HomeMy WebLinkAboutGlenallenCluster_BiomassPre-Feasibility_DalsonEnergy_July 2012This pre-feasibility assessment considers the potential for heating buildings at DNR Forestry,
Crossroads Medical Center, BLM/NPS Campus, PWSCC Glenallen Campus, and Copper River
School District with woody biomass from regional forests.
Pre-Feasibility Study
Heating with Woody Biomass for the
Glenallen, Alaska Cluster
D a l s o n E n e r g y I n c .
3 0 8 G S t . S t e 3 0 3
A n c h o r a g e , A l a s k a 9 9 5 0 1
907-2 7 7 -7900
2 | P a g e
Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Regional biomass information ...................................................................................................................... 4
Available fuels ........................................................................................................................................... 6
Economic development ............................................................................................................................ 8
Site Specific Analysis: DNR Forestry .............................................................................................................. 8
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges ................................................................................... 8
Technology or installation options assessed ............................................................................................ 8
Project chart ........................................................................................................................................ 10
Preliminary Cost Estimating ................................................................................................................ 11
Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 12
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps ................................................ 13
Site Specific Analysis: Cross Road Medical Center ...................................................................................... 13
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges ................................................................................. 13
Technology or installation options assessed .......................................................................................... 14
Project chart ........................................................................................................................................ 15
Preliminary Cost Estimating ................................................................................................................ 16
Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 17
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps ................................................ 18
Site Specific Analysis: Community Chapel .................................................................................................. 18
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges ................................................................................. 18
Technology or installation options assessed .......................................................................................... 18
Project chart ........................................................................................................................................ 19
Preliminary Cost Estimating ................................................................................................................ 20
Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 21
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps ................................................ 22
Site Specific Analysis: Prince William Sound Community College .............................................................. 22
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges ................................................................................. 22
Technology or installation options assessed .......................................................................................... 22
Project chart ........................................................................................................................................ 24
Preliminary Cost Estimating ................................................................................................................ 25
3 | P a g e
Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 26
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps ................................................ 27
Site Specific Analysis: Chistochina School ................................................................................................... 27
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges ................................................................................. 27
Technology or installation options assessed .......................................................................................... 27
Project chart ........................................................................................................................................ 28
Preliminary Cost Estimating ................................................................................................................ 29
Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 30
Life Cycle Cost Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 31
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps ................................................ 31
Site Specific Analysis: BLM NPS Campus ..................................................................................................... 31
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges ................................................................................. 31
Technology or installation options assessed .......................................................................................... 32
Project chart BLM/ NPS ....................................................................................................................... 33
Preliminary Cost Estimating: BLM Cluster #1...................................................................................... 34
Economic Analysis: BLM Cluster #1 .................................................................................................... 35
Preliminary Cost Estimating: NPS Cluster #1 ...................................................................................... 36
Economic Analysis: NPS Cluster #1 ..................................................................................................... 37
Preliminary Cost Estimating: NPS Cluster #2 ...................................................................................... 38
Economic Analysis: NPS Cluster #2 ..................................................................................................... 39
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps ................................................ 40
Summary of Benefit/ Cost analyses ............................................................................................................ 40
Recommendations and Next Steps ............................................................................................................. 41
Executive Summary
This assessment suggests small-scale heating with woody biomass technically, operationally, and
financially feasible in a number of community buildings in the Glenallen, AK, area. Of the projects
surveyed, three were found to have financial feasibility; four were found to be operationally and
4 | P a g e
technically feasible; and two are recommended to proceed to development, with a high degree of
technical, operational, and financial viability. The two projects recommended to proceed to
development are the Cross Road Medical Center, and NPS Cluster #1.
In general, containerized cordwood heating systems are the most financially attractive of the possible
project configurations evaluated, with the lowest capital cost and the lowest wood fuel cost. Pellets are
also an option for small-scale heating, although the projects described in this report have marginal
economic feasibility. Options for improving project’s financial profiles are discussed.
Regional biomass information
Over 1 million acres in the Copper Valley are forested. A number of institutional land owners manage
these lands, including the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources Forestry Division (DNR), US
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and Ahtna, Inc. According to a 2010 DNR timber resource
assessment, State lands alone in the Copper Valley hold more than 2 million tons of timber > 5” DBH
(diameter at breast height), and over 96,000 acres of pole timber. Non-commercial trees (too small or
defective to make sawlogs), including pole timber, is suitable for biomass energy. Concurrent to making
timber resources available for biomass energy development, the State of Alaska is undertaking Wildfire
Fuels Reduction Projects around Glenallen, McCarthy, Tazlina, Gulkana, and Gakona.
5 | P a g e
Figure 1: State Land forest inventory map1.
1 Hanson, Doug. “Forest Resources on State Forest Lands in the Copper River Basin: A Preliminary Estimate.” Alaska
Department of Natural Resources – Forestry. March 2010.
6 | P a g e
The presence of a forest resource is distinct from a wood energy fuel supply. Every energy project needs
a fuel plan. That plan could include a harvest contract and/or wood fuel delivery contract, and an
operations plan prior to development. Additionally, every project should have a primary and secondary
fuel supplier identified prior to investing in a project. Wood fuel supply and contracting is a lynchpin to
project success.
Available fuels
Wood chips
There are currently no local commercial manufacturers of woodchips. One initiative, the Glenallen
School biomass boiler project, may develop (or catalyze the development of) a chip manufacturing
operation if it proceeds to development.
Regal Enterprises produces woodchips for its own use. It operates a small biomass boiler for heating
several buildings. Regal Enterprises do not currently plan to sell chips commercially but may be willing to
do so if approached with a proposal for a fuel supply contract. Regal Enterprises historically harvested
firewood but their future production is unknown at this time.
Regionally, the Alaska Gateway School District (AGSD) in Tok, AK procures wood chips for the Tok
School’s biomass boiler project from local sources. A few trailers of chips would satisfy the annual
demand of any of the projects considered in this report. The chips supply is considered reliable, and is
priced at $60 - $80/ ton FOB Tok, AK. Regional vendors may be available to deliver woodchips in the
amounts necessary, until local sources are identified.
Cordwood
Glenallen is located in the Valdez-Cordova Census area, which contains about 10,000 residents. Of 3,914
occupied housing units in this census area, approximately 630 used wood as a primary heat source,
according to U.S. Census data. At an average of 5 cords per house, approximately 3,150 cords are used
annually in this Census area. There is no way to differentiate between cordwood and pellet wood among
the Census data, but pellets are expected to be a small percentage of the total wood fuel heating
demand.
Historically, wood is harvested by individual households for personal use. Additionally local businesses
harvest and sell firewood, as log-loads or processed cordwood. Local commercial firewood
manufacturers include Regal Enterprises and Benston Logging.
Cordwood is also available from regional producers, such as Young’s Timber Inc. and Kristian Crozier in
Tok, AK.
Commodity prices for cordwood follow:
Log length -- $1,800/ 10 cords FOB Tok, AK
Split/ delivered -- $200/ cord FOB Tok, AK
7 | P a g e
Pellets
Pellets are not produced commercially in the Copper Valley. However, a variety of pellet supplies are
accessible:
Superior Pellets, manufactured in North Pole, AK; delivered in 40 pound bags or bulk. The
company plans to acquire a 16 ton auger delivery truck in 2012. Current pellet price is $275/ ton
FOB Fairbanks, AK.
End of the Alcan (Supernaw’s), located in Delta Junction, imports pellets from Prince George,
Canada. Pellets are palletized in 40 lb. bags, 1 ton per pallet. Pallets are delivered to Delta
Junction or Tok. This operator currently distributes about 1,000 tons per year. Each load carries
about 25 tons (25 pallets). $330 per ton, FOB Tok.
