Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEnergy Projects 1984 Appendix G-1 AkiachakBethel Area Power Plan Feasibility Assessment APPENDIX G-1 AKIACHAK COMMUNITY REPORT DRAFT Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority by Harza Engineering Company and Darbyshire &Associates Draft April 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Background Population Housing Current Economic Activity Subsistence Cash Economy Future Economic Activity Current Eneryy Consumption Total Energy Electric Generation Future Energy Demand Formumation of the Supply Plans Economic Evaluation Base Case Supply Plan Optimized Base Case Supply Plan Thermal Supply Plans Hydropower Supply Plans Fuel Cell Supply Plans Sensitivity Analysis Regional Summary Environmental Evaluation Table No. Akiachak Akiachak Akiachak Akiachak Existing Akiachak LIST OF TABLES Title Household Size Employment and Income Projected Annual Earnings 1981 Fuel Prices and Consumption Generating Facilities Energy Demand Forecast Most Likely Scenario,Present Worth and Benefit-Cost Ratio of the Supply Plans Most Likely Scenario,Sensitivity Analysis Using 0%Real Fuel Escalation Sensitivity Analysis,Present Worth of Supply Plans Ranking of Energy Supply Plans - ii- Exhibit No. 1 LIST OF EXHIBITS Community Location Map Akiachak Population 1981 Economic and Energy Profile,Akiachak Economic and Energy Projections,Akiachak 1981 Primary Energy Consumption,Akiachak 1981 Energy Balance,Akiachak Electrical Distribution System iii- AKIACHAK COMMUNITY REPORT Introduction The Bethel Area Power Plan Feasibility Assessment has been performed by Harza Engineering Company under contract to the Alaska Power Authority.The assessment was done to determine the best alternative(s)to meet the future electric generation and space heating needs of the Bethel region.The community of Akiachak is within the study area,and is the subject of this Appendix.Detailed information on the overall regional assess- ment is contained in the Regional Report. The community report for Akiachak is intended to be an in- formational and working document for the residents of the commu- nity.Much data has been collected on the community's back- ground,population,housing,and its current economic and energy profiles.Existing electrical generation and transmission fa- cilities,as well as residential and commercial space heating needs,are documented in this report.Projections of future energy needs,based on future population,housing,and economic conditions,have been made.These projections have been used to develop alternative plans for meeting the electrical energy and space-heating needs of the region through year 2002,and those of Akiachak in particular.These alternative plans have been analyzed from both an economic and environmental standpoint. This community report for Akiachak is submitted as a draft for review and comment by the residents.The Alaska Power Au- thority welcomes your comments and questions. Background Akiachak is located in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Lowland on the right bank of the Kuskokwim River,25 miles upriver from Bethel (Exhibit 1).The village is located at the extreme lower end of the bottomland spruce-poplar forest belt that follows the course of the Kuskokwim River and its main tributaries.The remaining vegetation inland from the river bottom and downstream of Akia- chak is characterized as wet tundra.Standing water is present throughout the summer,which makes overland travel extremely difficult. Access to Akiachak is principally by year-round charter air service and limited summer lighterage service from Bethel.There is no road system in the area,Overland movement is limited primarily to the winter season.The river is used as a roadway for taxis and truck freight during the winter season after the ice has thickened.Fuel oil and other freight items are trucked I-1 over this ice highway on an ""as-necessary"basis to meet late- winter shortages.Snow machines provide the most competent mode of travel in winter. The Yukon-Kuskokwim Lowland was exposed to Russian influen- ce in the first half of the 19th Century when Russian churches and trading posts were established.Eskimos who inhabited the area shifted their villages closer to the new religious and trading centers.Akiachak was first noted on a USGS field sheet in 1898,A post office was established in the community in 1934;and in 1974,the village became incorporated. Beside the municipal government,Akiachak's Native popula- tion is represented by an IRA Council which is recognized by the federal government as the offical tribal governing body of the village.The IRA Council form of government was established under the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934.It is eligible to participate in some state and federal programs,and has received benefits under the Indian Self Determination Act,the State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act,the Housing and Community Develop- ment Act,the Comprehensive Employment Training Act (CETA),and the Indian Child Welfare Act. Another local organization,the village corporation,al- though not a government entity,exercises a variety of functions generally exercised by governments.The local village corpora- tion,Akiachak,Ltd.,was created under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to receive and manage lands conveyed to it under the act.It is entitled to receive title to the surface estate of 115,200 acres of land.To date,no lands have been trans ferred to the corporation by the Bureau of Land Management. In conjunction with this study,a public meeting was held in Akiak in April 1982.Residents of Akiachak were invited to attend. Population Exhibit 2 presents population data for the village.The population increased steadily from 43 in 1890 to 438 in 1980, Between 1960 and 1980,the population grew at an average annual rate of 3.3 percent.The racial composition has changed slight- ly from about 96 percent Alaskan Native in 1970 to about 91 per- cent by 1980.The age characteristics of the population have also changed.In 1970,the number of young people was high,and the average age was about 18.Since then,a significant number of young people apparently left the region in order to find jobs or to pursue their education.In 1980,the average age was about 22. Three scenarios of population projections are also present- ed on Exhibit 2.These projections were developed in conjunc- tion with the three scenarios of economic projections which are presented in the following pages.The projected annual growth rates are a combined product of historical trends,actual rate of natural increase,potential economic growth,and immigration or emigration.The projections also reflect a general decline of state population growth rates predicted by the U.S.Depart- ment of Commerce.In