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-7 Kwethluk
Bethel Area Power Plan Feasibility Assessment APPENDIX G-7 KWETHLUK 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 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 Page VII-1l VItI-l VII-2 VII-3 viiI-4 viiI-4 VII-5 VII-7 VII-8 vVII-9 VII-10 VII-10 VII-11 VII-14 VII-15 VII-16 VII-16 VII-17 VII-17 VII-17 VII-20 VII-20 Table No. VII-1 VII-2 VII-3 VII-4 VII-5 VII-6 VII-7 VII-8 VII-9 VII-10 LIST OF TABLES Title Kwethluk Household Size Kwethluk Employment and Income Kwethluk Projected Annual Earnings Kwethluk 1981 Fuel Prices and Consumption Existing Generating Facilities Kwethluk 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- Page VII-4 VII-6 VII-8 VII-9 VII-10 VII-11 VII-15 VII-18 VII-19 VII-21 Exhibit No. 1 2 LIST OF EXHIBITS Community Location Map Kwethluk Population 1981 Economic and Energy Profile,Kwethluk Economic and Energy Projections,Kwethluk 1981 Primary Energy Consumption,Kwethluk 1981 Energy Balance,Kwethluk Electrical Distribution System -iii- KWETHLUK 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 Kwethluk 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 Kwethluk is intended to be an informational and working document for the residents of the community.Much data has been collected on the community's background,population,housing,and its current economic and energy profiles.Existing electrical generation and transmission facilities,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 Kwethluk in particular.These alternative plans have been analyzed from both an economic and environmental standpoint. This community report for Kwethluk is submitted as a draft for review and comment by the residents.The Alaska Power Authority welcomes your comments and questions. Background Located on the Kwethluk River,east of its juncture with the Kuskokuak Slough,Kwethluk is approximately 11 miles east of Bethel (Exhibit 1).The village is located just below the lower end of the spruce-poplar forest belt that follows the course of the Kuskokwim River and its main tributaries.The remaining vegetation is characterized as wet tundra.Standing water is present throughout the summer,which makes overland travel ex- tremely difficult. Access to Kwethluk is principally by year-round charter air service and limited summer lighterage service from Bethel.It can be reached by air carrier daily from Bethel.Kwethluk is also served on a once-a-week basis by Hovercraft from Bethel. There is no road system in the area.Overland movement is li- mited primarily to the winter season.The river is used as a roadway for taxis and truck freight during the winter season VII-1 after the ice has thickened.Fuel oil and other freight items are trucked 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 village of Kwethluk has also been known as "Kuikluk," ""Kwiklak,"and Quithlook."The region was exposed to Russian influence in the early 19th Century,after which missions and trading posts were established throughout the region.The vil- lage became known as "Kwethluk"in 1938.The first post office was established in 1947.The village was incorporated in 1975. Beside the municipal government,Kwethluk'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,Kwethluk Incorporated,was created under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to receive and manage lands conveyed to it under the act.In July 1979,131,000 acres of land were trans- ferred to the corporation.Total entitlement amounts to about 138,000 acres.The village corporation also runs the village power plant and a store, In conjunction with this study,a public meeting was held in Akiak in April,1982.Residents of Kwethluk were invited to attend. Population The population of Kwethluk increased steadily from 75 in 1880 to 454 in 1980,As shown on Exhibit 2,between 1960 and 1980,the population grew at an average annual rate of 1.7 per- cent. The racial composition has not changed,remaining at about 97 percent Alaskan Native.The age characteristics of the popu- lation have changed,however.In 1970,the number of young people was high,with the average age about 17.Since then,a significant number of young people apparently left the region in VII-2 order to find jobs or to pursue their education.In 1980,the average age was about 21. 