Pellets from a variety of suppliers in Anchorage, mostly imported from Lower 48 or Canada.
Tongass Forest Enterprises, located in Ketchikan, is manufacturing pellets—not currently
exporting.
Summary
With regard to woodchips, the viability of any project depends on the ability to reliable obtain chips at a
reasonable price. Local woodchip producers are not actively manufacturing chips for sale. Therefore, the
viability of any woodchip project depends on new wood chip manufacturing enterprises, or being able to
obtain chips from the suppliers of the Alaska Gateway School District in Tok, or another supplier in the
area. A primary and secondary source of chips should be developed. Simple chipping equipment and
infrastructure could be purchased by a regional organization and made available for lease to
entrepreneurs. The preferred chip fuel is 20 – 35% moisture content, and less than 2.5” in size.
With regard to cordwood, the projects discussed herein use about 15 – 30 cords annually. The challenge
here is sourcing, not supply. Within the regional biomass market, the additional market demand of 15 –
30 cords will likely have little impact on the commodity pricing. With upcoming wildfire-fuels reduction
programs, it appears that more than sufficient volumes of wood should be available for sales, if
entrepreneurs engage with agencies (DNR, BLM, Ahtna). Additionally, bulk purchases are available from
commercial operators in Tok, Alaska.
Any project proceeding to development should:
A) Negotiate a fuel supply agreement with a local providers of firewood
B) Properly store (deck) wood 6 months – 1 year in advance of the heating season to ensure its dryness.
A moisture content of 20%-25% is the range of well-seasoned wood for most combustion systems..
With regard to wood pellets, two existing commercial suppliers are operating in the region: Superior
Pellets and End of the Alcan. Currently Superior Pellets has a 16 ton auger truck, but plans to purchase
additional delivery vehicles upon negotiation of a fuel supply contract.
8 | P a g e
Additionally, all pellet projects considered have the potential to charter their own truck from Prince
George or other sources, if pellet delivery from End of the Alcan became unavailable.
Economic development
A number of factors yield a favorable market opportunity for woody biomass energy development in the
Copper Valley, including high and escalating fossil fuel costs, planned hazardous fuels reduction, and the
local labor force.
Economic localization is the term used to describe local benefits gained by locally producing and
consuming commodities, especially energy supply and food. Woody biomass in particular can yield
savings in heat energy, improved price stability over fossil fuels, locally retained energy dollars, and job
creation.
With regard to price stability, although fossil fuels are an input price to biomass fuel harvesting and
processing, the biomass price is more inelastic than fossil fuels themselves.
Site Specific Analysis: DNR Forestry
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges
DNR Forestry office in Copper River/ Valdez is a division of the State of Alaska DNR Forestry, which
manages forests for multiple uses and the sustained yield of renewable resources on 20 million acres of
State land.
The representative of the office, Regional Forester Gary Mullen, is very interested on a biomass heating
project for the purpose of stabilizing operating costs and utilizing a renewable resource.
The facility is composed of three existing buildings: the Administration building, Shop, and Pump House.
The Administration building has recently been weatherized. A new Operations building, estimated at
2,000 sq. ft, will be constructed in the coming year.
Technology or installation options assessed
Because of the time constraints on limited current staff, only a fully automated system was considered.
This is directly based on feedback from DNR-Forestry personnel. The project is too small to
accommodate a wood chip boiler. Therefore, a pellet boiler was the only technology considered. The
pellets were assumed to be back-hauled using Forestry trucks, at no additional transportation costs to
DNR.
Both stand-alone and integrated biomass boiler systems were considered. DNR-personnel preferred the
stand-alone option. There is no room within existing buildings to accommodate the biomass plant. The
new building, currently in the design phase, has a separate budget that is limited. Therefore, a separate
source of funding for the biomass plant was preferred.
9 | P a g e
Because of the very low volume of fuel usage, a small pellet trough was assumed to be built into the
container system. The trough would be made of wood, and could be filled from above by 40 lb bags. A
forklift could lift up the pallet of pellets for filling from above.
Alternatively, a metal grain-style silo or small square silo could be employed. The challenge is that a full
truck carries 16 – 27 tons of pellets (a full year supply for DNR), but the storage devices for this volume
are not easily filled by hand. Because of the low volume of wood fuel usage, and the prospects for using
40 lb. bags of pellets rather than automatic filling, the economic analysis in this report assumes a
wooden trough style storage structure built into the containerized boiler system.
One additional note on this project: the DNR site also has a well house that distributes water to the
Campus building. This well house is outfitted with a 1.5 kilowatt electric baseboard heater. The well
house does not appear to be well insulated. The project design assumes heating this well house with a
small heat loop line, offsetting an estimated 4,500 kilowatt-hours per year (20 hours per day of
operation, 5 months of winter). The cost of this electricity is $1,485 per year.
Figure 2: Top Left: Location of proposed Operations Building. Top Right: Gravel drive to position boiler unit. Bottom Left:
Shop/ Storage building.
10 | P a g e
Project chart
Building Name Admin, Fire Cache, Water house, Operations (new)
Building Owner DNR Forestry
Contact Information Gary Mullen
Square footage and number of buildings
7,900 sq. ft total (3 buildings). Operations building in design,
estimated 1,400 -- 2,200 sq. ft.
Gallons per year, fuel oil #1 estimated 3,600 gallons
PRELIMINARY SITE INVESTIGATION
What feedback did staff offer on the current heating system?
Has recently completed weatherization on the Admin building, and is
considering weatherization of the Shop. Has some money to build a
new Operations facility, which will be highly efficient. That building
has not yet been designed but will be located north of the Admin
building.
What is the staff or building manager's interest in biomass heating?Seriously interested in automated wood heating. Very ready to install
biomass heating plant. Prefers containerized system.
Description of current heating system
Current heating systems are not connected. Office - hydronic fuel oil
boiler, 248,000 btu/hr; Shop - unit heater from ceiling (forced air,
185,000 btu); new heating system will be incorporated into new
Operations building. Water plant -- 1,500 watt electric baseboard
heater heats the water house (5,118 btu/hr).
Available space (within existing structures or space for newly
constructed building) Stand alone boiler system is preferred.
Street access Excellent street access, about 1/4 mile up driveway from Richardson
Hwy. Forestry trucks regularly access the area.
Delivery access Excellent delivery access to existing gravel driveway.
Fuel storage space Excellent fuel storage space for proposed pellet system.
Building or site constraints (topography, permitting, historical
preservation, etc.)None.
Options for biomass boiler system (fuel type, technology type,
building type)
Given the personnel available, a highly automated system is
preferred. At the scale of system required, only pellets are
recommended. Bulk pellets are available by the pallet ( 40 lb bags) or
by the truck. With the proposed biomass boiler configuration, the
facility should be able to offset 100% of heat demand using 27.5 tons
of pellets. Total annual estimated heat requirement is 450 MMBTU.
Estimated boiler size
two (2) 100,000 btu/hr pellet boilers, with cascading control function
among them, for a total capacity of 200,000 btu/hr. Boilers should
have turn down of 4:1, enabling the facility to meet almost all of its
heating needs with pellets.
11 | P a g e
Preliminary Cost Estimating
Initial investment: DNR Forestry
Biomass System
Size (2) 109,000 btu/hr
System Rating -- Btu/hr 218,000
Buffer tank 475 gal.
footnote notes
A $ 10,000
Pre-Fabricated Boiler System
Base price C 180,000$ Based on quote from viable suppliers.