year 2002,the Akiachak population is expected to be between 574 and 683 persons. Housing According to the 1980 census,the community had 87 houses. There were about 5 persons per housing unit.Only eight homes had complete plumbing facilities.A majority of the homes are wood-frame,although at least 19 are of log construction.Nine- teen homes were built in 1969 under the BIA Housing Improvement Program and 15 were built by ASHA in 1969.HUD plans to con- struct 37 additional homes in 1982-1983. The average floor space of the most recently built homes (HUD)are approximately 1200 square feet,while the older BIA built structures contain roughly half of this floor area. Whereas the older built homes are less well insulated,they are often better built and better sited away from wind expo- sure and snow drifting than the newer homes. The future housing stock will play an important role in determining future residential energy demands.The average number of persons per housing unit decreased from about 5.8 in 1970 to 5.0 in 1980.The improved household income and the supply of subsidized housing units were the major factors for this decline.These factors are expected to continue to reduce the average household size.However,because of the reductions in subsidized programs,the household size is expected to de- crease at a lower rate.As shown in Table I-l,the average household size is expected to vary between 3.5 and 4.5 by 2002, Table I-1l AKTACHAK HOUSEHOLD SIZE Emergy Demand Projections Year Low Most-Likely High 1980 (U.S.Census)N/A 5.0 N/A 1987 4.9 4.7 4.7 1992 4.7 4.5 4.5 2002 4.5 4.0 3.5 Current Economic Activity This section describes the current village economy,both in its subsistence and cash forms.This assessment will serve as a basis for the economic projections. Subsistence Residents of Akiachak depend on the environment in large part for subsistence.Subsistence can be defined as obtaining food,fiber,and shelter from the surrounding environment.Sub- sistence activities are pursued by a majority of the community's residents.A recent survey done in the Bethel region estimates that approximately one-third of the residents surveyed obtained one-half of their foodstuffs by engaging in such subsistence activities as fishing,berrypicking,and collecting gamebirds along the sloughs and on the swampy tundra.It is also esti- mated that the remaining two-third collects about one-fourth of their needs. Residents rely on subsistence activities for a number of reasons:it is the traditional method of provision passed to the present generation by its forefathers;in time of high shipping and transportation costs,it offers savings over the purchase of costly foodstuffs;and it provides a fruitful form of recreation.Dog,king,and silver salmon,as well as ling cod,shellfish,whitefish,and blackfish,provide food for many residents of Akiachak.Residents also hunt moose,bear,beaver, mink,rabbit,ptarmigan,duck,and geese. An estimate of the equivalent income obtained from subsis- tence activities can be derived by assigning that portion of the typical household budget that is replaced by these subsist- ence items.Using the figures developed for the Bethel region and assuming a typical household budget of about $10,000,the total cash value of these activities can be estimated at about $300,000 annually. Cash Economy Cash employment in Akiachak exists in forms which are si- milar to other outlying village economies in Alaska.Typically most jobs exist with the city government,school,store,health clinic,and the post office.Occasionally a construction proj- ect,such as the upcomming housing project and the building of a school warehouse in summer 1982,will provide temporary jobs for village residents. Exhibit 3 shows the 1981 economic and energy profile for Akiachak,Exhibit 3 corresponds to the forecasting model out- put for Akiachak as analyzed in this study.The forecasting model is described in Appendix A.In Exhibit 3,total annual income or earnings,in 1981 dollars,are first presented for each economic activity,followed by the corresponding number of average annual employment.The remaining columns present the end-use energy consumption for each activity.The column en- titled "Electricity"corresponds to the total electricity de- mand,which is the sum of last column "Light and Electric Ap- pliances"consumption and the electricity consumption used in "Cooking,Space Heating,and Water Heating".For convenience, all consumption data are in Million Btu.The electric energy demand can be translated into kilowatt-hours by dividing the consumption in Btu by 3,413 (Btu per kilowatt-hour).The lower section of Exhibit 3 presents the residential sector with popu- lation,average household size,total number of households, average energy consumption per household,and end-use demand. The last line summarizes the total demand from the commercial, government and residential sectors. Table I-2 below summarizes the 1981 average monthly employ- ment and annual income by sector that are typically found in a village the size of Akiachak.It should be noted that the num- bers listed for each sector do not necessarily indicate full- time employment.More than one of these positions may be held by one person simultaneously or by the same person at different times of the year. Table I-2 AKIACHAK EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME Average Monthly Annual Economic Activity Employment Earnings (1981 $) Renewable Resource Harvesting 7 $89,000 Mining and Exploration 0 -0- Construction 40 481,000 Household Manufacturing 1 8,000 Transportation 1 23,000 Wholesale,Dist.1 8,000 Comm.and Utilities 2 29,000 Trade and Private Services 13 155,000 Finance and Real Estate 4 55,000 Non-Profit Organization 3 33,000 Local and Regional Government 58 951,000 State Agencies/Services 1 18,000 Federal Agencies/Services 5 65,000 Transfer Payments N/A 907,000 TOTAL $2,822,000 As shown in Table I-2,the primary sources of income to the village are local and regional government,transfer payments, construction,trade and private services,and renewable resource harvesting.These and other income sources are described below. Local and Regional Government.The village school system provides the largest number of cash-earning positions to Akia- chak residents.Two separate systems currently exist.The state-run Lower Kuskokwim School District provides a village high school.The elementary grades are provided by the Bureau of Indian Affairs School System.Positions associated with the systems ares:principal teacher,certified teachers,substitute teachers,bilingual teachers,instructional aides,clerk/typ- ists,community educational coordinators,librarians,pre-school teachers,and athletic directors.Support positions that exist in the school are cooks,cook's helper,school maintenance and school custodian. Positions with the village government