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 population is expected to be between 518 and 622 persons. Housing There are approximately 100 homes in the community.Twelve are vacant.There are 5.2 people per housing unit.All homes have power.The community has a central watering point.ASHA built 30 of the existing homes in 1971,and HUD plans to adver- tise for bids for the construction of 39 additional homes this year. The average floor space of the most recently built homes (HUD)are approximately 1200 square feet,while the older struc- tures contain roughly half of this floor area.Whereas the older homes are less well insulated,they are often better built and better sited away from wind exposure 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 remained at about 5.2 for the period 1970-1980.The supply of HUD housing units will reduce the household size to about 4.0 in the short term.However, because of the reductions in subsidized programs,the household size is expected to decrease at a lower rate after 1987.As shown in Table VII-l,the average household size is expected to vary between 3.5 and 4.5 by 2002. VII-3 Table VII-1l KWETHLUK HOUSEHOLD SIZE Energy Demand Projections Year Low Most-Likely High 1980 (U.S.Census)N/A 5.2 N/A 1987 4.9 4.9 4.6 1992 4.7 4.5 4.3 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 Kwethluk depend on the environment in large part for subsistence.Subsistence can be defined as obtaining food,fiber,and shelter from the surrounding environment. Subsistence activities are pursued by a majority of the communi- ty's residents.A recent survey done in the Bethel region esti- mates that approximately one-third of the residents'surveyed obtained one-half or more of their foodstuffs by engaging in such subsistence activities as fishing,berrypicking,and col- lecting gamebirds along the sloughs and on the swampy tundra. It is also estimated that the remaining two-third of the resi- dents collects 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 ship- ping and transportation costs,it offers savings over the pur- chase 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 resi- dents of Kwethluk,.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.Using the figures developed for the Bethel region and assuming a typical household budget of about $10,000,then the viII-4 total cash value of these activities can be estimated at about $300,000 annually. Cash Economy Cash employment in Kwethluk exists in forms which are simi- lar 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 pro- ject,such as the upcomming HUD housing project and the building of teacher housing units,will provide temporary jobs for vill- age residents. Exhibit 3 shows the 1981 economic and energy profile for Kwethluk.Exhibit 3 corresponds to the forecasting model output for Kwethluk 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 "Electricity"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 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 VII-2 below sum- marizes the 1981 average monthly employment and annual income by sector that are typically found in a village the size of Kwethluk.It should be noted that the numbers listed for each sector do not necessarily indicate fulltime employment.More than one of these positions may be held by one person simul- taneously or by the same person at different times of the year, vVII-5 Table VII-2 KWETHLUK EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME Average Monthly AnnualEconomicActivityEmploymentIncome (1981 $) Renewable Resource Harvesting 7 $93,000 Mining and Exploration 0 -0- Construction 42 498,000 Household Manufacturing 1 8,000 Transportation 1 23,000 Wholesale,Dist.1 8,000 Comm.and Utilities 2 29,000 Trade and Private Services 14 158,000 Finance and Real Estate 4 57,000 Non-Profit Organization 3 33,000 Local and Regional Government 60 988,000 State Agencies/Services 1 18,000 Federal Agencies/Services 5 65,000 Transfer Payments N/A 943,000 TOTAL $2,921,000 As shown in Table VII-2,the primary sources of income to the village are local and regional government,transfer pay- ments,construction,trade and private services,and renewable resource harvesting.These and other income sources are de- scribed below. Local and Regional Government.The village school system provides the largest number of cash-earning positions'to Kwethluk 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 are:principal teacher,certified teachers,substitute teachers,bilingual teachers,instructional aides,clerk/ typists,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 form:fee agents,bookkeepers,city administrators,city clerks,city maintenance,city custodian,city recreation di- rector,village public safety officer,village patrolman,IRA Council administrator. VII-6 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 