Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Energy Projects 1984 Appendix G-4 Bethel
Bethel Area Power Plan Feasibility Assessment APPENDIX G-4 BETHEL 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 Energy Consumption Total.Energy Electric Generation Future Energy Demand Formulation of the Supply Plan 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 Iv-10 Iv-11l Iv-14 Iv-15 Iv-17 Iv-19 Iv-19 Iv-19 IV-20 IV-20 IV-20 IV-22 IV-22 Table No, Iv-l IvV-2 IvV-3 Iv-4 IV-13 Iv-14 LIST OF TABLES Title 1979 Bethel Housing Quality Bethel Household Size Bethel Employment and Income Bethel Projected Annual Earnings Bethel 1981 Fuel Prices and Consumption Bethel 1980 Monthly Energy,Peak and Load Factors Bethel 1981 Monthly Energy,Peak and Load Factors Bethel Historical Peak &Energy Generation Bethel Existing Generating Facilities Bethel 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- IV-23 Iv-24 Exhibit No. 1 2 3 LIST OF EXHIBITS Title Community Location Map Bethel Population 1981 Economic and Energy Profile,Bethel Economic and Energy Projections,Bethel 1981 Primary Energy Consumption,Bethel 1981 Energy Balance,Bethel Electrical Distribution System iii- BETHEL 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.Detailed informa- tion on the overall regional assessment is contained in the Regional Report. The community report for Bethel is intended to be an infor- mational and working document for the residents of the commun- ity.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 faci- lities,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 Bethel in particular.These alternative plans have been analyzed from both an economic and environmental standpoint. This community report for Bethel is submitted as a draft for review and comment by the residents.The Alaska Power Authority welcomes your comments and questions. Background The city of Bethel is centrally located in the tundra- covered southwestern Alaskan region.Located on the Kuskokwim River,Bethel lies approximately 400 air miles west of Anchorage and 540 air miles southwest of Fairbanks (Exhibit 1).It is the major service and supply center for 56 villages within the boun- daries of the Association of Village Council Presidents (AVCP) region.Bethel's location at the upper limit of navigation for ocean-going vessels on the Kuskokwim River is the principal reason why it has developed from a small trading post into a regional center for trade,transportation,distribution,commu- nications,administration,and higher education. The city is located well within the vast silt plain that characterizes the lower drainage area of the Kuskokwim River. This lowland area contains thousands of thaw lakes,ponds,and tundra hummocks and is continuously being transformed by the erosion and meanderings of the Kuskokwim River and its tributar- IV-1l ies.The Kilbuck Mountains,a low rolling range of hills,run in a north-south direction approximately 50 miles east of Bethel Although little is known regarding the origins of the com- munity,anthropologists suggest that abundant hunting,fishing, and food gathering resources,especially salmon from the Kuskok- wim River,contributed to the establishment of a permanent com- munity.The first community was located across the river from the present-day city site and was called "Mumtrelegamut"or "memtrekhalamute houses"which translates to "smokehouse people" or "people of many fish houses".The establishment of a trading post at the site of present-day Bethel occurred in the 1870's. By 1880,"Mumtrek Station"(as the U.S.Census called the vil- lage)had a population of 29 residents,while the older site had 41 people.The establishment of the Moravian Church in 1885 and the opening of a missionary school attracted more residents. The Moravians renamed the village Bethel. As time passed,a territorial school was constructed in 1913 and another school was built in 1923.Two roadhouses pro- vided lodging.By the early 1930's,about seven stores and trading posts existed in the village.In 1957,Bethel became incorporated as a city. Besides the municipal government,Native members of the community are represented by a Traditional Council.This organ- ization,which is eligible to participate in some state and fed- eral programs,has received benefits under the Indian Self De- termination Act,the State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act,the Housing and Community Development Act,the Comprehensive Employ- ment Training Act (CETA),and the Indian Child Welfare Act. Another local organization,the village corporation,although not a government entity,exercises a variety of functions gener- ally exercised by governments.The Bethel Native Corporation (BNC)was established under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)to administer lands conveyed to it by the federal government.To date,138,330 acres of land have been trans- ferred to the corporation.Total entitlement should amount to approximately 161,280 acres,BNC's business ventures include rentals and leases on 95 units of apartments,a 30,000 square- foot office complex,and an aircraft hangar which it owns.The corporation also has a 51%interest in Bethel-based Elm Fishe- ries. In conjunction with this study,two public meetings were held in Bethel in April,1982.All residents and officials of the city were invited to attend. Iv-2 Population As shown on Exhibit 2,the population increased steadily from 29 in 1880 to 3,576 in 1980.Since the 1960's,the popula- tion growth has heen associated with construction of large scale capital improvement projects and expansion of the commercial fishing industry.As a result,the racial composition changed Significantly from about 90 percent Alaskan Native in 1960 to about 68 percent by 1980.The age characteristics of the popu- lation 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 have left the region in order to find jobs or pursue their education.In 1980,the average age was about 23.5. 