Boiler shipping to hub city B 10,000$
Local delivery B 2,000$
Plumbing and electrical C 7,000$
C 3,000$ Forestry will construct gravel pad
Installation C 6,000$
District loop & building integration D 88,000$ Forestry will trench.
Subtotal-B&E Costs 306,000$
Contingency -- 20% 61,200$
Grand Total 367,200$
Soft Costs $
C 29,376$ 8% B&E
C 33,048$ 9% of B&E, because of district loop
incl'd in design
Equipment Commissioning and Training C incl'd with purchase
Construction Management C 29,376$ 8% B&E
Subtotal -- Soft Costs 91,800$
Recommended Project Budget -- Design and Construction Costs 459,000$
footnote
A
B Estimated based on quotes from viable suppliers
C Estimate
D $15,000 per building integration (4 buildings). $35/ft for duel insulated pex pipe. 800 ft.
Fire Marshall Plan Review
Site Prep
Building and Equipment Costs (B&E) $
Fuel Storage Building
(V-storage installed in fabricated building)
A/E Design Services
Project Management
Square bulk silo or pre-fabricated building with V-shaped storage trough, built of wood into container. Waterproof hatch. Fill
from above.
12 | P a g e
Economic Analysis
AEA B/C Model_DNR
Project Description
Community
Nearest Fuel Community
11 Region
RE Technology
Project ID
Applicant Name
Project Title
Category
Results
NPV Benefits $207,135
NPV Capital Costs $459,000 Low 300$
B/C Ratio 0.45 Med 330$
NPV Net Benefit ($251,865)High 400$
Performance Unit Value
Displaced Electricity kWh per year 4,500
Displaced Electricity total lifetime kWh 4,500
Displaced Petroleum Fuel gallons per year 3,600
Displaced Petroleum Fuel total lifetime gallons 90,000
Displaced Natural Gas mmBtu per year -
Displaced Natural Gas total lifetime mmBtu -
Avoided CO2 tonnes per year 37
Avoided CO2 total lifetime tonnes 914
Proposed System Unit Value
1 Capital Costs $459,000$
2 Project Start year 2013
3 Project Life years 25
Displaced Electric kWh per year 4,500
4 Displaced Heat gallons displaced per year 3,600
Displaced Transportation gallons displaced per year 0.00
10 Renewable Generation O&M$ per BTU
Electric Capacity kW 0
Electric Capacity Factor %0
Heating Capacity Btu/hr.218,000
Heating Capacity Factor %86
Glennallen
Tok
Rural
Woody biomass heat
DNR Forestry
Glennallen DNR Wood Heat
13 | P a g e
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps
Due to relatively low fuel oil consumption, this project has marginal economic feasibility. However, it
has all the attributes of a project that will thrive operationally: motivated and capable staff, appropriate
technology for available fuels and operating requirements, and simple building interconnections. This
project will demonstrate the viability of small-scale biomass heating to a variety of commercial and
municipal buildings.
Because of uncertainty regarding new building loads, and the potential to adjust the Shop heat load as
additional weatherization measures are undertaken, the recommended project technology are two
highly modulating wood pellet boilers. These boilers will probably offset 100% of the fuel oil demand of
the facility.
Usually AEA recommends funding for projects with a Benefit/ Cost ratio greater than 1.0. This project is
markedly lower than that, and is unlikely to move forward if AEA Renewable Energy Grant funds are the
only sources of funding.
Creative project development will need to be undertaken for this project to move forward. Such
development could include:
Partner with the neighboring heat consumer, DOT, for a district heating system serving both
agencies. This project would likely be able to be financed by grants or even private third parties
Attempt to establish the value of the project apart from financial value, such as the value of
monitoring, the value of purchasing regionally manufactured wood fuels, etc, to obtain grant
monies
Negotiate lower pellet prices for a long term wood fuel contract and/or partnering with another
pellet consumer to negotiate lower prices through bulk purchasing
This project is recommended to prove the concept of small-scale wood heating. It is also believed that
the facility staff would be very interested in record-keeping for the purpose of building models of
biomass heating in interior Alaska.
Site Specific Analysis: Cross Road Medical Center
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges
Cross Road Medical Center (CRMC) is a not-for-profit Christian Community Health Center serving the
residents of South Central Alaska. Since 1956, CRMC has been the only MD level provider of health care
for an area nearly the size of West Virginia.
CEO Joel Mendendorp and CFO Kevin Dorsey have been highly engaged in exploring the possibility of a
wood energy project, with the primary goal being reducing costs. Mr. Mendendorp also supports local
14 | P a g e
economic development via local wood harvests, and proposed allowing patients to offset healthcare
bills with cordwood.
The facility appears to be well maintained and had a dedicated maintenance staff, who participated in
all discussions regarding biomass heating.
The facility is comprised of three buildings: the Ambulance Garage and Clinic, which are heated by a
single hydronic boiler system located in the Ambulance Garage, and the Admin building, which is heated
by a separate hydronic boiler.
Technology or installation options assessed
The heat load of the facility accommodates a cordwood or pellet boiler. Both containerized and new
building construction options were considered. Due to Mr. Mendendorp’s desire to construct a new
ambulance bay, Dalson Energy recommends an addition onto the existing ambulance garage fo r
congruency with the existing structure. One bay would be used for the boiler equipment and fuel trailer;
the other would be used for trucks and other equipment. Both bays would be heated.
Figure 3: Above Left: Head Maintenance Manger Tim Sloma and CEO Joel Mendendorp in front of the Clinic. Above Right:
Foreground is existing boiler building and area for new biomass boiler installation. Background is Clinic. Below: Foreground
Admin building, background is Clinic.
15 | P a g e
Project chart
Building Name Administration building, Clinic, Garage (3)
Building Owner Cross Road Medical Center (non profit)
Contact Information Joel Medendorp, Kevin Dorsey
Square footage
21,640 sq. ft. Total. (Admin is 2,700 square feet;
Clinic is 17,640 sq. ft; Garage is 1,300 sq. ft.)
Gallons per year, fuel oil #1 7,675 gallons
PRELIMINARY SITE INVESTIGATION
What feedback did staff offer on the current
heating system?
Goal to reduce cost. Interested in potential
trade for cordwood in exchange for medical
bills.
What is the staff or building manager's interest in
biomass heating?
Very positive interest. Reduce costs. Willing to
hire. Keep existing system as back up.
Potential to use some hazardous fuels on the
property in the biomass system for a few years
of operation.
Description of current heating system
Garage and clinic are open 24/7. Admin
operates as an office. The Garage and Clinic are
heated by a single hydronic heating system,
located in the garage, using about 6,000 gallons
per year. The Admin building is heated by a
single hydronic boiler, located on the
Northwest corner of the building.
Available space (within existing structures or
space for newly constructed building)200 acres on site. Only 50 acres are developed.
Street access Excellent acess to Glenn Hwy.
Delivery access Excellent.
Fuel storage space Excellent, with "day bin" space adequate, as
well as long term storage on the "back 40."
Building or site constraints (topography,
permitting, historical preservation, etc.)
These three buildings are within 130' of each
other.
Options for biomass boiler system (fuel type,
technology type, building type)
Cordwood option preferred for local fuel
utilization, economic development, and
potential to trade for medical bills. Total
MMBTU is 959 per year. To offset 80% of the
load, about 38 cords of firewood would be
required. Cordwood system of about 350,000
btu/hr is recommended. A GarnPac would
serve this load well.
System would be located on East side of
Garage. A boiler plus new vehicle bay could be
added. Trailer with cordwood could be backed
into the Garage, then removed and reloaded
when necessary.
