HomeMy WebLinkAboutHarvest Analysis final - Upper Kobuk Valley est 2010
Submitted to:
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary – Key Findings ...............................................................................4
Key findings ..................................................................................................................................................................4
Introduction .................................................................................................................5
Purpose ...........................................................................................................................................................................5
Field Review .................................................................................................................................................................5
Regional Overview .....................................................................................................................................................6
Review of Biomass Heat Systems and Links to Harvest Systems .........................................................6
StickFired Boilers .....................................................................................................................................................7
ChipFired Boilers ......................................................................................................................................................8
Ambler Heating Systems .........................................................................................................................................8
Shungnak Heating Systems ...................................................................................................................................9
Kobuk Heating Systems.........................................................................................................................................10
Effects of moisture content on biomass utilization...................................................................................11
Sustainable Forest Management ......................................................................................................................13
Native Allotments ....................................................................................................................................................13
Review of Harvest Equipment Types ..........................................................................13
Timber Harvest Overview ...................................................................................................................................13
Wood Fuel Management ......................................................................................................................................14
Harvesting System Component Activities ....................................................................................................15
Chip fired boiler wood requirements and harvest scenarios ................................................................15
Stick fired boiler wood requirements and harvest scenarios ...............................................................16
Timber Harvest – Tree Felling ...........................................................................................................................17
Timber Harvest – Skidding, Decking, Loading and Transport.............................................................18
Wood transport – alternative ............................................................................................................................21
Wood Chip Production ..........................................................................................................................................22
Whole tree hauling..................................................................................................................................................22
Chipping .......................................................................................................................................................................23
Cord Wood & Fire Wood Production ..............................................................................................................24
Cord Wood Processing ...........................................................................................................................................24
Firewood production..............................................................................................................................................24
Harvest Equipment Recommendations by Village ......................................................25
Ambler .........................................................................................................................................................................25
Chip system harvest requirements ...................................................................................................................25
Cordwood system harvest requirements .......................................................................................................26
Ambler – Recommended Harvest System ....................................................................................................27
Shungnak ....................................................................................................................................................................28
Chip harvest system requirements ...................................................................................................................28
Cord wood harvest system requirements ......................................................................................................28
Kobuk ...........................................................................................................................................................................29
Chip system harvest requirements ...................................................................................................................29
Cord wood harvest system requirements ......................................................................................................29
Shungnak and Kobuk Recommended Harvest System ...........................................................................30
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
3
Appendix ...................................................................................................................32
Transportation System Analysis ......................................................................................................................32
Background ................................................................................................................................................................32
Log Rafting in spring and summer ..................................................................................................................32
Winter Hauling and Transport on Ice ............................................................................................................33
NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE ICE ....................................................................................................................34
How thick is the ice?...............................................................................................................................................34
How thick does the ice need to be?...................................................................................................................34
Minimum ice thickness required to support a load ..................................................................................34
Basic Procedures of Safety on Ice .....................................................................................................................35
SAFE OPERATIONS ON THE ICE COVER .......................................................................................................36
Equipment and Loading/ Unloading Point Considerations ..................................................................36
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
4
Executive Summary – Key Findings
The purpose of this report is to integrate the various key components of a biomass
system to a review of various types of harvest equipment that could be used to
support the harvesting component. This should be considered as a starting point
for equipment selection. Local input has not been gained in the development of this
document. In addition, other villages will have similar equipment tested prior to
implementation in the Upper Kobuk and could influence future thoughts on
equipment configuration.
Type of harvest equipment is directly linked to the type (stick fired or Chip fired
boiler) of boilers installed and the scale of the installation or amount of wood
required to operate the system. The stick‐fired boiler requires round wood that
must be fed into the boiler by hand and a chip‐fired system requires chips of set
specifications that will be fed automatically into the boiler. Harvest system
requirements are discussed for each. In addition, size and amount of equipment
required are determined by the size of the project and wood required to run the
system for a year.
Key findings
1. There should be two sets of harvest equipment for the Upper Kobuk: one for
Ambler and one for Shungnak and Kobuk to share;
2. All pieces of equipment should be able to multi‐task and there should be
some redundancy in the equipment for working in remote conditions;
3. A team of two can utilize the equipment components suggested to produce
the entire amount of wood needed for Ambler and a team of three would be
required for Kobuk/Shungnak;
4. Harvesting may occur in both summer and winter; however most wood will
be moved during the winter when the ground is frozen;
5. A system of harvesting based on time of year and summer vs winter
harvesting sites should be developed through a five year harvest plan;
6. Modeled costs of wood production for either chip or cordwood production is
much lower than costs used in the feasibility studies. This creates a very
robust conservative model for development of a harvest system, with plenty
of room for learning how best to produce wood locally;
7. A very robust harvest system for Amber will cost just under $500,000 and for
Kobuk/Shungnak $700,000. This is based on an all‐new maximum
productivity system linked with the largest chip system. If cordwood boilers
are selected, there is not a need for a chipper and can reduce both costs by
$70,000.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
5
Introduction
Purpose
The purpose of this report is for Alaska Wood Energy Associates (AWEA) to develop
an assessment of harvest equipment and methods that integrate the wood feedstock
requirements described in the boiler feasibility report and the forest management
requirements described in the biomass assessment report. If village‐scale district
heating systems are selected as a means to reduce oil usage for heat in a village,
wood chips are required in an automated system. The system requirements then
dictate the type of equipment needed for an annual supply of chips and appropriate
species mixes to assure that the forest is managed sustainably. If smaller building
systems or small district heating systems are selected then hand fed stick‐fired
systems will result. The system requirements then dictate cordwood and a different
type of management and harvest system. A successful biomass project requires
integrating all of the system components including:
A sustainable forest management strategy;
An economically viable and practical harvest system that will work in the
local landscape conditions;
A wood storage and handling system that meets the requirements of the
boiler selected;
Boiler type and size that fits the end scale selected for a specific village;
Business management system that integrates all of the components that fit
with the capacity and interests of the village.
This report will integrate the biomass assessment report with the boiler feasibility
report and discuss the various components of harvest systems and costs and relate
them to the various size boiler systems that have been modeled for the Upper Kobuk
villages.
Field Review
A field review of landscape conditions was conducted in March 2010 and again in
July 2010. The purpose was to assess travel conditions for various types of
equipment based on snow depth in winter or the amount of wet ground and streams
in summer. Snow machines were used in March to survey the areas around Ambler,
Shungnak, and Kobuk as well as travel between all of the villages. Snowfall was
considered to be much less than normal and in some areas very little snow was on
the ground. In other places, there were snowdrifts up to three feet. Four wheelers
were used in the summer survey to access lands around each of the villages during a
biomass assessment field trip. Except for selected sites for summer harvesting,
most wood hauling will need to be conducted during the winter months when the
ground is frozen. However with proper planning, establishment of appropriate
trails on ridges, redevelopment of small bridges and dry soil conditions in forest
stands, a significant amount of work can be done during the summer months as well.
Hauling wood into Shungnak will almost be exclusively done during winter due to
wetlands surrounding the village and types of trail systems.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
6
Regional Overview
The villages of Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk are located in the upper Kobuk River
valley, above the Arctic Circle, and at the northwestern edge of the range of white
spruce (Picea glauca) and black spruce (Picea mariana), as well as aspen (Populus
tremuloides), cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) and birch (Betula papyrifera). The
spruces are the only conifer tree species in the area, but in addition to aspen,
cottonwood, and birch (the largest hardwoods) there are a variety of willows and
alders that grow principally in wet areas, such as flood plains and braided stream
channels. In all cases, each of these species could be suitable to use as wood fuel for
both stick‐fired boilers and for chip fired boilers. Moisture content is the key issue,
however, cottonwood may not be as desirable as other hardwoods for stick‐fired
boilers.
Due to the small average tree size, a harvest system that could handle stem
diameters up to 14 inches would be adequate to process most of the woody biomass
found in the project area. The topography is rolling but gentle, and in most sites
observed, the forest soil is capable of supporting ground based harvest systems in
summer and winter conditions. However, transportation to those sites will have to
be planned for summer because of wetlands and creek crossings. Thus, summer
harvesting and transport are more limited, but can be accomplished with proper
trail development and planning.
This area of Alaska is remote. The principle means of transportation to reach these
communities is by small local airline or charter aircraft from Kotzebue,
approximately 140 miles due west. In years when river levels are adequate,
occasional barge transportation is available to carry supplies such as construction
materials or fuel to these communities. There is no road infrastructure connecting
these communities; however, in summer, boat travel on the river is possible, and in
winter, ATV, snow machine, and vehicle travel over the ice on the river is possible.
There are quite a few roads out of Kobuk connecting to mining areas, which will
help support harvest over a larger landscape to support both Kobuk and Shungnak.
Review of Biomass Heat Systems and Links to Harvest Systems
Alaska Wood Energy Associates has produced a boiler feasibility study that
describes the various configurations of boilers that are feasible for each village and
for each building. AWEA reviewed the feasibility of individual stick‐fired boilers for
each commercial building, neighborhoods of 9 or more houses, and for several
commercial building hooked together in a small district heat system for each village.
Many different combinations proved to be feasible from an economic and forest
sustainability perspective. A description of the two levels of harvest to support the
various potential systems follows. In each village, the largest systems are chip‐fired
automated systems with associated district heating systems. These systems will
require an automated harvesting approach to support the requirements of chip
boilers. If there are several stick fired systems or some larger systems selected,
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
7
then an automated harvest system will be required to meet the needs of cord wood
boilers. This document will address the machine requirements of the largest
automated chip systems and the largest stick systems.
