and the generator was said to have been burned in the fire. The project was never completed. A flight up Gartina Creek revealed the location of the falls and a ground reconnaissance was made. The log crib dam was still intact but the forebay had filled with sand and gravel. After much searching through the undergrowth, the remains of an old collapsed building was found. Upon removal of many rotten boards, shakes and timbers, the waterwheel was located. No nameplate data was found; however, the reaction type turbine appeared to be of Leffel manufacture and from measure- ments taken, it would be of approximately 100 horsepower. Gartina Creek The mouth of Gartina Creek, in latitude 58°06'N, and longitude 135°24'W, discharges into the head of a large -30- tidal slough on Hoonah Harbor, two miles southeast of downto\ID Hoonah. There is a waterfall 50 feet high about 1.6 miles southeast of the mouth of the creek. The falls are formed by a ridge of very resistant andesite rock. Below the waterfall the stream has a relatively flat grade. There are no lakes in the watershed. Salmon migrate upstream to the foot of the falls. There are 10.4 square miles draining to the top of the waterfalls. Using 7.75 cfs runoff per square mile the average annual flow is estimated at 80.6 cfs. The nominal discharge is estimated at 12 cfs. It is felt that only forebay regulation is available at the site. Excellent deposits of sand and gravel are available for concrete. A concrete dam 20 feet high and having a crest length of approximately 50 feet would create a forebay with about 100 acre-feet of storage. The water would be conveyed in a short penstock to a powerhouse at the toe of the falls. The power capacity is estimated at 55 k~'1 primary and 370 average kW. It is believed that 65 percent of the potential energy can be utilized for generation and could be used by Hoonah upon completion of construction. To take advantage of stream flow to twice the average flow; a 750 kW unit is recommended. Annual energy that could be utilized by Hoonah is estimated at 2,100,000 kWh or nearly one-half the energy requirements of Hoonah in 1981. This would replace 175,000 gallons of diesel fuel valued at $109,900 in 1981 and $283,325 in 1995. -31-· :;:. i;l- i '" j j i I I I r I I I i 1 I'l1 ~ 1:, I': if ~ Ii, ~ i!i m IP ~',' ~ ~ I ;.:' I I GARTINA CREEK PRELIMINARY LAYOUT PLATE 7' D. Kake Two sites were considered worthy of investigation for this study. The Sanborn Cutting Company developed a small hydro plant on Gunnuk Creek circa 1920. Part of the old wood stave penstock is still in evidence. The City of Kake has constructed a timber buttress dam across Gunnuk Creek with a crest at elevation 180 and uses a portion of the flow for their potable water. A new highway bridge is under construction.crossing Cathedral Falls Creek approximately one-quarter mile upstream from the falls. Highway access is available to both sites and excellent materials for earth-fill dams are abundant. Gunnuk Creek The mouth of Gunnuk Creek, in latitude 56°58'N, and longitude 133°56'W, discharges into Keku Strait and flows through the City of Kake. There are 11.5 square miles draining to the diversion dam at the 180-foot elevation. Discharge measurements have not been made. The watershed is low and lies in a belt of comparatively low precipitation. The mean discharge is estimated at 86·cfs or 7.5 cfs per square mile and the nominal discharge at 10cfs. The existing timber buttress dam provides forebay storage only. Storage for complete regulation would be prohibitive to obtain at this site. A suitable storage basin exists at approximate stream mile 3.5. Two earth fill dams would be required, one on each fork of the two southerly flowing branches of the stream. This would create a reservoir with a surface area of 586 acres and provide 14,500 acre-feet of storage. This would regulate 75 cfs flow at the existing dam. A penstock 2800 feet in length would convey the water to a powerhouse located at tidewater. The power capacity is estimated at 875 kW primary and 1000 kW average. Two 900 kW units are recommended for the installation. The voltage would be stepped-up to 7.2/12.47 kV and fed directly into the distribution system. Transmission will not be required. This development would also assure Kake of a reliable source of potable water. -33- Cathedral Falls Creek The mouth of Cathedral Falls Creek, in latitude 56°53 I N, and longitude 133°431~,], discharges into Hamilton Bay, and 10.5 miles by water or 10.0 miles by road to Kake. There are 26.3 square miles draining to a dam site at approximate stream mile 0.5. There is a 70 feet high waterfall at stream mile 0.25. The falls are formed by a resistant ridge of silicified marine siltstone. Extreme high tides extend to the large pool below the falls. There are no lakes in the watershed and the falls are a barrier to anadromous fish. The State Department of Highways is building a bridge across Cathedral Falls Creek approximately one-quarter mile upstream of the falls. Discharge measurements have not been made. The water- shed is low and lies "vi thin abel t of comparatively low precipitation. The mean discharge is estimated at 195 cfs or 7.5 cfs per square mile and the nominal discharge is estimated at 25 cfs. There are no good reservoir sites in the basin. An earth-fill dam upstream of the highway bridge and 70 feet high would create a reservoir with a surface area of 169 acres and provide for 2800 acre-feet of storage. This would regulate 41 cfs for primary power. A penstock approximately 2000 feet in length would convey the water under the bridge and to a powerhouse at the toe of the falls. The mean effective head would be 120 feet. The power capacity is estimated at 350 kW primary and 1660 kW average. A transmission line 9 miles in length would be required to tie into the existing system. An economic analysis was not made for this site as the Gunnuk Creek project is the obvious first development choice. The Cathedral Falls Creek site could be devel- oped into a peaking plant if the need should arise. -34- c-,,-,-~--:::------------:.~--0-' J ,-:--:,--L..:-_ 8 GUNNUK CREEKS CATHEDRAL FALLS CREEK PLATE 8 "- " , • -, . "'0 ~-\ " ---o 0_ ~IINNUK CREEK .... PRELIMINARY LAYOUT -PLATE 9 E. Kasaan Map investigations and field reconnaissance did not reveal a suitable hydro site within economic trans- mission distance of Kasaan, nor did a tie line with Klawock appear feasible. If a large electric load does develop, a transmission line to Black Bear Lake may be feasible. The possibility of a tie with Thorne Bay was considered but the information received was that Thorne Bay would be shutting down in 1980. F. Klukwan-Haines Although Haines was not included in the scope of this study, the only viable project within the Haines- Klu~wan area was much too large for Klukwan; however, it appeared to be of excellent size for development by both. Should a large electrical load be required in the area for the extraction of iron ore, the Chilkat River site at river mile 36 should be examined. The projected loads do not warrant review of this large site at this time. Chilkoot River Tributary A small tributary stream of the Chilkoot River, in latitude 59°25'N and longitude 135°41'W, discharges into the Chilkoot River 4.0 river miles upstream from the head of Chilkoot Lake. There is a small lake with an area of 91.5 acres at the 2270-foot elevation and 1.0 stream miles from the Chilkoot River. There are 4.6 square miles draining to the mouth of the lake. Discharge measurements have not been made. The lake is glacier fed and at this altitude in an otherwise dry area for the region, the average annual flow is estimated at 34.5 cfs using 7.5 cfs per square mile. A 40 feet high dam would create a reservoir with a m~xL~um surface area of 162.5 acres and would provide a st.orage of 5080 acre-feet.. This would regulate a flow of 21.5 cfs. Although several attempts were made to visit the site, the writer has not seen the outlet of ~~e lake. The 2000-foot elevation was the maximum obtained due to heavy fog and rain. The rock appeared to be very hard and looked like greywacke from the air. It may be possible to obtain complete regulation by tapping the lake with a tunnel. This would require ground contours under the water surface to determine this possibility. Even without complete regulation, the site looks very promising. A penstock 30 inches in diameter and 4800 feet in length would convey the water from the dam to a power- -38- f"Cr iJ! J'lROe€RT '*. REJHEAFOAD ASSOCIATES _ i : .. ". ". I CO"SULT'NG ENG'''I!I!AS .------------------_______ -.1 j I I f I· I j house on the east bank of the Chilkoot River at ele- vation 200. The penstock is sized larger than necessary as someday this site may be desired as a peaking plant. The small additional cost for a larger penstock during initial construction is felt to be warranted. Access to the powerhouse site would be over the existing road from Haines. A bridge across the Chilkoot River would be required. Construction access to the dam from the powerhouse may be by highline, tramway, or heli- copter. The project would require 16 miles of three phase transmission line to Haines and 8 miles of single phase, single wire-ground return line to Klukwan. With a mean effective head of 2055 feet, the power capacity is estimated at 3,150 kW primary and 5050 k~'l average. -39- L-rr 7J .JIR09EIn 'If. RE"THERFOAD ASSOCtAYES f 7 :"\ \ CQN5ULiiNG ENGINEERS I I i I i J i 1 ! , i 8 ~ .. " .... LEGEND ~ DAM r-~TUNNEL e:t PWR HSE -PE NSTOCK -X-X-TRANSMI SS ION 14 _c CATHEDRAL FALLS PRELIMINARY LAYOUT CHILKOOT RIVER TRIBUTARY PLATE II i ( I I t LEGEND A DAM }---{TUNNEL £:it PWR HSE . -PE NSTOCK -X-X-TRANSMISSION CHILKOOT RIVER TRIBUTARY PRELIMINARY LAYOUT PLATE 12 G. Pelican Office and field investigations led to the conclusion that stage development of Pelican Creek was the superior program of supplying hydroelectric energy to the City of Pelican. The Pelican Utility Company presently operates a small hydroelectric plant on Pelican Creek. A license for the project (FPC No. 1521) was issued by the Federal Power Commission on July 31, 1942. A description of the project is found in Section II, Existing Systems, Part 10, Pelican. Pelican Creek The development of Pelican Creek is envisioned as a four stage development with stages added as the power is needed. Stage 1: This stage consists of a rock-fill darn, with an impervious aluminum alloy face 40 feet high and approximately 150 feet long at the outlet of an unnamed lake at the headwaters of Phonograph Creek in latitude 57°58'N and longitude 136°05'W. A tunnel 550 feet in length would divert the water from Phonograph Creek into the Pelican Creek drainage. A penstock 1100 feet long would be installed between the tunnel and a power-. house located at the head of a small pond and at the 1570 foot elevation. The drainage to the lake at the damsite is 1.25 square miles at the 2010 foot elevation. Stream flow measure- ments have not been made. The estimated average annual flow is 16 cfs. The 5000 acre-feet of storage would provide complete regulation. The power capacity is estimated at 510 kW primary and average. Stage II: The natural outlet of the small pond receiving the tailrace discharge from Powerhouse No. 1 would be dammed to the 1565 foot elevation. The flow would be diverted into a low pressure pipeline 2500 feet long and then through a penstock 1250 feet long to Powerhouse No. 2 located on Pelican Creek at the 750 foot elevation. The estimated average annual flow of 23 cfs would be