thorough 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 in Kwethluk =andthroughouttheregionprovideemploymentopportunitiesthat typically represent the largest private cash-earning potential locally.The upcoming housing project 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 VII-2 make up only a minor part of the total village in- come.Federal agency services,finance and real estate,and transportation 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 de- veloped. The results of the economic projections for the years 1987, 1992,and 2002 are presented on Exhibit 4.Exhibit 4 is organized as described earlier for Exhibit 3.Table VII-3 sum- marizes 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 pro- jections represents the degree of confidence in projecting the future economic course of Kwethluk. VII-7 Table VII-3 KWETHLUK PROJECTED ANNUAL EARNINGS (Constant 1981 Dollars) Projections Year Low Most-Likely High 1981 (Surveyed)N/A $2,921,000 N/A 1987 $2,539,000 2,700,000 $3,294,000 1992 2,663,000 3,049,000 3,790,000 2002 2,876,000 3,620,000 4,298,000 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- Likely"primarily in the severity of the anticipated slump during the early 1980's.The effect of these less severe re- ductions is measured in the forecast as a slowly expanding economy of about 2 percent annual growth rate. 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 than 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 the energy consumption by end uses and by fuel type. VII-8 Total Energy Space and water heating was the major energy end use with a total consumption of about 15,000 million Btu.A Btu (British Thermal Unit)is a measure of the amount of heat energy required to raise the temperature of a pound of water by one degree Fah- renheit.Fuel oil provided about 66 percent of the total heat- ing demand,and wood the remaining 34 percent.Residential cooking consumed about 4,300 million Btu.Wood provided about 82 percent of the needs;fuel oil,10 percent;electricity, 5 percent;and propane/blazo,3 percent.Lights and electric appliances consumed an equivalent of about 800 million Btu.One kilowatt-hour of electricity is equal to 3,413 Btu. Table VII-4 summarizes the total consumption by fuel types. It also shows the average unit price of each fuel.The esti- mated total cost to Kwethluk for their 1981 energy demand was about $320,000,Some 23 percent was spent on diesel fuel for generating electricity. Table VII-4 KWETHLUK 1981 FUEL PRICES AND CONSUMPTION Unit Annual Price Consumption Fuel Oil $1.89/gal.75,000 gallons Diesel $1.89/gal.40,000 gallons Propane $118/100 lb bottle 25-100 lb bottles Blazo $3.40/gal.550 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 supply of the village must be delivered and stored on site during this portion of the year.Bulk fuel storage facilities are therefore a critical component of the present village energy system.Separate bulk fuel storage facilities are maintained in the village of Kwethluk for the LKSD high school,the BIA elementary school,and the village bulk fueldistributor.The combined total storage capacity is approxi- mately 63,000 gallons,which is not sufficient to contain the total annual fuel demand. VII-9 Exhibit 6 presents the village energy balance for 1981. Due to conversion factors and electric distribution losses,the "useful"energy was about 11,300 million Btu or 47 percent of the total consumption. Electric Generation Present Demand.In 1981,the total electric demand of the village was about 300 megawatt-hours.The 1981 peak demand was 95 kW.. Existing Facilities.The village of Kwethluk has more than enough generating capacity than is presently required.As shown in Table VII-5,the village owns two diesel generator sets with a combined capacity of 500 kW.In addition,the Lower Kuskokwim School District (LKSD)and BIA schools have their own standby generating capability. Generators are in good to excellent condition.The distri- bution system (Exhibit 7)is also in good condition and is less than five years old. Table VII-5 EXISTING GENERATING FACILITIES Operating Owner/Operator Status Capacity (kW) Kwethluk,Inc.Primary 250 Kwethluk,Inc.Primary 250 BIA Standby 100 BIA Standby 50 LKSD Standby 125 Total Capacity 775 kW Future Energy Demand Three projections of future energy demand (low,most likely,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 scenario reflects a more con- servative growth derived from the low projections of economic VII-10 activities,population,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 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 VII-6 summarizes the results.