Stick‐Fired Boilers
Stick‐fired boilers burn round or split wood in relatively straight pieces. The wood
is minimally processed, being selected for a range of diameters and trimmed only
for length. If the diameter of the wood is too large, the wood may be split. Although
the processing is minimal (compared to chipping), it is generally all done manually
(some splitting may be done with a machine). Nevertheless, at the assumed unit
costs, stick‐wood is the cheapest energy source available to the villages for
generating thermal energy.
However, utilizing stick‐wood results in much of the available biomass not being
used. Wood that is too large or too small, smaller tops and limbs that are bent
and/or tangled, or tops, which contain leaves, cones, or needles, are generally too
difficult to handle in a stick‐fired boiler. Typically, stick fired boilers use similar
species as woodstoves, thus the primary species to be used are spruce, birch and, in
some cases, aspen. Cottonwood may be burned, but BTU density is much less than
the other species. The burn chamber of the boilers is designed for straight stick‐
wood of about 4 feet in length. The wood used is generally air‐dried to, hopefully,
25% moisture content, “seasoned for one year”. The stick‐fired boilers used as the
basis of evaluation for this study are models manufactured by Garn. A number of
Garn Boilers are already installed in Alaska.
The Garn boilers are manually fed. For each burn, the operator must load the
combustion chamber with new stick‐wood, and manually start the fire. Once the fire
is lit, the chamber door is shut, and the fire burns until all the fuel is consumed.
However, as noted above, it would take a little over two hours of burn to fully heat
the storage tank. A single load of wood will not burn for two hours, meaning that
each burn must consist of more than one load of wood. In addition, during the time
the burn is taking place, heat is being extracted from the tank to meet the heating
load. Although a “burn” is treated as a single event in this study, it is important to
note that at or near peak load, a burn could take as long as three hours to complete,
and require two to three “reloads” of the combustion chamber. (A complete burn is
defined herein as burning enough fuel to raise the storage tank from 120 deg F to
200 deg F, even as heat is being extracted from the tank for ongoing heating.) Thus,
although the number of burns is limited (in this study) to no more than four a day,
this could still imply roughly 9 ‐ 10 hours a day of loading and burning the
combustion chamber.
As with any stick‐fired appliance, the fuel should be kept dry, and should be located
close to the point of use. Therefore, any building or structure constructed to house
the boiler should have sufficient space to stack cordwood. The amount of wood to be
stored within the building (as opposed to in a wood yard) depends on the site
conditions. In harsh conditions, it may be desirable to store several days’ worth of
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
8
cordwood (at peak load consumption rate) in the boiler building, in case weather
keeps the operator from being able to re‐stock the building from the wood yard. On
the other hand, in all cases, the existing oil‐fired system is assumed to be left in place
as back up, so this may limit how much wood the operator chooses to store in the
boiler building. Regardless of how much wood is stored in the boiler building,
considerable manual labor will be required to get the sticks from the wood yard to
the building; labor to load, unload, and stack the wood. Because no equipment is
required once the stick‐wood reaches the yard, the material handling, though labor
intensive, is not subject to equipment breakdowns.
Chip‐Fired Boilers
These automated boilers burn chipped biomass, which can come from virtually any
size of tree, or any part of the tree, although there are sometimes limits on the
amount of needles and leaves. The fuel is more highly processed than stick‐wood in
order to achieve uniform chip size, and thus slightly more expensive on a unit basis.
Fuel is dried in the woods for one year to reach an ideal moisture content of below
25%. The flip side of the higher cost of processing is that a much higher fraction of
the available biomass (tops, limbs, cones, needles, etc) can generally be used in a
chip‐fired boiler. This is especially important in an area where biomass yields are
low.
An automated boiler is intended to run for long periods with no supervision and is
dependent on its material handling systems. Fuel must be introduced into the boiler
automatically, and the ash removed. Weismann boilers can provide the systems
needed to fuel and de‐ash the boilers, but the trade‐off for this automation is
additional maintenance, and more potential failure points. In order to make chip‐
fired boilers feasible in the interior of Alaska, it will be important to minimize the
length of the material handling “chain”, as well as the number of moving parts.
Ideally, a single auger would pull fuel out of a fuel bin, which would be manually
filled periodically (manual here implies a person running a front loader or similar
machine). The chips would slide by gravity to the auger inlet, minimizing failure
points. In practice, the feed process can be fully automated, but this is not feasible
on the scale of boiler plants considered in this study, and it presents too many
potential points of failure.
Chip fired boilers being considered can take up to 50% moisture fuel. However, a
realistic and more efficient use of biomass would be to dry the fuel to 25%. This has
a significant impact on the amount of BTUs recovered from fuel used and can reduce
the harvest impact.
Ambler Heating Systems
Three scenarios for chip‐fired district heating systems were modeled for Ambler. In
addition, multiple scenarios were modeled on a building‐by‐building basis,
comparing chip‐fired boilers to stick fired boilers. The results are discussed in
Boiler Feasibility Report, and model output can be found in Appendix A. The largest
chip‐fired system will heat nine commercial buildings including the school complex,
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
9
water treatment plant, sewer heat trace, new NANA office building, tribal office,
clinic, city office buildings and a 9 house subdivision. These buildings together use
an estimated 67,616 gallons of fuel oil annually. The district heating system will
displace 99% of the fuel. The cost of the district heating system is projected to be
$2.6 million dollars with a Net Simple Payback (NSP) of 11.1 years. The system is
projected to require 773 tons of wood chips at 25% moisture and will require
harvesting approximately 62 acres annually at approximately 20 tons to the acre on
average. Projecting a realistic rotation time of 40 years to produce 35 tons to the
acre with some forest management, impacted area is 2480 acres. If 35 tons per acre
can be produced on managed acres, then the amount of acres required to support
the entire system is reduced to only 883 acres on a 40‐year rotation.
The largest individual stick fired system modeled, and one that is practical, was
installation of 2 Garn stick‐fired boilers to heat the school complex, water treatment
plant and the sewer system. The system would displace 92% of the estimated
43,000 gallons used annually, which is 39,824 gallons of fuel. The projected cost of
the system would be $559,390 and the NSP would be 4.43 years. The system would
require 332 cords of wood annually, which is approximately 20 acres harvested
annually. This would be 800 acres over a 40‐year rotation. The density of
cottonwood is such that this species would probably not be used for cord wood
boilers, although could be. Thus, the target species would be aspen, birch, black
spruce and white spruce.
Shungnak Heating Systems
Four scenarios for chip‐fired district heating systems were modeled for Shungnak.
In addition, multiple scenarios were modeled on a building‐by‐building basis
comparing chip‐fired boilers to stick fired boilers. The results are discussed in
Boiler Feasibility Report and model output can be found in Appendix B.
The largest chip‐fired system will heat five commercial buildings including the
school complex, water treatment plant, new proposed NANA office building, city
office, clinic and 44 houses in subdivisions. These buildings together use an
estimated 77,833 gallons of fuel oil annually. The district heating system will
displace 98% of the fuel. The cost of the system is projected to be $3.4 million
dollars with a Net Simple Payback (NSP) of 12.5 years. The system is projected to
require 885 tons of wood chips annually at 25% moisture and will require
harvesting approximately 70.5 acres annually at approximately 20 tons to the acre
on average. Projecting a realistic rotation time of 40 years to produce 35 tons to the
acre with forest management, impacted area is 2820 acres for 40 years. If 35 tons
per acre can be produced on managed acres, then the amount of acres required to
support the entire system is reduced to only 1011 acres on a 40‐year rotation.
The two largest individual stick fired systems modeled, and that was practical, was
installation of a Garn stick‐fired boiler to heat the school and one to heat the new
NANA office building. Together these two individual systems would displace 93.5%
of the estimated 36,000 gallons used annually, which is 33,661 gallons of fuel. The
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
10
projected cost of the school system would be $348,728 and the NSP would be 9.72
years. The system would require 174 cords of wood annually, which is
approximately 9 acres harvested annually. This would be 360 acres over a 40‐year
rotation. The projected cost of the NANA Office building system would be $264,261
and the NSP would be approximately 3.33 years. The system would require 102
cords of 25% moisture wood, which is approximately 5‐6 acres. The target species
are aspen, birch, black spruce and white spruce. If 35 tons per acre of wood (aspen
and birch) can be grown to 4 inch diameter in a 40 year rotation, as anticipated
through forest management, then the amount of acres for both systems would be
approximately 315 acres of land.
Kobuk Heating Systems
Four scenarios for chip‐fired district heating systems were modeled for Kobuk. In
addition, multiple scenarios were modeled on a building‐by‐building basis
comparing chip‐fired boilers to stick fired boilers. The results are discussed in
Boiler Feasibility Report and model output can be found in Appendix B.
The largest chip‐fired system will heat five commercial buildings including the
school complex, water treatment plant, new proposed NANA office building, city
office, clinic and a 9 house in subdivision. These buildings together use an estimated
44,441 gallons of fuel oil annually. The district heating system will displace 98% of
the fuel. The cost of the system is projected to be $2.2 million dollars with a Net
Simple Payback (NSP) of 14.1 years. The system is projected to require 630 tons of
wood chips annually at 25% moisture and will require harvesting approximately 50
acres annually at approximately 20 tons to the acre on average. Projecting a
realistic rotation time of 40 years to produce 35 tons to the acre with forest
management, impacted area is 2000 acres for 40 years. If 35 tons per acre can be
produced on managed acres, then the required land base to support the entire
system is reduced to only 720 acres on a 40‐year rotation.