completely regulated by the two reservoirs. The power capacity is estimated at 1265 k\rl primary and average. Stage III: A diversion dam would be constructed across Pelican Creek 0.6 miles downstream from Powerhouse No.2 at the 650 foot elevation. A penstock 2300 feet in length would convey the water to Powerhouse No. 3 located on Pelican Creek at the 280 foot elevation. -42- W R08£RT w. REl"HERFOftD ASSOCIATES , \ COtooSUL TlNG E IN I I I The average annual flow is estimated at 47 cfs. With the upstream regulation and natural minimum flow, 30 cfs is estimated to be the regulated flow to Powerhouse No.3. The power capacity is estimated at 840 kW primary and 1200 kW average. Stage IV: The existing dam would be removed and a new dam 65 feet high would be constructed to form a reservoir with a normal maximum pool elevation of 175. The wooden flume would be replaced with a pipeline and a surge tank installed at the present intake box location. A new steel penstock would replace the wood-stave pipe and the powerhouse enlarged to accommodate additional units. It is assumed the existing 500 kW unit will be renovated in the interim to develop its rated capacity. The regulated flow is estimated at 100 cfs and the average annual is estimated at 124 cfs. Allowing 5 cfs for potable water, the flow available for power is estimated at 95 cfs and 119 cfs respectively. The power capacity is estimated at 945 kW primary and 1180 kW average. Approximately 4.0 miles of transmission line will be required from Powerhouse No. 1 to the existing system, routed past succeeding powerhouses, and sized for the ultimate development •. Total development of Pelican Creek hydro potential is estimated at 3,560 kW primary and 4,155 kWaverage. By utilizing the existing diesel plant for peaking and reserve capacity, the development of Stage I and the renovation of the existing hydro will provide the power requirements of Pelican, as projected through the study period. Cost estimates of Stage I only are developed for this report. -43- f).,:! JiROBER'J w. FlETHERFOFlD ASSOCIATES i f I p~r If'l1N r.RF'F'K PRFI IMINARY LAYOUT PI AT!=' 1':\ --------~~-------------------------------------------------4 .. -. . " . -:. ~ .-. ~ ... .:....:.-. # .". . "... ..- ~ "-: ." .... "~. LEGEND PELiCAN CREEK ~-• ~ DAM }-~TUNNEL PRELIMINARY ·LAYOUT -! . IS PWR HS( -PENSTOCK -.. : -X-X-TR AN S MI SS ION PLATE 14 H. Yakutat . The Yakutat tidal basin development at Ankau is not considered an economically worthwhile project. The potential head is 10 feet maximum; however, the effective head for power generation is only 5 feet due to condi- tions required for operating within the rising and falling cycles of the tides. Dividing the tidal basin between Ankau and Kardy Lake provides an operating reservoir of 500 acre-feet. Assuming continuous genera- tion, this will provide firm capacity of only 177 kW. To develop this minimal capacity requires construction of three dams and associated control gates in addition to the turbine-generators and appurtenant electrical and mechanical equipment. A cost estimate was not made as it was obvious the cost would be high and the project not competitive to alternative -power sources. -46- SECTION V Preliminary Cost Estimates General: The preliminary cost estimates in this section are based on an on-site inspection for each project except the tributary to the Chilkoot River, preliminary arrangement and quantity takeoffs, experience with other Alaska projects, equipment suppliers prices, and knowledge of construction costs, methods and means throughout the State of Alaska. A conservative approach has been taken in this preliminary cost estimates due to the limited topographic and geologic information available. Detailed studies for a Definite Project Report leading to Applications for License to Con- struct the recommended projects will be required for final arrangement and detailed cost estimates. The annual costs of the hydro-projects based on a 1979 bid have been compared with replacement fuel costs only, assuming without the hydro that all generation would be from diesel engine driven generators. Certain major cost items, such as diesel operation, maintenance, lubricating oil, and addition of diesel units to meet growing electrical demand would be included in a detailed Power Cost Study. In the following analysis, any project that approaches replacement fuel costs is recommended for further study. 7 The average bus bar costs on the preliminary construction cost sheets assume that all of the energy is usable. A discussion sheet makes comparisons of hydro costs with fuel replacement costs for the first five years and for the fifteen year study period. The estimated annual fixed charges used in this study are based on the following: 2% 5% 8% 35 yrs 35 yrs 35 yrs Cost of money 4.46 6.11 8.58 Depreciation (sinking fund annuity -7% -50 yrs.) 0.25 0.25 0.25 Insurance 0.55 0.55 0.55 Total 5.36% 7.01% 9.48% Operation and maintenance costs are based on fully automated plants. -47- Drainage Area Est. Ave. Discharge Est. Annual Run-off Ave. Annual Flow Regulated THAYER CREEK 62 Sq. Mi. 7.5 cfs/sq.mi. 336.65 K Ac-Ft 465 cfs 90 cfs ANGOON Hean Effective Head 90 Ft. . Prime Power 575 kW Secondary Power 425 kW ** Prime Energy 5037 MWh Secondary Energy 3723 MWh ======:===============~=====~=========~===============~===============~===~= Remarks: Thayer Lake -Surface Area = 2784 acres. Proposed Wilderness designation. 7.2/12.47 kV - 3 phase transmission line - 6 miles. **Secondary Power based on capacity of unit installed. Reservoir Clearing Dam -Concrete Arch -50 ft. high w/crest 150 ft. long = 1700 cy Intake and spillway Roads, Bridges and Access Waterways -Tunnel -350 ft. long @6Ft. ¢ Powerplant Powerhouse Turbines & Generators 1,000 kW Access. Elec. & Misc. SUBTOTAL: Engineering, Interest during construction and contingency @ 35%: 450 cy PROJECT TOTAL: Annual Costs Fixed Charges* Interim Replacement @ 0.2% O&M TOTAL: Credit for Sec. Energy @ 5 mills/kWh NET ANNUAL COSTS Average Bus Bar Costs, Prime Overall Transmission Estimated Trans. Cost: 4 mills/kWh 2% 211,291 7,884 20,000 239,175 18,615 220,560 0.044 0.025 50,000 1,445,000 75,000 250,000 300,000 150,000 500,000 150,000 2,920,000 1,022,000 3,942,000 5% 276,334 7,884 20,000 304,218 18,615 285,603 0.057 0.033 *Fixed Charges .•. 2% money @ 5.36%, 5% money @ 7.01%, 8% money @ 9.48%. -48- 8% 373,702 7,884 20,000 401,586 18,615 382,971 0.076 0.044 THAYER CREEK -ANGOON Project costs are based on a 1979 bid date. The firm installed capacity in Angoon is 300 kW. The projected power requirements indicates the need of an additional unit in 1978 and another unit in 1988. Fuel costs at Angoon: = $ 633,505 3,731,205 1981 through 1985 1981 through 1995 = Ave. = $126,701 Ave. = $248,747 Hydro Costs * : (with 4 mills/kWh transmission) 1981 through 1985 1981 through 1995 2% 1,141,203 3,455,891 5% 1,466,418 4,431,536 8% 1,953,258 5,89,056 The above comparison shows the project would be feasible with 2% money through the study period. Development even with 2% money would result in increased power rates during the early years. * Hydro costs based on net annual costs. -49- BLACK BEAR LAKE (CRAIG, HYDABURG, KLAWOCK) Drainage Area 2.25 Sq. Mi. Mean Effective Head 1460 Ft. Est. Ave. Discharge 10 cfs/sq.mi. Prime Power 2330 kW Est. Annual Run-off 16.29 K Ac-Ft Secondary Power 340 k\V+ Ave. Annual Flow 22.5 cfs Prime Energy 20,410 MWh Regulated/Excess Flow 22.5 cfs Secondary Energy 2,979 MWh ==~======;===~=================:===~=================================:====~= Remarks: Excellent hydro site. Costs are excessive for Klawock alone; reasonable for Craig and Klawock and very good for Craig, Hydaburg, Klawock and the cannery in Hydaburg in 1981. The U.S. Forest Service has developed a small recreation facility on Black Bear Lake. Two -2500 kW ~nits. Reservoir Clearing Dam -Concrete -30' high, ISO' crest Intake and spillway Roads, Bridges and Access Waterways -24" III penstock, 3300 ft. long 320,000 lbs. Powerplant Powerhouse Turbines & Generators 5,000 kW Access. Elec. & Misc. SUBTOTAL: Engineering, Interest during construction and contingency @ 35%: PROJECT TOTAL: Annual Costs Fixed Charges* Interim Replacement @ 0.2% O&M TOTAL: Credit for Sec. Energy @ 5 mills/kWh NET ANNUAL COSTS Average Bus Bar Costs, Prime Overall **Transmission 14.4/24.9 kV -42 miles total Estimated Trans. Cost 7.2 mills/k\fu 2% 294,722 10,997 30,000 335,719 14,896 320,823 0.016 0.014 100,000 735,000 40,000 150,000 448,000 200,000 2,250,000 150,000 4,073,000 1,425,550 5,498,550 5% 385,448 10,997 30,000 426,445 14,896 411,549 0.020 0.018 **9.0 mi. to Klawock + 6.5 mi. to Craig + 26.5 mi. to Hydaburg. *Fixed Charges ••. 2% money @ 5.36%, 5% money @ 7.01%, 8% money @ 9.48%. -50- 8% 521,263 10,997 30,000 562,260 14,896 547,364 0.027 0.023 BLACK BEAR LAKE, CRAIG -HYDABURG -KLAWOCK Project costs are based on 1979 bid. It is immediately obvious that the development of Black'Bear Lake for only one of the communities is prohibitive. A comparison of Craig-Klawock and Craig-Hydaburg-Klawock are made. It should be noted that the value of the intertie will need consideration in a detailed analysis. Craig has 1315 kW installed and 1000 kH firm and Klawock has 1300 kl'l installed and 800 kw firm. An intertie between Craig and Klawock would result in 2615 klA7 installed and 2115 kH firm. The intertie would result in firm capacity for both to 1992. Hydaburg with the cannery has an installed capacity of 1440 klv and a firm capacity of 940 klv. An intertie with Craig- Klawock would result in 4,055 kW' installed and 3,555 kW of firm capacity. Fuel Costs @ Craig -Klawock: 1981 through 1985 = $ 1,754,538 1981 through 1995 = $10,370,137 Ave. = $350,908 Ave. = $691,342 Hydro Costs, Craig -Klawock (with a 3 mill transmission cost) 2% 5% 8% 1981 through 1985 1,686,645 2,140,275 2,819,350 1981 through 1995 5,130,885 6,491,775 8,529,000 Fuel Costs @ Craig -Hydaburg -Klawock with cannery: 1981 through 1985 = 2,817,098 1981 through 1995 = 16,263,484 Hydro Costs, Craig -Hydaburg -Klawock (with 7.2 mills transmission cost): 1981 through 1985 1981 through 1995 2% 1,931,893 6,049,195 5% 2,385,523 7,410,085 8% '3,064,598 9,447,310 These comparisons show that annual costs for the Black Bear Lake project for Craig -Klawock would be less than fuel costs for the first five years at 2% money and less through the study period at 8% money. The project appears feasible during the first five years of operation @ 5% money when other factors are considered. The Craig -Hydaburg -Kla\vock comparison shows an over- whelming advantage of the hydro over diesel generation @ 8% money. The Craig -Klawock comparison would be improved if one 2500 kW unit was deferred until needed. -51- REYNOLDS CREEK -LAKE MELLEN ONLY (CRAIG, HYDABURG, KLAWOCK) Drainage Area 5.5 Sq. Mi. Mean Effective Head 865 Ft. Est. Ave. Discharge 10.5 cfs/sq.mi. Prime Power 3560 kW* Est. Annual Run-off 41. 99 K Ac-Ft Secondary Power kW Ave. Annual Flow 58 cfs Prime Energy 30,660 MWh Regulated/Excess Flow 58/0 cfs Secondary Energy MWh =============~=============~=============:===========================;====== Remarks: The project with the installation of only one unit is larger than needed throughout the study period. *One 3500 kW unit installed with provision for a second future unit. Reservoir Clearing Dam -concrete, 40 ft. high, 250 ft. long Intake and spillway Roads, Bridges and Access Waterways -Penstock -24" ¢, 3700 ft. long Powerplant Powerhouse Turbines & Generators 3500 kW Access. Elec. & Misc. SUBTOTAL: Engineering, Interest during construction and contingency @ 35%: PROJECT TOTAL: Annual Costs Fixed Charges* Interim Replacement @ 0.2% O&M TOTAL: Credit for Sec. Energy @ 5 mills/kWh NET ANNUAL COSTS Average Bus Bar Costs, Prime Overall Transmission Estimated Trans. Cost 8 mills/kWh 2% 368,674 13,757 45,000 427,431 0.014 100,000 2,000,000 50,000 400,000 620,000 200,000 1,575,000 150,000 5,095,000 1,783,250 6,878,250 5% 482,165 13,757 45,000 540,922 0.016 *Fixed Charges ... 