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,and potential economic growth and immigra- tion or emigration.The projections also reflect a general decline of state population growth rates predicted by the U.S. Department of Commerce.In year 2002,the Bethel population is expected to be between 5,185 and 5,829. Housing The 1980 Census reported 1,272 housing units for Bethel. This represents a net gain of 557 units over the number reported in the 1970 Census.This net increase is due,for the most part,to private development:the Bethel Native Corporation apartments,the trailer court,the city subdivision,and the Tundra and Ptarmigan subdivisions.A breakdown by type of dwel- ling unit shows that about 72 percent of the units were single family homes,10 percent were mobile homes,and the balance consisted of various multi-family units.Of the total of 1,272 units,1,083 or 86 percent were occupied.The majority of the unoccupied units are judged uninhabitable. Table IV-1 illustrates Bethel housing quality as evaluated by the 1979 housing survey.The occupancy was about 40%owner- occupied,and 60%rental units.Since the Census,the Public Health Service (PHS)constructed 40 homes,Alaska Housing Fi- nance Corporation (AHFC)financed the construction of another 50 homes,and private individuals built a half dozen homes. IV-3 Table IV-l 1979 BETHEL HOUSING QUALITY Point Ratingl/Type of Unit J 2 3 4 5 Total Single-family 126 99 83 168 218 694 Multi-family 0 0 2 123 61 186 Mobile Home 4 3 14 119 0 140 Total 130 102 99 410 279 1020 Percent 12.7 10.0 9.7 40,2 27.4 100 l/Point Ratings:Uninhabitable or ready for demolition -Needs major rehabilitation Needs minor repair rehabilitation -Needs only cosmetic work -Good or newWmWNHrH|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 4.5 in 1970 to about 3.3 in 1980.The improved household income,the supply of subsidized housing units,and the immigration of non- natives were among the major reasons for this decline.However, because of the reductions in subsidy programs,the household size is expected to decrease at a lower rate in the future.As shown on Table IV-2,the average household size is expected to vary between 2.6 and 3.1 by year 2002, Table IV-2 BETHEL HOUSEHOLD SIZE Energy Demand Projections Year Low Most-Likely High 1980 (U.S.Census)N/A 3.3 N/A 1987 3.2 3.1 3.0 1992 3.2 3.0 2.8 2002 3.1 2.9 2.6 Iv-4 Current Economic Activity This section describes the current economy,both in its subsistence and cash forms.This assessment will serve as the basis for the economic projections. Subsistence Many of the longer-time residents of Bethel depend on the environment in large part for subsistence.Subsistence can be defined as obtaining food,fiber,and shelter from the sur- rounding environment.Subsistence 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,berrypick- ing,and collecting gamebirds along the sloughs and on the Swampy tundra. 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 times 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 Bethel.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 subsistence items to these efforts.Using the figures developed for the region,and assuming a typical household budget spent on food- stuff of approximately $10,000,then the total cash value of these activities can be estimated at $360,000 annually. Cash Economy Bethel's role as a regional seat of government for federal, state and regional agencies accounts for over 50%of employment in the city.Public regional agencies located there and serving the region include the AVCP Housing Program,AVCP Manpower Of- fice,Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation,Prematernal Home, Public Health Service Hospital,Bureau of Indian Affairs,Kus- kokwim Community College,Lower Kuskokwim School District,and the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Bethel also serves as the commercial center of the region, based largely on its role as a transportation center and trans- shipment point for goods.Food,fuel,gravel,and construction Iv-5 materials are supplied by barge from Seattle and other locations and distributed from Bethel to villages in the region.Ware- houses and fuel storage tanks to serve regional demands are located in Bethel.The city also serves as a center for ser- vices.These include banking and insurance,construction con- tractors,charter flights,machinery repair and other services. Exhibit 3 shows the 1981 economic and energy profile for Bethel.Exhibit 3 corresponds to the forecasting model output for Bethel 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 entitled "Electrici- ty"corresponds to the total electricity demand,which is the sum of last column "Light and Electric Appliances"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 pre- sents the residential sector with population,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 IV-3 below summarized the 1981 average employ- ment and income by sector that are found in Bethel.It should be noted that the numbers listed for each sector do not neces- sarily 