The 2 largest individual stick fired systems modeled, and that were practical, was
installation of the largest model of Garn stick‐fired boilers to heat the school, water
treatment plant, teacher housing and the City Office and the middle size Garn to heat
the NANA office building. The systems would displace 92.9% of the estimated
36,500 gallons used annually, which is 33,911 gallons of fuel. The projected cost of
the school complex system would be $441,706 and the NSP would be 6.83 years.
The system would require 179 cords of wood annually, which is approximately 9
acres harvested annually. This would be 360 acres over a 40‐year rotation. The
projected cost of the NANA office building system would be $264,261 and the NSP
would be approximately 3.33 years. The system would require 102 cords of 25%
moisture wood, which is approximately 5‐6 acres or 240 acres over a rotation. The
target species would be aspen, birch, black spruce and white spruce. If 35 tons per
acre of wood (aspen and birch) can be grown to 4‐5 inch diameter in a 40 year
rotation, as anticipated through forest management, then the amount of acres for
both systems would be approximately 321 acres of land.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
11
Effects of moisture content on biomass utilization
This discussion is not meant to be a detailed treatise on the issue of moisture
content of wood relative to combustion, but to create an awareness of how the
forest management and wood harvest systems will impact the amount of wood
required and efficiencies of wood heating systems in a village, relative to moisture
content of wood when burned.
The amount of biomass required to fuel a district heating system depends on the
total BTU demand of the system and the efficiency of the burning process. Most
modern boilers, both stick and chip fired, are essentially as efficient as possible for
wood at 80‐85%. Oil boilers, in comparison, are typically 85% efficient when
operating properly. Wood burners of all sorts will specify an ideal range of moisture
contents for fuel. Most standard gasifying boilers can burn from 10% ‐ 55%
moisture content, but typically have an ideal range of 20‐30% moisture
requirements. Actual BTUs in wood is species dependent, but only slightly. Species
differ only by about 10% based on weight and moisture, so for this discussion, we
assume that local species in the Upper Kobuk area are similar in BTU amounts based
on weight. However, density of wood makes some wood heavier in smaller volume
that others, for instance, a pound of birch at 20% moisture is much smaller than a
pound of cottonwood at 20% moisture.
However, there are significant differences in recoverable BTUs through the
combustion process based on the moisture content of the wood going into the
combustor, whether in cord wood or in chips. This is simply because the combustor
cannot burn water and must “dry” the fuel in the burning process. For instance, if a
40‐pound armload of split firewood for a wood stove at 20% moisture (seasoned),
adds approximately one gallon of water into a wood stove with the wood, at 40%
moisture content, the amount would be two gallons of water. The wood stove must
dry the wood to burn it during the combustion process, thus the amount of heat
captured for heating is much less (Table 1).
Green, freshly cut, wood is typically 45‐60% moisture content. It follows that if
wood is harvested, chipped and delivered to the boiler, recoverable BTUs will range
from 3825‐3400 BTUs/lb (Table 1). Chips do not dry very effectively in a pile and,
in fact, begin to compost over time. Chip dryers can be installed in the system,
however, a significant amount of energy is required for drying. If wood is
“seasoned”, air‐dried to 20‐25% moisture content, then chipped and injected into
the system the amount of recoverable BTUs in the system essentially doubles to
6800 BTUs/LB. This is a significant point in the development of a Biomass Energy
System that is using local resources to power the system. However, conservative
moisture content on average will be from 25%‐35%. AWEA recommends boilers
capable of burning up to 50% moisture, since management systems do not always
work to the ideal level.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
12
Table 1. Effects of moisture on deliverable BTUs
The Effect of Fuel Moisture on Deliverable Wood Heat
Moisture Content
(MC) wet basis
(%)
0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Higher Heating
Value as fired
Btus/lb
8,500 7,275 6,800 6,375 5,950 5,525 5,100 4,575 4,250 3,825
Actual annual wood demand can vary depending on whether a management
strategy is developed to “dry” or “season” wood. As described above, moisture
content of the wood going into the boiler has a tremendous affect on the number of
tons of wood chips required annually to operate the heat system. In addition, the
number of acres to secure the required wood varies with tons per acre of wood
growing on the site and the type of harvest strategy for regeneration, either thinning
or patch clear‐cut.
For example annual wood demand for the largest chip system modeled in Ambler
ranges from 1300 green tons at 50% moisture down to 773 tons per year at 25%
moisture. Difference in acres harvested is not large on annual bases, which are 70
acres at 50% moisture and 62 acres at 25% moisture. However, over a 40 year
rotation the difference in the total acreage needed to fuel the system is 2800 acres
for 50% moisture fuel and 2480 for 25% fuel. By managing for seasoned wood,
number of acres impacted by harvest is reduced by 11.5%. Our range of estimates
is from 12 ‐20% reductions in the number of acres needed to support a biomass
project, if wood is dried to 25% moisture prior to feeding the boiler. An additional
benefit of drying wood in the forest is the reduced cost of wood delivery. Moving
green wood at 50% moisture is heavier, and moving water costs both in equipment
wear and tear and cost of fuel.
Cost of wood delivered to the boiler has been modeled for off road villages,
depending on types of equipment used, economies of scale and local conditions. The
Upper Kobuk, like all interior rural villages, has few roads and must deal with the
local terrain and weather conditions. Harvesting and wood hauling will likely occur
during late summer months after the ground has had time to dry, and during winter
months after freeze up. Delivered costs are conservatively expected to be as high as
$175‐$200 per green ton for wood chips. Even at this high cost, wood energy
systems appear to be financially feasible if well designed. Final feasibility depends
on the inherent efficiency of the system installed. A critical component of the
system is a well‐designed harvest system and sustainable forest management
program. Drying wood to 25‐35% moisture can occur if properly managed and
decked for a year in advance of use. If the forest is managed properly and targeted
toward the fastest growing trees, which are cottonwood, aspen and birch, then a
biomass rotation is achievable in forty years. However, if stick fired boilers are
used, the target species will be spruce, aspen and birch. Cottonwood can be burned
in these boilers, but the volume of wood required for BTU value is high, even when
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
13
dried to 25% moisture. Thus, at any single loading of the boiler, the actual number
of BTUs is less with cottonwood.
Sustainable Forest Management
A five‐year harvest plan should be developed with specific harvest locations
mapped in a GIS system. The plan should be maintained in a company GIS system.
Since actual annual harvest plans must adapted to weather and site conditions and
these will change, an annual update of the five‐year plan should be completed. So
harvesting is based on an annual and a five‐year plan with an annual update.
Forest management and regeneration will be accomplished through stump
regeneration of hardwoods including cottonwood, birch and aspen. Each stand
should be surveyed after three years to make sure that the stand is properly
regenerating. If regeneration is not being accomplished, then a plan can be made for
augmenting the stand with rooted cuttings. These are simply hardwood cuttings
that have been rooted the prior year then planted the following spring. This is a
simple inexpensive method for enhancing natural regeneration.
Native Allotments
Native allotments should be indentified in the GIS system during development of the
annual and five‐year harvest plan. Harvesting should avoid travel across allotments
and harvesting on allotments unless allotment owners should want to develop
agreements with the harvesting group.
Review of Harvest Equipment Types
Timber Harvest Overview
The primary timber harvest review will be based on the largest chip fired heating systems
modeled for each village. At the level of harvest summarized above, mechanized
systems will need to be used taking the harvesting process beyond subsistence wood
gathering process of snow machine, wood sleds, and chain saws. This discussion will
describe the systems required to support the larger heat systems to provide the greatest
economy of scale, financially, for both chip systems and cordwood. Smaller system
configurations with greater manual labor associated with them can be used to harvest
smaller cordwood systems. The cordwood systems will be described based on the
assumption that a midsize scale of fuel oil displacement will occur using stick-fired
boilers, probably in multiple locations within a village. These system descriptions will
allow for future discussion of harvest requirements needed to support the scale of the
biomass heating system chosen for future installation. Another assumption of the harvest
assessment is that Ambler will be a stand-alone harvest system and Kobuk and Shungnak
will share a harvest system for both villages. This increases the economy of scale for the
harvest system, as the same land base will serve both of the western villages.
It is necessary to plan for both summer and winter harvesting in order to meet these
production goals, particularly in the first few years. However, most hauling from the
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
14
woods will be done in winter conditions when the ground is frozen. Accordingly, the
harvest system must be capable of working well in the extreme temperature ranges and
types of terrain found in the Upper Kobuk Valley. The forest is widely distributed over
the ownership of the NANA Regional Corporation. However, Ambler has significant
forest close to and surrounding the village. Kobuk and Shungnak have forest near the
villages, but Shungnak will require the longest hauling distance and will only be able to
have wood delivered in the winter when the wet tundra surrounding the village is frozen.
The road system in this area is limited to within a short distance of each village, except
Kobuk, where mining roads allow much greater access to the forest. Economics severely
limit the feasibility of road construction for the harvest activities, so the harvest program
must be able to operate in a remote, roadless setting utilizing permanent trails developed
with the harvest equipment, as needed, to supply annual harvest needs.
