l-----alaska power authority - Alaska Energy Data Inventory

LAST. TE DOCRECONNAISSANCE STUDYOFENERGY REQUIREMENTS & ALTERNATIVESFORBUCKLAND, CHUATHBALUK, CROOKED CREEKHUGHES, KOYUKUK, NIKOLAI, RED DEVIL,RUSSIAN MISSION, SHELDON POINT, SLEETMUTE,STONY RIVER, TAKOTNA AND TELIDAMAY 1981INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC.A MORRISON·KNUOSEN COMPANYROBERT W. RETHERFORD ASSOCIATES DIVISIONL-----ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY_---'

RECONNAISSANCE STUDY OF ENERGYREQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES FORBUCKLAND, CHUATHBALUK, CROOKED CREEK,HUGHES, KOYUKUK, NIKOLAI, RED DEVIL,RUSSIAN MISSION, SHELDON POINT, SLEETMUTE,STONY RIVER, TAKOTNA AND TEL IDAFINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONSMAY, 1981Dr ~!I~!UI~uDWnFunding was made available to the Power Authority in July of 1980 to conductreconnaissance studies of energy requirements and alternatives in 29 selectedWestern Alaskan villages. Robert W. Retherford Associates was the engineeringfirm selected to conduct the reconnaissance studies for the villages ofBuckland, Chuathbaluk, Crooked Creek, Hughes, Koyukuk, Nikolai, Red Devil,Russian Mission, Sheldon Point, Sleetmute, Stony River, Takotna, and Telida.STUDY DESCRIPTION:The purpose of the study was to identify and assess the present and futurepower needs of each community and to assess the power project alternativesavailable to that community. It will serve as the basis for recommendingmare detailed data collection activities, resource assessments or detailedfeasibility studies of one or more specific power project alternatives. Thereport includes the following items:1. An assessment of existing demographic and economic conditions, powerfacilities, heating facilities, and preparation of an energy balancethat characterizes total energy use in terms of energy forms enteringthe area, end uses and waste heat.2. A 20 year energy requirements forecast which addresses economicactivity, planned capital projects and electrical and heating end uses.The forecast includes electrical energy, heating energy and peak loads.3. A resource and technology assessment. This includes an energy resourceassessment for those resources available to each individual village, abrief description of the full range of alternative electrical energytechnologies, and a determination of which technologies are available toeach village.4. Formulation of a number of energy plans for each individual villageincorporating those technologies previously determined to be available.The plans include a base case plan which consists of the continuation ofexisting practices.5. Economic, environmental and technical evaluation of each plan.Page 1

IUI'Q.,6. Recommendation of the preferred energy alternatives for each individualvillage and required subsequent resource assessments and feasibilitystudies.FINDINGS:, 1IW'~wBuck and - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapprox mately 298,100 kwh/yr and 85 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 1,178,000 kwh/yr and 269 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 10,522 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 15,667 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. Existing power generatingfacilities consist of a centralized village owned 140 kw and 75 kw dieselgenerator set. The school maintains a 135 kw and 55 kw standby generatorset. Heating is accomplished by oil-fired stoves and furnaces.Chuathbaluk - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 129,900 kwh/yr and 25 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 798,100 kwh/yr and 182 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 7,344 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 11,510 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Chuathbaluk. The school maintains two 50 kwdiesel electric generators which supply power to the school and certainpublic buildings. Plans are underway to electrify the community by summer,1981. Eighty percent of the heating requirements for residential and smallcommercial consumers are supplied by wood with the remainder being suppliedby fuel oil.Crooked Creek - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demandare approximately 97,800 kwh/yr and 19 kw respectively. These requirementsare expected to increase to 848,700 kwh/yr and 194 kw by the year 2000.Existing heating energy requirements are 7,088 MBTU/yr. This requirement isexpected to increase to 11,339 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Crooked Creek. The school maintainstwo 50 kw diesel electric generators which supply power to the school,satellite earth station and three private consumers. The community hall andclinic are lighted by small gasoline generators as needed. Plans are underwayto electrify the community by summer, 1981. Heating for residential andsmall commercial consumers is primarily by wood with the remainder of thecommunities heating requirements being supplied by fuel oil.Hughes - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 129,200 kwh/yr and 33 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 455,000 kwh/yr and 104 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 5,286 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 6,972 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Hughes. The school maintains one 50 kw andtwo 35 kw diesel electric generators which supply power to the school andvillage. Heating for residential and small commercial consumers is primarilyby wood with the remainder of the communities heating requirements beingsupplied by fuel oil.Page 2