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. IV-6 Table IV-3 BETHEL EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME Average Annual Monthly Earnings Economic Activity _Employment (1981 $) Renewable Resource Harvesting 47 586,000 Mining and Exploration 5 50,000 Construction 182 2,177,000 Household Manufacturing 6 33,000 Transportation _297 4,655,000 Wholesale,Dist.100 938,000 Comm.and Utilities 49 703,000 Trade and Private Services 306 3,517,000 Finance and Real Estate 45 603,000 Non-Profit Organizations 211 2,714,000 Local and Regional Government 553 9,146,000 State Agencies/Services 90 1,173,000 Federal Agencies/Services 193 2,714,000 Transfer Payments N/A 4,489,000 Total $33,498,000 As shown in Table IV 3,the primary sources of income to the city are local and regional government,transportation,transfer payments,trade and private services,non-profit organizations, federal services,and construction.These and other income sources are described below. Local and Regional Government.Public agencies administer and provide services to the regions.Their officials are elect- ed by local residents (i.e.,city governments,local IRA coun- cils,and the Lower Kuskokwim School District). Community services relating to health,safety,and welfare are provided by local government.Major entities are the Public Health Service,Fire Department,the Lower Kuskokwim School District,and the Association of Village Council Presidents, Transportation.Employment opportunities in the transpor- tation industry in Bethel include individuals employed in the various taxi companies,hauling freight,working in both the scheduled and charter flight operations,or employed in the water transportation businesses locally. Transfer Payments.Non-employment forms of cash exist as transfer payments.Transfer payments are made directly to IV-7 households in two forms --cash and in-kind.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. Trade and Private Services.This category includes firms and individuals selling merchandise for personal and household consumption (i.e.,building materials,general merchandise,food stores,automotive and small engine sales,clothing and furni- ture stores,eating and drinking establishments);and firms and individuals providing services (i.e.,hotels,roadhouses,laun- dry and cleaning services,beauty shops,private legal and ac- counting services,amusement and recreational services,church activities,automotive and small engine repair). Non-Profit Organizations.This category includes corpora- tions and other types of associations and agencies organized for purposes other than profit,which administer regional housing, health,educational,legal,and social programs. Federal Services.Employers in this category include all legislative,judicial,executive,administrative and regulatory offices and agencies of the U.S.Government (i.e.,BLM,PHS, National Weather Service,FAA,Coast Guard).Also included are the U.S.Postal Service and such short-term programs as river- bank control,flood protection programs,and summer firefighting. Construction.Construction projects both in Bethel and throughout the region provide employment opportunities that typically represent the largest private cash-earning potential locally. Other Sources.The remaining income sources listed in Table IV-3 make up only a minor part of the total village in- come.State agency services,wholesale distibution,communica- tions and utilities,and finance and real estate services repre- sent 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 variations of economic changes over the next twenty years,three levels of expected change (most-likely,low and high)were developed. 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 IV-4 below IV-8 sumamrizes the range of future economic activity.Total annual earnings,in constant 1981 dollars,are given under the three scenarios.The difference between the "Low"and the "High" projections represents the range of confidence in projecting the future economic course of Bethel. Table IvV-4 BETHEL PROJECTED ANNUAL EARNINGS (Constant 1981 Dollars) Projections Year Low Most-Likely High 1981 N/A 33,498,000 N/A 1987 29,450,000 31,582,000 38,043,000 1992 30,746,000 35,357,000 43,925,000 2002 33,219,000 41,865,000 49,540,000 By the year 1992,under the "Most-Likely"set of circum- stances,the total economy is expected to have completed its recovery from the early 1980's slump.The remainder of the forecast to the year 2002 is characterized by a period of slow and continual expansion at an annual rate of about 1.7 percent. The "High"forecast assumptions differ from the "Most- Likely"primarily in the severity of the anticipated slump dur- ing the early 1980's,The effect of these less severe reduc- tions is measured in the forecast as a slowly expanding economy of about 2 percent annual growth until 2002. On the other side,the "Low"forecast assumptions represent a much more sudden and severe slump in the total income earning potential of the city during the remainder of the 1980's.Reco- very 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 than the most-likely and high projections.By 1992,the total cash earned in the economy is expected to be only 92 percent of the amount earned 10 years earlier.By the year 2002,the total cash earning potential of the city 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 city's total energy consumption,and the relative importance of electricity.Exhibit 5 presents a de- Iv-9 tailed listing of the 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 