The harvest system as a whole must be flexible enough to be used in both summer and
winter applications. All machines should be integrated into a system and each machine
should have multiple applications and multiple attachments. A key issue is determining
how much woody biomass will be produced during each season. Summer activities will
require mobilization and wood fuel transport based on where equipment can travel
around wetlands and/or cross streams to “dry summer harvesting stands”, and winter
harvesting can only occur when the ground is frozen solid enough to support the expected
load weights. Ice travel is discussed in detail below. Rivers can be used as travel
corridors only when safe operations are implemented. In some situations, the river can be
used as a road, in others, there may only be a need to cross the river. Operations must be
located and configured where they can be carried out both efficiently and safely during
each season. We assume that most of the transport of wood from the field to the village
will occur during winter months when the ground is frozen.
Each harvest site will have its own set of unique circumstances that will influence
harvest implementation. The operations manager must learn how to recognize site
characteristics and risks in order to make preparations to address any specific
challenges well in advance of mobilizing equipment and personnel. As part of the
development process for a wood energy program, a five‐year harvest plan should be
developed. This plan should be updated annually based on the previous year’s
management activities.
Wood Fuel Management
Moisture content of wood and its impacts on efficiency have been discussed
previously. Because of these efficiencies, it makes sense to manage the harvest and
wood feeding systems to as low moisture content as possible. A realistic goal is to
store wood in the round for at least one summer season. Hopefully, the wood will
dry to 25% moisture or less. One scenario would be to harvest wood in the early
spring while the ground is still frozen and deck the wood in the forest where it is
felled in loose piles; or while the ground is still frozen the harvested wood can be
processed into whole tree logs and brought to a staging wood yard near the village
for drying. Before green up in spring is the time of year the wood has the lowest
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
15
moisture content, especially the hardwoods. The wood will then dry during the
summer season to various levels of moisture content, depending on the weather
conditions. Depending on the travel conditions from the site to the village, whole
trees may be moved to the wood yard in town and chipped into storage or stored for
future chipping in a wood yard. In some cases, moving whole trees may not be
practical because of trail limitations. In that case, tops are cut off the trees and logs
are moved into the village to be chipped. The trade off is that logs are easier to
move than whole trees, but require more time to manufacture and adds cost. Also,
depending on species, tops and limbs may be 15‐25% of the tree, thus if only logs
are hauled, a portion of the potential biomass will be left in the woods. These
decisions are site and terrain specific, but equipment components should be
developed to make the most efficient use of biomass. Of course, if stick‐fired boilers
are selected, all tops will be removed and logs only will be transported.
A second scenario is to chip trees in the field and move chips. This process is more
complicated and requires specialized equipment. Chipping in the forest is being
done more and more in Europe as a more efficient overall process. The approach
has been recommended for Fort Yukon as one option, and most likely will be tried.
This option will not be recommended for the Upper Kobuk villages at this time
because of the logistics of moving a chipper into the field and the specific equipment
required to store and haul chips from the field, rather than logs or whole tree
hauling. If proven in Fort Yukon, and the economy of scale is such in the Upper
Kobuk, the systems described in this report can be augmented to achieve this
approach.
Harvesting System Component Activities
There are many options for how to harvest trees with an automated system. The
system depends on what the end product is for feeding the boiler as well as how the
processing is to be done. Linkage between the harvest system and the boiler is
critical. Integrating the harvest system equipment into landscape conditions is also
critical for success.
Chip fired boiler wood requirements and harvest scenarios
A chip‐fired boiler requires clean chips free of leaves, dirt, rocks, etc., preferably at
25% moisture content. Dirt contamination can cause clinker build up in the boiler,
and storage and transportation methods should take this into consideration. Chip
fired boilers have an automatic feed that is adjusted to the correct speed for the
specific demand placed on the boiler. Ideally, chips are uniform in size at 1‐2 inch
squares or rectangles and approximately ¼ to ½ thick. This helps the feeding
mechanism insert wood smoothly into the boiler. Ten to twenty percent variations
are acceptable, however, long stringers will need to be filtered out of the mix as it
proceeds into the boiler. An automated de‐asher is part of the automated system.
Chip quality is a process that starts with harvesting the tree and is integral
throughout the harvesting system. A well‐maintained chipper is essential.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
16
An automated system for producing chips is essential at the scale of demand
modeled for the boiler systems in Ambler, and then in Kobuk and Shungnak. The
system components include the following activities:
Felling: Tree felling is laying the tree on the ground, and can be
accomplished with several different types of felling heads and
carriers/machines;
Skidding and Decking: Whole trees are then skidded and decked in lose piles
for drying/seasoning;
Transporting: If possible whole trees are then loaded and hauled to the
village along previously designated trails with special types of equipment for
whole tree hauling. If hauling whole trees is not possible from a specific site,
the trees must be processed in the woods cutting limbs and tops off and
loading on a log trailer;
Unloading and Storing: The whole trees or logs will then be unloaded into a
temporary storage wood yard to wait for chipping, ideally in a location where
they can the be chipped directly into storage;
Chip Processing and Storing: A wood chipper will need to be large enough to
handle multiple whole trees at once and requires a method to feed the trees
into the chipper. Once chips are in dry storage, a machine is required to fill
the boiler chip‐feeding bin. This machine can and should be one of the
harvest system pieces of equipment.
Figure 1. Example of good quality clean chips required to feed an automated boiler system.
Stick fired boiler wood requirements and harvest scenarios
A stick‐fired boiler requires four‐foot length round logs typically 3‐8 inches in
diameter as they must be hand fed into the boiler burn box. Shorter lengths work as
well, as does split firewood. However, the best product is one that can be handled
easily and can fill the firebox completely with limited spaces. This allows for
maximum number of BTUs to go into the boiler at any one firing and increase burn
efficiency. Any component discussed below can be done in the traditional way by
hand labor if the system requirements are small enough. This discussion, however,
will assume that the boiler, or multiple boilers, requirements are large enough to
require an automated system.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
17
An automated harvest system that produces cordwood for a stick‐fired boiler must
perform the following tasks:
Tree felling is cutting the tree and laying it on the ground;
The tree is then skidded into piles and decked for drying;
The tree must then be delimbed and cut into manageable lengths, typically in
4‐foot increments for ease of cutting, once delivered to the storage/boiler
site. If long lengths are made initially, this step can be done while cutting as
well.
The 8‐12 foot logs are then loaded for transport to the village along
previously designated trails;
The logs are unloaded into a wood yard and stored for further processing
into correct lengths (which can be done with chain saws) and stored for
feeding the boiler; or if multiple stick fired boilers are in use at multiple sites,
the logs need to transported to storage at specific sites next to boilers. This
local storage should be covered, but not heated.
Timber Harvest – Tree Felling
Fuel wood harvesting systems in the Upper Kobuk must be able to efficiently produce
both stick firewood and wood chips depending on system demands. The majority of stick
firewood in the Upper Kobuk is white and black spruce, birch, and aspen to be used in
stick-fired boilers. Wood chips can be produced from all tree species and some willow
species. Much of the standing forest inventory of woody biomass is in hardwood species
such as aspen, cottonwood and birch. The weight and financial limitations will influence
the maximum size of trees that the equipment can safely handle.
It is anticipated that the majority of timber harvested will be whole tree, when possible, to
move whole trees to the village for chipping. In this case, it is likely that the largest
diameter that will be mechanically harvested is 12” to 14” diameter at breast height
(DBH) the smallest trees will be 3”-8” DBH. Hydraulically powered tree shears provide
the most economical and reliable option to mechanically fell timber of this size. A skid
steer machine (on tracks with sheers) is an excellent felling mechanism. The picture in
Figure 1 is a wheeled skid steer. Tracts can be added or the machine can be purchased set
up with tracks. Smaller shears can be mounted on 60 hp excavators with the hydraulic
plumbing and controls suitable for this purpose. The excavator-mounted shears would be
suitable to harvest 3”-10” DBH stems such as smaller black spruce, poplar, aspen and
birch. Figure 1 has an excavator with a “cut to length harvest head” for making logs.
This type head not only will cut the tree but also will strip the limbs and cut the log into
prescribed lengths and place them in a pile. If large amounts of cordwood are the product
needed, this type of machine and harvester head is the most efficient. If whole trees are
to be piled and then moved to the village for chipping, the skid steer with a shear head is
the most efficient machine configuration.
It is important to note that these tree size limitations are smaller than some of trees in the
forest. The decision of whether or not to hand fell the larger stems will be made on-site. It
is likely that in many cases the larger stems will simply be left standing while the smaller
stems are harvested, achieving a desirable partial cut harvest pattern in some areas. Also
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
18
the managed future forest stand is expected to be 4”-8” DBH at harvest maturity.
Note the guarding on the excavator in Figure 2. This is a safety requirement for
machines that work in forestry. A Fecon skid steer in Figure 2 has the guarding
required for a skid steer shear harvester on tracks. The skid steer below is for illustrating
the shear and would require tracks rather than tires.
Figure 2. Skid steer machine with felling shears for felling trees (left) and a small excavator for
felling, limbing and cutting to length trees into logs (right) armored for wood harvesting.
Timber Harvest – Skidding, Decking, Loading and Transport
Once the tree is felled, it will need to be skidded and decked to dry or “season”,
ideally for at least a summer season, to reduce moisture in the wood. After a
season, the wood will be moved to the village in form of a log or whole tree, if
chipping. Leaves and needles will be gone from the tree at this point. By utilizing
whole tree for chips, the process increases actual biomass utilization by 15‐30%
depending on size and species of the tree harvested and by utilizing tops and limbs.