take the following forms:fee agents,bookkeepers,city administrators,city clerks,city maintenance,city custodian,city recreation di- rector,village public safety officer,village patrolman,IRA Council administrator. Transfer Payments.Non-employment forms of cash flow exist as transfer payments.Transfer payments are made directly to a household in two forms --cash and/or goods.Cash payments are made through social security,general welfare (SSI,Old Age, Blind,AFCD,VA,food stamps,etc.),home mortgage subsidies, rental subsidies,and home energy and fuel purchase subsidies. A major subsidy is the state's Power Cost Assistance Program. Construction.Construction projects both in Akiachak and throughout the region provide employment opportunities that ty- pically represent the largest private cash-earning potential locally.The upcoming housing project and the building of a school warehouse in summer 1982 will provide temporary jobs for village residents. Trade and Private Services.Retail trade activities pro- vide full-time managerial,clerical,and stock room positions. A village corporation owned and operated store exists,together with other privately owned village stores.Private services are provided as well as small variety and novelty shops and small engine dealers and service. Renewable Resource Harvesting.Positions under this cate- gory include trapping,firewood gathering,fishing,and serving as guides in fishing,hunting,and excursion trips.The most cash-rewarding activity in this industry is commercial fishing. Other Sources.The remaining income sources listed in Table I-2 make up only a minor part of the total village income. Federal agency services,finance and real estate,and transpor- tation services represent the largest income sources of this group. Future Economic Activity Future energy demand will depend upon the changes in the economy and the purchasing ability of the households.To re- flect the potential changes over the next twenty years,three levels of expected change (most likely,low and high)were deve- loped. The results of the economic projections for the years 1987, 1992,and 2002 are presented on Exhibit 4.Exhibit 4 is orga- nized as described earlier for Exhibit 3.Table I-3 summarizes the expected range of future economic activity.Total annual earnings,in constant 1981 dollars,are shown for the three scenarios.The difference between the low and high projections represents the degree of confidence in projecting the future economic course of Akiachak. Table I-3 AKTACHAK PROJECTED ANNUAL EARNINGS (Constant 1981 Dollars) Projections Year Low Most-Likely High 1981 (Surveyed)N/A $2,822,000 N/A 1987 $2,452,000 2,610,000 $3,183,000 1992 2,570,000 2,945,000 3,662,000 2002 2,778,000 3,497,000 4,153,000 By the year 1992,under the "Most-Likely"set of circum- stances,the total village cash economy is expected to have completed its recovery from the 1980's slump.The remainder of the forecast to the year 2002 is characterized by a period of slow and continual expansion at a rate of about 2 percent, The "High"forecast assumptions differ from the "Most-Like- ly"primarily in the severity of the anticipated slump during the early 1980's.The effect of these less severe reductions is measured in the forecast as a slowly expanding economy of about 2 percent annual growth rate until 2002, On the other side,the "Low"forecast assumptions represent a much more sudden and severe slump in the total income earnings potential of the village during the remainder of the 1980's, Recovery is expected from this "slump"period caused by govern- mental cutbacks due primarily to a shift in the regional econo- mic base toward decentralization.Still,this recovery is as- sumed to be slower and to begin at a much lower point then the most-likely and high projections.By 1992,the total cash earned in the economy is expected to be only 91 percent of the amount earned 10 years earlier.By the year 2002,the total cash earning potential of the village economy is expected to have recovered to the 1981 level. Current Energy Consumption An energy use inventory was conducted in order to gain an understanding of the total village energy consumption,and the relative importance of electricity.Exhibit 5 presents a de- tailed listing of energy consumption by end uses and by fuel type. Total Energy Space and water heating was the major energy end use,with a total consumption of about 19,000 million Btu.A Btu (British Thermal Unit)is a measure of the amount of heat energy required to raise the temperature of one pound of water by one degree Fahrenheit.Fuel oil provided about 73 percent of the total heating needs,followed by wood (27 percent).Residential cook- ing consumed about 4,000 million Btu,mostly provided by wood (85 percent).Lights and electric appliances consumed an equi- valent of 908 million Btu.One kilowatt-hour of electricity is equal to 3,413 Btu. Table I-4 AKIACHAK 1981 FUEL PRICES AND CONSUMPTION Unit Annual Price Consumption Fuel Oil $1.89/gal.222,000 gallons Diesel $1.89/gal.40,000 gallons Propane $118/100 1b bottle 35-100 1b bottles Blazo $3.50/gal.610 gallons Wood $150/cord 650 cords Because of the large quantities of fuel needed to meet year-round energy demands,the only economical supply method is by water barge.A regional lighterage service is operated out of Bethel which uses the vast network of rivers and sloughs to deliver the fuels during the relatively short ice-free period of late summer and fall.Consequently,the vast majority of the annual fuel demand of the village must be delivered and stored on site during this portion of the year.Bulk fuel storage fa- cilities are therefore a critical component of the present vil- lage energy system.The village of Akiachak maintains separate bulk fuel storage facilities for the high school (72,000 gal.), for the BIA elementary school (37,000 gal.),and for the re- mainder of the village (64,000 gal.).The combined volume is not sufficient to store the total annual needs. Exhibit 6 presents the village energy balance for 1981. Due to conversion factors and electric distribution losses,the "useful"energy was about 13,400 million Btu or 48 percent of the total consumption. Electric Generation Present Demand.In 1981,the total electric demand of the village was about 325 megawatt hours (MWh).The 1981 peak de- mand was 95 kW. Existing Facilities.The village of Akiachak has more than enough generating capacity than is presently required.As shown in Table I-5,the village owns four diesel generator sets with a combined capacity of 785 kW.In addition,LKSD and BIA schools have their own generating capability.The schools have not in- tertied to the village system because the village distributes two-phase power and the schools require three-phase. Generators are in good to excellent condition.The ages of generators are unknown.The distribution