900,000 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 97 percent of the total heating needs,and the remaining by electricity,wood,and propane/blazo with approximately 1 percent each.Cooking con- sumed about 40,000 million Btu.Fuel oil provided about 65 percent of the cooking needs;propane and blazo,18 percent; electricity,14 percent;and wood,2 percent.Lights and elec- tric appliances consumed an equivalent of about 50,000 million Btu.One kilowatt-hour of electricity is equal to 3,413 Btu, Table IV-5 summarizes the total consumption by fuel types. It also shows the average unit price of each fuel.The estimat- ed total cost to Bethel for their 1981 energy demand was about $11.3 million.Some 18 percent was spent on diesel fuel for generating electricity. Table IV-5 BETHEL 1981 FUEL PRICES AND CONSUMPTION Price Annual Consumption Fuel Oil $1.33/gal.6,600,000 gallons Diesel $1.33/gal.1,500,000 gallons Propane $75/100 lb.bottle 5,000 -100 lb.bottles Blazo $3.35/gal.4,500 gallons Wood $150/cord 650 cords Because of the large quantities of fuel oil and diesel needed to meet year-round energy demands of both Bethel and the entire southwest region of Alaska,the only economical supply method is by water transportation.Ocean barging of fuels from non-Alaskan sources is relied upon to supply these annual re- gional energy requirements.A regional lighterage service is operated out of Bethel which uses the vast network of rivers and Sloughs to deliver the large quantities of fuel during the re- latively short ice-free periods of late summer and fall.Conse- quently,the vast majority of the annual energy demand of the region,including Bethel,must be delivered and stored on site during this portion of the year.Bulk fuel storage facilities IV-10 are therefore a critical component of the present regional ener- gy system.Separate bulk fuel storage facilities are maintained in the city of Bethel for the LKSD high school,the BIA elemen- tary school,and the city bulk fuel distributor,Chevron USA, Inc.All combined,the total storage capacity is approximately10milliongallons. Exhibit 6 presents the Bethel energy balance for 1981.Due to conversion factors and electric distribution losses,the "useful"energy was about 614,000 million Btu,or 56 percent of the total consumption. Electric Generation Present Demand.Monthly energy,peak power demand,and load factors for 1980 and 1981 are shown in Tables IV-6 and IV- 7,vespectively.In general,energy requirements are about 35 percent greater in winter than in summer.The peak demand oc curs in winter,and was equal to 4,200 kW in 1981. Table IV-6 BETHEL 1980 MONTHLY ENERGY,PEAK,AND LOAD FACTORS Energy Peak Load Month Generation Demand Factor (MWh)(kW)(%) January 2,021 3,900 69.7 February 1,900 3,800 71.8 March 1,728 3,500 66.4 April 1,774 3,300 74.7 May 1,411 3,100 61.2 June 1,393 3,000 64.5 July 1,433 3,000 64,2 August 1,161 2,800 55.7 September 1,879 3,300 79.1 October 1,695 3,300 69.0 November 1,950 3,800 71.3 December 2,143 4,200 68.6 Annual 20,500 4,200 55.7 Iv-ll Table IV-7 BETHEL Energy Month Generation (MWh) January 2,200 February 1,900 March 1,900 April 1,800 May 1,600 June 1,500 July 1,600 August 1,700 September 1,600 October 1,800 November 1,900 December 2,100 Annual 21,600 1981 MONTHLY ENERGY,PEAK,AND LOAD FACTORS Peak Load Demand Factor (kW)(%) 4,200 70,4 3,700 76.4 3,300 80.0 3,100 78.0 3,000 71.7 2,800 74.4 3,000 71.7 3,100 73.7 3,000 74.1 3,200 75.6 3,700 71.3 3,700 76.3 4,200 58.7 Historical data on annual energy generation,for the period 1975-1981,are presented in Table Iv-8, generation was about 22,000 MWh, the 1980 level. increase was about 4 percent. Slowly from 0.51 in 1975 to 0.60 in 1981, For the period 1975-1981, Iv-12 In 1981,the total an increase of 7 percent over the average annual The annual load factor increased Table IV-8 BETHEL HISTORICAL PEAK AND ENERGY GENERATION Energy Peak Load Year Generation Demand Factor (kWh)(kW)(%) 1975 17,040,599 3,800 51 1976 ---1// 1977 16,738,005 4,100 47 1978 18,216,678 4,000 48 1979 18,745,092 4,100 53 1980 20,499,332 4,200 56 1981 21,973,931 4,200 60 1/Data not available.Fire struck power plant in December 1975.Emergency generation through September 1976. Existing Facilities.Bethel Utilities Corporation (BUC),a privately owned utility,provides electricity for the entire community and sells bulk power to the village of Napakiak.In addition,the two school systems (LKSD and BIA)and the PHS hospital have their own standby systems. All primary electric generation for Bethel is by Bethel Utilities Corporation.Table IV-9 lists BUC's primary facili- ties,along with standby facilities maintained by others.BUC has been continually upgrading their distribution system.All four BUC generators are new,having been replaced after the fire in December 1977.Exhibit 7 shows the major portion of their distribution system. Iv-13 Table IvV-9 BETHEL EXISTING GENERATING FACILITIES Owner/Operator Operating Status Capacity (kW) BUC Primary 2,100 BUC Primary 2,100 BUC Primary 2,100 BUC Primary 2,100 LKSD Standby 125 LKSD Standby 125 LKSD Standby 75 BIA Standby 250 BIA Standby 250 BIA Standby 250 P.H.S.Hospital Standby 565 P.H.S.Hospital Standby 565 P.H.S.Hospital Standby 565 Total Capacity 11,170 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 trends.The low scenarios reflects a more conservative growth derived from the low projections of economic activities,popula- tion,and household size,as well as a real annual energy 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 