Also, there is greater cost in manufacturing logs in the woods for transport.
However, transport of logs is simpler than whole tree transport. The best system
will be able to do both, and the decision of whole tree versus logs will be determined
by the site and travel corridor conditions. It will be most efficient if the
management process is directed toward whole tree harvesting and transport.
The machine that does these tasks needs to be versatile, reliable and have low track
pressure on the ground. Two types of machines are possible to use: An articulated
4 wheel drive tractor that has hydraulics on the front and back and can operate
equally in either direction; and a modern tracked skid steer machine. Both are ideal
for these applications. Some of the manufacturers produce skid steer configurations
of their machines that are built to fit the needs of forestry applications. Either
machine must have all the safety specifications mandated by OSHA, particularly
with regard to cab roll over protection and guarded windshields.
Skid steer machines also have the versatility of being able to use the many skid steer
attachments that are available for a wide variety of applications. We noted above
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
19
that this type of machine is ideal for whole tree felling. Caterpillar, ASV, Bobcat,
Fecon, and Takeuchi are all popular machines with high flow options and “forestry
packages” (undercarriage guarding, Roll Over Protection, etc.) available. Of these,
Fecon seems to lead in the development of some of their smaller models such as the
FTX100L and FTX148L specifically for these types of forestry use. These Fecon
models are well suited for commercial forestry applications in the Upper Kobuk.
Figure 3. A Fecon skid steer with a front grapple for loading (left), the machine also could have a
front shear as in Figure 1 and other attachments for skidding. The JCB C4X tractor is 4‐wheel drive
and a perfect compliment to work with the skid steer or as a stand‐alone integrated harvesting
machine.
They can be used as a carrier for log skidding with grapple or cable arch, as a tow
vehicle for a small log forwarding trailer, as well as a log loader with front‐end
grapples (Figure 3). One machine can be used to fell, skid, and load logs if called
upon to do so. This type of versatility is critical for remote operations such as the
Upper Kobuk.
Like all skid steer machines manufactured today, the Fecon models can employ most
attachments made for these types of machines. It is highly recommended that
several attachments be purchased for this program. These include a rake grapple,
gravel bucket, dozer blade, 14” felling shears, snow blower, and firewood processor
for the front end of the machine. A rotating logging grapple should also be
purchased for the back of the machine. These attachments are a relatively low cost
option to make the skid steer a very versatile machine that can reliably accomplish a
variety of tasks. This versatility will prove to be an invaluable asset over the life of
the project, supplying the proper tools for specific situations as they come up,
without having to use a different machine for each specific task.
The Fecon, depending on proximity to adequately sized trees (>6”), would require
200‐300 hrs (based on 30 trees per hour at 300 lbs per tree) to fell and pile the
minimum annual requirements for Ambler. The time needed to skid this material to
a load‐out area will obviously depend on distance. The Fecon alone could
theoretically provide the minimum annual harvesting requirements, staged for
winter shipment, within the hours allotted for spring and summer harvesting.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
20
Using a 4‐wheel drive tractor (Figure 3) is an option to assist the skid steer and with
similar capacity in the felling, decking, and hauling activities and would serve as the
primary loader/unloader and trailer hauler for transport. Two models in particular
meet minimum specifications, including:
Four Wheel Drive with front and rear tires equal size;
Operator ability to rotate for convenient front or rear operation;
Hp and hydraulic capability to accommodate Kesla Shear/ Grapple
attachments, load and unload log transport trailers, and pull trailers of
biomass over ice roads and snow trails with chains in the Upper Kobuk.
There are two models of tractors that could effectively be used. The models are the
New Holland TV 6070, 145 or 140, and the JCB 4CX (Figure 3). The New Holland is
an agricultural tractor that lists new at $100,000. It articulates and has a PTO on
both the front and rear as well as hydraulic hook‐ups and valving. The JCB lists for
$116,000 with cab, loader and 14’ backhoe (it cannot be purchased new without a
backhoe). Either will accommodate shears, delimbing and cut to length
attachments, grapple loader and many similar attachments as the Fecon skid steer.
This configuration would permit the tractor to fell (if needed) and shear standing
timber up to 9” or 10”, delimb and cut to length, load and unload trees on/off a
trailer it pulls (10 ton trailer is $12,000), pull the loaded trailer to the village, feed
the chipper. Figure 4 is an example of a tractor, trailer and loader system that is a
great transport system. These systems have been developed and proven in Finland,
and thus are suitable for the terrain in the upper Kobuk. Snow depth should not be
an issue on maintained snow packed trails. However, the tractor must not be used
in wet boggy conditions, even though it is 4‐wheel drive.
A tractor can also be used as the harvesting machine with either a cut to length
harvesting head attached to a loading crane or a harvesting shear attached to the
loading crane (Figure 5). With this configuration a tractor can become the exclusive
machine in the harvest system, which can cut whole trees or cut to length logs, skid,
pile, load/unload, haul and feed the chipper. This is a quite versatile capability.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
21
Figure 4. Tractor, 10‐ton log trailer, and hydraulic loader grapple (left). Same log trailer with track
on back tires (right). Trailer can come with PTO driven trailer assist for moving the trailer in snow.
The trailer above has loader hydraulics connected to the tractor but mounted on the trailer; another
configuration is a trailer with a self‐operating loader that runs on a small engine mounted on the
tongue of the trailer.
Figure 5. Demonstrates a tractor with a harvesting and cut to length head (left) similar to what is on
an excavator in Figure 2. Felling shear (right) that will also work with the tractor for whole tree
harvesting. The same arm with a grapple can unload and load trailers.
Wood transport – alternative
Figure 6 is a Morooka 1500VD, a proven track machine in the arctic. This machine
comes as a dump, but can be outfitted with hook lift mechanism that can slide on
and off for transporting logs or bins of chips. It has the capacity to pull a 10‐ton log
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
22
trailer while hauling a log bunk on the rear. The Morooka is versatile with rear
hydraulics for potentially connecting to a hydraulic loader. If there are concerns
about transporting logs in winter with chains on a tired tractor, this could be the
machine to take the place of the tractor as the primary hauling mechanism. The
machine has strong towing power and can tow a similar trailer to the tractor system
described as well as a log bunk on the back. However, the machine cannot do nearly
as many tasks as the tractor described above.
Figure 6. Morooka with a hook lift system (left) that can be substituted with a log bunk and (right)
Morooka traveling across Norton Sound in winter. Above is an example of loading a log bunk onto a
truck (just for an example) rather than a Morooka. The principle is the same however; the one that
would go with the Morooka is of course smaller.
Wood Chip Production
Whole tree hauling
Whole tree hauling is specifically for making chips for chip boilers. Whole tree
chipping (with limbs) will increase the efficiency of wood utilization from a stand by
20‐30%. Whole log (entire tree minus limbs) will increase utilization by 10‐20%.
For an example of the magnitude of transport round trips from the woods: Ambler
will require 94, 9‐ton loads over the frozen ground, providing the minimum annual
quantity for the largest proposed village heating system. Thus, hauling needs to be
efficient. Whole tree hauling (with limbs) is probably not feasible, as stacking trees
with limbs on the types of log bunk trailers will be impractical. However, whole log
hauling (entire log no limbs) is quite possible as shown in Figure 7. The
configurations in the photos are solely for illustration and are too large for the needs
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
23
of the Upper Kobuk. If log trailers long enough for whole log hauling are not
available, an extension dolly can be manufactured that will work effectively as a
trailer extension. A second method that has some potential is the use of a clam bunk
and, essentially, dragging the whole logs. This type of activity will be winter only, as
a summer application will add dirt to the logs. Dirt increases wear on the chipper
and causes problems for the boiler.
Figure 7. Examples (although too large for Upper Kobuk) of a whole log forwarder (left) and a clam
bunk for dragging whole logs with a tractor. Both of these concepts, if used, would be scaled to a
tractor size.
Chipping
Chipping capacity is a function of horsepower (hp) and infeed opening. A good rule
of thumb is 10 hp per ton per hour capability. For Ambler, using a chipper at ten
tons per hour, the system would have to be operated a total of 85 hours per year to
produce the needed chips. There are several models that can do this: a Vermeer
rated at 122 hp, the small Woodsman at 84 hp and the larger Woodsman 790 is 170
hp. The minimum production from the three is 8 tons per hour, more than enough
for an 850 ton per year requirement. The tractor with the grapple can feed the
chipper.
Chipping is, to a certain degree, a simpler process than log production when the end
use of the chips is as fuel and the chip specifications are such that they allow whole
log chipping. Whole tree chipping is highly preferred whenever a single machine,
such as a Morbark 20/36 Whole Tree Chipper (Figure 8) can conceivably carry out
this task rather efficiently. This chipper, and others like it, are small enough to fit the
physical parameters discussed above and are able to accept materials up to 16” in
diameter. The chip feed system for the boiler must be able to reliably operate with
some percentage of bark mixed in with the wood chips. Also, chippers tend to need
regular maintenance, particularly so with the chipper knives. An operation that
relies heavily on a whole tree chipper should anticipate these maintenance needs
and be suited with extra parts and any special tools that may be necessary for
keeping the chipper in production. Purchasing several sets of blades and an
automated blade‐sharpening grinder will be critical for efficient production of good
quality chips.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
24
Figure 8. Mobark chipper of sufficient size to support the production of all three villages if a decision
was made to transport during winter between villages.