Koyukuk - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 140,100 kwh/yr and and 27 kw respectively. These requirementsare expected to increase to 553,300 kwh/yr and 126 kw by the year 2000.Existing heating energy requirements are 7,311 MBTU/yr. This requirement isexpected to increase to 7,913 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Koyukuk. The school maintains 100 kw, 75kw, and 30kw diesel electric generators which supply power to the school,Public Health Service building and other public faci'lities. Plans are underwayto electrify the community by summer, 1981. Residential and small commercialspace heating are almost entirely with wood. A few public and communitybuildings and the school are heated by fuel oil.JIJUI~IWV'Nikolai - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 192,500 kwh/yr and ,49 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 475,300 kwh/yr and 109 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 6,511 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 7,352 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. Existing power generatingfacilities consist of a centralized village owned 25 kw, 50 kw and 15 kwdiesel generator set. The school does not maintain standby generation atNikolai. Residential and commercial heating are primarily with wood stoves.Public buildings and the school heat primarily with fuel oil.Red Devil - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 86,100 kwh/yr and 16 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 332,700 kwh/yr and 76 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 3,770 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 4,762 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Red Devil. The school maintains its owngenerating. facility and the clinic and store maintain small individualgenerators. There are no plans for a centralized power facility in theimmediate future. Residential and small commercial heating are primarilywith fuel oil, although there is a definite trend toward wood heating.Public buildings and the school rely primarily on fuel oil for heating.Russian Mission - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demandare approximately 251,700 kwh/yr and 64 kw respectively. These requirementsare expected to increase to 957,900 kwh/yr and 219 kw by the year 2000.Existing heating energy requirements are 9,456 MBTU/yr. This requirement isexpected to increase to 12,840 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. The centralizedpower generating facility at Rus'sian r~ission is temporarily out of commissiondue to a diesel generator failing. A new 90 kw diesel generator is scheduledfor installation by summer, 1981. Electrical power to the school and publicbuildings is currently being supplied by the school owned generator. Residentialheat'jng is accomplished by wood and fuel oil. The school and publicbuildings are heated with fuel oil. Waste heat from the school generators isused to heat the school hot water supply.Sheldon Point - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demandare approximately 150,300 kwh/yr and 29 kw respectively. These requirementsare expected to increase to 831,700 kwh/yr and 190 kw by the year 2000.Existing heating energy requirements are 8,111 MBTU/yr. This requirement isexpected to increase to 11,017 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Sheldon Point. School owned dieselPage 3

generators supply electricity to the school and several public buildings.There are no plans for a centralized power facility in the immediate future.A demonstration project to install individual wind generators at severalresidences is currently underway. Residential and small commercial heatingare primarily with fuel oil, supplemented with driftwood. The school andpublic buildings are heated with fuel oil.Sleetmute ~ The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 124,200 kwh/yr and 24 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 548,300 kwh/yr and 125 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 6,767 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 8,309 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Sleetmute. The school operates two 50 kwdiesel electric units which supply power to the school and numerous publicbuildings. A combination retail outlet and flying service located across theriver operates a small generator for its own use. Plans are underway toelectrify the community by summer, 1981. Heating requirements for residentialand small commercial consumers are satisfied primarily with wood which issupplemented with fuel oil. The school and public facilities utilize fueloil for heating.Stony River - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 108,000 kwh/yr and 21 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 361,600 kwh/yr and 83 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 4,201 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 5,565 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Stony River. The school operates two 50 kwdiesel generators which supply electricity to the school and certain publicbuildings., Plans are underway to electrify the community by summer, 1981.Residential and small consumer heating is accomplished almost entirely bywood. The school, community hall and clinic are heated with fuel oil.vi Takotna - The ~xisting electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 118,200 kwh/yr and 22 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 547,800 kwh/yr and 125 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 5,360 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 7,111 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. Existing power generatingfacilities consist of centralized 40 kw and 20 kw air cooled diesel generators.All village electricity consumers are being supplied by this system. Mostresidential and small commercial consumers utilize wood supplemented withfuel 0;1 for space heating. Public buildings and school facilities areprimarily heated with fuel oil.u/Telida - The existing electrical energy requirements and peak demand areapproximately 42,500 kwh/yr and 8 kw respectively. These requirements areexpected to increase to 137,200 kwh/yr and 35 kw by the year 2000. Existingheating energy requirements are 1,891 MBTU/yr. This requirement is expectedto increase to 2,219 MBTU/yr by the year 2000. There are no centralizedpower generating facilities at Telida. The school operates two 12 kw aircooled diesel generators which supply electricity to the school and satelliteearth station. Three individuals in the community have l2-volt batterieswhich are charged by the school generators. School and all residentialheating are accomplished entirely by wood.Page 4