IV-10 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 23,810 and Iv-14 37,960 MWh in year 2002,with a most likely demand of 30,720 MWh.The most likely 2002 peak demand is 6,380 kW. Table IV-10 BETHEL ENERGY DEMAND FORECAST Most Low Likely High Total Energy Demand (Btu x 108) 1981 Demand N/A 1,122,194 N/A 1987 Demand 1,019,465 1,093,094 1,314,083 1992 Demand 1,090,075 1,262,287 1,573,215 2002 Demand 1,211,470 1,578,442 1,902,017 Electric Energy Demand (MWh) 1981 Demand 20,230 20,230 20,230 1987 Demand 19,490 20,590 24,410 1992 Demand 20,950 24,200 29,820 2002 Demand 23,810 30,720 37,960 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 description of each supply plan is given in the following para- graphs. I.Base Case.The base case plan represents a continu- ation of the present practices of diesel generation for electricity.The base case plan also assumes the continued 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 Iv -15 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 formu- lated,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, 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 10-MW plant with waste heat recovery that would supply 62 percent of the heating demand in Bethel.The remaining heating demand 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 Iv-16 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. Vv.Fuel Cell Alternatives.Two fuel cell alternativeplanswereformulated.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. 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 evalua- tion are based on the Power Authority guidelines (Economic Para- meters 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 dol- lars.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 as- sumed 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. IV-17 Using the timing of capacity additions and costs presented in the Regional Report,the present worth of costs for each supply plan was computed.Table IV-1l summarizes the present worth of each supply plan for Bethel.The present worth compu- tation was done separately for the heating demand and electric demand.Electric demand includes the costs associated with generation facilities and transmission interties. Table IV-1ll MOST LIKELY SCENARIO PRESENT WORTH AND BENEFIT-COST RATIO OF THE SUPPLY PLANS 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 461,953 146,396 608,349 1,00 - Optimized Base Case Plan II 327,554 146,396 473,950 1.28 1,00 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 327,554 160,444 487,998 1,25 0.97 Plan IIIB 308,845 160,444 469,289 1.30 1.01 Plan IIIC 327,554 199,247 526,801 1.16 0.90 Plan IIID 287,654 199,247 486,901 1.25 0.97 Plan IIIE 337,486 199,247 536,733 1.13 0.88 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 310,879 139,479 450,358 1.35 1,05 Plan IVB 306,816 139,479 446,295 1,36 1.06 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 327,554 152,032 479,586 1,27 0.99 Plan VB 299,239 152,032 451,271 1.35 1,05 Iv-18 The following paragraphs describe the results for Bethel under each supply plan.A Regional summary is presented at the end of this section. 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 IvV-1l,the total present worth of the Base Case is $608,349,000,of which $146,396,000,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,and transmis--- sion intertie.Since a waste heat recovery system is already in operation,no analysis was performed.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 con- version to coal direct combustion by 1988,the present worth of the heating costs would be reduced by about $134,399,000 (in 1982 dollars)over the period 1988-2039,Wind generation was only found to be economically feasible in the villages of Eek and Tuntutuliak.Transmission intertie from Bethel to outlying villages was found to be marginally attractive. As shown on Table IV-11,the total present worth of the Optimized Base Case is $473,950,000.The benefit-cost ratio is 1.28 when compared to the Base Case.The present worth of the electric energy demand is the same than to the Base Case.The present worth of the heating demand was reduced from $461,953,000 to $327,554,000. Thermal Supply Plans AS shown on Table IV-1l,the 4-MW base load coal-fired plant with diesel generators used for peaking demand (Plan IIIB) has the lowest total present worth of the thermal plans.Plan IIIB has a benefit-cost ratio of 1.30 when compared to the Base Case,but has about the same present worth as the Optimized Base Case,All other 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 Base Case elec- tric demand. Iv-19 Hydropower Supply Plans As shown on Table IV-11l,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 about 1.05 when compared to the Optimized Base Case. Fuel Cell Supply Plans The fuel cell alternative with waste heat recovery (Plan VB)has a present worth smaller than the same alternative with- out waste heat recovery.Plan VB has an overall benefit-cost ratio of 1.05 when compared to the Optimized Base Case.How- ever,the present worth of the electric demand,alone,is greater than the present worth of the Base Case electric demand. 