Cord Wood & Fire Wood Production
Cord Wood Processing
Trees that will be used for stick cord wood will need to be limbed and cut into
lengths divisible by four feet, if the stem will be going into a Garn stick fired boiler.
It is desirable for this process to be done mechanically for economic and safety
reasons. But, if the volume needed is small enough, then hand labor can be used.
The best machine configuration is the four‐wheel tractor with a cut‐to‐length head,
a grapple and a PTO driven log bunk trailer (Figures 4&5).
Firewood production
In development of an automated harvest system for a village, there is the
opportunity to develop a woodstove firewood production process. A key issue that
must be understood at the beginning is that this production system can deliver
seasoned, cut and split firewood to a residence at a significantly lower cost than
local wood haulers. Figuring out a fair and appropriate implementation is beyond
the scope of this report. This can be done in conjunction with either a chip
production system or a cord wood production system. In some cases both maybe
instituted in a village.
There are several manufacturers of firewood processing equipment that produce
equipment capable of meeting the expected production needs of the Upper Kobuk
Villages. These are stand‐alone machines that produce cut and split firewood from
logs. Most of these machines (Figure 9), such as Blockbuster, Multitek, and Cord
King, are portable and have a conveyor system that loads a truck as the wood is
being processed. As a system, these units cost anywhere between $30,000 to over
$100,000, depending on size and configuration. Due to their size (processor and
conveyor), transportation costs will be comparatively high, particularly to rural
Alaska. There are two difficulties with processing firewood with these types of
machines. First, the initial purchase and transportation cost of the machine is high in
light of the comparatively low annual production needs. Second, the machines will
be difficult to transport and operate anywhere but in the village itself, thus requiring
logs to be transported from the woods to the village for processing in most cases.
Firewood processing in the village is anticipated to be more practical than in the
forest in many instances, based on conditions in the Upper Kobuk. The option to
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
25
produce firewood in the field or in the village is practical with a firewood processing
attachment that can be mounted on a tracked skid steer such as the Fecon
mentioned earlier. Hahn Machinery has recently made such an attachment available
(Figure 9). Capable of producing up to 2 cords per hour in small logs, at a purchase
price of $23,000, the FP160 Firewood Processor seems an ideal fit for the project.
Figure 9. Example of an automated firewood producer (left) and the Hahn skid steer mounted firewood
producer (center and right).
Harvest Equipment Recommendations by Village
Ambler
Chip system harvest requirements
The largest chip system in Ambler will displace 68,022 gallons of heating fuel
annually and will require 773 tons of chips at 25% moisture content to operate the
automated boiler. Total capital cost of the system is approximately $2.5 million
dollars with a net present value of approximately $4.0 million. Harvest will require
approximately: 390 hours for felling, limbing and piling; 305 hours for loading,
hauling, and unloading (7 mile average distance and 5 mph average speed); and,
finally, 155 hours (5 tons/hour) for chipping. This is a total of 850 hours of labor for
harvesting and delivering wood chips to the system. Two men will be used, for
safety purposes, so a total of 1700 hours at $25 per hour is $42,500 for base labor
without benefits. One of the two men conducting the harvest will be trained as a
boiler operator for a chip‐fired system. The recommended boilers can be remotely
monitored and needs a brief check daily during the workweek similar to a diesel
power plant. Typically chips must be added to the chip bin (depending on design)
once every other week. The boiler has an automated tube cleaning system and auto
de‐ashing. Ashes will need to be dumped every 2 weeks as well. Monthly normal
operating time is approximately 20 hours. This time will apply to Kobuk and
Shungnak as well.
Annual insurance is estimated at $20,000 and $6000 for fuel and maintenance for
machines; the cost of a delivered ton of 25% moisture fuel is slightly less than $90
per ton. The models were developed using $175 per ton to be extremely
conservative. However, the capital costs of machinery are not accounted for here,
assuming they have been bought with grant funds.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
26
Cordwood system harvest requirements
If only cordwood systems are used to their maximum benefit in Ambler, given a
reasonable payback, there would be four cord wood boilers installed. The Northern
subdivision would require one Garn boiler and approximately 68 cords of fuel
annually. The school complex, water treatment plant and the sewer trace would be
one small system and require two Garn boilers and 330 cords of wood annually.
The new NANA office building would require one Garn boiler and 106 cords of wood
annually. A total of 504 cords of wood are required. Total capital costs of the boiler
systems are approximately $1.4 million.
Harvest will require approximately: 252 hours for felling, limbing and piling 16’
logs; 205 hours for loading, hauling and unloading (using same parameters as
above); and 200 hours to cut to 4’ lengths and split for the boiler. This is a total of
657 hours times 2 employees for a total of 1314 hours for harvesting and delivery of
wood to the village costing $32,850 in labor without benefits. With an assumed cost
of $25,000 for insurance and $5000 for fuel and maintenance; the cost of a delivered
cord of firewood at 25% moisture is approximately $125 per cord. The model to
develop the economics of the boiler systems was based on a standard of $250 per
cord. Neither capital cost of the equipment nor replacement costs are included in
these calculations.
Feeding the boiler is manual and will require multiple burns per day. The coldest
days will require up to four burns per day based on the feasibility models developed
for the Upper Kobuk. Each load and ignition process takes about 20 minutes per
boiler, if the stoking wood and fire starter are readily available at the boiler. A burn
takes two hours, but does not require attendance once the fire is going well. Ideally,
burns should be scheduled at equal intervals throughout the entire day/night cycle.
A middle of the night burn may not be possible. A more realistic schedule may be to
burn early morning, mid morning, mid afternoon and late evening. If a centralized
business is developed to manage the burn process for burns at all the boiler
installations, then overall labor costs will be reduced for each.
The time of feeding the boilers throughout the cold season is estimated at 30
minutes per burn per boiler. In the shoulder months, a boiler may be burned only
once every two days, and on coldest days 4 times during one day. We will use an
average of two burns per day for the entire 242‐day burn season, mid‐September to
mid‐May. There are a total of 4 boilers so there would be a total of 1936 burns
during the season. This will equate to approximately 968 hours for burns, not
counting moving wood to the various installations. At $25 per hour the labor for
feeding and igniting the boilers is $24,200 annually. On a per cord basis this is
approximately $50 per cord, bringing the cost of harvesting and feeding the boilers
to approximately $175 per cord conservatively. However, the financial modeling
was done with the standard $250 per cord.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
27
Ambler – Recommended Harvest System
Equipment redundancy is a key attribute for a successful operation in remote
Alaska, as is the ability for one machine to do multiple tasks. The system
recommended (Table 3) is a maximum system to meet the needs of a chip‐fired
system in Ambler to produce 773 (25% moisture) tons of wood chips annually.
Since there are two machines, one with tracks and one with chained wheels,
production should not be problematic during times of deeper snow. A plan for
initiating and maintaining major trails to where the annual wood supply is located
should be developed, however.
Machine Attachment Cost
Total
Machine &
Attachments
Fecon TRX100L $118,000
Bucket $2,500
Brush Rake $4,800
Grapple $5,800
Dozer Blade $4,700
Pallet forks $900
Hahn firewood
processor $26,000
14" tree shear $12,000
Sub Total Fecon $174,700 $174,700
JCB 4CX Tractor Backhoe - Loader $116,000
Loading Crane 305T $26,500
Grapple $11,500
Snow Blower $6,000
Stroke Harvester $28,000
2-9 ton Kesla log bunk
Trailers $26,500
Trailer Tracks $18,000
Tractor guarding $12,000
sub total Tractor $244,500 $244,500
Morbark Chipper $70,000 $70,000
Total $489,200
Table 3. Maximum set of machines, attachments and costs of a recommended harvesting system for
Ambler to supply 773 tons of wood chips annually. (Freight is not included)
If a cordwood system only were to be developed as a minimal system, which could
do the work, it would be the JCB 4CX Tractor, with all the recommended
attachments. It would then be necessary for the Hahn firewood processor listed
under the Fecon Attachments to be used with the tractor. Preliminary review shows
that it would work with the tractor; however, this needs to be confirmed with both
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
28
equipment companies. At this point, freight has not been calculated for delivery of
the equipment.
Shungnak
Chip harvest system requirements
The largest chip system in Shungnak will displace 77,883 gallons of heating fuel
annually and will require 885 tons of chips at 25% moisture content to operate the
automated chip boiler. Total capital cost of the system is approximately $3.4 million
dollars with a net present value of approximately $4.8 million. Harvest will require
approximately: 445 hours for felling, limbing and piling; 240 hours for loading,
hauling, and unloading (10 mile average distance and 5 mph average speed); and,
finally, 177 hours (5 tons/hour) for chipping. This is a total of 862 hours of labor for
harvesting and delivering wood chips to the system. Based on labor of $25/hour
with two people working this is $43,100 in labor without benefits. With an
estimated $20,000 annual insurance and $6000 for fuel and maintenance for
machines; the cost of a delivered ton of 25% moisture fuel is less than $90 per ton.
The models were developed using $175 per ton to be extremely conservative since
these are estimated costs and times.