system (Exhibit 7)is practically new except for one residential area in the east end of town. Table I-5 EXISTING GENERATING FACILITIES Operating Owner/Operator Status Capacity (kW) Akiachak,Ltd.Primary 275 Akiachak,Ltd.Primary 275 Akiachak,Ltd.Primary 135 Akiachak,Ltd.Primary 100 BIA Primary 100 BIA Primary 50 BIA Primary 60 LKSD Primary 75 LKSD Primary 75 LKSD Primary 25 Total Capacity 1,170 kw Future Energy Demand Three projections of future energy demand (low,most-like- ly,high)were developed,based on current use,socio-economic projections,and assumptions regarding future end use demand. The most likely scenario is based on the most likely projections of economic activities,population,and household size described earlier.It also reflects a mid-range forecast of energy price I-10 trends.The low scenario reflects a more conservative growth derived from the low projections of economic activities,popula- tion,and household size,as well as a real energy annual growth rate of 2.5 percent.The high scenario assumes a continuation of the subsidized present situation,both at the energy level and at the economic level. The forecasts are based on estimated growth in each econo- mic activity described earlier,and in the residential sector. Pages 1 through 3 of Exhibit 4 present the end use projections for 1987,1992 and 2002 under the most likely scenario.Pages 4 through 6,and 7 through 9 present the projections for the low and high scenario,respectively.Table I-6 summarizes the re- sults.Space heating demand was increased by about 15 percent to reflect the average annual heating needs of the region,since 1981,the base year,was warmer than average.The total elec- tric energy demand is expected to vary between 500 and 825 MWh in year 2002,with a most likely energy demand of 655 MWh.The most likely 2002 peak demand is 85 kw. Table I-6 AKIACHAK ENERGY DEMAND FORECAST Most Low Likely High Total Energy Demand (Btu x 106) 1981 Demand 23,761 23,761 23,761 1987 Demand 28,858 30,904 33,580 1992 Demand 32,968 37,879 41,462 2002 Demand 34,181 49,060 54,700 Electric Energy Demand (MWh) 1981 Demand 325 325 325 1987 Demand 375 400 435 1992 Demand 430 495 540 2002 Demand 500 655 825 Formulation of the Supply Plans To meet the projected energy demand,a base case and four alternative supply plans were formulated to examine the relative energy costs and environmental and socioeconomic impacts.With- in each alternative,subplans are also formulated to meet the combinations of electrical and total energy demand.The plans are representative of mixes of supply modes for meeting end-use demands. The four alternatives to the base case include coal direct combustion for meeting all the heating demand.A general de- scription of each supply plan is given in the following para- graphs. I.Base Case.The base case plan represents a continua- tion of the present practices of diesel generation for electricity.The base case plan also assumes the conti- nued use of fuel oil for residential and non-residential heating needs.No new transmission interties are included in the Base Case. II.Base Case Alternatives.The base case alternatives will utilize the diesel units as described in the base case,with inclusion of wind electric generation,waste heat recovery,and coal direct combustion for heating de- mand.A regional and sub-regional transmission interties were also evaluated.The optimization of the base case alternatives is given in the next section. For consistency between all alternative supply plans,it was assumed that the conversion to coal direct combustion would be in 1988,the same year as the coal fired plant would be in operation.All existing residential and non- residential systems would be converted to burn coal for heating. III.Thermal Alternatives.Five sub-plans were formulat- ed,including a 4-MW or a 10-MW coal-fired plant,located in Bethel.Transmission interties to the outlying villages were also considered for each of the five plans.The re- sults of the economic feasibility to intertie Akiachak is presented in the following section. Supply Plan IIIA would consist of a 4-MW base load plant supplemented by diesel generators to meet the peak demand. The heating demand in Bethel and the villages would be met by fuel oil until 1988 then coal direct combustion as de- scribed in the Base Case Alternatives. Supply Plan IIIB would consist of the same 4-MW base load plant with waste heat recovery that would supply about 25 percent of the heating demand in Bethel.The remaining heating demand would be met as in Plan IIIA. Supply Plan IIIC would consist of a 10-MW cycling plant that would generate the electric energy demand.The heat- ing demand would be met as in Plan IIIA. Supply Plan IIID would consist of the same l10-MW plant with waste heat recovery that would supply 62 percent of the heating demand in Bethel,The remaining heating de- mand would be met as in Plan IIIA. Supply Plan IIIE would also consist of a 10-MW plant with a supplemental boiler to supply about 80 percent of the total heating demand of Bethel.The remaining heating demand would be met as in Plan IIIA. IV.Hydroelectric Alternatives.Two sub-plans were formu- lated from the Chikuminuk Lake development,as described in Chapter IV.The 9.5-MW project (Plan IVA)was sized to meet the monthly electric energy requirements of the Bethel region through year 2002.The average annual energy pro- duction would be 60 GWh,or about 21 GWh more than the projected electric energy demand in 2002,under the most likely projections.That average surplus of energy would meet about 7%of the total heating requirements of Bethel, in year 2002.The second plan (Plan IVB)consists of a development that approaches the topographic limits of the site.The 24-MW project would produce an average annual energy of 120 GWh.This development would meet the proj- ected electric energy demand and about 27%of the heating requirements of Bethel,in year 2002.In both plans,the remaining heating demand would be met by coal direct com- bustion,as in Plan IIIA. Both supply plans include a high voltage transmission line from Chikuminuk Lake to Bethel via Kwethluk and Akiachak. Additional transmission interties to the other village were also considered. V.Fuel Cell Alternatives.Two fuel cell alternative plans were formulated.Both plans include a centralized 9-MW fuel cell electric generation plant,located in Be- thel.The difference between the alternatives is that one plant (Plan VB)is designed for waste heat recovery,which could provide an estimated 12%of the heating demand in Bethel.The remaining heating demand would be met by coal direct combustion.As with the other plans,transmission interties to Akiachak were considered. The basic assumptions and cost estimates underlying each supply plan are given in the Regional Report. Economic Evaluation The economic parameters and