2% money @ 5.36%, 5% money @ 7.01%, 8%.money @ 9.48%. -52- 8% 652,058 13,757 45,000 710,815 0.021 REYNOLDS CREEK, CRAIG -HYDABURG -KLAWOCK Project Costs are based on 1979 bid. It is immediately obvious that the development of Reynolds creek for the Hydaburg area is prohibitive even with the deferment of one generating unit. The advantages of the inter tie are the same as noted under Black Bear Lake. Fuel Costs @ Craig -Hydaburg -Klawock with cannery: 1981 through 1985 = 1981 through 1995 = 2,817,098 16,263,484 Hydro Costs* (with 8 mills for transmissio cost) 1981 through 1985 1981 through 1995 2% 2,501,155 7,785,545 5% 3,068,610 9,487,910 8% 3,918,075 12,036,305 This comparison shows that the first stage development of Reynolds Creek with the deferral of one unit is feasible at 2% money and probably at 5% during the first five years of operation and at 8% money through the study period. The Black Bear Lake is superior to the Reynolds Creek for development through the study period and for the projected loads. This project should definitely be considered if an unforeseen need of a large block of power were to develop. * Hydro costs based on Total Annual Costs with no credit for secondary energy. -53- CHILKOOT RIVER TRIBUTARY (HAINES, KLUKtvAN) Drainage Area 4.6 Est. Ave. Discharge 7.5 Est. Annual Run-off 25.0 Ave. Annual Flow 34.5 Regulated/Excess Flow 21.5/13 Sq. Hi. cfs/sq.mi. K Ac-Ft cfs cfs Mean Effective Head Prime Power Secondary Power Prime Energy Secondary Energy 2055 Ft. 3,150 kW 1900 kW 27,594 MWh 16,644 MWh ====~==~=======:===========~================~============================== Remarks: Access to dam would be by tramway, high-line or helicopter. Access to powerhouse would be by constructing a bridge across the Chilkoot river to connect with existing road. Environmental impact would be negligible. Dam would be rockfill with aluminum alloy facing. Two -4000 kW units. Reservoir Clearing -None required Dam 900,000 lptake and spillway 200,000 Roads, Bridges and Access Waterways Powerplant Powerhouse Turbines & Generators Access. Elec. & Misc. SUBTOTAL: Engineering, Interest during construction and contingency @ 35%: PROJECT TOTAL: Annual Costs Fixed Charges* Interim Replacement @ 0.2% O&M TOTAL: Credit for Sec. Energy @ 5 mills/kWh NET ANNUAL COSTS Average Bus Bar Costs, Prime Overall Transmission 16 mi. @ 50,000 & 8 mi. Estimated Trans. Cost 4 mills/kWh 2% 488,430 18,225 60,000 566,655 83,220 483,435 0.018 0.011 @ 30,000 = $1,040,000 150,000 900,000 800,000 3,600,000 200,000 6,750,000 2,362,500 $9,112,500 5% 638,786 18,225 60,000 717,011 83,220 633,791 0.023 0.014 *Fixed Charges ... 2% money @ 5.36%, 5% money @ 7.01%, 8% money @ 9.48%. -54- 8% 863,865 18,225 60,000 942,090 83,220 858,870 0.031 0.019 CHILKOOT RIVER TRIBUTARY, HAINES -KLUKWAN Project costs are based on 1979 bid. The Haines Light and Power Company will need to add generation and probably replace some of its generating units during the study period. Klukwan needs to build a new powerhouse and modify the sizes of their generating units. The distribution line to Klukwan from the hydro site is envisioned as a single wire -ground return single phase line over the mountain ridge at elevation 4600. Fuel costs @ Haines -Klukwan 1981 through 1985 = 3,083,780 1981 through 1995 = 17,876,048 Hydro Costs* (with 4 mills transmission costs) 2% 5% 8% 1981 through 1985 3,086,259 3,838,039 4,963,434 1981 through 1995 9,461,121 11,716,461 15,092,646 The above comparison shows the hydro project is feasible with 2% money during the first five years of operation and may be feasible with 5% money. The project is recommended for detailed study at this time if 5% money is made available. The deferral of one 4000 kW unit would reduce the costs during the first five years by $600,480, $778,900, and $1,045,440 respectively for 2%, 5% and 8% money. * Hydro costs based on Total Annual Costs with no credit for secondary energy. -55- GARTINA CREEK (HOONAH) Drainage Area 10.4 Sq. Mi. Mean Effective Head 60.0 Ft. Est. Ave. Discharge 7.75 cfs/sq.mi. Prime Power 50 kW Est. Annual Run-off 58.35 K Ac-Ft Secondary Power 750 kW Ave. Annual Flow 80.6 cfs Prime Energy 438 MWh Regulated/Excess Flow 12/67.4 cfs Secondary Energy 1,662 MWh ===========~===============c=================~============================== Remarks: This project is not considered as a primary power source. Evaluation is based on fuel replacement only. Environmental impact would be minimal. Sufficient sources of quality aggregate available for overflow type concrete dam. One 750 kW unit installed. Reservoir Clearing - 4 acres @ $1500/acre Dam -80 cu. yd. concrete, preparation, etc. Intake and spillway (Intake only, lump sum) Roads, Bridges and Access 1.8 miles access road @ 50,000/mi. Bridge over Gartina Creek, Lump sum Ha terways (Lump sum) Powerplant Powerhouse Turbines & Generators Access. Elec. & Misc. SUBTOTAL: Engineering, Interest during construction and contingency @ 35%: PROJECT TOTAL: Annual Costs Fixed Charges* Interim Replacement @ 0.2% O&M TOTAL: Credit for Sec. Energy @ 5 mills/kWh NET ANNUAL COSTS Average Bus Bar Costs, Prime 2% 61,506 2,295 15,000 78,801 Overall Transmission 2 miles @ 50,000/per mile Estimated Trans. Cost 3 mills/kWh 0.038 $100,000 6,000 130,000 30,000 90,000 20,000 24,000 50,000 400,000 100,000 850,000 297,500 1,147,500 5% 80,440 2,295 15,000 97,735 0.047 *Fixed Charges •.• 2% money @ 5.36%, 5% money @ 7.01%, 8% money @ 9.48%. -56- 8% 108,783 2,295 15,000 126,078 0.052 GARTINA CREEK, HOONAH project costs are based on 1979 bid date. Gartina Creek is considered as a run-of-stream type plant with 2,100,000 kWh of usable energy in 1981 and throughout the study period. The plant could not be relied upon for dependable capacity. No consideration for anything but fuel replacement costs should be made. Fuel costs @ Hoonah for 2,100,000 kWh per year: 1981 through 1985 = 1981 through 1995 = 632,100 2,759,400 Hydro Costs (with 3 mills transmission costs): 2% 8% 1981 through 1985 1981 through 1995 425,505 1,276,515 5% 520,175 1,560,525 661,890 1,985,670 The above comparison indicates that the development of Gartina Creek is a viable project with 8% money. -57- GUNNUK CREEK (KAKE) Drainage Area H.5 Sq. Mi. Mean Effective Head 165 Ft. Est. Ave. Discharge 7.5 cfs/sq.mi. Prime Power 875 kW Est. Annual Run-off 62.3 K Ac-Ft Secondary Power 125 kW Ave. Annual Flow 86 cfs Prime Energy 7,665 MWh Regulated/Excess Flow 75/11 cfs Secondary Energy 1,095 MWh ====~================~=======~============================================~= Remarks: The reservoir has been clear-cut from logging operations. Logging roads provide suitable access to reservoir dams. Two -900 kW units. Reservoir Clearing (Lump sum) Dam -earth fill Intake and spillway Roads, Bridges and Access -none required. Waterways Powerplant Powerhouse Turbines & Generators Access. Elec. & Misc. SUBTOTAL: Engineering, Interest during construction and contingency @ 35%: PROJECT TOTAL: Annual Costs Fixed Charges* Interim Replacement @ 0.2% O&M TOTAL: credit for Sec. Energy @ 5 mills/kWh NET ANNUAL COSTS Average Bus Bar Costs, Prime Overall Transmission Estimated Trans. Cost 1 mills/kWh 2% 188,136 7,020 12,000 207,156 5,475 201,681 0.026 0.023 150,000 800,000 100,000 350,000 150,000 810,000 240,000 2,600,000 910,000 3,510,000 5% 246,051 7,020 12,000 265,071 5,475 259,596 0.034 0.030 *Fixed Charges ... 2% money @ 5.36%, 5% money @ 7.01%, 8% money @ 9.48%. -58- 8% 332,748 7,020 12,000 351,768 5,475 346,293 0.045 0.040 GUNNUK CREEK, KAKE Project costs based on 1979 bid date. The T-HREA has an installed capacity of 1600 kW and 1100 kW firm. Projections indicate another unit will be required in 1982. The Gunnuk Creek powerhouse would be located near the load center. Fuel Costs @ Kake: 1981 through 1985 = $1,447,891 1981 through 1995 = $8,341,157* Hydro Costs** (with 1 mill transmission cost) 1981 through 1985 1981 through 1995 2% 1,059,687 3,195,358 5% 1,349,262 4,064,083 8% 1,782,747 5,364,538 This project shows feasibility during the first five years with 5% money and should still be considered for further study is 8% money is required. * This total is for 7,665,000 kWh generated.by hydro during the years 1994 and 1995. Total diesel fuel costs would be $8,451,517. ** Hydro costs based on Total Annual Costs with no credit for secondary energy. -59- Drainage Area Est. Ave. Discharge Est. Annual Run-off Ave. Annual Flow Regulated/Excess Flow PELICAN CREEK STAGE I 1.25 Sq. Mi. 12.8 cfs/sq.mi. 11.6 K Ac-Ft 16 cfs 16/0 cfs (PELICAN) Mean Effective Head 450 Ft. Prime Power 510 kW Secondary Power 0 kW Prime Energy 4,468 MWh Secondary Energy 0 MWh ============================================================================ Remarks: Environmental impact is negligible. Secondary benefit is increased nominal and average flow in Pelican Creek for power and potable water. Rockfill dam with aluminum alloy face. Side-channel spillway. Access trail to powerhouse along transmission route. One -500 kW unit. Reservoir Clearing -none required. Dam Intake and spillway (Lump sum) Roads, Bridges and Access - 4 mi. @ 50,000 Waterways -Tunnel 550 ft. @ $800/ft. Penstock, Valves, etc. Powerplant Powerhouse Turbines & Generators Access. Elec. & Misc. SUBTOTAL: Engineering, Interest during construction and contingency @ 35%: PROJECT TOTAL: Annual Costs Fixed Charges* Interim Replacement @ 0.2% O&M TOTAL: Credit for Sec. Energy @ 5 mills/kWh NET ANNUAL COSTS 2% 153,403 5,724 15,000 174,127 Average Bus Bar Costs, Prime 0.039 Overall Transmission 4 mi. @ 50,000/mi. = $200,000 Estimated Trans. Cost 6 mills/k';vh 650,000 80,000 200,000 440,000 300,000 83,500 266,500 100,000 2,120,000 742,000 2,862,000 5% 200,626 5,724 15,000 221,350 0.050 *Fixed Charges .•. 2% money @ 5.36%, 5% money @ 7.01%, 8% money @ 9.48%. -60- 8% 271,318 5,724 15,000 292,042 0.065 PELICAN CREEK, PELICAN Project costs based on 1979 bid date. The first stage development is burdened with the costs of access, transmission and key storage for the first three stages. The other development stages would be very attractive should an unforeseen need for a larger block of electrical power be required. Some credit in a detailed analysis should be given the first stage for enhancing the potable water supply. Fuel Costs @ Pelican (assuming 1,250,000 kWh per year from existing hydro) 1981 through 1985 = $696,970 1981 through 1995 = $4,478,528 Hydro Costs (with 6 mills transmission costs): 1981 through 1985 1981 through 1995 2% 928,036 2,850,245 5% 1,164,151 3,558,590 8% 1,517,611 4,618,970 This project shows marginal feasibility when viewed from the criteria set forth. Recommendations are made for detailed study if 5% money can be obtained and/or there is a con- siderable increase in demand over the projections. -61- SECTION VI RECOMMENDATIONS 1. General The following recommendations are the results of pre- liminary findings based in some cases on rough estimates of topographic features, incomplete water records and construction costs. The recommendations are intended to pin-point the most favorable hydroelectric sites which are worthy of more detailed investigation consistent with the foreseeable power market. 