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 440 and 740 MWh in 2002,with a most likely energy demand of 570 MWh.The most likely 2002 peak demand is 160 kw. Table VII-6 KWETHLUK ENERGY DEMAND FORECAST Most Low Likely High Total Energy Demand (Btu x 106) 1981 Demand N/A 22,211 N/A 1987 Demand 24,499 25,420 28,465 1992 Demand 27,596 31,130 35,283 2002 Demand 31,111 39,984 50,833 Electric Energy Demand (MWh) 1981 Demand 300 300 300 1987 Demand 345 355 395 1992 Demand 390 435 495 2002 Demand 440 570 740 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. VII-11 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 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. IIl.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. The results of the economic feasibility to intertie Kwethluk 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. VII-12 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 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. Ve 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 Kwethluk were considered. The basic assumptions and cost estimates underlying each supply plan are given in the Regional Report. vVII-13 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 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 supply plan was computed.Table VII-7 summarizes the present worth of each supply plan for Kwethluk.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. vII-14 Table VII-7 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 11,798 5,175 16,973 1,00 - Optimized Base Case Plan II 8,356 4,555 12,911 1,32 1.00 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 8,356 4,727 13,083 1,30 0.99 Plan IIIB 8,356 4,727 13,083 1,30 0.99 Plan IIIC 8,356 4,954 13,310 1.28 0.97 Plan IIID 8,356 4,954 13,310 1.28 0.97 Plan IIIE 8,356 4,954 13,310 1.28 0.97 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 8,356 3,082 11,438 1.48 1.13 Plan IVB 8,356 3,082 11,438 1.48 1.13 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 8,356 4,281 12,637 1.34 1.02 Plan VB 8,356 4,281 12,637 1.34 1.02 The following paragraphs describe the results for Kwethluk 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. VII-15 As shown on Table VII-7,the total present worth of the Base Case is $16,973,000,of which $5,175,000 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 30%or $1,040,000 (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 Kwethluk 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 VII-7,the total present worth of the Optimized Base Case is $12,911,000,The benefit-cost ratio is 1.32 when compared to the Base Case.The present worth of the electric energy demand was only reduced by $520,000 when com- pared to the Base Case.The present worth of the heating demand was reduced from $11,798,000 to $8,356,000. 'Thermal Supply Plans As for the Optimized Base Case,an economic evaluation was performed to decide whether or not Kwethluk 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 village.As shown on Table VII-7 the present worth of the electric demand which includes the intertie is very similar to the present worth of the Base Case.As a result,Kwethluk could be intertied to Bethel. However,as shown on Table VII-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 VII-16 is 0.99 for Plans IIIA and IIIB,and 0.97 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 VII-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 VII-7,the present worth of the electric demand which includes the intertie is lower than the present worth of the Base Case.The fuel cell alternatives have an overall benefit- cost ratio of 1.02 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 VII-8. VII-17 Table VII- 8 MOST LIKELY SCENARIO SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS USING 0%REAL FUEL ESCALATION Total Demand Benefit-Cost Ratio Present Worth (1982 $x103)With With Heating Electric Total Base Optimized Supply Plan Demand Demand Demand Case Base Case Base Case Plan I 8,121 3,975 12,096 1.00 - Optimized Base Case Plan II 6,457 3,829 10,286 1.18 1,00 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 6,457 4,135 10,592 1.14 0.97 Plan IIIB 6,457 4,135 10,592 1.14 0.97 Plan IIIC 6,457 4,310 10,767 1,12 0.96 Plan IIID 6,457 4,310 10,767 1.12 0.96 Plan IIIE 6,457 4,310 10,767 1.12 0.96 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 6,457 2,935 9,392 1,29 1.10 Plan IVB 6,457 2,935 9,392 1.29 1.10 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 6,457 3,752 10,209 1.19 1.01 Plan VB 6,457 3,752 10,209 1.19 1,01 Table VII-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 VII-9. VII-18 T¢-IIATable VII-10 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 1l 11 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 1l 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 l 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. 