assumptions used in the eval- uation are based on the Power Authority guidelines (Economic Parameters for the 1983 Fiscal Year).The economic anaysis is done for the period starting in 1982 and ending in 2039,the last year of the 50-year economic life of the hydro project which would come on line in 1990,All costs are in terms of 1982 dollars.Petroleum fuels and coal are escalated at a real rate of 2.5 and 2.0 percent respectively,over the next twenty years.After year 2002,real escalation rates and load growths are assumed to be zero.A discount rate of 3.5 percent is used to calculate the present worth of costs occurring in different years on an equivalent basis. The present worth calculations were done according to the Power Authority evaluation procedure.The costs are busbar costs and do not include cost allowances for distribution,ad- ministration,taxes,etc.The present worth of consumer costs would be signficantly higher than the present worth of busbar costs developed in this evaluation.However,since these addi- tional costs are the same for all alternatives,the relative ranking of the alternatives would not be affected. Using the timing of capacity additions and costs presented in the Regional Report,the present worth of costs for each sup- ply plan was computed.Table I-7 summarizes the present worth of each supply plan for Akiachak.The present worth computation was done separately for the heating demand and electric demand. Electric demand includes the costs associated with generation facilities and transmission interties. Table I-7 MOST LIKELY SCENARIO PRESENT WORTH AND BENEFIT-COST RATIO OF THE SUPPLY PLANS Total Demand Benefit-Cost RatioPresentWorth(1982 $xl03)"With With Heating Electric Total Base Optimized Supply Plan Demand Demand Demand Case Base Case Base Case Plan I 15,151 5,554 20,705 1.00 - Optimized Base Case Plan II 10,595 6,065 16,660 1,24 1.00 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 10,595 6,175 16,770 1,24 0.99 Plan IIIB 10,595 6,175 16,770 1,24 0.99 Plan IIIC 10,595 6,435 17,030 1.22 0.98 Plan IIID 10,595 6,435 17,030 1,22 0.98 Plan IIIE 10,595 6,435 17,030 1.22 0.98 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 10,595 4,205 14,800 1.40 1.13 Plan IVB 10,595 4,205 14,800 1.40 1.13 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 10,595 5,578 16,173 1.28 1.03 Plan VB 10,595 5,578 16,173 1.28 1.03 The following paragraphs describe the results for Akiachak under each supply plan.A regional summary is presented at the end of this section. Base Case Supply Plan The present worth of the Base Case using diesel plants for electric generation and fuel oil for heating was first computed to serve as a reference.As shown on Table I-7,the total pre- sent worth of the Base Case is $20,705,000,of which $5,554,000 is for electric energy demand. Optimized Base Case Supply Plan The Base Case Alternatives were optimized based on an eval- uation of coal direct combustion,wind generation,waste heat recovery,and transmission intertie.As described in the Re- gional Report,the analysis shows that conversion to coal direct combustion for heating would provide significant economic bene- fit.Under the Most Likely Scenario,assuming a complete conversion to coal direct combustion by 1988,the present worth of the heating costs would be reduced by about $4,556,000 (in 1982 dollars)over the period 1988-2039,Wind generation was only found to be economically feasible in the villages of Eek and Tuntutuliak.Diesel waste heat recovery was not found to be economically attractive in Akiachak when it is compared to coal heating.Transmission intertie to Bethel was found to be marginally attractive.A sub-regional transmission intertie between Akiachak,Akiak,Kwethluk,and Tuluksak was not found to be economically feasible. As shown on Table I-7,the total present worth of the Opti- mized Base Case is $16,660,000.The benefit-cost ratio is 1.24 when compared to the Base Case.The present worth of the heat- ing demand was reduced from $15,151,000 to $10,595,000. Thermal Supply Plans As for the Optimized Base Case,an economic evaluation was performed to decide whether or not Akiachak should be intertied to Bethel,site of the coal-fired plant.To reflect the share of construction cost for the central coal-fired plant in the present worth computation of each village,an incremental unit cost of $1,500 per kilowatt was used.This unit incremental cost was multiplied by the projected village peak demand in year 2002 to estimate the construction cost associated with that vil- lage.As shown in Exhibit 38 of the Regional Report,the pre- sent worth of the electric demand which includes the intertie to Akiachak,Akiak,and Kwethluk is very similar to the present worth of the Base Case.As a result,Akiachak could be inter- tied to Bethel. However,as shown on Table I-7,all thermal plans have a benefit-cost ratio lower than one when compared to the Optimized Base Case.In all thermal supply plans,the present worth of the electric demand,alone,is greater than the present worth of the Optimized Base Case electric demand.The benefit-cost ratio is 0.99 for Plans IIIA and IIIB,and 0.98 for Plans IIIC,IIID, and IIIE. Hydropower Supply Plans The economic analysis was done,using an incremental hydro- electric construction cost of $3,000 per kilowatt.As shown on Table I-7,the present worth of the electric demand is lower than the present worth of the Base Case.The hydropower supply plans have the lowest present worth of all supply plans.Both plans have a benefit-cost ratio of 1.13 when compared to the Optimized Base Case. Fuel Cell Supply Plans An incremental construction cost of $1,000 per kilowatt was used for the economic evaluation of village interties.As shown on Table I-7,the present worth of the electric demand which in- cludes the intertie is similar to the present worth of the Base Case.The fuel cell alternatives have an overall benefit-cost ratio of 1.03 when compared to the Optimized Base Case. Sensitivity Analysis The timing and rate of conversion from fuel oil to coal or electric heat to meet the heating demand would directly affect the value of all supply plans,except the Base Case,For the purpose of the economic analysis,we assumed a 100 percent con- version in 1988 to coal direct combustion for space heating. But,actually,the conversion would be more progressive.As a result,the present worth of all alternative supply plans to the Base Case would increase,thereby reducing the difference with the Base Case. A sensitivity analysis was first performed to analyze the impacts of fuel escalation rates.The same supply plans were reevaluated using 0%real fuel escalation for fuel oil and coal. The results are summarized in Table I-8. Table I-8 MOST LIKELY SCENARIO SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS USING 0%REAL FUEL ESCALATION Total Demand Benefit-Cost