2. Angoon Preliminary economic analysis of the small hydroelectric site on Thayer Creek indicates marginal feasibility at the best and is not recommended for further study at this time. The citizens of Angoon should attempt to have the Thayer Creek hydro potential sites excluded from the proposed Admiralty Island Wilderness Area for future development should their electrical demand greatly exceed the projection. 3. Craig, Hydaburg and Klawock Two separate sites were studied as potential sources of hydroelectric energy for these villages. It was imme- diately apparent that the forecasted growth of anyone of the communities could not justify development of either site. Craig and Klawock combined could develop the Black Bear Lake potential; however, the comparison with all three communities showed an overwhelming advantage of an intertie. The first stage development of the Reynolds Creek project with an intertie between Craig, Hydaburg and Klawock shows preliminary feasibility; however, the Black Bear Lake project is superior to the Reynolds Creek project under projected loads. It is recommended that a Definite Project Report be prepared immediately on the Black Bear Lake project to provide electrical energy for the Craig, Hydaburg and Klawock market area. 4. Haines and Klukwan Although Haines was not included in the scope of service, the most promising hydro site in the area required the inclusion of Haines for consideration. -62- It is recor~ended that the Chilkoot River Tributary shown on Plates 11 and 12 of Section IV receive high priority for detailed investigations. 5. Hoonah The development of the hydroelectric potential of Game Creek was considered as the only viable project in terms of engineering and economic feasibility to provide Hoonah with a reliable source of primary hydro energy. Environmental aspects were questionable and later proved to be the factor that rejected it for recom- mendation. The run-of-stream plant on Gartina Creek is considered feasible from an engineering, economic and environmental mode to provide secondary energy to the Hoonah area. The installation would be classified as a minor project with the Federal Power Commission and, consequently, the Application for License is greatly simplified and issued in a shorter time frame. It is recommended that an Application for License be prepared immediately for developing the hydroelectric potential of Gartina Creek. 6. Kasaan Investigations and area reconnaissance did not reveal a viable hydroelectric project for Kasaan. The projected power requirements do not justify a transmission line to the recommended Black Bear Lake project. 7. Kake Two potential hydroelectric sites were investigated for the Kake area. The transmission distance and the lack of a suitable reservoir for primary power ruled out Cathedral Falls Creek. An apparent reservoir for stream regulation exists in the Gunnuk Creek drainage basin. It has a plus factor in that the powerhouse would be located near the load center and also would enhance the potable water supply for Kake. It is recommended that the proposed Gunnuk Creek project be considered for immediate detailed investigation. 9. Pelican Pelican Creek lends itself very well to stage development of its hydroelectric potential. It is unfortunate that the first stage of development is burdened with the access and transmission costs for the first three stages. -63- It is reco~nended that stage one development, .as pro- posed, be considered for detailed investigation only if 5% money is available for construction. 10. Yakutat There are no recommended potential hydroelectric sites within feasible transmission distance of Yakutat for the projected loads. There may exist a supply of natural gas of such limited amounts that it would not be feasible to market outside of the area. If so, it is conceivable that gas turbine generation would be allowed. -64- SECTION VIr APPENDIX This appendix has been included to illustrate the type of equipment available for small hydroelectric installations as proposed in this report and budget quotations to lend credibility to the equipment cost estimates. A copy of a telex received from P.W.E. Stapenhorst, Inc. appears on page A-2"that gives budget prices for generating equipment under various flows and heads. These budget prices are for the Ossberger turbines described in this appendix. A recent telephone quotation was received from General Electric Company for a 4000 horsepower, 2500 kW generating unit with 850 feet of net head complete with switchgear, governor, supervisory and remote control, and completely installed for $1,078,000. This is equal to $431.20 per kW for a turgo impulse turbine as manufactured by Gilbert Gilkes and Gordon, Ltd., also described in this appendix. A-I mIRA AHG September 7, 1977 Telex No. 8133 Attention: Mr. Carl Steeby Subject: Our Reference No. 5-1816 In response to your enquiry, we are pleased to quote the following budget prices: Ite..'1l 1 -450 feet, 16 cfs. Our output 466 k~'1 Price: Item 2 -400 feet, 42 cfs Our output 2 x 545 ktv Price: Item 3 -200 feet, 104 cfs Our output 2.x 674 kH Price: Item 4 -70 feet, 40 -120 cfs Our output 165 -544 kW Price: Item 5 -180 feet, 20 -llO cfs Our output 2 x 210 -642 Price: Item 6 -120 feet, 100 -400 cfs Our output 3" x 750 -1037 Price: 172,500. 204,000. each 244,000. each 205,000. kt'l 234,000.. each kW 345,000. each All prices fob Anchorage, for completely automatic synchronous generating sets, including shut-off valves. Installation supervisor not included, but can be provided at a cost of 250.00 per day, ~)lus all expenses. All outputs at Generator terminals considering cross-flow turbine effi- ciencies at heads and flows available. Regards, F. Kanger Fi"S STAP£:NHORST, INC., -HTL. Hl.!H'i STAP PCLR 1\-2 \iVATER POWER " .~1Mi"V7n 11 = I 511l't1!.Ji1 I I J'QC 1 AI I'rn " ' • 3;-.1 ( .~~ ./ ; ;;."'0 j ;a OSSBERGER 1. <\J" ''.A> :1. <II . ~~ ... -·'"5,:_::~:.ff --~~,;~::~~:·:?:'!:~~~=~r <-';'''' .• '~'.~:::.::z~~~.'';..~!-;sI ,.:-;.. .... ~~~~::.":;,!;~ ~:;...;:-~o.: ~_r_-=---.:;;.,:·.-----;.;. • ..! ~ ... _'\.~~~~",. ~:..; ...... I-• ....;, I _~t:t!/~~:~fi:.:r;;;:;r~~ ~11!~4~1@.:3-~, <~<;;;c~~fS',;:;~~·'t-,: ;"o..;;;"i~;;~~.~,q:;-.• -.'",··:.:::::-~-:-..... ·~:~~:tti~1~~:~~ ., t ....• ~ '--."' .. ' 285 LA BROSSE AVE., POINTE CLAIRE, OUE. H9R 1A3 TELEPHONE (514) 695-2044 TELEX 05-821778 A-3 '" i .~-.. ~ ....... :'.~'" tI .'...: .. --: ~~' .. TURBINE GENERATING SETS UP 'ID 3000 HP PER smC;-LE UNIT OR NULTIPLES THEREOF BY GROUPING TflEX (,)·2,Li ;',~: .,,- / .I.~ • . ,:'" f ' .---' i \ .. " .; A-4 { STAPENHORST (>HGANIZATION INTRODUCTION The continuing energy crisis together with steep increases in capital invest- ment, as well as operating costs, fuel prices, and construction costs influ- enced F. W. E. Stapenhorst Inc. to explore the possibilities of exploiting small clams for the generation of additional hydro-electric power. With this 'in mind, considerable research was carried out with particular emphasis on supplying hydro-electric generating equipment which could easily cope with var iations in head and water discharge. The results of our research produced an economical range of units which complied with these variables, with the unique combination of: -High efficiency. -High reliability. -Low installation costs. -Low maintenance costs. We are certain that we can propose the most economical installations avail- able today. Stapenhorst offer complete co-operation from the initial study to a complete turn-key project. In all phases of design, such as selection of turbine sizes and associated equipment, economical planning, and related work, our e)<'''perience is at your disposal. All engineering is carried out in Stapenhorst offices. When supplying com- plete generating sets for the North American market, we select as far as possible, components manufactured in Canada or the U.S.A. by reputable and acceptable manufacturers. Some elements are designed and manufac- tured in our l\1ontreal Plant. The following pages provide a detailed des- cription of our activities, 1 A-5 PRINCIPLES OF OPERATION The OSSBERGER turbine is a radial, impulse-type turbine \,dth partial ad- mission. Its specific speed makes it a low-speed turbine. The intake water is forced through a rectangular cross-section and guide-vane system through the blades of the cylindrical runner, first from outside to inside and then, after passing through the interior of the runner, from inside to outside. This flow pattern has a unique advantage: leaves, grass or melting snow and ice, which may be forced between the blades of the runner as the water enters, are washed out by the outgoing water through the centrifugal forces after half a revolution of the runner. The runner is, therefore, self-cleaning and ne- ver becomes blocked. H the nature of the operating condition requires, the Ossberger turbines can be built in a multi-section configuration, the normal ratio being 1:2. The small guide vane section is used for restricted water supplies, the large section for medium flows, and both sections together for full flow. This ar- rangement permits the use of any water quantity in the range from 1/6 to 1/1 (16%-100%) with optimum efficiency in all ranges, making the Ossberger tur- bines particularly suitable for the efficient utilization of water flows subject to wide fluctuations in head and discharge. Flow pattern in OSSBERGER cr055- flow turbine; horizontal admission. 4 Flow pattern in OSSBERGER cross- flow turbine; vertical admission. A-6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~) { 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A-7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GUIDE VANE SYSTE.M Water admission to the divided OSSDERGER turbine is controlled by two balanced guide vanes. The intake water strcam is divided by the guide vanes which, irrespective of their opening, direct the water to provide a smooth entry into the runner. The two guide vanes have variablc pitch and are pre- cision-mounted in the turbine housing. At water heads of up to 150 feet, the guide vanes may be used as valves, eliminating the need for butterfly valves between penstock and turbine. The guidc vanes are adjusted individually by linkages to an automatic or manual control system. 1 ~31 2 /oIU I I I ,~Ft== -'---- -- RUNNER The runner is the heart of the turbine. It consists of precision-formed blades made of bright-drawn sectional steel, which are fitted and welded into the end rings. Depending on its size, the runner may have up to 30 blades. The blades are curved only in the radial direction and produce no axial thrust, thus eliminating the need for thrust bearings or labyrinth bearings and all their inherent disadvantages. In long runners, the blades are strengthened by several intermediate support rings. Although the use of bright-drawn steel· blade sections ensures almost perfect balanCing, each runner is carefully balanced prior to final assembly. DRAFT TUBE OSSBERGER turbines are basically impulse type turbines. In medium and low head ranges, a draft tube is essential to combine safety under high- water conditions with loss-free utilization of full head. The impulse turbine, especially \\lith a wide range of 1/6 to 1/1 admiSSion, and with a draft tube, requires regulation of the head in its draft tube. A simple air inlet valve controls the vacuum in the turbine hOllsing, permitting heads. even as little as 3~ feet, to be used to optimum efficiency. The design of the draft tube with ,i steel elbow reduces civil engineering costs conSiderably in these in- stallaL;ions, which would otherwise not be economically feasible in many cases. (j A-a 100 90 80 70 ?i 0 60 z ~ ..... 