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 1.56 when compared to the Base Case,and 1.14 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 VII-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 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. VII-20 6T-IIATable VII-9 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS PRESENT WORTH OF SUPPLY PLANS (1982 $x103) Low Scenario Most Likely Scenario High Scenario Heating Electric Total Heating Electric Total Heating Electric Total Supply Plan Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Base Case Plan I 9,764 4,315 14,079 11,798 5,175 16,973 14,123 6,411 20,534 Optimized Base Case Plan II 7,114 4,083 11,197 8,356 4,555 12,911 9,803 5,193 14,996 Thermal Plans Plan IIIA 7,114 4,207 11,321 8,356 4,727 13,083 9,803 5,443 15,246 Plan IIIB 7,114 4,207 11,321 8,356 4,727 13,083 9,803 5,443 15,246 Plan IIIC 7,114 4,390 11,504 8,356 4,954 13,310 9,803 5,728 15,531 Plan IIID 7,114 4,390 11,504 8,356 4,954 13,310 9,803 5.728 15,531 Plan IIIE 7,114 4,390 11,504 8,356 4,954 13,310 9,803 5,728 15,531 Hydroelectric Plans Plan IVA 7,114 2,886 10,000 8,356 3,082 11,438 9,803 3,384 13,187 Plan IVB 7,114 2,886 10,000 8,356 3,082 11,438 9,803 3,384 13,187 Fuel Cell Plans Plan VA 7,114 3,844 10,958 8,356 4,281 12,637 9,803 4,890 14,693 Plan VB 7,114 3,844 10,958 8,356 4,281 12,637 9,803 4,890 14,693 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. VII-22 ve cau WC 0 205 n yy asigluk @ @ Nunapitchuk »j Akiacha LS fg "ot oP ¥.a <x 5 ALT "p we ON Va Akiak:D>SY ee r)go \Atmautluak |Boo JS 'ode Kwethluk] mS m Oscarville 3 Napaskiak - ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY |MILES BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN 0 4 8 1 16 20 FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENTNFAIRBANKS\,> i a er er ee| BETHEL ancnorace |SCALE ¥:1,000,000 COMMUNITY LOCATION MAP x JUNEAUg HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY LS KEY MAP December 1982 Exhibit 2 KWETHLUK POPULATION HISTORICAL DATA,PROJECTIONS,AND ANNUAL GROWTH RATES HISTORICAL DATA Annual Growth Year Population Rate (3) 1950 212 4.4 1960 325 2.3 1970 408 1.0 1980 454 PROJECTIONS Most Year Low Likely High 1980 454 454 454 Annual Growth Rate:0.75%13%1.5% 1987 477 481 495 Annual Growth Rate:0.753%13%1.53% 1992 495 508 536 Annual Growth Rate:0.5%1%1.5% 2002 518 558 622 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-Protrit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs ***eTransfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 1981 PROFILE,Kwethluk,Alaska Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) Elect Income Emplymt ricity($000)--=(No,.)-enenne-===== 93 7 0 0 0 0 498 42 0 8 1 0 23 1 0 8 1 1 29 2 0 158 14 36 57 4 2 33 3 8 988 60 306 18 1 3 65 5 2 943 2921 141 358 454 52 87 130 668 1026TOTALENERGY(M,.Btu) Cooking Heating oooooooo0ocooooo4300 4300 (Million Btu) Space Water Light & Heating Applian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 0 27 0 0 0 437 0 3 87 0 306 70 6248 973 30 109 0 142 0 7429 1043 358 6337 226 453 13766 1269 811 NWHn©NYOnNOrOCCOCo€LIGIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST MOST-LIKELY 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 ***eTransfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 1987 FORECAST,Kwethluk,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.)ener en nnn ne 94 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 504 42 0 0 8 1 0 0 23 1 0 0 8 1 1 0 30 2 0 0 148 13 34 0 54 4 2 0 31 2 8 0 939 57 290 0 20 2 3 0 40 3 1 0 801 2700 136 339 0 481 4.9 98 151 871 5611 1210 5611TOTALENERGY(M.Btu) (Million Btu)-= 8269 15298 Water Light & Heating Applian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 34 0 2 67 8 924 290 0 3 0 1 991 339 295 591 1286 930 6JOLabeg¢LIGIHX3S BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST MOST=-LIKELY Projection 10/15/82 1992 FORECAST,Kwethluk,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light &SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian--($000)---(No.)