RatioPresentWorth(1982 $x103)"With With Heating Electric Total Base Optimized Supply Plan Demand Demand Demand Case Base Case Base Case Plan I 10,419 4,178 14,597 1.00 - Optimized Base Case Plan II 8,151 5,232 13,383 1.10 1.00 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 8,151 5,496 13,647 1.07 0.98 Plan IIIB 8,151 5,496 13,647 1.07 0.98 Plan IIIC 8,151 5,697 13,848 1.05 0.97 Plan IIID 8,151 5,697 13,848 1.05 0.97 Plan IIIE 8,151 5,697 13,848 1.05 0.97 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 8,151 4,028 12,179 1.20 1.10 Plan IVB 8,151 4,028 12,179 1,20 1.10 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 8,151 4,972 13,123 1,11 1.02 Plan VB 8,151 4,972 13,123 1.11 1,02 Table I-8 shows that the hydroelectric and fuel cell plans still have a benefit-cost ratio greater than the Optimized Base Case, if there is no real escalation in fuel cost. Another sensitivity analysis was performed to analyze the impacts of the low and high projections of energy demand.Simi- lar supply plans using a 4-MW and 10-MW coal-fired plant,a 9-MW hydroelectric plant,and a 9-MW fuel cell plant were analyzed. The analysis was done using a 2.5%real escalation for fuel oil, and 2.0%for coal until year 2002.The results are presented in Table I-9. 6T-IPRESENT WORTH OF SUPPLY PLANS Low Scenario Table I-9 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS (1982 $x10 ) Most Likely Scenario High Scenario Heating Electric Total Heating Electric Total Heating Electric TotalSupplyPlanDemandDemandDemandDemandDemandDemandDemandDemandDemand Base Case Plan I 12,371 4,510 16,881 15,151 5,554 20,705 17,604 6,641 24,245 Optimized Base Case Plan II 8,887 5,478 14,365 10,595 6,065 16,660 12,118 6,678 18,796 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 8,887 5,533 14,420 10,595 6,175 16,770 12,118 6,865 18,983 Plan IIIB 8,887 5,533 14,420 10,595 6,175 16,770 12,118 6,865 18,983 Plan IIIc 8,887 5,739 14,626 10,595 6,435 17,030 12,118 7,181 19,299 Plan IIID 8,887 5,739 14,626 10,595 6,435 17,030 12,118 7,181 19,299 Plan IIIE 8,887 5,739 14,626 10,595 6,435 17,030 12,118 7,181 19,299 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 8,887 3,956 12,843 10,595 4,205 14,800 12,118 4,487 16,605 Plan IVB 8,887 3,956 12,843 10,595 4,205 14,800 12,118 4,487 16,605 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 8,887 5,033 13,920 10,595 5,578 16,173 12,118 6,159 18,277 Plan VB 8,887 5,033 13,920 10,595 5,578 16,173 12,118 6,159 18,277 Under the Low Scenario,the conversion to coal-direct combustion for heating demand would still provide substantial savings,assuming a 100%percent conversion in 1988.Under the High Scenario,the hydroelectric plans have the lowest present worth,with a benefit-cost ratio of 1.46 when compared to the Base Case,and 1.13 when compared to the Optimized Base Case, Regional Summary The regional analysis for Bethel and the twelve surrounding villages shows that conversion to coal direct combustion for heating would provide significant economic benefit.Under the Most Likely Scenario,assuming a complete conversion to coal direct combustion by 1988,the present worth of the heating costs would be reduced by about 30%or $169 million (in 1982 dollars)over the period 1988-2039.Wind generation was only found to be economically feasible in the villages of Fek and Tuntutuliak,.Diesel waste heat recovery was not found to be economically attractive in the villages when it is compared to coal heating.Transmission interties to the outlying villages are only economically attractive under the Hydroelectric Supply Plans where the cost of electric generation (fuel and operation and maintenance costs)are negligible. Table I-10 shows the ranking of the energy supply plans under the Low,Most Likely,and High Scenarios.The first part of the table shows the ranking under the total demand,including beth the heating and electric demand.Under the Low Scenario, only the Fuel Cell Supply Plan with waste heat recovery (Plan VB)is more attractive than the Optimized Base Case.Under the Most Likely and High Scenarios,the Hydroelectric Supply Plans are the most attractive.Assuming no real fuel escalation over the period 1982-2039,the Optimized Base Case is the best plan. The second part of the table shows the ranking under the electric demand.Under the Most Likely Scenario,with real fuel escalation during the period 1982-2001,the Hydroelectric Supply Plans are the only plans which have a present worth lower than the Optimized Base Case.Under the Most Likely Scenario with no real fuel escalation,the Base Case Supply Plan has the lowest present worth. Environmental Evaluation A detailed description of the environmental impact,cost, or risk that may occur with each of the technologies associated with the selected energy supply plans is given in the Regional Report. Té-ITable I-10 RANKING OF ENERGY SUPPLY PLANS Total Demand Electric Demand With Fuel Escalation*Without F.E.With Fuel Escalation*Without FE. Low Most Likely High Most Likely Low Most Likely High Most Likely Supply Plans Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Base Case Plan I ll 11 ll 10 1 3 4 1 Optimized Base Case Plan If 3 5 6 1 2 2 3 2 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 7 7 7 6 5 5 5 4 Plan IIIB 5 4 4 4 5 5 5 4 "Plan IIIC 9 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 Plan IIID 8 7 8 8 6 6 6 6 Plan IIIE 10 10 10 11 6 6 6 6 Hydroelectric Plans ' Plan IVA 2 2 2 3 4 1 1 5 Plan IVB 3 1 1 7 4 l 1 5 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 6 6 5 5 3 4 2 3 Plan VB 1 3 3 2 3 4 2 3 *Assumes 2.5%real escalation rate for fuel oil and 2.0%for coal during the period 1982-2001.No escalation rates are assumed after 2001. Environmentally,the Base Case is probably the most desi- reable of all the selected supply plans.No transmission lines would be used.The small separate generating systems located throughout the region would not create any large impact.En- vironmental drawbacks to the Base Case are the potentials for spill and fire hazard involved in fuel handling and storage. Due to the use of coal for space heating,the supply plan alternatives would be less desireable than the Base Case.Run- off and dust from storage piles,combustion emissions,and ash disposal will all impact the environment to a certain degree, and the public acceptance to coal for space heating is yet to be determined. Other key environmental constraints involve impacts of the hydroelectric project operation on aquatic and terrestrial re- sources,and impacts of the transmission lines on birds and access to subsistence. 22reI Gan VO mpKasighuk @"a onoy é g P eo oyef,3 Je>»ov ge =)Pa Qs . S a ee ore Nunapitchuk 54}ataEReoWyvsOVesa TINS PA °.¢ere el EY sg)SH Atmautluak |Vo a 9 $°o &we &=&7 F (wy Kwethluk©°e Leen ¢BETHEL @2Seep@'Y ;CQ)Les) 2 fo SPIN ee .:&Oscarville } ze °Ze JS Napaskiak°€ae ks Napakiak -... s 2 tS)Ko =7 AALS 3 3 %D€B Q Oe Sh :Z Ge S 0 -v .Ape se .Wry Foal° ° "i xe vat Eek Ysft&ve :Re.'Lake oNei,2s ;\>neg eyPeSeEOF°eye" e wad oo NA, liak .