0 ..... 50 "-..... ~ ~ 40 30 20 10 ( c: /(; o I eROS TU!; /' / 1 L I I I I , I I 10 ~-FLOV BINE....., ... -- ...,." /1' / V // II / ....... FF ANCIS TURB NE / / ! I 20 30 40 50 60 GATE OPENING 7 1------ 70 80 ------- % 90 100 A-9 Leaflet ~I 3-l/l967 A HIGH-SPEED IMPULSE TURBINE By PAUL N. WILSON. M.A.. M.l.e.E .• M.I.Mech.E. Reprinted from "Water Power" January. 1967 BORDER ELECTRIC COMPANY BLAINE I;l/ASHINGTON 98230 ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS & ENGINEERS PHONE 332-5545 GILBERT Gll~{ES &: GORDON lTD WATER TURBINE & PUMP MANUFACTURERS KENDAL . ENGLAND . Telephone: KENDAL 20028 • Telex: 65125 A-10 ( A High-Speed Impulse Turbine This article describes the development and characteristics of the new high-capacity Turgo impulse turbine, which shows great improvements in capacity, efficiency and specific speed compared with earlier models. \Vithin its range it is regarded as a strong competitor to both Pelton and Francis machines By PAUL N. WILSON*, M.A., M.I.C.E., M.I.Mech.E. I N the last 15 years or so great strides p'l.ve been made in the design of Francis turbines, enabling them to be used for higher heads than was pre- viously thought possible. Hence there has been a tendency to neglect impulse turbines for some appli- cations where either could be used, and to overlook Fig. 1 Fig. 1. High-capacity Turgo impulse turbine the fact that there have also been great strides in the design of impulse turbines during the same period. What then are the basic advantages of m·.1dern impulse over Francis turbines in the intennedlute head and power range where both should be con- sidered? The best answer can be given by a practical engineer who has experience in the operation and maintenance of both impulse and Francis turbines. The· farther such a user is away from substantial repair facilities and the greater his difficulty in getting skilled maintenance men, the more important does the question of "wearing well" become. Viewed then from this angle the points enumerated below would be regarded as fair by any engineer experienced in the field operation of both types: (1) The impulse turbine is the simplest form of • Olaimun, Gi:bert GiLkes &. Gordon Limited, Kendal, W",~o~·and. prime mover. A wheel on a shaft carried in bearings is struck by a jet of water emerging through a nozzle, the area of which is controlled by a movable spear. (2) The wheel rotates in air at atmospheric pressure. The shaft must have water throwers in \yay of Fig.2 Fig. 2. Turgo and Pelton turbines contrasted the surrounding casing, but there is no need to seal with a gland. (3) Particles of solid matter in the water will, in process of time, wear the tip of the spear, the nozzle, and, after a very much longer period, the runner. The first two are easily removable, renewable, and repairable. Runner repair by welding, which may only be necessary after many years, can often be done without remoying the runner from the shaft or casing. This type of wear, provided it is not allowed to carry on until it becomes too bad, has little effect upon the turbine efficiency. (4) The working parts are easily accessible by remov- ing the top cover (horizontal-shaft units) or from the tailrace, and through suitably placed manholes. (5) Governing is usually carried out by jet deflector, A-ll Thru Fig. 3. The 1936 design of Turgo turbine and the operation of this, when load is rejected, is virtually instantaneous, thereby controlling the speed rise within acceptable limits and cutting the required flywheel effect to a minimum. Often the inherent inertia ill the generator rotor is sufficient. The operation of the deflector also initiates a follow"up closure of the spear, the rate of spear closing being arranged to suit the pipeline profile and to keep the pressure rise to a nominal figure. Only those who have spent long hours struggling \vith the problems of governing Francis turbines with long pressure penstocks realise this great virtue! (6) There is no danger of cavitation. (7) The efficiency curve is extremely flat. There are three inherent disadvantages, namely: (8) Low specific spee<;l. (9) A reduction in the operating head, as the suction head cannot be used. (l0) Possibly a lower efficiency at full load. Consider now the Francis turbine under the same headings: (1) H~re again we have a runner on a shaft rotating in bearings, but tile water is admitted through from ten -to twenty or more openings, the rate of flow being controlled by a number of carefully shaped adjustable guide vanes. In order to 0btain efficiencies higher than those of an equivalent impulse. turbine, clearances between the end covers and runner must be extremely finc. Practical considerations, how- eyer do not always match the theoretical re-quir~ments and often the actual clearances have to be scveral times greater than desired. (2) A shaft gland or seal must be provided. We are consiG<:!ring a high-head installation, and the seal and/or the shaft will ultimately wear if there is any silt in the water. To protect the shaft a removable sleeve may be fittcd, but results in a major strip-down of the unit when the time comC5 to replace the worn sleeve. Four (3) Water which is not clean can cause very rapid wear in high-head Francis turbines. Tn passing through the fine clearances petween guide vanes and end cover facings and, worse stilI, between the runner and clearance rings, it can quickly reduce overall efficiency of the turbine by several per cent. The effect is much more serious in turbines of small diameter than in large ones. (4) The examination and overhaul of a Francis turbine is a much more difficult job than that of the equivalent impulse turbine. Unless the machine is large enough to enter, the discharge bend, runner, and possibly one, or both, end covers will have to be removed before clearances can be measured and a true assessment made of the repairs that will be necessary. Badly worn guide vanes will almost certainly have to be replaced by new ones, and this, involving as it does refitting all links, pins and operating mechanism, will take a considerable time. * (5) A Francis turbine is governed by opening and closing the guide vanes. With heavy load rejec- tion, the problems of speed rise and pipeline pressure rise have to be met and overcome. This is usually done by either: (a) having a relatively· slow-acting governor, requiring an increase in the flywheel effect of the rotating parts. This usually means that a large flyvlheeI is necessary, or (b) having a governor of normal operating speed interconnected to a relief valve or impulse jet brake, thereby adding to the cost, com- plication, and number of parts subject to wear. A leaking relief-valve seat may waste water for many months or even for years before the defect is discovered. (6) Cavitation is an ever-present danger. The study of cavitation is not an exact science, and the raising of a power-house floor level to reduce the danger of flooding, or to cheapen construc- tion, may be followed by endless cavitation troubles. (7) A low specific-speed (high-head) Francis turbine should, with fine clearances, have a high effi- ciency from full load to half load. Usually from about five-eighths load downwards the impulse turbine will be much better. If there is much likelihood of long periods of running below half load the Francis turbine will not only lose out on efficiency but the cavitation panger will become mOre serious. The advantages of the Francis turbine are: (8) Possibly a higher speed. If an impulse turbine runs at 600rpm, and a Francis at 1,000, the size, weight and cost of the Francis turbine, with its associated alternator will probably be lower, and tramport problems reduced. Naturally, the higher the specific speed of the impulse turbine, the less will differences of this sort occur. (10) The efficiency from about five-eighths to full load may be slightly up on that of the impulse turbine. . Forty-five years ago these facts were \vell known to Gilbert Gilke5 & Gordon Limited, water-turbine .. Tht!' ··Oraf[ gu;rJe for Comm;~iiun:ng. O;J~rJ.tion ::lnd ~f.l:ntcnJ.nce of HydrJu~ic Tl!;b:n~~" recl!ntly circu;J.!.ed to in::::rt':ited membtrs by the ESI. !"ooU:.t:Il~J::S lh.1.l Fr.lnci~ turbines should N cx:tmined annu3.r!r A-12 f • manufacturers, Kendal, and particularly to their ~tanc.ging Director, Mr. Eric Crewdsoll. At that time individual units were very much smaller than they are today, and Francis turbines were not being built for such high heads. Crewdson realised that a strong case could be made out for an impulse turbine with a very much higher specific speed than the single-jet Pelton wheel, and in 1919 he set about designing the first Turgo impulse turbine which is described in British Patent No. 155,175 of 16 December 1920. Like all good designs it was very simple. The jet of a Pelton ",heel strikes the splitter edge of the bucket, bifurcates, and is discharged at either side. With the Turgo impulse turbine the jet is set at an angle to the face of the runner, strikes the buckets at the front, and discharges at the opposite side. The basic difference will be clear from Fig. 2. Any impulse turbine achieves its maximum effi- ciency when the velocity of the bucket at the centre line of the jet is slightly under half the jet velocity. Hence for maximum speed of rotation, the mean diameter of the runner should be as smaII as possible. There is a limit, however, to the size of jet which can be applied to any impulse turbine runner without seriously reducing the efficiency. If: d=Jet diameter D = Runner mean diameter the ratio D/d decides all the main characteristics of the turbine. For Pelton wheels of the early twenties a normal ratio of D/dwas about 10 to 1. Consider, for example, a 4in-diameter jet applied to a Pelton wheel. The mean diameter would be about 40in. If the head was 750ft the spouting velocity of the jet (neglecting the coeffi- cient of velocity) would be 220ft/sec and the velocity component of the runner along the centre line of the jet would be approximately half this, giving a rotative speed of about 600rpm. The basic advantage of Crewdson's Turgo impulse turbine was that a much larger jet could be applied to a runner of a given mean diameter. In the earliest design the relation D/d was 5·25 to I. Considering the example quoted above, the runner me2.n diameter would be: 4in x5·25=21in, and the speed about 1,IOOrpm. In the field for which it was suited the Tunw impulse turbine was a complete break-through, and soon became known through the world as a standard Gilkes product. In addition to the mountainous districts of Scotland and Wales, many Turgo impulse turbines, usual\y ranging in output from about SO to SOOhp, were sold to mines. factories, and muni- cipalities in Peru, Colombia. South Africa, Ceylon, Western Canada. and many of the more remote parts of the world. They established a remarkably high reputation for trouble-free operation, and were extremely competitive in price. In 1935. Gilkes' Chief Engineer, ~1r. Ernest Jackson, carried out further basic research on the Turgo impulse turbine. The Company's permanent water-turbine testing tank had been completed the previous year, and this was the second major develop- ment project. Jackson redesigned the runner, and moved the path of the jet so that it struck the runner ahead of the vertical centreline as shown in Fie:. 