Cord wood harvest system requirements
If only cordwood systems are used to their maximum benefit in Shungnak, given a
reasonable payback, there would be six cord wood boilers installed. The Alley
Street subdivision will require one garn boiler and 95 cords annually. The Jim
Street subdivision will require one garn boiler and 104 cords of wood annually. The
Andy Land subdivision would be connected with the water treatment plant and
require one Garn Boiler and 99 cords of wood. The Back Street subdivision would
be connected with the Clinic and require one Garn boiler and only 49 cords of wood
annually. The new NANA office building would require one Garn boiler and 102
cords of wood annually. A total of 623 cords of wood are required annually. Total
capital costs of the boiler systems are approximately $3.09 million. The costs are
high due to the amount of piping and costs to hook up individual houses. Net Simple
paybacks range from 3.33 years to 10.5 years for the various installed systems.
Harvest will require approximately: 315 hours for felling, limbing (cut to length)
and piling; 247 hours for loading, hauling and unloading (using same parameters as
above); and 200 hours to cut to length and split for the boiler. This is a total of 762
hours times 2 employees for a total of 1524 hours for harvesting and delivery of
wood to the village costing $38,100 without benefits. With $25,000 for insurance
and $5000 for fuel; the cost of a delivered cord of firewood at 25% moisture is
approximately $110 per cord. The model to develop the economics of the boiler
systems was based on a standard of $250 per cord. Neither capital cost of the
equipment nor replacement costs are included in these calculations.
Feeding the boiler is manual and will require multiple burns per day. The coldest
days will require up to four burns per day based on the feasibility models developed
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
29
for the Upper Kobuk. Each load and ignition process takes about 30 minutes per
boiler, if the stoking wood and fire starter are readily available at the boiler. A burn
takes two hours, but does not require attendance once the fire is going well. Ideally,
burns should be scheduled at equal intervals throughout the entire day/night cycle.
A middle of the night burn may not be possible. A more realistic schedule may be to
burn early morning, mid morning, mid afternoon and late evening. If a centralized
business is developed to manage the burn process for burns at all the boiler
installations, then overall labor costs will be reduced for each.
The time of feeding the boilers throughout the cold season is estimated at 30
minutes per burn per boiler. In the shoulder months, a boiler may be burned only
once every two days, and on coldest days 4 times during one day. We will use an
average of two burns per day for the entire 242‐day burn season, mid‐September to
mid‐May. There are a total of 6 boilers so there would be a total of 2904 burns
during the season. This will equate to approximately 1452 hours for burns, not
counting moving wood to the various installations. At $25 per hour the labor for
feeding and igniting the boilers is $36,300 annually. On a per cord basis this is
approximately $60 per cord bringing the cost of harvesting and feeding the boilers
to approximately $180 per cord conservatively. However, the financial modeling
was done with the standard $250 per cord.
Kobuk
Chip system harvest requirements
The largest chip system in Kobuk will displace 44.441 gallons of heating fuel
annually and will require 630 tons of chips at 25% moisture content to operate the
automated boiler. Total capital cost of the system is approximately $2.1 million
dollars with a net present value of approximately $2.7 million. Harvest will require
approximately: 350 hours for felling, limbing and piling; 280 hours for loading,
hauling, and unloading (7 mile average distance and 5 mph average speed); and,
finally, 126 hours (5 tons/hour) for chipping. This is a total of 756 hours of labor for
harvesting and delivering wood chips to the system. Two men will be used for
safety purposes so a total of 1512 hours at $25 per hour is $37,800 for base labor
without benefits. Annual insurance is estimated at $20,000 and $6000 for fuel for
machines; the cost of a delivered ton of 25% moisture fuel is approximately $100
per ton. The models were developed using $175 per ton to be extremely
conservative. However, the capital costs of machinery are not accounted for here
assuming they have been bought with grant funds.
Cord wood harvest system requirements
If only cordwood systems are used to their maximum benefit in Kobuk, given a
reasonable payback, there would be four cord wood boilers installed displacing a
total of 42,207 gallons of fuel with 525 cords of wood. The HUD subdivision will
require one garn boiler and 61 cords of wood annually to heat nine homes and
displace 7200 gallons of fuel. A district heating system that would link the school
with the proposed new construction, the clinic, the new NANA office building,
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
30
teacher housing water treatment plant, and the city office building would require
two Garn boilers and a total of 285 cords of wood to displace a total of 35,007
gallons of fuel. Total capital costs of the boiler systems are approximately $1.2
million. Net Simple paybacks range from 4.56 years for the district heating system
to 11.24 years for the subdivision.
Harvest will require approximately: 275 hours for felling, delimbing (cut to 16’
lengths) and piling; 210 hours for loading, hauling and unloading (using same
parameters as above); and 200 hours to cut to length and split for the boiler. This is
a total of 685 hours times 2 employees for a total of 1368 hours for harvesting and
delivery of wood to the village costing $34,200 in labor without benefits at $25 per
hour. Using $25,000 for insurance and $5000 for fuel and maintenance; the cost of a
delivered cord of firewood at 25% moisture is less than $125 per cord. The model
to develop the economics of the boiler systems was based on a standard of $250 per
cord. Neither capital cost of the equipment nor replacement costs are included in
these calculations.
Feeding the boiler is manual and will require multiple burns per day. The coldest
days will require up to four burns per day based on the feasibility models developed
for the Upper Kobuk. Each load and ignition process takes about 20 minutes per
boiler, if the stoking wood and fire starter are readily available at the boiler. A burn
takes two hours, but does not require attendance once the fire is going well. Ideally,
burns should be scheduled at equal intervals throughout the entire day/night cycle.
A middle of the night burn may not be possible. A more realistic schedule may be to
burn early morning, mid morning, mid afternoon and late evening. If a centralized
business is developed to manage the burn process for burns at all the boiler
installations, then overall labor costs will be reduced for each.
The time of feeding the boilers throughout the cold season is estimated at 30
minutes per burn per boiler. In the shoulder months, a boiler may be burned only
once every two days, and on coldest days 4 times during one day. We will use an
average of two burns per day for the entire 242‐day burn season, mid‐September to
mid‐May. There are a total of 3 boilers so there would be a total of 1452 burns
during the season. This will equate to approximately 726 hours for burns, not
counting moving wood to the various installations. At $25 per hour the labor for
feeding and igniting the boilers is $18,150 annually. On a per cord basis this is
approximately $35 per cord bringing the cost of harvesting and feeding the boilers
to approximately $155 per cord conservatively. However, the financial modeling for
the boiler feasibility was done with the standard $250 per cord.
Shungnak and Kobuk Recommended Harvest System
A system that will support both Shungnak and Kobuk will need to produce a little
more than twice as much wood as the system for Ambler. The Ambler system has
plenty of capacity to produce the wood, but for the two villages we will need more
hauling capacity. Thus we are recommending two tractors and four trailers. Based
on the results of the boiler modeling/feasibility analysis, the best fit for Shungnak is
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
31
a chip system and the best fit for Kobuk is a cordwood system. However, a small
chip system will work in Kobuk as well. A chipper could serve both communities if
scheduled correctly and moved in the winter across frozen ground or on the Kobuk
River.
The proposed system is again a maximum system with redundancy and can serve
both the chip and cord wood boiler requirements for both communities.
Machine Attachment Cost
Total
Machine &
Attachments
Fecon TRX100L $118,000
Bucket $2,500
Brush Rake $4,800
Grapple $5,800
Dozer Blade $4,700
Pallet forks $900
Hahn firewood
processor $26,000
14" tree shear $12,000
Sub Total Fecon $174,700 $174,700
JCB 4CX Tractor
x 2 Backhoe - Loader $232,000
2-Loading Crane
305T $53,000
2-Grapple $23,000
Snow Blower $6,000
Stroke Harvester $28,000
4-9 ton Kesla log bunk
Trailers $53,000
2 Trailer Tracks $36,000
2 Tractor guarding $24,000
sub total Tractor $455,000 $455,000
Morbark Chipper $70,000 $70,000
Total $699,700
Table 3. Maximum set of machines, attachments and costs of a recommended harvesting system for
Shungnak and Kobuk to supply 1515 tons of wood chips annually. (Freight not included)
The total amount of cordwood if both villages were to choose stick‐fired boilers is
1148 cords annually. A minimal system to accomplish the tasks would delete the
chipper and the skid steer. However, we would recommend, if affordable, to keep
the skid steer to support the tractors. Again, redundancy, when affordable, makes
for a more robust harvest system in off road bush Alaska.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
32
Appendix
Transportation System Analysis
Background
A critical element of a sustainable woody biomass fuels program for the Upper
Kobuk Valley is the safe and efficient transport of equipment and wood fuel over the
river systems in the project area during winter. The lack of road access to the forest
resources to be managed and harvested for this alternative energy program
requires the use of these rivers as transportation corridors. The local knowledge
base of water and ice conditions has served the community well. The residents of
Upper Kobuk Valley use the rivers regularly for transportation, subsistence, and
recreation. Ice transportation use, however, has had very limited application for
hauling wood and equipment at an industrial scale. It is vital that the local
knowledge base be supplemented with a more detailed understanding of how to
utilize these rivers for forestry transportation applications in a safe and efficient
manner. The simplest use is in developing crossings; however, in some
circumstances ice roads on the Kobuk River will make transport of wood and
equipment much more efficient.
This analysis begins the supplementation of the local knowledge process. The size of
the project area precludes an exhaustive analysis of the water and ice conditions for
the project area. In addition, there is a lack of historic ice thickness data that are
available on other rivers in the state. Significant efforts have been made to develop
an understanding of the major issues that may be encountered by a wood fuel
project when it utilizes the river as a transport corridor.