-u­IUWWII riI~iQI~wIUU!IWiU!IUWIJiIJIWI.QIirlI~No significant environmental impacts were found to be associated with thebase case diesel electric plans, waste heat recovery systems, or wind energyconversion systems. However, the coal and wood fired binary cycle systemsand hydroelectric projects could have significant environmental problems.The hydroelectric power generation alternative, although not available toevery village, was preferred by the local residents in each of the thirteenvi 11 ages.RECOM~1ENDATIONS :It is the recommendation of the Power Authority that centralized dieselelectric generation satisfy the electric energy requirements of all thirteenvillages studied. Such generation facilities either exist or are planned forinstallation in the immediate future in each of the villages with the exceptionof Hughes, Red Devil, Sheldon Point and Telida. Centralized electrificationof these villages should be accomplished in the near future. Studies shouldbe conducted to determine the feasibility/final design of water jacket wasteheat recovery in each of the thirteen villages. This would involve thereplacement of the existing centralized air cooled diesel electric systemwith a liquid cooled system a~tna_.""",If the appropriate type and size of wind generator proves itself in theAlaskan environment and becomes commercially available in the future, feasibilitystudies should be conducted to determine if such units would be aviable conservation measure to work in conjunction with diesel generators atBuckland and Russian Mission. The possibility of using small 1.5 kw windenergy conversion systems should be re-examined at Sheldon Point and_T_eljda.when enough technical and economic data are available from the Sheldon Pointwind demonstration project. Wind anemometers should be installed if the windgenerators prove themselves feasible to further assess wind potential. Ademonstration project should be conducted to determine the feasibility ofutilizing wood and coal fired binary cycle electrical generation at an optimallocation in Alaska. The demonstration project should also address co-generationfor district heating. If determined feasible in the Alaskan environment andthe appropriate type and size of unit is commercially available, site specificfeasibility studies of using the coal or wood fired binary cycle alternativeshould be conducted in the villages.The Power Authority also recommends conducting energy audits of all villagebuilding stock and the implementation of cost effective weatherization programsand other conservation measures. Increased use of woodstoves should be encouragedas part of this program. The estimated cost of the various programsare summarized below:Page 6

Vi 11 ageWaste Heat RecoveryFeasibility/FinalDesign StudyEnergy AuditsElectrificationFinal DesignStudyBucklandChuathbalukCrooked CreekHughesKoyukukNikolaiRed DevilRussian MissionSheldon PointSleetmuteStony RiverTakotnaTelida$15,000$15,000$10 ,0006,5008.0004.5006,5005,5003,50010 ,0008,5005,0003,5005,5002,500$100,000$100,000$140,000$ 60,000$ 64,000The estimated cost of a combination coal and wood fired binary cycleelectrical generation demonstration project is $3,000,000.Eric P. YouldExecutive Director'lUr -,wi ~Page 7

!IUIoUoThis report was prepared by:Robert W. Retherford AssociatesDivision of International Engineering CompanyR.W. Retherford, P.E.Frank J. Bettine, E.I.T.James J. Lard, E.I.T.Mark Latour, EconomistIllustrations on the front cover were prepared and sketched by~athryn L. Langman. These illustrations portray several energyresource alternatives investigated for the Thirteen Villagesincluded in this study.APA 20/T2