3. Both the efficiency and the output were substan- tially increased, and the new design was covered by British Patent No. 468.557 of 7 July 1937. The Did ratio was reduced to 4·5 to I. This became known as the "1936 Desie:n" and it immediately superseded the earlier design. At the outbreak of the 1939-45 War two 3,OOOhp turbines were being built for Mauritius, to be followed after the War by one of 4,300hp for the same station. These operated at 1,000rpm under a head of 900ft. All units have been running almost continuously since they were installed. The most powerful Turgo impulse wheels of this design which ha\"e so far been built are two of 6,000hp operating at 600rpm, under a head of 800ft for the City of Re\elstoke in British Columbia. Here again, the second unit followed the first some four years later. Fig. 4, Double Turgo impulse turbille for Cia Marl1lolcs y Cel1lClltos del Narc, Colol/lbia A-13 Fi\'e Fig. 5. From and rear viell's of a new high-capacity Turgo impulse runner _ Engineers who have had Turgo impulse turbines remain very loyal to them. One of the most interesting cases is that of Cia. Marmoles y Cementos del Nare, a cement factory on the Magdelena River in Colom- bia. A good supply of water at a head of 300ft is a\aibble from the Nare River at a point a few miles from the factory. Unfortunately, the water is heavily cont2.minared with sharp quartz particles, and the wear on small Francis turbines used for the .initial power supply was most severe. In 1938 the factory purchased a 180hp, 900rpm Turgo impulse turbine which operated so well that tenders weie called next year for a 3,000kW (4,250hp) unit which .must be of the impulse type. With the outbreak of War the scheme was suspended, and then, as the need for power was desperate, and American manufacturers were not prepared to make special impulse turbines, two 2,125hp Francis tur- bine'> were installed. The wear was fantastic. Every few months one or other turbine was out of commis- sion and undergoing repair, but nozzle and spear tip repairs to the Turgo impulse only necessitated a few hour,>' shutdown. In 1947 Dr. I\lejia, the Managing Director, asked Gi!kes and Bruce Peeblcs to design a 3,000kW 300~pm double-runner Turgo impulse turbine for a h~J.d of 29-lft. There were considerable technical dirficulties, particularly with the bearing arrange- i7!~nt (the runners were overhung), and it must be co,ne in mind that the jets, lO'25in in diameter, are 0:-, a par with those of the largest impulse turbines i;: the world. The set is depicted in Fig. 4. Due to it trade recession this unit was not com- il::ssi0:;;;d until 1953, but its operation was so good, ,,-~d so f.::'s spares h:tve been required, that a duplic;:;te W:lS ordered in 1962 and is now installed. Although ",:lny engill~:rs may regard these units as 11l1eCOnO- inic-, the fact rem:lins that, after many years of 0r~ra­ I;0n~~11 e"perience, a hard-headed commercial firm 5£x was prepared to pay far more for an impulse turbine of proved design than for a Francis turbine which. it was known, would be a continual source of trouble. The low wear on Turgo impulse turbines is due to the fact that only the silt carried by the boundary layer of the jet comes into contact with the nozzle, spear tip and "working" face of the runner bucket. In 1946 Gilkes were visited by a Russian hydro- electric engineer who had been commissioned to enquire whether they would be prepared to sell Turgo impulse turbines to Russia. Gilkes offered no objection, and prepared a considerable amount of general information relating to duties, performance, etc., which was passed on. Nothing further was heard until the late '50s, when the interchange of technical and scientific information became more possible. It was then found that the Russians had been doing a lot of research work on "Inclined Jet Turbines," and papers had been written by W. S. 9 0 ~--1----+.,.--. \ 0 -'-&,P I J/ . ~!. HIGH CAPACITY ~/ 191!} DESIGN 1936 DESIGN· DESIGN 0 of I 8 7 0 , 0 1 i o·----t o 1------1-----r-----~ u ~~--;---------~ 2 0 o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 TURBINE OUTPUT. hp FiK. 6. E(ficicllcy Clines, sliOlring the superiority of the high-capacity design A-14 TABLE I.-GILKES HIGIl-CAPACIT" Tl:RGO I~'!PlJLSE Tl:RIlISES Purchaser (Consulting engineers, if any) No. I Output Net h.:ad Speed! :\i:itl!~e of, sets i per set i ------~-----'--------------,------------' -----------'--i hp ft rpm; ;[_ Chipinga Hydroelectric Scheme, Rhodesia· . . . . 1 I 600 445 1,000 i,' L~O (;\lerz & :-'lcLellan) -w-.-G-.-G-o-rd-o-n-,-£-sq-.-, -B-l-air--A-th-o-lI-,-P-e-n-h-sh-.i-re'-, ----OJ' ---1-------:---·-·_-- Scotlandt .. .. .. .. " .. 1 , 150 ____ 18_3 ___ . 75_0 __ i,,' (Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners) __ _ Dominica, \V.I. t . . . . . . . . . . 2 1,360 462 1.000 I :\rp~C'\, sea k~el Colonial Development Corpn.. "Padu Hydel," I r ------------------I-----------;-----!---------'-----Ni~~~:ria Elect~i~ity .~UPpl~. Cor.p.n., • .. ~wall:·: 2 /' 3,000 650 1.000 I, (Balfour Beatty) ----------------1----1------'1:------I------'~;Ii'------ ~.500 Empresa Electrica Ibarra. "£1 Ambi." Ecuador. S.A. 2 5,600 585 600 6.000 • Installed 1965. t Installed 1966 Kwiatowski and I. F. Shipulin. They had worked to a lower specific speed and a higher Did ratio than Gilkes' 1936 design, but otherwise their results corresponded closely, and they advocated the use of this type of turbine for "heads up to 1,000ft and outputs up to 7,500hp." In 1960 Jackson again tackled the job of improving the performance of the turbine; he was optimistic, but did not anticipate the remarkable results which were to be achieved. A nin mean-diameter standard 1936 design tur- bine was available, and although rather small this had advantages in enabling alterations to be made quickly. In any case it was differences in performance that were being investigated, and all instrumentation was very carefully checked. First, a full set of tests were made on the standard turbine, and kept for control purposes. A wooden model was then made, shaped to represent the profile of the bucket as it would appear, relative to the jet, when the bucket was rotating. By carving away and filling with paraffin wax the profile was improved, but in the process a good deal of water flowed over the investigators and the Research Department! Working back from this model. and coupled with a lot of theoretical work, a new runner was designed. The efficiency was improved considerably, and showed no signs of falling off even when the spear was in its fully open position. It was clear that an even larger jet could be used, and also that the existing casing \vas going to be too small. Jackson was anxious to carryon with this step-by-step method of investigation. He did not want to make several alterations and not know the exact effect of each. This slowed up the work, but was undoubtedly the correct procedure. After many months of \vork the new Gilkes "High-Capacity Turgo Impulse" turbine prototype was complete. The main improvement was obtained by the com- plete redesign of the runner, for which British Patent 1"0. 938967 of 2 May 1961 was granted. The inlet angle of the jet was altered, and due to the rate of flow of water causing a larger spread at the discharge side of the runner, it was decided that the driving shaft should no longer be carried from the discharge side, as was done in previous designs. Accordingly. thc jet now enters from thc driving side of the runner between it and the alternator, and discharges freely with no obstruction at the opposite side to the alternator. This has an additional ad\'antag:e of considerably reducing the overall length of th-e s;':t. The ratio Did was reduced to 3·75: 1 and the inl;':t and discharge sides of the runner are shown in Fig:. 5. The steady increase in e1liciency and output for a 24in mean-diameter Turgb impulse turbine operating under a head of 750ft is strikingly shown by the output efficiency curves in Fig. 6. It is hardly neces- sary to draw the attention of any engineer who is interested in hydroelectric developmer.t to the re- remarkably flat efficiency curve of the high-capacity Turgoimpulse turbine. The production of a single-jet impulse turbine with its associated simplicity of design, having a specific speed of 15 (66 metric un:ts) must be admitted as a very remarkable achie\'cmem, and Gilkes are now satisfied that for heads up to LOOOft and possibly higher, there are many cases in which a Turgo impulse turbine would be a much more attractive proposition than a Francis turbine or mUltiple-jet Pelton wheel. It is interesting to consider the alternatives available to an engineer who is considering installing a single lO\IW hydroelectric unit operating under a head of 1,000ft at an altitude of 2,OOOft. The turbine outpm would be approximately I4,000hp, and a 3Sin mean- diameter high-capacity Turgo impulse turbir.e would be suitable for this duty at a speed of 750rpm for a 50-cycle system, or nOrpm for a 60-cycle system. A four-jet Pelton wheel would run at 500 or pos- sibly 600rpm, and the choice would be bet\\een a vertical-shaft four-jet or a horizontal-shaft doub!e- runner two-jet machine. Neither alternative is \ erv attractive. The machine would be re\!arded as smalt for a multi-jet vcrtical Pelton. and -the foundatio~ work would be expensive. A Francis turbine running at 750rpm would, at this altitude, have to have the runner at approxi- matcly tailrace level. It would be a \ ertical-sh1ft machine, the alternator would cost more. and the foundation work would be much more ditllcult and expensive than that for the Turgo impulse. The re- marks made earlier on the characteristic5 oi Francis turbines related to a horizontal shaft machine. The difi1culties of examination and o\'erh:::ul are much g:rcater with a vertical-shaft machine. -Table I is a list of Gilkes high-C:l.p:lcity Turgo impulse turbincs installed or Jt present in cOllrse of exccution for delivcry during 1967. A-IS Se\'('11 PAMPHLET \\ II §rPIfia~GF9£LD ©1}S~~ i ~ 1 j A-16 \. are designed and built to suit your particular water power requirements Since 1862, we have specialized in the design and manu- facture of all kinds of hydraulic turbines in a wide range of capacities and types. \Vithin this range we produce turbines of specific speeds, from the lowest practical for Francis runners to the highest for runners of the propeller type, both fixed and adjustable blade. \Ve also manufacture a complete line of impulse turbines -as well as a wiele variety of horizontal low head "flow-through" turbines backed by many years of specialization in the low head field. Leffel hydraulic turbines are designed and built to not only dri\'e generators-but many other kinds of machinery. :-'1any undeveloped, obsolete, or inefficient water-power in· stallations can be profitably developed or modernized and economicall), equipped with Leffel turbines. In addition to all sizes and types of hydraulic turbines from the smallest to very large units, we also manufacture self-contained generator units for estates, farms, ranches and similar uses. \Ve also supply governors and governor equip- ment for hydraulic turbines -relief valves (pressure regu- lators) -steel penstocks -gate valves -free discharge valves -head and sluice gates and hoists -trash racks and other related equipment. For the answers in water power equipment -contact Leffel -it pays! ;i:", i~fE JAM!ES n.~E=!FlEl ~ (@o ';'_??'