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 IV-12, IV-20 Table IV-12 MOST LIKELY SCENARIO SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS USING 0%REAL FUEL ESCALATION Total Demand Benefit-Cost RatioPresentWorth(1982 $x103)With With Heating Electric Total Base OptimizedSupplyPlanDemandDemandDemandCaseBaseCase Base Case Plan I 320,021 108,463 428,484 1.00 - Optimized Base Case Plan II 252,082 108,463 360,545 1.19 1.00 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 252,082 129,594 381,676 1,12 0.94 Plan IIIB 245,265 129,594 374,859 1.14 0.96 Plan ITIC 252,082 166,534 418,616 1,02 0.86 Plan IIID 239,704 166,534 406,238 1.06 0.89 Plan IIIE 286,727 166,534 453,261 0.95 0.79 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 240,342 135,725 376,067 1.14 0.96 Plan IVB 250,380 135,725 386,105 1.11 0.93 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 252,082 126,545 378,627 1.13 0.95 Plan VB 235,227 126,545 358,772 1.19 1.00 Table IV-12 shows that the fuel cell plan with waste heat recovery (Plan VB)is the only plan with a benefit-cost ratio greater than the Optimized Base Case,if there is no real escal- ation 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, Iv-21 and 2.0%for coal until year 2002.The results are presented in 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 1.38 when compared to the Base Case,and 1.07 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 Eek 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 IV-14 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 both 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. IV 22 "p%eo ©<Ahe¢N i onQa 5 wy'Akiachak g/tCUClecLEKwethiuk"dy wee figenETHEL'ff .N Yow JrespeoAaa Oscarvilleoo,og Cm Napaskiak >So,<Napakiak -AAPL ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLANMILoaeSa620FEASIBILITYASSESSMENT L435 1 1 J BETHEL \SCALE 1:1,000,000 COMMUNITY LOCATION MAP JUNEAUg HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY 'LF KEY MAP7 December 1982 €Z-AILow Scenario Table IV-13 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ) PRESENT WORTH OF SUPPLY PLANS (1982 $x103 Most Likely Scenario High ScenarioHeatingElectricTotalHeatingElectricTotalHeatingElectric TotalSupplyPlanDemandDemandDemandDemandDemandDemandDemandDemandDemand Base Case Plan I 376,033 120,043 496,076 461,953 146,396 608,349 554,215 177,634 731,849 Optimized Base Case Plan II 273,198 120,043 393,241 327,554 146,396 473,950 387,910 177,634 565,544 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 273,198 133,919 407,117 327,554 160,444 487,998 387,910 191,890 579,800 Plan IIIB 265,748 133,919 399,667 308,845 160,444 469,289 368,504 191,890 560,394 Plan IIIC 273,198 171,362 444,560 327,554 199,247 526,801 387,910 231,596 619,506 Plan IIID 253,862 171,362 425,224 287,654 199,247 486,901 360,087 231,596 591,683 Plan IIIE 302,164 171,362 473,526 337,486 199,247 536,733 422,432 231,596 654,028 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 260,084 139,515 399,599 310,879 139,479 450,358 379,680 149,547 529,227 Plan IVB 261,980 139,515 401,495 306,816 139,479 446,295 378,562 149,547 528,109 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 273,198 ©130,245 403,443 327,554 152,032 479,586 387,910 177,426 565,336 Plan VB 255,081 130,245 385,326 299,239 152,032 451,271 363,561 177,426 540,987 vC-AITable Iv-14 RANKING OF ENERGY SUPPLY PLANS Total Demand Electric Demand With Fuel Escalation*Without F.E.With Fuel Escalation*Without F.E. 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 11 11 1l 10 1 3 4 1 Optimized Base Case Plan II 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 1 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 resources,and impacts of the transmission lines on birds and access to subsistence. IV-25 Year 1950 1960 1970 1980 Year 1980 Annual Growth Rate: 1987 Annual Growth Rate: 1992 Annual Growth Rate: 2002 BETHEL POPULATION HISTORICAL DATA,PROJECTIONS,AND ANNUAL GROWTH RATES HISTORICAL DATA Exhibit 2 Annual Population Growth Rate (%) 650 6.8 1,250 6.8 2,416 4.0 3,576 PROJECTIONS Low Most-Likely High 3,576 3,576 3,576 2.15%2.5%2.5% 4,148 4,250 4,255 2.03%2.5%2.5% 4,577 4,792 4,828 1.25%1.7%1.9% 5,185 5,686 5,829 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST 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 Income ($000)---(No.) 1981 PROFILE,Bethel,Alaska Emplymt Elect- ricity Cooking Heating (Million Btu) Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu) 586 47 0 0 50 5 0 0 2177 182 639 0 33 6 0 0 4655 297 2436 0 938 100 1021 0 703 49 1949 0 3517 306 8864 2910 603 45 1915 0 2714 211 340 0 9146 553 12270 909 1173 90 1966 134 2714 193 12577 719 4489 33498 2084 43977 4672 3576 3.3 1084 211 25076 29635 69053 34307 Space Water Light & Heating Applian 0 0 0 0 0 0 10981 0 639 0 0 0 20112 0 2235 737 41 1010 58069 0 1754 113242 8070 8070 3497 0 1866 84577 0 340 197677 18177 10452 42101 492 1966 164035 2695 12217 695028 29475 40549 159345 21656 13678 854373 51131 54227 €LIGIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST MOST-LIKELY Projection 10/15/82 1987 FORECAST,Bethel,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian -----($000)=-=(No.)