Estimated Boiler Size 350,000 btu/hr cordwood
16 | P a g e
Preliminary Cost Estimating
Initial investment: Clinic, Option #1
Biomass System
Rating -- Btu/hr 350,000
Btu stored 415,000
footnote notes
A $ 1,500
Boilers
Base price B 30,000$
Shipping to Tok C 10,000$
Shipping to Glennallen C 2,000$
Boiler Building D 67,200$ 12' x 40'
Plumbing and electrical C 40,000$
Installation C 20,000$
District loop & building integration E 20,150$
Subtotal-B&E Costs 190,850$
Contingency -- 20% 38,170$
Grand Total 229,020$
Soft Costs $
18,322$ 8% of B&E
27,482$ 12% of B&E
included in design
Equipment Commissioning and Training C 4,000$
Construction Management 18,322$ 8% of B&E
Subtotal -- Soft Costs 68,126$
Recommended Project Budget -- Design and Construction 297,146$
footnote
A
B Based on quotes from viable suppliers
C Estimate
D $140/ sq ft
E
$15,000 per building integration (1 building). $35/ft for duel insulated pex pipe. $600 for trenching
130 feet.
Long term storage at Shop/ Storage area
Project Management
Fire Marshall Plan Review
A/E Design Services
Building and Equipment Costs (B&E) $
Fuel storage facility (gated gravel facility +
trailer)
17 | P a g e
Economic Analysis
AEA B/C Model_Clinic
Project Description
Community
Nearest Fuel Community
11 Region
RE Technology
Project ID
Applicant Name
Project Title
Category
Results
NPV Benefits $414,108
NPV Capital Costs $297,146 Low 175$
B/C Ratio 1.39 Med 200$
NPV Net Benefit $116,962 High 300$
Performance Unit Value
Displaced Electricity kWh per year -
Displaced Electricity total lifetime kWh -
Displaced Petroleum Fuel gallons per year 6,140
Displaced Petroleum Fuel total lifetime gallons 191,875
Displaced Natural Gas mmBtu per year -
Displaced Natural Gas total lifetime mmBtu -
Avoided CO2 tonnes per year 62
Avoided CO2 total lifetime tonnes 1,948
Proposed System Unit Value
1 Capital Costs $297,146$
2 Project Start year 2013
3 Project Life years 25
Displaced Electric kWh per year -
4 Displaced Heat gallons displaced per year 6,140
Displaced Transportation gallons displaced per year 0.00
10 Renewable Generation O&M$ per BTU
Electric Capacity kW 0
Electric Capacity Factor %0
Heating Capacity Btu/hr.350,000
Heating Capacity Factor %86
Glennallen
Tok
Rural
Woody biomass heat
Crossroad Medical Center
Glennallen Crossroads Medical Wood Heat -- New
Construction
18 | P a g e
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps
This project has strong economic and operational feasibility. It has all the attributes of a project that will
thrive operationally: motivated and capable staff, appropriate technology for available fuels and
operating requirements, and simple building interconnections. This project will demonstrate the viability
of small-scale biomass heating to a variety of commercial and municipal buildings using cordwood.
This project also underlines an essential aspect of heating with wood in places like Glenallen: ultimately,
heating with wood is about thriving rural communities. This project will result in cost savings and
economic development to the region, as well as a few happy patients who are able to offset health care
costs with cordwood.
This project is highly recommended to prove the concept of small-scale wood heating with cordwood. It
is also believed that the facility staff would be very interested in record-keeping for the purpose of
building models of biomass heating in interior Alaska.
Site Specific Analysis: Community Chapel
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges
The Glenallen Community Chapel is a community building used for Church services and community
events, such as weddings.
Pastor Nathan Winer expressed interest in a cordwood heating system for its potential to reduce utility
costs and provide reliable heat. However, he stressed that the Chapel would need to hire someone to
stoke the boiler.
Technology or installation options assessed
Because of the relatively low fuel oil consumption, the only options considered were cordwood and
pellet heating systems. Because the Chapel staff preferred local resource utilization and manual stoking,
the option recommended is cordwood.
Figure 4: Left -- Pastor Nathan Winer with his Church. Right: West side of the Church, where the biomass boiler unit would be
positioned.
19 | P a g e
Project chart
Building Name Glennallen Community Chapel
Building Owner Glennallen Community Chapel
Contact Information
James Fields (owner) 907 320 0334; also Nathan Winer
(pastor) 907 822-3499
Square footage and number of buildings 10,000 sq ft; 1 bldg
Gallons per year, fuel oil #1 2,800 gallons
PRELIMINARY SITE INVESTIGATION
What feedback did staff offer on the current heating
system?
Would need to hire staff. Not afraid of cordwood system.
Would like to use local resources.
What is the staff or building manager's interest in
biomass heating?Lowering cost
Description of current heating system
Two (2) hydronic fuel oil boilers, 152,000 btu/hr each.
Maintenance is completed by the landlord. The leasee
calls when there are problems. Some leaking on boilers
and stacks. There may be the possibility to lower cost
through improved insulation.
Available space (within existing structures or space for
newly constructed building)
There is no space within the structure but there is
adequate space for the boiler and fuel storage in the
parking lot on the West side of the building
(approximately 20' x 60'). The parking lot is used for
weddings, so some aesthetic consideration of the boiler
building exterior is advised.
Street access Excellent
Delivery access Excellent
Fuel storage space
Excellent, with additional space via clearing land on
property. Approximately 3 -- 4 acres is owned by the
Church.
Building or site constraints (topography, permitting,
historical preservation, etc.)used for weddings; other than that it is a parking lot
Options for biomass boiler system (fuel type,
technology type, building type)
Preference for cordwood; concern about price and
availability
Estimated Boiler Size 120,000 btu/hr cordwood boiler
20 | P a g e
Preliminary Cost Estimating
Initial investment: Chapel
Biomass System
Rating -- Btu/hr 120,000
Btu stored 160,000
footnote notes
A
$ 9,720
(18 cds @ 20 sq. ft. /
cd.)
Pre-Fabricated Boiler System
Base price C 93,000$
Shipping to Tok C 20,000$
Delivery to Glennallen C 3,000$
Plumbing and electrical C 2,500$
C 4,500$
Installation C 6,000$
Subtotal-B&E Costs 138,720$
Contingency -- 20% 27,744$
Grand Total 166,464$
Soft Costs $
C 13,317$ 8% of B&E
C 9,988$ 6% of B&E
C pre-approved
Equipment Commissioning and Training C 4,000$
Construction Management C 13,317$ 8% B&E
Subtotal -- Soft Costs 40,622$
Recommended Project Budget -- Design and Construction Costs 207,086$
footnote
A
B Based on quotes from viable suppliers
C Estimate
Long term storage at back field
Fire Marshall Plan Review
Building and Equipment Costs (B&E) $
Fuel Storage Building
(fabricated building, gravel pad, $27/sf)
Project Management
A/E Design Services
Site Prep
21 | P a g e
Economic Analysis
AEA B/C Model_Chapel
Project Description
Community
Nearest Fuel Community
11 Region
RE Technology
Project ID
Applicant Name
Project Title
Category
Results
NPV Benefits $46,459
NPV Capital Costs $207,086 Low 175$
B/C Ratio 0.22 Med 200$
NPV Net Benefit ($160,627)High 300$
Performance Unit Value
Displaced Electricity kWh per year -
Displaced Electricity total lifetime kWh -
Displaced Petroleum Fuel gallons per year 2,240
Displaced Petroleum Fuel total lifetime gallons 60,000
Displaced Natural Gas mmBtu per year -
Displaced Natural Gas total lifetime mmBtu -
Avoided CO2 tonnes per year 23
Avoided CO2 total lifetime tonnes 609
Proposed System Unit Value
1 Capital Costs $207,086$
2 Project Start year 2013
3 Project Life years 25
Displaced Electric kWh per year -
4 Displaced Heat gallons displaced per year 2,240
Displaced Transportation gallons displaced per year 0.00
10 Renewable Generation O&M$ per BTU 0.000029
Electric Capacity kW 0
Electric Capacity Factor %0
Heating Capacity Btu/hr.120,000
Heating Capacity Factor %86
Glennallen
Tok
Rural
Woody biomass heat
Community Chapel
Glennallen Community Chapel Wood Heat
22 | P a g e
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps
Technically, a new biomass boiler unit has strong viability. It could sit directly adjacent to the existing
boiler room and easily tie in. However, there is some concern about the capacity of maintenance. The
existing boiler room is under-maintained and potentially dangerous, and the building tenant did not
demonstrate significant interest in biomass heating. The building owners are interested, but it is not
clear what level of involvement they would have in operating the unit.