There are three basic components to a successful wood fuel transportation program
on ice: Adequate water depth; adequate ice thickness; proper equipment; effective
work force. This analysis addresses the ice thickness issues.
Log Rafting in spring and summer
Assembling wood fuel production into log raft form for transport to the village has
attractive possibilities to significantly increase program efficiencies. With the
proper boat towing or pushing capacity, several tons of logs could be moved in a
single tow resulting in a significant reduction in fuel oil consumption and other
hauling costs.
There are at least two important unknowns at this point in time that tend to
discourage log rafting as the chief form of wood transport in the early stages of the
program. First is the issue of obtaining necessary permits for these activities, and
the second is determining volumes of wood that can be effectively transported in
this fashion on an annual basis. It is important to realize that it will take some time
to develop an understanding of the operational issues that come with rafting logs in
the area. It seems prudent to defer the complexities of rafting until a later time
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
33
when the operation can better handle the additional responsibilities that come with
it.
Winter Hauling and Transport on Ice
Hauling cargo over ice is a common practice throughout the Arctic. Oilfield
development and other industrial applications have used winter ice conditions to
transport equipment and other goods for decades. During this period, a
considerable amount of useful information and experience has been developed on
how to haul on ice efficiently and safely. Ice travel in the Upper Kobuk using snow
machine and other light vehicles is common. The Upper Kobuk wood fuel program
can use rivers to efficiently haul significant volumes of wood fuel over ice, either in
simple crossing sites or as a road for longer hauling. To date, very little heavy
hauling has occurred over river ice in this area, and thus there is little local
knowledge in this regard. Ice thickness records for the area have not been kept.
However, limited data indicates that during certain periods each winter, ice
thicknesses at the point of measurement exceeds the required capacity to haul wood
fuel safely. Ice strength equations and tables established by the U.S. Army Cold
Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory and others correlate ice thickness
and other parameters to the load carrying capacity of the ice. Procedures for
measuring thickness and determining ice quality have also been determined.
Properly applied, this information can empower the stakeholders in the Upper
Kobuk wood energy project with the ability to safely haul wood fuel and equipment
over river ice for more than three months out of the year.
Figure 10. Well‐maintained ice road in Alaska. (left). Sampling ice depth and quality on the Yukon
River. (right)
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
34
NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE ICE
It is important to use systematic observations of the ice sheet to determine support
of a load. There may be many variations in the structure, thickness, temperature,
and strength of a floating freshwater ice sheet.
How thick is the ice?
Ice thickness is determined by drilling holes with a drill or ice auger (Figure 10).
The accepted technique is to drill a hole to check ice thickness every 150 feet, or
where needed along the intended path, and should be done more frequently if the
ice thickness is quite variable. Also noted is whether the ice in each hole is clear
(sometimes called black ice) or white (due to air bubbles—sometimes called snow
ice). The thickness of both kinds of ice must be measured. On rivers, the ice
thickness and quality can change measurably in a short distance; one should be
particularly alert to variations in ice thickness due to bends, riffles or shallows,
junctions with tributaries, etc. For both rivers and lakes, warm inflows from springs
can create areas of thinner ice. The ice near shores can either be thinner (due to
warm groundwater inflow or the insulating effect of drifted snow) or thicker (due to
the candle‐dipping effect of variable water levels). Differences snow cover thickness
on top of the ice cover may mean highly variable ice thicknesses.
Once a wood harvesting program has been initiated, monthly measures along the
major travel routes should be established to obtain ice quality and thickness data.
This data set will help the wood haulers understand when and where they can most
safely haul wood and allow for future planning of hauling timing. The process will
also allow for development of the dynamics of ice thickness variability and timing.
How thick does the ice need to be?
Table 2 can be used to determine the minimum thickness for transport. The load is
the total load in tons (not a vehicle's load capacity) of both the equipment and the
load. The table is valid when the load of a wheeled or tracked vehicle is distributed
over a reasonable area of a continuous ice sheet, which is the case with a tractor or
Morooka pulling a loaded trailer. The larger the load, the greater the area it should
cover for the calculation to remain valid. Neither large loads that are concentrated in
relatively smaller areas, nor loads that are at or near the edge of a large opening in
the ice, are safely described by the table. In such cases, seek more advice or simply find
another route.
Minimum ice thickness required to support a load
The table assumes clear, sound ice. If white, bubblefilled ice makes up part or all of
the ice thickness, count it as only half as much clear ice. A tractor 16,000 pounds and
a load of wood and trailer 20,800 is a total of 18.4 tons will require clear ice
thickness of 18‐20 inches for a safe haul.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
35
Table 2. Minimum ice thickness required
to support a load
Load
(tons)
Required ice thickness
(inches)
Distance between loads
(feet)
0.1 2 17
1 4 34
2 6 48
3 7 58
4 8 67
5 9 75
10 13 106
20 18 149
30 22 183
40 26 211
Basic Procedures of Safety on Ice
• Never go out on an ice cover alone, and never go out on the ice if there is any
question of its safety.
• While you are planning the haul, obtain the record of air temperature for the
past several days and continue observing air temperatures while the ice will
be used to support loads.
• Always let someone know of your plans and when you will return.
• When you arrive at the water's edge, visually survey the ice. Look for open
water areas, and look for signs of recent changes in water levels: ice sloping
down from the bank because the water dropped, or wet areas on the ice
because the water rose and flooded areas of the ice that couldn't float
because it was frozen to the bottom or the banks. (If the ice is snow‐covered,
look for wet areas in the snow.)
• It is best to traverse the haul route with a snow machine first to make sure
that all conditions are the same as the last ice inspection.
• Listen for loud cracks or booms coming from the ice. In a river this can mean
the ice is about to break up or move; on a lake larger than several acres such
noises may be harmless responses to thermal expansion and contraction.
• It is best to maintain an easy point of access to the ice, free of cracks or piled,
broken ice on both ends of the haul.
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
36
• Near shore, listen for hollow sounds while probing. Ice sloping down from
the bank may have air space underneath. This is not safe; ice must be floating
on the water to support loads.
• Only after you have learned the characteristics of the ice cover should any
vehicle be taken on the ice.
SAFE OPERATIONS ON THE ICE COVER
If using an enclosed vehicle, always drive with the windows or a door open for quick
escape. If you drive across wet cracks, your path should be as close to perpendicular
to them as possible, instead of parallel to them. A load deflects the ice slightly into a
bowl shape. When you drive on floating ice, this moving bowl generates waves in
the water. The ice sheet deflection is increased when the speed of the waves equals
the vehicle speed and the ice is much more likely to break. The problem is more
serious for thin ice and shallow water. In general you avoid this danger by driving
below 15 mph. When there are two loads on the ice, the safe distance between them
is about 100 times the ice thickness at the required minimum thickness. This is
shown in the third column of table 2. When the two loads are different, choose the
spacing shown for the larger load. At ice thicknesses greater than the required
minimum, this spacing can be reduced.
A loaded ice sheet will creep, or deform, over a long period of time, without any
additional load. If an ice sheet has to be loaded for a long period, drill a hole near the
load. If the water begins to flood the ice through the hole, move the load
immediately. Remember this if your vehicle ever becomes disabled: if left for a few
days, it may break through the ice as a result of long‐term creep.
Equipment and Loading/ Unloading Point Considerations
Weight limitations for equipment and cargo apply for hauling over ice. Thus
production‐scheduling risks of hauling over river ice due to inadequate ice thickness
also exist. All of the equipment utilized in the summer months will also be used in
the winter production period. The weight limitations based on smaller efficient
equipment are within acceptable parameters for ice hauling. For example, an 8 ton
machine will need less than 13 inches of clear, sound, floating ice for safe transit,
according the ice strength table. Ice thicknesses exceeding this amount are common
over much of the project area for 3 or more months of the year, according to
historical records. Thus, the machine weights anticipated by this report are not
expected to be a limiting factor for hauling over ice. Wood fuel loads will be towed
from the field with the four‐wheel drive tractor with chains on tires pulling trailers.
Heavier loads are desired whenever possible in order to haul more wood fuel per
trip to reduce the number of trips necessary to meet production goals. With this
system, the entire load weight can be regulated by the number of trailers being
towed and the distance between each one in order to comply with the maximum
load capacity of the ice being traversed. Establishing safe routes to cross a river on
ice is another strategy that has the capacity to reduce risk and increase efficiency. By
limiting the distance equipment and wood fuel is hauled over ice, the risk of an
Wood Harvest Systems Upper Kobuk Biomass Program
Alaska Wood Energy Associates
37
accident or production interruption due to inadequate ice thickness can be
managed. A single crossing over a relatively short stretch of river can more easily be
monitored for safe ice conditions than longer stretches over river segments that
may have varying ice thicknesses and quality. However, transporting on the Kobuk
River between Kobuk and Shungnak could be advantageous in mid winter if ice
thickness is adequate.
Ice thickness can also be managed on a specific crossing site fairly readily by
employing ice road construction and maintenance techniques that will increase ice
thickness. This is an easier task for a 200‐yard river crossing than a 10‐mile long
river route. Hauling across stretches of ice where the operator is highly confident of
capacity to support the load weight is vital to the entire operation. Consistent load
weights being systematically transported, carefully monitored with managed ice
crossings, will significantly increase the efficiency of the Upper Kobuk Wood Fuel
Program.