(Million Btu)--- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 103 8 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 560 47 0 0 0 0 0 Household Mfq.9 2 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 26 2 0 0 82 0 0 Wholesale,Dist.8 1 1 0 31 0 1 Comm.and Utilities 33 2 0 0 0 0 0 Trade &Pvt.Service 165 14 37 0 456 0 37 Finance &Real Est.60 4 2 0 92 0 2 GOVERNMENT Non-Protit Org.33 3 8 0 309 71 8 Local &Reg.Govt.1143 69 354 0 7230 1126 354 State Agencies/Svcs 21 2 4 0 131 0 4 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 40 3 1 0 87 0 1 ***eTransfer Payments 848 TOTAL 3049 157 407 0 8418 1197 407 RESIDtNTIAL Population (No.persons)508 Household Size 4.5 Total Households 113 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)163 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)1080 6957 10252 366 732 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1487 6957 18670 1563 1139 640ZebegyLISIHXS 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 ***Transfer Payments RESIDENTIAL Income 2002 FORECAST,Kwethluk,Alaska Emplymt ($000)---(No.)= Elect -Space Water Light & ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) 116 9 0 0 0 0 625 52 0 10 2 0 30 2 0 9 a 1 39 3 0 188 16 43 72 5 2 44 3 ll 1295 78 401 25 2 4 55 4 2 1112 3620 177 464 558 4 140 179 1473 1937TOTALENERGY(M.Btu) (Million Btu)--- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 0 0 0 34 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 518 0 43 0 110 0 2 0 411 94 11 0 8191 1276 401 0 158 0 4 0 121 0 2 0 9637 1370 464 9489 13983 499 999 9489 23620 1869 1463 640€abedvyLIGIHX3 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 ***Transfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 1987 FORECAST,Kwethluk,Alaska Light & Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)Wwb&Sfoe]MNWONNOwMOOOCO570 Elect-Space Water Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian($000)--=-(No.)ene n renner (Million Btu)---- 90 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 496 41 0 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 22 1 0 0 69 0 7 1 1 0 27 0 26 2 0 0 0 0 140 12 32 0 388 0 50 4 2 0 76 0 25 2 6 0 237 54 914 55 283 0 5782 900 15 1 2 0 93 0 40 3 1 0 87 0 707 2539 130 327 0 6759 954 477 4.9 97 147 841 5414 7979 285 1168 5414 14738 1239TOTALENERGY(M.Btu)897 6JOpobegpyLIGIHX4S BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST LOW Projection 10/15/82 1992 FORECAST,Kwethluk,Alaska Elect Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian"<<-($000)---(No.)w2-2 nnn n m=(Million Btu)----- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 99 8 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 509 43 0 0 0 0 0 Household Mfg.8 1 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 23 1 0 0 73 0 0 Wholesale,Dist.8 1 1 0 29 0 1 Comm.and Utilities 31 2 0 0 0 0 0 Trade&Pvt.Service 152 13 34 0 419 0 34 Finance &Real Est.53 4 2 0 80 0 2 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.28 2 7 0 261 60 7 Local &Reg.Govt.998 60 309 0 6312 983 309 State Agencies/Svcs 17 1 3 0 104 0 3 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 30 2 1 0 65 0 1 ***eTransfer Payments 707 TOTAL 2663 138 357 0 7343 1043 357 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)495 Household Size 4.7 Total Households 105 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)156 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)966 6223 9170 328 655 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1323 6223 16513 1371 1012 630GobeypyLIGIHX3S BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST LOW Projection 10/15/82 -2002 FORECAST,Kwethluk,Alaska Elect-Space Water Light & SECTOR Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian Te en mn ($000)---(No.)meen nen nn nnn (Million Btu)--- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 112 9 0 0 0 0 0 Mining &Exploration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction 647 54 0 0 0 0 0 Household Mfg.8 1 0 0 0 0 0 Transportation 26 2 0 0 83 0 0 Wholesale,Dist.9 1 1 0 34 0 1 Comm.and Utilities 34 2 0 0 0 0 0 Trade &Pvt.Service 163 14 37 0 451 0 37 Finance &Real Est.57 4 2 0 87 0 2 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.31 2 8 0 290 67 8 Local &Reg.Govt.1035 63 320 0 6545 1019 320 State Agencies/Svcs 17 1 3 0 104 0 3 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 30 2 1 0 65 0 1 *kkPransfer Payments 707 TOTAL 2876 155 372 0 7659 1086 372 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)518 Household Size 4.5 Total Households 115 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)168 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)1135 7307 10769 385 769 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1507 7307 18428 1471 1141 630gebegyLIGIHX3 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-Prorit Org. Local &Reg.Govt. State Agencies/Svcs Fed.Agencies/Svcs ***eTransfer Payments RESIDENTIAL 1987 FORECAST,Kwethluk,Alaska Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu) Elect-Space Water Light &Income Emplymt ricity Cooking Heating Heating Applian($000)---(No.)