Site Specific Analysis: Prince William Sound Community College
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges
Prince William Sound Community College is an extension office of the main campus located in Valdez,
Alaska. The College offers a variety of accredited courses and community training courses, such as
emergency response.
Technology or installation options assessed
The college has only two full-time staff, and no maintenance personnel. Because of the availability of
current staff, only a fully automated system was considered. This is directly based on feedback from the
Community College personnel. The project is too small to accommodate a wood chip boiler. Therefore, a
pellet boiler was the only technology considered.
Because of the very low volume of fuel usage, a small pellet trough was assumed to be built into the
container system. The trough would be made of wood, and could be filled from above by 40 lb bags. A
forklift could lift up the pallet of pellets for filling from above.
Alternatively, a metal grain-style silo or small square silo could be employed. The challenge is that a full
truck carries 16 – 27 tons of pellets (nearly a full year supply for the College), but the storage devices for
this volume are not easily filled by hand. Because of the low volume of wood fuel usage, and the
prospects for using 40 lb. bags of pellets rather than automatic filling, the economic analysis in this
report assumes a wooden trough style storage structure built into the containerized boiler system.
23 | P a g e
Figure 5: Left: Face of Prince William Sound Community College. Right: East side of the facility, where the biomass boiler
facility would be positioned.
24 | P a g e
Project chart
Building Name Glennallen Campus Buildings
Building Owner Prince William Sound Community College
Contact Information James Fields, 907 320 0334
Square footage and number of buildings 5,780 square feet total
Gallons per year, fuel oil #1 4,500 gallons
PRELIMINARY SITE INVESTIGATION
What feedback did staff offer on the current
heating system?
This building is leased by University of Alaska Anchorage via
Prince William Sound Community College. The building is
owned and maintained by Homestead Enterprise. The
Community College staff call Homestead Enterprise when
there is a problem. There is no on-site maintenance staff.
Both owners of Homestead Enterprise are in the
construction and supply business, with extensive
knowledge of boilers, plumbing, mechanical maintenance.
What is the staff or building manager's interest in
biomass heating?
Staff of the Community College hope to avoid lease fuel
surcharge clauses as a result of stable fuel costs.
Description of current heating system
Single hydronic boiler, 266 MBH Burnham. Very old and
appears to be leaky and potentially dangerous. Stack also
shows residues.
Available space (within existing structures or space
for newly constructed building)
Very adequate space immediately outside boiler room on
the East side of the building in the gravel drive.
Street access Excellent.
Delivery access Excellent.
Fuel storage space Excellent.
Building or site constraints (topography,
permitting, historical preservation, etc.)none
Options for biomass boiler system (fuel type,
technology type, building type)
Because there is no existing maintenance staff, a highly
automated heat system is preferred. At the scale of of the
facility, pellets appear to be the preferred option. Peak load
is about 260,000 btu/hr. Recommended biomass size is
about 150,000 btu/hr. About 31 tons of pellets needed per
year.
Boiler size 164,000 btu/hr pellet boiler
25 | P a g e
Preliminary Cost Estimating
Initial investment: Price William Sound Community College
Biomass System
System Rating -- Btu/hr 164,000 btu/hr
Buffer tank 380 gal.
footnote notes
A $ 10,000
Pre-Fabricated Boiler System
Base price B 186,000$
Shipping to Tok C 10,000$
Local delivery C 2,000$
Plumbing and electrical C 2,500$
C 4,500$
Installation C 6,000$
Subtotal-B&E Costs 221,000$
Contingency -- 20% 44,200$
Grand Total 265,200$
Soft Costs $
C 21,216$ 8% of B&E
C 15,912$ 6% of B&E
pre-approved
Equipment Commissioning and Training C 4,000$
Construction Management C 21,216$ 8% B&E
Subtotal -- Soft Costs 62,344$
Recommended Project Budget -- Design and Construction Costs 327,544$
footnote
A
B Based on quotes from viable suppliers
C Estimate
A/E Design Services
Fire Marshall Plan Review
Square bulk silo or pre-fabricated building with V-shaped storage trough, built of wood into
container. Waterproof hatch. Fill from above.
Building and Equipment Costs (B&E) $
Pellet storage structure
Site Prep
Project Management
26 | P a g e
Economic Analysis
AEA B/C Model_PWS Community College
Project Description
Community
Nearest Fuel Community
11 Region
RE Technology
Project ID
Applicant Name
Project Title
Category
Results
NPV Benefits $184,520
NPV Capital Costs $327,544 Low 300$
B/C Ratio 0.56 Med 330$
NPV Net Benefit ($143,024)High 400$
Performance Unit Value
Displaced Electricity kWh per year -
Displaced Electricity total lifetime kWh -
Displaced Petroleum Fuel gallons per year 4,050
Displaced Petroleum Fuel total lifetime gallons 112,500
Displaced Natural Gas mmBtu per year -
Displaced Natural Gas total lifetime mmBtu -
Avoided CO2 tonnes per year 41
Avoided CO2 total lifetime tonnes 1,142
Proposed System Unit Value
1 Capital Costs $327,544$
2 Project Start year 2013
3 Project Life years 25
Displaced Electric kWh per year -
4 Displaced Heat gallons displaced per year 4,050
Displaced Transportation gallons displaced per year 0.00
10 Renewable Generation O&M$ per BTU
Electric Capacity kW 0
Electric Capacity Factor %0
Heating Capacity Btu/hr.150,000
Heating Capacity Factor %86
Glennallen
Tok
Rural
Woody biomass heat
Prince William Sound Community Collge
Glennallen Community College Wood Heat
27 | P a g e
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps
Technically, a new biomass boiler unit has strong viability. It could sit directly adjacent to the existing
boiler room and easily tie in. However, there is some concern about the capacity of the tenant for
maintenance. The existing boiler room is under-maintained and potentially dangerous, and the building
owner did not demonstrate interest in biomass heating. A pellet boiler could be viable in terms of its low
maintenance requirements, and the possibility of a local contractor servicing several local pellet boilers.
Site Specific Analysis: Chistochina School
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges
The Chistochina School building no longer operates as a School, due to low enrollment. However, the
School is still State property. Currently, the School is being leased by George Drinkwater of Cheesh’na
Tribal Council. It will be used for a variety of community activities, such as community education and
recreational activities. The School has provided a letter explaining the closure. It is currently leased to
the contractor that is building a new clinic.
The building was recommended for consideration because the utility costs inhibit the ability of the tribe
to use it as a community center, according to the application.
Technology or installation options assessed
There are no maintenance personnel, or even full time staff. Because of the availability of current staff,
only a fully automated system was considered. This is directly based on feedback from the Community
College personnel. The project is too small to accommodate a wood chip boiler. Therefore, a pellet
boiler was the only technology considered.