~-":"":'" I SPRINGFIELD, OHIO, U. S. A. '~~~;;~::'~j MORE EFFICIENT HYDRAULIC POWER FOR OVER A CENTURY A-17 ~BNTS ON THE DEVElOPj'VlENl Of SiAAtL WATER POWERS ~, . This pamphlet has been prepared for those who contemplate the construction of srnaJl water power ( p!ants on small streams for the purpose of generating electric current for general home use, and it is intended to convey certain information in order that the subject may be grasped by those unacquainted with the gen- eral rules and requirements for such developments. It is generally understood by all that a flowing stream may be made to produce power, but it is not gen- erally understood what information is required by the manufacturer of water power equipment in order that proper ad"ice and recommendations may be given. Therefore we are outlining below the rules and require- ments that must be observed when asking for information pertaining to the development of water power. We will add that the subject matter of this pamphlet applies principally to the smaller developments, but, at the same time, the same rules may be applied to the larger developments to a certain extent. FAll OR HEAD In order to produce power from a flowing stream there must be a "fall" in the stream. This "fall" is almost always augmented, or increased by the construction of a dam. A dam in the stream is necessary in order to raise the water to a maximum level to create a head, and to divert the water from the stream to the turbine, or water wheel. This head that is created is the vertical distance from the surface of the water at the dam down to the surface of the water in the stream below the dam and at a point where the turbine will be located. . As the useful power that may be produced from any waterpower is the direct product of the "head- and the weight of the water, which weighs 62.34 lbs. per cubic foot, it follows that the "head" available and the amount of water flowing in the stream in cubic feet per minute are absolute factors when it is desired to compute the amount of power that may be developed. It will be understood that the term "fall" means the natural fall or drop in the course of a stream, and that the term "head" defines the vertical drop resulting from the construction of a dam in the stream. Please note Design 30 illustrating how this term is applied to a turbine installation. HOW TO DETERMINE THE "f--3EAiY' When selecting the dam site it is wen to remember that the higher th~ dam is built the more the ~head" \vill be, and the greater the "head" the more power a given amount of water will produce; and the smaller will be the turbine. Therefore, it is well to exercise care in the selection of the dam site so that the highest possibJe head may be realized. However, consideration must be given to the cost and possible dam- age to your neighbor's property. Usually the topography of the ground will suggest the logical location for the dam, although there are other detennining factors to be taken into consideration, such as character of foundation, property lines, pond area, etc. Space does not .i>ennit a more detailed treatment of these subjects. \Ve will say, however, that it may be well to have an engineer or surveyor run out "contour lines'" upstream from the dam site representing proposed water levels back of the dam. In this manner the flooded area may be determined before the dam is built, and serious complications avoided if such there may be. After the height, or elevation, of the water back of the dam has been established, levels may be run downstrea..-n v.jth an engineer's level or transit to determine the "fall" or "head" that may be secured below the cam site within a reasonable distance. It follows that the TOTAL HEAD that may be secured is that which is created by the dam plus the "fall or head" th at may be secured below the dam. This TOTAL HEAD is represented by the VERTICAL DISTANCE from the surface of the water back of the dam down to the surface of the water below the dam and at the point where the turbine may be located. If L~e developed "head" is low; that is, from a few feet up to ten to fifteen feet, the turbine is usually located right at. or very close to the dam, the water being conveyed to the turbine through an open flume or penstock. But, in some cases, where the head is not any greater than mentioned above, the turbine may be quite small and for that reason alone it migbt be more economical to convey the water to the turbine throug~ a steel pipe line. In some cases, regardless of the head secured, it is desirable to place the turbine some little distance belo\v the dam to secure additional head due to the fall of the stream below the dam. In such cases a pipe line. or an open Burne or open ditch may be used to convey the water to the turbine. However, there are (:25('5 v,,-here an open tail race may be excavated from the stream to the powerhouse to secure at least part of tr.e fall below the dam; this being less expensive than the above mentioned pipe line or ditch. A-18 1 MEASUREMENi orr WA1E~ FLOWING I~~ TKE STltEAM The second ahsolute factor that detennines tlle amount of power that may be developed is the quanti!y of water available for power purposes fIowi.'1g in the stream. Quantity of water for power purposes should be expressed in "cubic feet per minute" (C.F.M.). There are two well known methods of measuring streams; one by the weir method and the other by the float method. Both methods are fully described and illustrated on a leaflet attached to tllis pampblet. Tnere are cases where it is obvious that the water supply is more than adequate for the power to be developed but in most cases it is highly important that the water be carefully measured. It will generaJly be found that the flow of water in any stream will vary greatly with the season of the year and this should be taken into consider?-tion when measurements are taken. The minimum flow of a stream, in most cases, has a duration of several weeks during t.~e dry season, and this flow, when taken into consideration, represents the amount of water that can be developed continuously, or 10070 of the time outside of that period of time the stream m.ay be in flood stage. As the flow of the stream increases, the amount of power that may be developed increases, although it is true that as the flow increases the actual head on the turbine is decreased somewhat on account of a greater quantity of water being discharged into the tail race which raises the level of the water therein. As the flow increases beyond the nonnal, or average stage the head is reduced still further. Howe"r·er. periods of higb water and low head are of comparatively short duration and while this condition must be contend~ with, it should not be allowed to stand in the way of the development of the water power. It is obvious that a stream should be measured at various times of the year in order that complete data on the flow be established. Daily measurements are ideal and may be made conveniently, especially if the weir method of measuring is used. It is also obvious that any measurement taken during Bood period would be of little value except that . . such measurements may be used to estimate the size of the flood or waste gate in the dam. It should be noted here that if the stream is subject to floods, provision must be made in the dam to allow the e"cess water to escape; thereby preventing damage to the dam and powerhouse structure. EFFECT OF PONDAGE '\!hen a dam is built in a stream there is created back of L~e dam a pond that is really a storage reservoir that may be used to very good advantage to conserve the supply of water during times when the turbine is consuming less water than is flowing in the stream, and to supply water over and above that fIOW4 ing in the stream when it is needed. If the pond is of sufficient area the above feature is of much benefit during times when the stream is at minimum flow. In further explanation it may be stated that the load on any plan is seldom, if ever, fixed as it may and will vary with the needs of the power consumer. For example: Let us assume that the maximum capacity of the turbine is 600 cubic feet of water per minde, and that the load on the turbine at the moment requrres all of this water to develop the power required by the load. Assume also, that the flow of water in the rneam at the same time is only 300 cubic feet per minute. It will be seen that the turbine will consume the 300 cubic feet of water flowing in the stream plus 300 cubic feet more per minute which will be drawn from the pond. Now assume that in a short time the load changes to the extent that the turbine onI,. requires 100 cubic feet of water per minute. Inasmuch as there are 300 cubic feet of water flowing in the stream and the tur· bine only requires 100 cubic feet of it, the difference, or 200 cubic feet of water per minute, will be stored in the pond to replace that which was drawn out. A great many water-power feed and flour mills depend a great deal on pond age as they operate during the day, drawing on the pond for excess water not supplied by the nonnal flow of the stream. At night they shut down and the flow of the stream refills the pond which allows them to start the next morning with a full pond. From the above we believe it will be seen how important and necessary the pond is to the successful operation of a water power plant during times when the normal flow of the stream is not great enough to sup- ply the maximum capacity of the turbine installed. In other words one may take advantage of the existence of a pond and install a larger turbine than he could otherwise, and, thereby, be able to carry 2 greater momen- tary, or peak load for short times. Therefore, the area of the pond created by the dam should be given along with the infonnation rege.rd- ing the head and the quantity of water. The area of the pond may be given approximately and in terms of acres. .2 A-19 ( ~5iL',1ATJNG THE POWE~ R:::QUl~ED As this pamphlet is principally for those who desire to install water power equipment to drive generators for furnishing eledric current for home and farm use, we will confine our remarks to that ,type of load. It m:1y be your wish to furnish electricity to only a small cottage, a group of cottages, a group of farm buildings, or perhaps, to a private estate including all the buildings thereon. But, whatever it is, there are certain items of information we should have to be able to advise you regarding the amount of power required to accomplish the results you desire. A list of the total number of electrical outlets in all of the buildings should be made, and this list should include only the outlets for electric lights. Then, in addition, list all of the electrical appliances that may be used, including heaters, flat irons, radios, television sets, electrical ranges, milking machines, cream separators, etc. \Vith such a list at hand we can then estimate the approximate pea.