- .--......-------------------~----,;~ ~.-IIU,DiUIDI~:~I~Ui W'ilI-iw!I:UI, r 1/UIWDA.RLIS .,.Alaska Resources Librarv & InfonnationSelvkesLibrary Building: Suite III3211 Proviucm:e DrneAnchom!!e, AK 99508-4614RECONNAISSANCE STUDYOFENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVESFORBUCKLAND, CHUATHBALUK, CROOKED CREEKHUGHES, KOYUKUK, NIKOLAI, RED DEVIL,RUSSIAN MISSION, SHELDON POINT, SLEETMUTE,STONY RIVER, TAKOTNA AND TELIDAMAY 1981Prepared by:Robert W. Retherford AssociatesDivision of International Engineering Co., Inc.Anchorage, AlaskaFor theAlaska Power Authority333 West Fourth Avenue, Suite 31Anchorage, Alaska 99501Under Contract No. AS44.56.010-ff/0312.5'"/U~j?l{22/9?!APA 20fT1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWe wish to express our thanks to the citizens of the thirteen villagesfor their hospitality and valuable cooperation and support expressedfor this study.Information on coal, oil, gas and peat was provided by C.C. Hawley andAssociates.Information on wood was provided by Reid, Collins, Inc.APA 20/T3

.JrjITABLE OF CONTENTS)I~ Section PageJ 1. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1-1I\LA Summary 1-1I~1.B Evaluation Results 1-81 1.C Recommendations 1-17I~I J 2. INTRODUCTION 2-13: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCE 3.1JI A. Introduction 3-1B. Villages - North of Yukon River 3-2J1. Buckland 3-22. Hughes 3-7IJ13. Koyukuk 3-12I4. Russian Mission 3-17II~5. Sheldon Point 3-23J C. Villages ~ Middle and Upper Kuskokwim 3-28lI~6. Chuathbaluk 3-287. Crooked Creek 3-33V 8. Nikolai 3-38IJi 9. Red Devil 3-4310. Sleetmute 3-48J11. Stony River 3-53I, . V 12. Takotna 3-58I ~ V' 13. Telida 3-63!JD. Summary of Existing Conditions 3-67IIW: iIUAPA 20/T4-i-

TABLE OF CONTENTS(Continued)~~Section Page !I4. ENERGY REQUIREMENT FORECAST 4-1i~A. Introduction 4-1(a) Planned CapitallProjects andEconomic Activity Forecast 4-1 i(b) Population Forecast 4-2 ~(c) End Use Forecast 4-2Electric Power Requirements 4-2 ~Heating Requirements 4-5IB. Vi 11 ages' North of Yukon River 4-7~fI1. Buckland 4-7 ~2. Hughes 4-113. Koyukuk 4-154. Russian Mission 4-195. Sheldon Point 4-23I~I~APA 20/T5C. Villages of Middle and Upper Kuskokwim 4-27 II.l6. Chuathbaluk 4-27f7. Crooked Creek 4-31~8. Nikolai 4-359. Red Devil 4:-3910. Sleetmute 4-43 ~11. Stony River .4-4712. Takotna 4-51 ~13. Telida 4-55- i i-'-.;~.r :i.J

~~ TABLE OF CONTENTS(Continued)SectionI J1IJ1 D. Energy and Peakload Forecast Summary 4-59II J 5. RESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 5-1IJA. Energy Resource AssessmentI Introduction 5-1Diesel fuel 5-11I~ Wood fuel 5-1Coal fuel 5-21I J Waste heat recovery 5-3Hydroelectric potential 5-4,jWind Potential· 5-5i Conservation & solar heating 5-5J B. Survey of Technologies 5-20II J l. Direct fired coal 5-212. Direct fired wood 5-221 3. Geothermal 5-23II.IIl 4. Diesel 5-245. Gas turbine 5-256. Low-Btu gasification 5-26Iji J 7. Wind energy conservation 5-278. Diesel waste heat recovery 5-29I 9. Geothermal heating 5-30I iJIJ10. Binary cycle 5-3111. Single wire ground returntransmission 5-3212. Hydroelectric generation 5-33I--,13. Electric heating 5-3414. Passive solar heating 5-35I~III~ APA 20/T61 iI ~-iii-Page