28 | P a g e
Project chart
Building Name Chistochina school
Building Owner Copper River School District
Contact Information
George Drinkwater, Lessee. Michael Johnson,
Superintendent
Square footage 5,604 square feet, 1 building
PRELIMINARY SITE INVESTIGATION
What feedback did staff offer on the current heating
system?
School is closed as a result of low enrollment (<10
students). George Drinkwater of Cheesh'na Tribal
Council leased the school property for uses to be
determined, but it could include community
education and recreational activities.
What is the staff or building manager's interest in
biomass heating?
Superintendent provided letter explaining school
closure. Lessee is interested in automated heating
system (woodchip, puck or pellet-fired system) for
reduced cost.
Description of current heating system #1 fuel oil-fired boiler system
Available space (within existing structures or space
for newly constructed building)
Limited space inside buildings. Open space around
school building is available; 5,640 square feet
Street access Good access from paved roads
Delivery access Good access for trucks or delivery vehicles
Fuel storage space Good space for storage buildings or silo
Building or site constraints (topography, permitting,
historical preservation, etc.)None identified
Options for biomass boiler system (fuel type,
technology type, building type)
Pellet boiler with external storage silo, or other
automated system most appropriate
Estimated boiler size 120,000 btu/hr pellet
29 | P a g e
Preliminary Cost Estimating
Initial investment: Chistochina School
Biomass System
System Rating -- Btu/hr 120,000
Buffer tank 350 gal.
footnote notes
A $ 10,000
Pre-Fabricated Boiler System
Base price B 186,000$
Shipping to Tok C 10,000$
Local delivery C 2,000$
Plumbing and electrical C 2,500$
C 4,500$
Installation C 6,000$
Subtotal-B&E Costs 221,000$
Contingency -- 20% 44,200$
Grand Total 265,200$
Soft Costs $
C 21,216$ 8% of B&E
C 15,912$ 6% of B&E
pre-approved
Equipment Commissioning and Training C 4,000$
Construction Management C 21,216$ 8% B&E
Subtotal -- Soft Costs 62,344$
Recommended Project Budget -- Design and Construction Costs 327,544$
footnote
A
B Estimated from quotes from viable suppliers
C Estimate
A/E Design Services
Fire Marshall Plan Review
Square bulk silo or pre-fabricated building with V-shaped storage trough, built of wood into container.
Waterproof hatch. Fill from above.
Building and Equipment Costs (B&E) $
Pellet storage structure
Project Management
Site Prep
30 | P a g e
Economic Analysis
AEA B/C Model_Chistochina School
Project Description
Community
Nearest Fuel Community
11 Region
RE Technology
Project ID
Applicant Name
Project Title
Category
Results
NPV Benefits $34,673
NPV Capital Costs $327,544 Low 290$
B/C Ratio 0.11 Med 330$
NPV Net Benefit ($292,871)High 400$
Performance Unit Value
Displaced Electricity kWh per year -
Displaced Electricity total lifetime kWh -
Displaced Petroleum Fuel gallons per year 2,400
Displaced Petroleum Fuel total lifetime gallons 60,000
Displaced Natural Gas mmBtu per year -
Displaced Natural Gas total lifetime mmBtu -
Avoided CO2 tonnes per year 24
Avoided CO2 total lifetime tonnes 609
Proposed System Unit Value
1 Capital Costs $327,544$
2 Project Start year 2013
3 Project Life years 25
Displaced Electric kWh per year -
4 Displaced Heat gallons displaced per year 1,920
Displaced Transportation gallons displaced per year 0.00
10 Renewable Generation O&M$ per BTU
Electric Capacity kW 0
Electric Capacity Factor %0
Heating Capacity Btu/hr.120,000
Heating Capacity Factor %86
Glennallen
Tok
Rural
Woody biomass heat
Chistochina School
Chistochina School Wood Heat
31 | P a g e
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps
The uncertain future usage of the Chistochina school building makes it an unlikely candidate for a grant-
funded biomass project, at least until the community usage is determined.
Site Specific Analysis: BLM NPS Campus
General Description of Opportunity & Challenges
This site is shared among the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and National Park Service (NPS). The
agencies have an interagency agreement that allows them to share space and some resources at this
Campus. Decisions affecting both entities would be subject to dual approval from both the Glenallen
Field Office Manager (BLM) and the Wrangell St. Elias Superintendent (NPS).
There are multiple challenges to a successful project here. Besides interagency coordination, there is
also the challenge of motivation as a result of high turnover. Also, it is not clear how available or
amenable maintenance staff would be to operation of the project, although the head maintenance
District:Copper Valley
School:Chistochina School Wood Pellet Boiler
Project: Chistochina School Wood Pellet Boiler
Project No. NA
Study Period:20
Discount Rate: 3.50%
Alternative #1 (low)Alternative #2 (high)
Initial Investment Cost 327,544$ 400,000$
O&M and Repair Cost 7,500$ 9,320$
Replacement Cost 74,247$ 150,000$
Residual Value 50,000$ 90,000$
Total Life Cycle Cost 459,291$ 649,320$
GSF of Project 5,604 5,604
Initial Cost/ GSF 58.45$ 71.38$
LCC/ GSF 81.96$ 115.87$
Life Cycle Costs of Project Alternatives
32 | P a g e
personnel of BLM has operated a wood boiler in the past. However, the existing facilities appear well-
maintained.
Technology or installation options assessed
Three Clusters were identified. BLM Cluster #1 contains the Old Admin, Rec, and New Admin buildings,
all of which are managed by BLM. NPS Cluster #1 contains the NPS garages, and NPS Cluster #2 contains
NPS housing A & B.
Due to the heat load and interest of BLM Forester Ben Seifert, and the comfort of existing maintenance
staff with cordwood heating systems, a cordwood option was considered for Cluster 1. This Cluster
could also be heated by pellets.
Figure 6: Cluster 1: from Left to Right: New Admin, Rec, and Old Admin Building. Truck access to proposed boiler facility is
pictured on the right.
NPS Cluster #1, comprised of NPS shop buildings, has a load that could be accommodated by either a
cordwood or a biomass pellet system. However, the Maintenance Supervisor, who has operated an
outdoor cordwood boiler, preferred local resource utilization through a cordwood system. Therefore, a
cordwood system was considered for NPS Cluster #2.
33 | P a g e
Project chart BLM/ NPS
Building Name BLM Cluster Glennallen
Building Owner Bureau of Land Management
Contact Information Ben Seifert
Square Footage
20,000 total (8 buildings). Three Clusters evaluated:
Cluster 1: Old Admin, Rec, and New Admin buildings (BLM)
Cluster 2: Park service garages (NPS)
Cluster 3: Park service housing (NPS)
Gallons per year
Cluster 1: 4,400
Cluster 2: 6,038
Cluster 3: 5,488
PRELIMINARY SITE INVESTIGATION
What feedback did staff offer on the current heating
system?
BLM local staff is unsure of the support for biomass conversion
project support, especially if the local staff would need to be
pulled off their existing workloads to be involved in the
development of the project. Suggestion was that a performance
contract or ESCO model development might be a more welcome
option for them. There is also some difficulty in coordinating
multiple agencies.
All existing systems operate reliably and appear to be well-
maintained.
What is the staff or building manager's interest in biomass
heating?
NPS and BLM staff support local resource utilization, lower carbon
footprint fuel (less transportation) and economic development
through using cordwood.
Description of current heating system
Cluster 1: The buildings in this Cluster have hydronic boiler
systems, amounting to a total of 321 MBH boiler capacity. These
buildings use about 4,400 gallons of fuel oil per year.