\ load that would have to be carried by the turbine and helps us to decide on the proper size of turbine and accessory equipment. TYPES OF ELECTRIC GENERA10~S There are two types of electric generators that may be used, and we are referring to their electrical characteristics in this instance. One type generates Alternating Current and the other type generates Direct Current. The type to be selected depends on a number of factors which must be given consideration. Alter- nating Current may be transmitted much greater distances than Direct Current wit bout undue loss and with smaller wires. Therefore, the distance from the power plant to t.l:!e place where the current will be used is Q very important factor and should be stated in your inquiry. The size of the generator is another factor, but that is determined when the power of the turbine is determined, and, therefore, this will be taken into account when the recommendations are made. Tne type of equipment to be operated by the electrical current is, also, a factor, and it is well to re- member in this connection that any electrical apparatus having heating elements, such as light bulbs and heaters, may be operated by either Alternating or Direct Current. On the other hand, any apparatus oper- ated by electric motors must be equipped with either Alternating Current motors or Direct Current motors as it is substantially true that it is impossible to have a motor that will operate on both A.C. and D.C. current. If your buildings are already furnished with Alternating Current equipment it is a very dedding factor in the selection of the generator, irrespective of the distance the current must be transmitted. But. if fui.J ap- paratus is yet to be pm:chased, consideration may be given to the selection of a Direct Current generator and equipment to suit. Direct Current generators are generally less expensive tha.n the A.C. type, and. if wound in a certain specific manner for constant voltage, expensive governing equipment for the turbine equipment may be omitted. . For additional information on this subject please write to any of the principal electrical manufactu:rers, or confer with your local electrician. TYPES AND STYLES Of 1URB)N~S THE JAMES LEFFEL & COMPANY, with main office and factory located at Spriugfield, Ohio, having manufactured turbine water wheels since 1862, have many lines of patterns from which a selection may 1>0 ITl3de to fit practically every condition of installation. We are prepared to furnish turbines developing frac- tional horsepower up to thousands of horsepower, and these are made in many different styles to meet the requirements of our customers. No inquiry is neglected regardless of the size of the equipment involved, and each and every inquiry is given prompt and careful attention. We earnestly desire that t.'1e party miling inquiry correspond with us freely, and V-le will do everything within our power to advise and counsel him to the end that when th.e plant is ccmpleted it win be a thing of usefulness and not a failure. We urge you to accept our advice and suggestions BEFORE work is started. Altogether too many people have come to us for advice AFTER they have attempted to make an installation, relying on their own limited knowledge of an art that is highly specialized. They have nothing to their credit but failure, loss of time and much money which, if properly dirt'Cted in the beginning, would have spelled success. The successful completion of a w3.terpower plant is not a difficult problem if it is properly engineered in the begior.ing. If the owner will realize that the problems confronting him" are of an unusual nature and that to solve L,em properly requir~ spedal training, he win not start construction or expend his resOUl"CeS without proper advice. 3 A-20· \Ve have endeavored to show in this pamphlet what infonnation we must have in order to p~oper!y ad\;se those who are contemplating the construction of small water power plants, and, on receipt oftb.!s information, ... ve ~;ll promptly advise the amount of power that may be developed, together with a sug- gestion as to the type and size of turbine thnt would best suit the conditions. Quotations on the equip:ne-.1t will also be given at the proper time. At this point we might describe in detail the various types and styles of turbines which we are in posi- tion to furnish, but to do so would have a tendenc~' to confuse and we would, therefore, prefer to dwell on L~is matter at length after the first preliminary information is at hand which is covered in this pamphlet. We .... ill, however, describe briefly a few of the more common types of turbines and their application. A turbine water wheel is a de .. ;ce for transfonning the energy of failing water to power in a forr:J. which may be applied to the driving of machinery, electrical or otherwise. TIle empounded water back of the dam flows into a Burne or penstock which is built into the dam., and from thence, it Bows through the turbine and into what is known as a discharge pit, or tail race, eventually reaching the stream again below the dam. Attached to this pamphlet is a special, illustrative page entitled "IMPROVED VERTICAL SAMSON TURBINES" and if this page is referred to it will be noted that a turbine consists of threeprincipaI parts, the runner and shaft, which are the parts that rotate; the gate or guide casing which contains the adjust- able gates for guiding the water into the runner; and the discharge cylinder, or draft tube, which conveys the water-to the discharge pit, or tail race, after it has left the runner. A turbine may be installed in a vertical or horizontal position, but the vertical position (like Design SO) is to be preferred as it is usually more economical and efficient. The illustrative page referred to above shows a typical, vertical, open Burne turbine. When this type of turbine is installed an extension shaft is attached to the coupling on the top end of the turbine shaft, and on this extension shaft is mounted a pulley for drhing a generator by means of a quarter tum belt. Necessary bearings are also mounted on this exten- sion shaft. Examples of quarter tum belt drives may be found in our bulletin No. 38, copy of which will be sent on request. The Burne in which the turbine is installed is usually built of concrete, but sometimes wood or steel is used. An open Burne or penstock is one that is open at the top to the atmosphere, and a closed flume is closed at the top which is below headwater level. In this case (closed Burne) the extension turbine sha.'t and the gate operating shaft pass through suitable packing boxes in the lop of the Burne. \Vhen turbines of small capacity are used under heads of water of about fifteen feet or more, they are often installed in steel or cast iron cases and the water is conveyed to the turbine by means of a pipe made from steel or wood. In all cases the turbine is fitted with a set of adjustable gates of the wicket type that may be open or closed to any degree from closed position to open position, and they are located in the gate, or guide casing mentioned above. These gates are used to regulate the flow of water through the turbine runner, and thus regulate the power and speed of the turbine. In many cases the adjustment of the turbine gates is accomplished by means of a suitable handwheel located at a convenient place in the powerhouse, and connected to the turbine gate operating mechanism by suitable shafting. In other cases the adjustment Df the turbine gates is accomplished by an automatic governor, which automatically adjusts the turbine gates to maintain a constant speed on the turb;ne when the load is diminishing or increasin[!. When used this governor is located in the powerhouse and is arranged in such a manner that the turbine gates may be opera~~d by hand if desired. Whether or not a governor is needed depends on the size of the turbine, type of load on the plant, type of generator used, and the desirability for good speed regulation. It is also a factor i:l the cost of the equip- ment as the governor cost is sometimes as much as that of the turbine equipment if the turbine is small. These as well as related questions are covered in detail when the quotation is made. In instances where the turbine is installed in concrete or wooden flumes, WE: consider it our duty and a part of our business to furnish information showing the proper size, or the internal dimensions of such flumes, as it is of the utmost importance that these flumes be built sufficient in size to handle the water w;thout undue loss in head. It is well to note here that the water flowing in the flume flows at a velocity dt'~ermined by the size or area of the flume, and, as it requires a certain amount of head to produce a J!i\'en wlocity. it follows that the higher the velocity the more head is required to produce that velocity. This head is lost to the turbine and, therefore, does not produce power. It is highly important, therefore, that the Rume. pipe line or penstock, as well as all the water passages conveying water to the turbine be de-signe-d with ample dimensions, and \ve do all that is possible to see that this type of construction is carried out. But. all too frequently. we find flumes and penstocks designed and built altogether too small for the size of the hlrbine installed. The result is that the turbine does not operate under the head expected ::lnd the o\'mer is sorely disapPOinted with the performance of the plant. 4 A-21 ~u'AASH RAC'(S AND HEAD GATES To prevent trash and floating material from getting into the turbine and plugging up the water pa38ages with a resultant reduction in power and efficiency, and, also, possible damage to the turbine, it is highly de- sirable to install at the head of the flume or penstock a suitable trash rack made from steel bars set on edge to the flow of the water and properly spaced according to the size of the turbine. It is usual to design trash racks so that the maximum water velocity does not exceed one and one-half feet per second. Just back of the trash rack should be installed suitable head gates that may be operated easily to close the water out of the Burne or penstocK to allow the turbine equipment to be inspected, cleaned, or repaired as th~ case may be. We manufacture both trash racks and head gate hoisting equipment and we will furnish further infor- mation regarding these items on request. OLD WATER-POWER PLANTS REMODElED It often happens that an old, abandoned water-power plant is purchased and it is desired to have it re- modeled and brought up to date. In such cases it b well for us to know this in the beginning, as we have records of many of these sites, and such information means a saving not only to the customer but to our- selves as well. Quite often existing structures may be saved, and if the old flumes or penstocks are to be .used we should have full information regarding them. In most instances of this kind it is desirable to have one of our engineers visit the site in order to get first hand information and data. 5~RV)tES Of AN ENGINEER As mentioned in the above paragraphs, we are prepared to have one of our expert engineers visit the water power site to collect the necessary information and data on existing water power struchu"es to assist in the planning of the application of new turbine equipment. This engineer would also be competent to ta,.l..e measurements of the head and to go over the ground in a preliminary manner, advising to the best of his ability and experience, whether or not the project is practical. Arrangements for the services of such an engineer may be made on written application to The JRIDes Leffel & Company, Engineering Department, Springfield, Ohio. IN CONCLUSION \Ve have discussed in a general way in this pamphlet several items of information that should be given us when !Dquiry is made regarding the possibilities of small water powers and, in conclusion, we will group these items in condensed form on the following page in order that they may be readily taXen into consider- ation and proper reply made. • • • • • • • Please fill out the attached perforated sheet completely -tear it out and return to - THE JAM~S LEf}=~t AND COMPANY S?RING~JHD OHIO 5 A-22