**oRE,2 é iSeger coat , ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY |MILES BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT N FAIRBANKS \1 4 8 12 16 °e \ i i l 1 | BETHEL ANCHORAGE SCALE 1:1,000,000 COMMUNITY LOCATION MAP tt. JUNEAUg HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY December 1982LSKEYMAP HISTORICAL DATA, Year 1950 1960 1970 1980 1980 Annual Growth Rate: 1987 Annual Growth Rate: 1992 Annual Growth Rate: 2002 AKIACHAK POPULATION PROJECTIONS,ANNUAL GROWTH RATES HISTORICAL DATA Population 179 229 312 438 PROJECTIONS Low 438 1.8% 495 1.5% 530 0.8% 574 Annual Growth Rate (3) 2.5 3.1 3.4 Most Likely 438 2.1% 508 2.0% 561 1.2% 635 Exhibit 2 High 438 2.4% 517 2.5% 583 1.6% 683 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST SECTOR COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest Mining &Exploration Construction Household Mfqa. Transportation Wholesale,Dist. Comm.and Utilities Trade &Pvt.Service Finance &Real Est. GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs ***eTransfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 1981 PROFILE,Akiachak,Alaska Space Cooking Heating Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) Elect Income Emplymt ricity ($000)---(No.)- 89 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 481 40 0 0 8 1 0 0 23 1 0 0 8 1 3 0 29 2 0 0 155 13 41 0 55 4 4 0 33 3 10 0 951 58 389 0 18 1 4 0 65 5 3 0 907 2822 136 454 0 438 5 88 130 659 3974 1113 3974TOTALENERGY(M.Btu) (Million Btu) Water 149 Light & Heating Applian 6585 16996 341 1883 &BrOWOOCCSOi)So454 908 €&LIGiHxX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST MOST=LIKELY Projection 10/15/82 1987 FORECAST,Akiachak,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applianaheaheaheahaienteteaihetetatenetenananeranenananas($000)==(No.)ener en nn nnnnn (Million Btu)--eerrrrnnererenn-COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 91 7 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 486 41 0 0 0 0 0 Household Mfq.8 1 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 23 1 0 0 75 0 0 Wholesale,Dist.8 1 3 0 26 0 3 Comm.and Utilities 30 2 0 0 0 0 0 Trade &Pvt.Service 145 13 38 0 405 0 38 Finance &Real Est.53 4 4 0 81 0 4 GOVERNMENT Non-Protit Org.31 2 9 0 324 40 9 Local &Reg.Govt.904 55 370 0 8738 1424 370 State Agencies/Svcs 20 2 4 0 125 0 4 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 40 3 2 0 89 0 2 ***Transfer Payments 771 TOTAL 2610 132 430 0 9863 1464 430 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)508 Household Size 4.7 Total Households 108 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)151 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)943 5689 9427 488 650 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1373 5689 19290 1952 1080 630|abegpyLISIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST MOST-LIKELY Projection 10/15/82 SECTOR COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest Mining &Exploration Construction Household Mfq. Transportation Wholesale,Dist. Comm.and Utilities Trade &Pvt.Service Finance &Real Est. GOVERNMENT Non-Prorit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs ***Transfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 1992 FORECAST,Akiachak,Alaska Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) Elect-Space Water Light &Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian ($000)---(No.)=---(Million Btu)- 99 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o-0 541 45 0 0 0 0 0 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 26 2 0 0 84 0 0 8 1 3 0 28 0 3 33 2 0 0 0 0 0 161 14 42 0 451 .0 42 58 4 4 0 90 0 4 33 3 10 0 346 43 10 1101 67 450 0 10642 1735 450 21 2 5 0 134 0 5 40 3 2 0 89 0 2 816 2945 152 516 0 11864 1778 516 561 4.5 125 163 1171 7065 11707 606 807 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1687 7065 23571 2384 1323 639ZafegbvLISIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST MOST-LIKELY Projection 10/15/82 SECTOR COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest Mining &Exploration Construction Household Mfq. Transportation Wholesale,Dist. Comm.and Utilities Trade &Pvt.Service Finance &Real Est. GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs **keTransfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 2002 FORECAST,Akiachak,Alaska Space Cooking Heating Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) Elect- Income Emplymt ricity($000)---(No.)--(Million Btu) 112 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 604 50 0 0 9 2 0 0 30 2 0 0 9 1 4 0 39 3 0 0 183 16 48 0 70 5 5 0 44 3 13 0 1247 75 510 0 25 2 6 0 55 4 3 0 1070 3497 172 589 0 635 4 159 179 1647 9940 2236 9940TOTALENERGY(M.Btu) 16471 30018 Water Light & Heating Applian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 48 0 5 57 13 1965 510 0 6 0 3 2022 589 852 1136 2874 1725 630€ofeyvLIGIHXS BETHEL ARFA POWER STUDY FORECAST LOW Projection 10/15/82 1987 FORECAST,Akiachak.Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applianaaenaatietestenteatetatetehetetateteteteatehered($000)==(No.)eno e ene n ne (Million Btu)---<--<<---<------- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 87 7 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 478 40 0 0 0 0 0 Household Mfq.7 1 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 22 1 0 0 71 0 0 Wholesale,Dist.7 1 3 0 25 0 3 Comm.and Utilities 26 2 0 0 0 0 0 Trade &Pvt.Service 137 12 36 0 384 0 36 Finance &Real Est.48 4 4 0 75 0 4 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.25 2 8 0 265 33 8 Local &Reg.Govt.880 53 360 0 8510 1387 360 State Agencies/Svcs 15 1 3 0 95 0 3 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 40 3 2 0 89 0 2 **eTransfer Payments 680 TOTAL 2452 127 416 0 9514 1420 416 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)495 Household Size 4.9 Total Households 101 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)147 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)858 5178 8580 444 592 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1274 5178 18094 1864 1008 630PpabegbvLIGIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST LOW Projection 10/15/82 SECTOR COMMERCIAL Renew.ResS.Harvest Mining &Exploration Construction Household Mfq. Transportation Wholesale,Dist. Comm.and Utilities Trade &Pvt.Service Finance &Real Est. GOVERNMENT Non-Prorit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs **eTransfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 1992 FORECAST,Akiachak,Alaska Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) Elect- Income Emplymt ricity($000)-<--(No.)eseterrennn 95 8 0 0 0 0 491 41 0 7 1 0 23 1 0 8 1 3 31 2 0 148 13 39 51 4 4 28 2 8 961 58 393 17 1 4 30 2 1 680 2570 