Cluster 2: The buildings in this Cluster have a hydronic and a
forced air furnace heating system, both heated by fuel oil. A
water house here is heated by propane.
Cluster 3: The 2vhousing units in this Cluster have 2 hydronic
boilers each.
Available space (within existing structures or space for
newly constructed building)
Cluster 1: Good access on the North corner of the Old Admin
Building. The lot would have to be developed but is already clear
and has road access.
Cluster 2: No space within the existing building.
Cluster 3: No space within existing building.
Street access
Cluster 1: Good.
Cluster 2: Good
Cluster 3: Good
Delivery access
Cluster 1: Good.
Cluster 2: Good
Cluster 3: Good
Fuel storage space
Cluster 1: Adequate space on site or available in the "back 40".
Cluster 2: Adequate space on site.
Cluster 3: Space would need to be created, but there appears to
be plenty of room.
Building or site constraints (topography, permitting,
historical preservation, etc.)
No building or site constraints, except interagency agreement
where necessary.
Options for biomass boiler system (fuel type, technology
type, building type)
Loads would justify a cordwood or pellet heating system.
Cluster 1: Up to 28 cords to wood or 34 tons of pellets
Cluster 2: Up to 38 cords to wood or 46 tons of pellets
Cluster 3: Up to 34 cords of wood or 42 tons of pellets
Estimated boiler size:
Cluster 1: 200,000 btu/hr
Cluster 2: 300,000 btu/hr
Cluster 3: 250,000 btu/hr
34 | P a g e
Preliminary Cost Estimating: BLM Cluster #1
Initial investment: Cluster A
Biomass System
Brand and Model #WHS 1500
Rating -- Btu/hr 200,000
Btu stored 350,000
footnote notes
A $ 15,120 (28 cds) @ $27 / sq. ft.
Boilers
Base price B 100,000$
Shipping to hub city C 20,000$
Local delivery C 3,000$
Plumbing and electrical C 2,500$
Installation C 4,500$
6,000$
District loop & building integration C 53,750$
Subtotal-B&E Costs 204,870$
Contingency -- 20% 40,974$
Grand Total 245,844$
Soft Costs $
19,668$ 8% of B&E
22,126$ 9% of B&E, because of district loop
included in design
Equipment Commissioning and Training C included with boiler price
Construction Management 19,668$ 8% of B&E
Subtotal -- Soft Costs 61,461$
Recommended Project Budget -- Design and Construction 307,305$
footnote
A
B Quote
C Shipping quoted 7/3/12
D Estimate
Fire Marshall Plan Review
A cord occupies 128 cu. ft. If the wood is stacked 6 1/2 feet high, the area required to store the wood is
20 sq. ft per cord.
Project Management
A/E Design Services
Site prep
Building and Equipment Costs (B&E) $
Fuel Storage Building
(conex or equivalent, gravel pad, chute $30/sf)
35 | P a g e
Economic Analysis: BLM Cluster #1
AEA B/C Model_BLM #1
Project Description
Community
Nearest Fuel Community
11 Region
RE Technology
Project ID
Applicant Name
Project Title
Category
Results
NPV Benefits $191,118
NPV Capital Costs $307,305 Low 175$
B/C Ratio 0.62 Med 200$
NPV Net Benefit ($116,187)High 300$
Performance Unit Value
Displaced Electricity kWh per year -
Displaced Electricity total lifetime kWh -
Displaced Petroleum Fuel gallons per year 4,400
Displaced Petroleum Fuel total lifetime gallons 110,000
Displaced Natural Gas mmBtu per year -
Displaced Natural Gas total lifetime mmBtu -
Avoided CO2 tonnes per year 45
Avoided CO2 total lifetime tonnes 1,117
Proposed System Unit Value
1 Capital Costs $307,305$
2 Project Start year 2013
3 Project Life years 25
Displaced Electric kWh per year -
4 Displaced Heat gallons displaced per year 3,520
Displaced Transportation gallons displaced per year 0.00
10 Renewable Generation O&M$ per BTU
Electric Capacity kW 0
Electric Capacity Factor %0
Heating Capacity Btu/hr.200,000
Heating Capacity Factor %86
Glennallen
Tok
Rural
Woody biomass heat
Bureau of Land Management
BLM Cluster #1 Wood Heat
36 | P a g e
Preliminary Cost Estimating: NPS Cluster #1
Initial investment: NPS Cluster #1
Biomass System
Rating -- Btu/hr 300,000
Btu stored 375,000
footnote notes
A $ 16,200 (30 cds) @ $27 / sq. ft.
Boilers
Base price B 100,000$
Shipping to hub city C 20,000$
Local delivery C 3,000$
Plumbing and electrical C 2,500$
Installation C 4,500$
6,000$
District loop & building integration C 33,500$
Subtotal-B&E Costs 185,700$
Contingency -- 20% 37,140$
Grand Total 222,840$
Soft Costs $
17,827$ 8% of B&E
20,056$ 9% of B&E, because of district loop
included in design
Equipment Commissioning and Training C included with boiler price
Construction Management 17,827$ 8% of B&E
Subtotal -- Soft Costs 55,710$
Recommended Project Budget -- Design and Construction 278,550$
footnote
A
B Quote
C Shipping quoted 7/3/12
D Estimate
Project Management
A/E Design Services
Fire Marshall Plan Review
A cord occupies 128 cu. ft. If the wood is stacked 6 1/2 feet high, the area required to store the wood is
20 sq. ft per cord.
Building and Equipment Costs (B&E) $
Fuel Storage Building
Site prep
37 | P a g e
Economic Analysis: NPS Cluster #1
AEA B/C Model_BLM #1
Project Description
Community
Nearest Fuel Community
11 Region
RE Technology
Project ID
Applicant Name
Project Title
Category
Results
NPV Benefits $325,564
NPV Capital Costs $278,550 Low 175$
B/C Ratio 1.17 Med 200$
NPV Net Benefit $47,014 High 300$
Performance Unit Value
Displaced Electricity kWh per year -
Displaced Electricity total lifetime kWh -
Displaced Petroleum Fuel gallons per year 6,003
Displaced Petroleum Fuel total lifetime gallons 150,075
Displaced Natural Gas mmBtu per year -
Displaced Natural Gas total lifetime mmBtu -
Avoided CO2 tonnes per year 61
Avoided CO2 total lifetime tonnes 1,523
Proposed System Unit Value
1 Capital Costs $278,550$
2 Project Start year 2013
3 Project Life years 25
Displaced Electric kWh per year -
4 Displaced Heat gallons displaced per year 4,830
Displaced Transportation gallons displaced per year 0.00
10 Renewable Generation O&M$ per BTU
Electric Capacity kW 0
Electric Capacity Factor %0
Heating Capacity Btu/hr.300,000
Heating Capacity Factor %86
NPS Cluster #1 Wood Heat
Glennallen
Tok
Rural
Woody biomass heat
Bureau of Land Management
38 | P a g e
Preliminary Cost Estimating: NPS Cluster #2
Initial investment: NPS Cluster #2
Biomass System
Rating -- Btu/hr 250,000
Btu stored 300,000
footnote notes
A $ 15,120 (28 cds) @ $27 / sq. ft.