==(Million Btu)-- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 596 48 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 462 46 0 9 0 0 0 Construction 2200 184 646 0 11099 0 646 Household Mfq.32 6 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 4687 299 2452 0 20247 0 2250 Wholesale,Dist.961 103 1046 0 755 42 1035 Comm.and Utilities 721 50 1997 0 59503 0 1737 Trade &Pvt.Service 3294 287 8302 2726 106067 7558 7558 Finance &Real Est.578 43 1836 0 3353 0 1790 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.2577 200 323 0 80313 0 323 Local &Reg.Govt.8690 526 11658 864 187829 17272 9931 State Agencies/Svcs 1313 101 2202 150 47153 551 2202 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 1655 118 7672 438 100061 1644 7453 ***Transfer Payments 3816 TOTAL 31582 2011 38134 4178 616380 27067 34985 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)4220 Household Size 3.1 Total Households 1361 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)215 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)32128 37970 204161 27747 17525 0TOTALENERGY(M.Btu)70262 42148 820541 54814 9251 6$0|obeyvyLIGIHX3 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-Protit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs *k*Transfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 1992 FORECAST,Bethel,Alaska Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu) Elect- Income Emplymt ricity($000)---(No,.)nee nnn nn 654 52 0 394 39 0 2447 205 718 35 6 0 5234 334 2738 1053 113 1147 798 56 2210 3669 319 9248 640 48 2032 2747 214 344 10584 640 14199 1407 108 2360 1655 118 7672 4040 35357 2252 42668 4792 3 1597 228 39919 82587 Cooking Heating 47177 51865 (Million Btu) Space Water Light & Heating Applian 0 0 0 0 0 0 12343 0 718 0 0 0 22611 0 2512 827 46 1135 65854 0 1989 118149 8419 8419 3712 0 1981 85611 0 (344 228762 21036 12095 50521 590 2360 100061 1644 7453 688451 31735 39006 253664 34475 21774 942115 66210 60780 630zebegvyLISIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST MOST-LIKELY Projection 10/15/82 2002 FORECAST,Bethel,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applianlentedeanna($000)--=(No.)(Million Btu)-"on COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 736 59 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 372 37 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 2731 228 802 0 13778 0 802 Household Mfq.40 7 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 5989 382 3133 0 25872 0 2875 Wholesale,Dist.1181 126 1286 0 928 52 1272 Comm.and Utilities 954 66 2643 0 78762 0 2379 Trade &Pvt.Service 4168 363 10503 3449 134194 9563 9563 Finance &Real Est.764 57 2427 0 4432 0 2365 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.3648 284 457 0 113689 0 457 Local &Reg.Govt.11990 725 16085 1192 259154 23830 13702 State Agencies/Svcs 1688 130 2832 193 60625 708 2832 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 2307 164 10690 611 139430 2291 10385 **kTransfer Payments 5297 TOTAL 41865 2628 50858 5445 830864 36444 46632 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)5686 Household Size 2.9 Total Households 1961 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)251 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)53990 63806 343082 46628 29449 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)104848 69251 1173946 83072 76081 630©abevyLISIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST LOW Projection 10/15/82 1987 FORECAST,Bethel,Alaska Space Water Light & Cooking Heating Heating Applian Elect- SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity -caatenteatententneteateaes ($000)---(No.)een nnn COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 571 46 0 0 Mining &Exploration 462 46 0 0 Construction 2165 181 636 0 Household Mfg.30 5 0 0 Transportation 4431 283 2318 0 Wholesale,Dist.923 99 1005 0 Comm.and Utilities 630 44 1745 0 Trade &Pvt.Service 3121 271 7865 2582 Finance &Real Est.530 40 1684 0 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.2104 164 263 0 Local &Reg.Govt.8464 512 11355 841 State Agencies/Svcs 997 77 1672 114 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 1655 118 7672 438 ***kTransfer Payments 3367 TOTAL 29450 1886 36215 3975 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)4148 Household Size 3.2 Total Households 1296 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)213 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)30297 35805 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)66512 39780 (Million Btu)--- 0 0 0 0 0 0 10920 0 636 0 0 0 19141 0 2127 725 40 994 52015 0 1571 100481 7160 7160 3075 0 1642 65568 0 263 182939 16822 9673 35786 418 1672 100061 1644 7453 570711 26084 33191 192523 26165 16526 763234 52249 49717 6JO»ofegvLISIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORFCAST LOW Projection 10/15/82 1992 FORECAST,Bethel,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applianaltenaetnaeetennateata($000)---(No.)"-(Million Btu)--aatated COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 624 50 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 233 23 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 2223 186 '653 0 11215 0 653 Household Mfg.31 6 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 4664 298 2440 0 20149 0 2239 Wholesale,Dist.1013 108 1103 0 796 44 1092 Comm.and Utilities 745 52 2063 0 61481 0 1857 Trade &Pvt.Service 3370 293 8494 2789 108521 7733 7733 Finance &Real Est.561 42 1780 0 3251 0 1735 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.2314 180 290 0 72119 0 290 Local &Reg.Govt.9239 559 12395 918 199701 18363 10559 State Agencies/Svcs 1114 86 1868 127 39996 467 1868 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 1248 89 5785 331 75456 1240 5620 ***eTransfer Payments 3367 TOTAL 30746 1972 36871 4165 592685 27847 33646 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)4577 Household Size 3.2 Total Households 1430 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)217 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)34634 40931 220084 29911 18891 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)71505 45096 812769 57758 52537 630GebegvLIGIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST LOW Projection 10/15/82 SECTOR COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest Mining &Exploration Construction Household Mfg. 