--(Million Btu)---------<---------- 105 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 603.50 0 0 0 0 0 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 27 2 0 0 84 0 0 8 1 1 0 30 0 1 35 2 0 0 0 0 0 175 15 40 0 482 0 40 65 5 2 0 99 0 2 36 3 9 0 337 77 9 1048 63 324 0 6626 1032 324 20 2 3 0 126 0 3 75 5 2 0 164 0 2 1084 3294 158 381 0 7948 1109 381 495 4.6 108 153 971 6252 9214 329 658 1352 6252 17162 1438 1039 630ZabegvLIGIHX3 BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST HIGH Projection 10/15/82 1992 FORECAST,Kwethluk,Alaska Elect-Space Cooking HeatingSECTORIncomeEmplymtricitysatantaedaanteateretetateateatate($000)---(No.)==-- COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 125 10 0 Mining &Exploration 0 0 0 Construction 723 60 0 Household Mfq.18 3 0 Transportation 31 2 0 WhoLesale,Dist.10 1 1 Comm.and Utilities 43 3 0 Trade &Pvt.Service 202 18 46 Finance &Real Est.74 6 3 GOVERNMENT Non-Protit Org.38 3 9 Local &Reg.Govt.1287 78 398 State Agencies/Svcs 23 2 4 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 85 6 3 **kxTransfer Payments 1131 TOTAL 3790 192 464 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons)536 Household Size 4.3 Total Households 125 Usage Rate (M.Btu/household)166 Total Res.Demand (M.Btu)1219 TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu)1683 ooooeoooo0e°oeo°o7854 7854 (Million Btu) Water Light & Heating Applian 11575 21197 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 46 0 3 81 9 1267 398 0 4 0 3 1348 464 413 827 1761 1291 6408ebegyLISIHXS BETHEL AREA POWER STUDY FORECAST HIGH Projection 10/15/82 Emplymt [ooooo0oo0oo°ocoooooo2002 FORECAST,Kwethluk,Alaska SpacericityCookingHeating Heating (Million Btu)--- Light & ApplianSECTORIncome "mon aw mene ($000)=--(No.) COMMERCIAL Renew.Res.Harvest 146 Mining &Exploration 0 Construction 935 Household Mfg.21 Transportation 36 Wholesale,Dist.12 Comm.and Utilities 50 Trade &Pyt.Service 226 Finance &Real Est.84 GOVERNMENT Non-Profit Org.40 Local &Reg.Govt.1352 State Agencies/Svcs 25 Fed.Agencies/Svcs 98 ***kTransfer Payments 1273 TOTAL 4298 RESIDENTIAL Population (No.persons) Household Size Total Households Usage Rate (M.Btu/household) Total Res.Demand (M.Btu) TOTAL ENERGY (M.Btu) 19219 29414 oWrRoOarOaOOCOCSo_o418 1373 1863 6406abegyLISIHX Exhibit 5 1981 PRIMARY ENERGY CONSUMPTION,KWETHLUK Residential Sector Million Btu Lights &Appliances Electricity 453 Space Heating Fuel Oil 1,516 Wood 4,821 Water Heating Wood 226 Cooking Electricity 215 Fuel Oil 453 Wood 3,508 Propane/Blazo 124 Total 11,316 Commercial Sector Lights &Appliances Electricity 39 Space &Water Heating Fuel Oil 624 Total 663 Government Sector Lights &Appliances Electricity 319 Space &Water Heating Fuel Oil 7,848 Total 8,167 Equivalent Btu:kilowatt-hour =3,413,Btu gallon of fuel oil =136,000 Btu gallon of blazo =136,000 Btu 100-1b bottle of propane =2,500,000 Btu cord of wood =13,000,000 BtuPeeEP =EXHIBIT 6 S|]ELECTRIC 2 DIESEL 3 2&|GENERATION o (817)T LIGHTS AND 8 LIGHTS AND AN REJECTED ENERGY 7PROPANE/BLAZO 9],(125)_ PH SoTT]3 S|]COOKING w 9 woopD (eH (5047) 3) SPACE 2 70,AND ry3 WATER USEFUL ENERGY FUEL OIL 2 s HEATING 8 2 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT (UNITS:MILLION Btu) 1981 ENERGY BALANCE KWETHLUK HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY December 1982 PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY TO KWETHLUK JUNCTION AND AKIACHAK EXHIBIT 7 KWETHIW SLOUGH Bhoo{Moon,/Teo}40or i" UA.QUAVEr#4221 TRact Bl Ue.Raver #4221 Tract ic! [eternopl.SHR, [EXIM VILLAGEJERMORBUILDING ee "A oO °°Qu}FAS?A s°--->iva]100 /2 __F -%Cemetser a a u ee]nese]OO #8 :an DeKMA CH,BS /SS aBURRMOOULE4!”PROPOSED LOCATION OF |AR arRie %=a SWITCH GEAR AND GROUND GRID bo creer &47221 ra f°PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY TO NAPASKIAK Fa Nore”\BaaniNa TRACED FROM AERIAL.PHoToGaNHS ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY el 4 BETHEL AREA POWER PLAN Qo Oo OS KWETHLUK -ELECTRICAL perrigunou <=FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM P.E.COMPANY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY P.O.Box 42543 ape,Alaska Phone (907)276-5442 99509 December 1982