Boilers
Base price B 100,000$
Shipping to hub city C 20,000$
Local delivery C 3,000$
Plumbing and electrical C 2,500$
Installation C 4,500$
6,000$
District loop & building integration C 33,500$
Subtotal-B&E Costs 184,620$
Contingency -- 20% 36,924$
Grand Total 221,544$
Soft Costs $
17,724$ 8% of B&E
19,939$ 9% of B&E, because of district loop
included in design
Equipment Commissioning and Training C included with boiler price
Construction Management 17,724$ 8% of B&E
Subtotal -- Soft Costs 55,386$
Recommended Project Budget -- Design and Construction 276,930$
footnote
A
B Quote
C Shipping quoted 7/3/12
D Estimate
Building and Equipment Costs (B&E) $
Fuel Storage Building
Site prep
Project Management
A/E Design Services
Fire Marshall Plan Review
A cord occupies 128 cu. ft. If the wood is stacked 6 1/2 feet high, the area required to store the wood is
20 sq. ft per cord.
39 | P a g e
Economic Analysis: NPS Cluster #2
AEA B/C Model_BLM #1
Project Description
Community
Nearest Fuel Community
11 Region
RE Technology
Project ID
Applicant Name
Project Title
Category
Results
NPV Benefits $278,014
NPV Capital Costs $276,930 Low 175$
B/C Ratio 1.00 Med 200$
NPV Net Benefit $1,084 High 300$
Performance Unit Value
Displaced Electricity kWh per year -
Displaced Electricity total lifetime kWh -
Displaced Petroleum Fuel gallons per year 5,488
Displaced Petroleum Fuel total lifetime gallons 137,200
Displaced Natural Gas mmBtu per year -
Displaced Natural Gas total lifetime mmBtu -
Avoided CO2 tonnes per year 56
Avoided CO2 total lifetime tonnes 1,393
Proposed System Unit Value
1 Capital Costs $276,930$
2 Project Start year 2013
3 Project Life years 25
Displaced Electric kWh per year -
4 Displaced Heat gallons displaced per year 4,390
Displaced Transportation gallons displaced per year 0.00
10 Renewable Generation O&M$ per BTU
Electric Capacity kW 0
Electric Capacity Factor %0
Heating Capacity Btu/hr.250,000
Heating Capacity Factor %86
Base System Unit Value
Diesel Generator O&M $ per kWh 0.033$
Diesel Generation EfficiencykWh per gallon
NPS Cluster #2 Wood Heat
Glennallen
Tok
Rural
Woody biomass heat
Bureau of Land Management
40 | P a g e
General perspective of project viability, and recommended next steps
BLM Cluster #1, which would be owned and operated by BLM, has a reasonable heat load to
accommodate a cordwood or pellet-fired biomass boiler, a motivated project champion, and
experienced maintenance personnel to operate the project. However, this project has marginal
economic feasibility, and key decision makers at the BLM were not available to discuss the project and
did not respond to emails or phone calls.
NPS Cluster #1 and #2, which would be owned and operated by NPS, have reasonable heat loads to
accommodate a cordwood biomass boiler and and experienced personnel to operate the project. Like
BLM Cluster #1, these projects could source firewood from BLM lands. Both projects have reasonable
economic feasibility.
Summary of Benefit/ Cost analyses
Dalson Energy would like to note that B/C analyses and the other financial metrics listed below are only
one way of calculating the value of a project. A project’s likelihood of operational success (in other
words, the risk associated with the investment) is another crucial factor. In many cases, a project with
lower risk and less attractive financials may be preferable over a project with higher risk and more
attractive financials. Additionally, the nascent biomass energy industry in Alaska is still building
experience of operational success; projects with marginal economic feasibility may be considered an
investment in the industry.
41 | P a g e
Estimated System Description
(abbreviated)
NPV Benefits NPV Capital
Costs
B/C Ratio
DNR Forestry Two (2) 100,000 btu pellet boilers,
containerized; hand loaded
pellets if necessary into fuel
hopper
($252,000) $459,000 0.45
Cross Road
Medical
Center
350,000 btu cordwood boiler,
integrated into new garage bay
on existing ambulance garage;
trailer for moving cordwood from
long term storage to garage bay
$117,000 $297,000 1.39
Community
Chapel
120,000 btu cordwood boiler,
containerized. Fuel storage in a
separate building on site.
($161,000) $207,000 0.22
Prince William
Sound
Community
College
160,000 btu pellet boiler,
containerized. Fuel storage via
hopper.
($143,000) $327,500 0.56
Chistochina
School
120,000 btu pellet boiler,
containerized. Fuel storage in a
separate building on site.
($293,000) $328,000 0.11
BLM Cluster
#1
200,000 btu cordwood boiler,
containerized. Fuel storage
building in a separate building on
site.
($116,000 $307,000 0.62
NPS Cluster #1 300,000 btu cordwood boiler,
containerized. Fuel storage
building in a separate building on
site.
$47,000 $279,000 1.17
NPS Cluster #2 250,000 btu cordwood boiler,
containerized. Fuel storage
building in a separate building on
site.
$1,000 $278,000 1.00
Recommendations and Next Steps
Each candidate facility should examine the proposed capital costs and operational profiles of the
projects presented in this report, and approach the Consultant with any concerns or questions.
Facilities with a Benefit/ Cost ratio greater than 1.0 are likely candidates for Alaska Energy Authority’s
Renewable Energy Fund grant program, Round 6 has a September 24 deadline. Any of these projects
could apply for design and construction grants.
42 | P a g e
Projects with a Benefit/ Cost ratio less than 1.0 are encouraged to look at creative strategies for
improving the financial profile of their project. In particular, DNR-Forestry, which has a high probability
for operational success, is encouraged to adapt their project profile by exploring a heat loop partnership
with DOT.
The most likely candidates for successful projects, in the opinion of the Consultants, are Crossroads
Medical Center and the DNR-Forestry Campus. Both of these projects have motivated and capable staff,
appropriate technology for available fuels and operating requirements, and simple building
interconnections. These facilities are owned and controlled by the organization, rather than being leased
from a separate owner. The NPS Clusters may also be successful, but the management team was not
available to discuss the opportunity for biomass heating.
43 | P a g e
About the Consultant
Dalson Energy is a Renewable Energy Consulting and Technology Research firm based in Anchorage,
Alaska. Dalson Energy staff and partners have decades of experience in construction project
management, project development consulting and renewable energy technology research. Dalson
Energy teams with licensed engineers, architects and designers in Alaska, Canada and Lower 48.
Dalson Energy has worked with Alaska Energy Authority, Alaska Center for Energy & Power, University of
Alaska Fairbanks, Washington State CTED (Community Trade & Economic Development) and California
Energy Commission on biomass energy technology research.
Dalson Energy’s President, Thomas Deerfield, has been involved in biomass energy RD&D since 2001,
winning grants and managing projects with NREL (National Renewable Energy Labs), USFS (US Forest
Service), and CEC (California Energy Commission).
Thomas managed the field-testing of biomass CHP systems, including the first grid-connected biomass
gasification CHP system in the U.S. (2007). Thomas coordinated the design and creation of the first
prototype Biomass “Boiler in a Box” in Alaska, in 2010. That Garn-based system is now installed in Elim,
in the Bering Sea region.
Thomas founded Shasta Energy Group (SEG), a 501c3 nonprofit, and managed wind energy research,
biomass energy feasibility studies, energy efficiency for buildings, and hydronic heating system research
design and development (RD&D). He also initiated a rural economic development think tank and has
engaged his writing skills to assist many other renewable energy project initiatives.
Wynne Auld is a Biomass Energy Specialist with Dalson Energy. She focuses on assessing opportunities
for woody biomass heating, and assisting communities in developing wood energy projects. Over the
past few years she has supported the business development of integrated biomass energy campuses in
Oregon and Idaho, especially related to their energy initiatives. Her efforts have included marketing
Campus biomass heating products to major wholesalers and retail buyers, and planning and developing
Campus sort yards.