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,Bethel,Alaska Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) Elect- Income Emplymt ricity($000)-==(No.)-- 710 57 0 234 23 0 2824 236 829 33 6 0 5296 338 2771 1160 124 1263 832 58 2305 3632 316 9153 609 45 1933 2579 201 323 9581 580 12854 1114 86 1868 1248 89 5785 3367 33219 2159 39084 5185 3.1 1673 230 42189 81273TOTALENERGY(M.Btu) Space Cooking Heating --(Million Btu) 49860 54275 0 0 14244 0 22880 911 68690 116938 3530 80380 207091 39996 75456 630116 268093 898209 Water Light & Heating Applian 0 0 0 0 0 829 0 0 0 2542 51 1249 0 2075 8333 8333 0 1884 0 323 19043 10950 467 1868 1240 5620 29134 35673 36436 23012 65570 58685 6409ebegyLISIHXS 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 Income 663 555 Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) 1987 FORECAST,Bethel,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian($000)---(No.)=(Million Btu)-- 53 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 0 220 773 0 13287 0 773 10 0 0 0 0 0 341 2795 0 23080 0 2564 111 1133 0 818 46 1121 60 2385 0 71086 0 2147 338 9779 3211 124937 8903 8903 52 2195 0 4009 0 2140 233 374 0 93206 0 374 587 13013 964 209658 19279 11085 104 2261 154 48416 565 2261 222 14463 826 188640 3099 14050 2386 49171 5155 777137 31892 45418 4255 3 1418 219 34137 40344 216926 29482 18620 83308 45499 994063 61374 64038TOTALENERGY(M.Btu)6JOZabegpyLIGDIHXS BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST HIGH Projection 10/15/82 1992 FORECAST,Bethel,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating ApplianARme($000)---(No.)-(Million Btu)----- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 792 64 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 693 69 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 3156 264 927 0 15919 0 927 Household Mfq.75 13 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 6164 393 3225 0 26629 0 2959 Wholesale,Dist.1232 132 1341 0 968 54 1327 Comm.and Utilities 1051 73 2910 0 86731 0 2619 Trade &Pvt.Service 4498 391 11336 3722 144825 10320 10320 Finance &Real Est.791 59 2512 0 4588 0 2449 GOVERNMENT Non-Protit Org.3145 245 394 0 98025 0 394 Local &Reg.Govt.11912 721 15981 1184 257478 23676 13614 State Agencies/Svcs 1501 115 2517 172 53889 629 2517 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 3528 251 16350 934 213246 3503 15882 ***eTransfer Payments 5387 TOTAL 43925 2790 57493 6012 902298 38182 53008 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)4828 Household Size 2.8 Total Households 1724 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)234 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)44286 52338 281417 38247 24156 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)101779 58350 1183715 76429 77164 649gafeyvLISIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST HIGH Projection 10/15/82 2002 FORECAST,Bethel,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applianaetnatenetteeta($000)---(No.)enon nnnnn----=-(Million Btu)-<--- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 927 74 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 1153 115 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 4084 341 1199 0 20600 0 1199 Household Mfq.87 16 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 7127 455 3729 0 30789 0 3421 Wholesale,Dist.1446 155 1574 0 1136 63 1558 Comm.and Utilities 1216 85 3369 0 100384 0 3032 Trade &Pvt.Service 5021 437 12655 4155 161677 11521 11521 Finance &Real Est.891 66 2830 0 5169 0 2759 GOVERNMENT Non-Protit Org.3298 257 413 0 102791 0 413 Local &Reg.Govt.12518 757 16794 1244 270576 24881 14306 State Agencies/Svcs 1642 126 2753 188 58941 688 2753 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 4070 289 18865 1078 246053 4042 18326 ***Transfer Payments 6060 TOTAL 49540 3173 64181 6665 998116 41195 59288 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)5829 Household Size 2.6 Total Households 2242 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)266 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)65366 77251 415372 56453 35654 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)129547 83916 1413488 97648 94942 6406abegvLIGIHX3 (131)DIESEL so]ELECTRIC&|GENERATION (54)TIGHTS ANDAPPLIANCES PROPANE/BLAZO woop COOKING SPACE AND FUEL OIL oS WATER2 HEATING 1 EXHIBIT 6 REJECTED ENERGY > (UNITS:BILLION Btu)(550)USEFUL ENERGY > ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT 1981 ENERGY BALANCE BETHEL HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY December 1982 BETHEL -BLECTRICAL DISTRIBUTIOU EXHIBIT 7 Page 1 of 3 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT 0.0.Bon 4-2543 Phone (907)276-3442 P.E.COMPANY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY Anchorage,Alaska 99509 December 1982 NOTE: PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY TO ._NAPAKIAK STARTS AT THE BLA. HEADQUARTERS BUILDING LOCATED AT THE WEST END OF THIS ROAD (NOT SHOWN ON THIS SHEET) EXHIBIT 7 Page 3 of 3 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM P.E.COMPANY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY P.O.Box 42543 72g@,Alaska Phone (907)276-3442 99s09 December 1982 'i id EXHIBIT 7 Page 2 of 3 Wy ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY December 1982 'aSg 00KG|}beHECTRICAL-eonwoo - P.E.COMPANY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS 99509 Anchorage,Alaska Phone (907)276-3442 P.O.Box 42543