134 452 530 4.7 113 156 1017 1469TOTALENERGY(M.Btu) Space Water Light & Cooking Heating Heating Applian (Million Btu)-wo me rene n-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 0 0 0 27 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 415 0 39 0 79 0 4 0 291 36 8 0 9290 1514 393 0 106 0 4 0 67 0 1 0 10350 1550 452 6138 10172 526 702 6138 20522 2076 1154 630GabegvyLIGIHXS BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST LOW Projection 10/15/82 2002 FORECAST,Akiachak,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applianwennnnnen($000)----(No.)eee enn e nen =(Million Btu)-----coon COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 108 9 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 624 52 0 0 0 0 0 Household Mfq.8 1 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 26 2 0 0 85 0 0 Wholesale,Dist.9 1 3 0 31 0 3 Comm.and Utilities 34 2 0 0 0 0 0 Trade &Pvt.Service 160 14 42 0 447 0 42 Finance &Real Est.55 4 4 0 86 0 4 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.31 2 9 0 324 40 9 Local &Reg.Govt.996 60 408 0 9634 1570 408 State Agencies/Svcs 17 1 4 0 106 0 4 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 30 2 1 0 67 0 1 *k*eTransfer Payments 680 TOTAL 2778 150 471 0 10780 1610 471 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)574 Household Size 4.5 Total Households -128 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)168 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)1236 7462 12365 640 853 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1707.7462 23145 2250 1324 6J09obegbpLISIHXA BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST HIGH Projection 10/15/82 SECTOR COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest Mining &Exploration Construction Household Mfq. Transportation Wholesale,Dist. Comm.and Utilities Trade &Pvt.Service Finance &Real Est. GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs ***Transfer Payments RESIDENTIAL Income ($000)---(No.) Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) 1987 FORECAST,Akiachak,Alaska Emplymt &_nVIDeRWwUUDNFDDO©©TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu) Elect- ricity &WUMowoonoce__413 997 1482 Space Cooking Heating oooo0ococooooo6014 6014 (Million Btu) 9967 21079 Water Light & Heating Applian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 45 0 5 47 ll 1590 413 0 5 0 3 1637 485 516 687 2153 1172 640£abegvyLISIHXS BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST HIGH Projection 10/15/82 1992 FORECAST,Akiachak,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light &SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applianohanaatariateeteteenetantetnel($000)---(No.)--(Million Btu)---- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 120 10 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 697 58 0 0 0 0 0 Household Mfq.18 3 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 31 2 0 0 99 0 0 Wholesale,Dist.10 1 4 0 33 0 4 Comm.and Utilities 43 3 0 0 0 0 0 Trade &Pvt.Service 198 17 52 0 553 0 52 Finance &Real Est.72 5 5 0 lll 0 5 GOVERNMENT Non<-Protit Org.38 3 11 0 396 49 11 Local &Reg.Govt.1239 75 507 0 11978 1953 507 State Agencies/Svcs 23 2 5 0 143 0 5 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 85 6 4 0 189 0 4 ***Transfer Payments 1088 TOTAL 3662 185 588 0 13502 2002 588 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)583 Household Size 4.5 Total Households 130 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)166 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)1246 7517 12456 644 859 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1834 7517 25958 2646 1447 630gabegyLISIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST HIGH Projection 10/15/82 SECTOR COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest Mining &Exploration Construction Household Mfq. Transportation Wholesale,Dist. Comm.and Utilities Trade &Pvt.Service Finance &Real Est. GOVERNMENT Non-Protit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs ***Transfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 2002 FORECAST,Akiachak,Alaska Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) Cooking Heating ooo°oeoooo0°ooo°ococe13195 Elect Income Emplymt ricity($000)--=(No.)soonernnerene 141 11 0 0 0 0 902 75 0 21 4 0 36 2 0 12 1 4 50 3 0 221 19 58 81 6 6 40 3 12 1302 79 533 25 2 5 98 7 4 1224 4153 212 622 683 3.5 195 194 2187 2809TOTALENERGY(M.Btu)13195 Space Water Light & Heating Applian (Million Btu)---9--------------- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 39 0 4 0 0 0 618 0 58 125 0 6 415 52 12 12587 2052 533 156 0 5 218 0 4 14273 2104 622 21867 1131 1508 36140 3235 2130 6406obeytLISIHX4 1981 PRIMARY ENERGY Residential Sector Lights &Appliances Electricity Space Heating Fuel oil Wood Water Heating Fuel oil Wood Cooking Electricity Fuel Oil Wood Propane/Blazo Total Lights &Appliances Electricity Space &Water Heating Fuel oil Total Government Sector Lights &Appliances Electricity Space &Water Heating Fuel Oil Total Equivalent Btu :bstekilowatt-hour = gallon of fuel oil gallon of blazo 100-lb bottle of propane = cord of wood = CONSUMPTION,AKIACHAK Exhibit 5 Million Btu 1 4 3 454 1646 1939 87 254 205 209 7412 148 11 7354 3,413,Btu 136,000 Btu 136,000 Btu 2,500 13,000,000 Btu 7000 Btu .WOOD SPACE AND WATER 8 HEATING 2 i] = FUEL O!L SDIESELGk (4440)PROPANE /BLAZO H AND APPLIANCES |COOKINGbod 2 REJECTEDREVECTED _yyENERGY 'EXHIBIT 6 (11,000)USEFUL __yENERGY ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY (UNITS:MILLION Btu) BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT 1981 ENERGY BALANCE. AKIACHAK HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY December 7982 EXHIBIT 7 my PROPOSED SWITCH GEAR/GROUND " --PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY TO KWETHLUKANDAKIAK(ALTERNATE)GRID LOCATION >a" /° _J )'deeececcene Peeve meeeenesceecensssansessscefascese one seen eee eee pee nesesneeseeransesse muease sanashonen/..20,000 Gb.TAM FARMPROPOSEDRIGHT-OF-WAY TO BETHEL "0S fe NE pe tcp A mmnnnnnmnn ieee 2STORAGEoa° . vm pace a TOR Ry <.7 GENERNTOR,BLOG HEN COUBTRUCTION a REIRC RA LUGUL. -Ned BLD Fees, 9 e fe)a <-:\\O POT OPPLE.jhe7%)i :\AN ec: Did 2 IN 41G0/2deoHigAttAlcolesce BW 2b IL 4160 /24c0HGHVOLTAGEyeeAL6.4,4479 TRacT 'A! SHEET NCTES+ CipecHan.SERNICE KOT CONNECTEDCOScHOd.GENERATORZEA1StwBO TER tw OOKAW/CATS LY WAGTE HEAT RECOVERY RLINNING @ 25cn,STEM PERRY LEAVE TO WAGHETARIA LEST OW GIDUND.ee THE REROON THE ECHOLS ARE HOT TIED 1 fm RECALCE THEY REQUI2®OP SERVICE Deals TRACED FROM euandeo AERIAL.From .KUSKOKLIIM RIVER,-ee YN1.ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENTELECTRICALDISTRIBUTION _ aN AKIACHAK = ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM P.E.COMPANY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY 0.0.Box 4-2348 Anchorage,MashaPhone(907)276-3442 9esos December 1982