TABLE OF CONTENTS(Continued)IaJSection Page '-.J15. Conservation 5-3616. Other 5-37I~C. Appropriate Energy Technologies 5-386. ENERGY PLANS 6-1 LA. Introduction 6-1I.JB. Villages North of Yukon River 6-3!1. Buckl and 6-3 I..J2. Hughes 6-5i3. Koyukuk 6-7 !I.J4. Russian Mission 6-95. Sheldon Point 6-11~C. Villages of Middle and Upper Kuskokwim 6-13I I!I.l6. Chuathbaluk 6-13i7. Crooked Creek 6-15 '1./V-8. Nikolai 6-169. Red Devil 6-1710. Sleetmute 6-18~J./11. Stony Ri ver , 6-19 rI12. Takotna 6-20 ~13. Telida 6-22IIII..lI.u-iv-(~APA 20/T7rI~r~

,iIAiTABLE OF CONTENTS(Continued)Section7.PageENERGY PLAN EVALUATION 7-1A. Economic Evaluation 7-11- Methodology 7-12. Parameter 7-1B. Economic Evaluation Results 7-61- Introduction 7-62. Results 7-6C. Environmental Evaluation 7-101- Introduction 7-102. General Evaluation 7-113. Evaluation Matrix 7-148.RECOMMENDATIONS 8-1,jI\WII J" 1WAPA 20/T8A.B.IntroductionRecommended Plans8-18-11. Diesel Generation Supplemented withWaste Heat Recovery 8-12. Diesel plus Binary Cycle GenerationSupplemented with Waste Heat 8-1 .Recovery3. Diesel Plus Waste Heat RecoverySupplemented with Wind 8-2Generation-v-

~LTABLE OF CONTENTS(Continued)I.JAPPENDICES~IA. COMMUNITY MEETINGSB. DATA ON EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEC. ENERGY FORECASTING PROCEDURES AND CALCULATIONSD. TECHNOLOGY PROFILESE. ENERGY PLAN COSTS AND NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSF. DESCRIPTION OF RECOMMENDED PLANG. WOOD FUEL RESOURCE ASSESSMENTH. COAL, PEAT AND PETROLEUM RESOURCE ASSESSMENTI. REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTSA-IB-1C-l0-1E-lF-lG-lH-lI-I~~~k ,i~Li~rI~I~II.iAPA 20/T9-vi-i-.J! i.Jr ..-.J

~1I~)1.LISTS OF FIGURES AND GRAPHSSUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS1. 1 A 1 as ka Map1-23.EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCE,w-JI3.1 Buckland Energy Balance Graph3.2 Hughes Energy Balance Graph3.3 Koyukuk Energy Balance Graph3.4 Russian Mission Energy Balance Graph3.5 Sheldon Point Energy Balance Graph3.6 Chuathbaluk Energy Balance Graph3.7 Crooked Creek Energy Balance Graph3.8 Nikolai Energy Balance Graph3.9 Red Devil Energy Balance Graph3.10 Sleetmute Energy Balance Gra~h3.11 Stony River Energy Balance Graph3.12 Takotna Energy Balance Graph3.13 Telida Energy Balance Graph3-53-103-153-213-263-313-363-413-463-513-,563-613-65~I.I~4.ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST\\\JIII,Ji! JI JJ(WI4.1 Rural Western Alaska VillagesSeasonal Electrical Energy Use-vi i-APA 20/T104-3

LIST OF TABLES1. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS1.1 Summary of Existing Village Conditions1.2 Appropriate Energy Technologies1.3 20-Year Accumulated Present Worth PlanCosts and Benefits ($1,000)1.4 50-Year Accumulated Present Worth Plan1-41-71-9Cost and Ben~fits ($1,000) 1-111.5 Environmental & Technical Evaluation Matrix 1-131.6 Environmental & Technical Evaluation Matrix 1-141.7 Environmental & Technical Evaluation Matrix 1-151.8 Environmental & Technical Evaluation Matrix 1-16I......k\3. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCE3.1 Energy Balance - 1979, Buckland3.2 Energy Balance - 1979, Hughes3.3 Energy Balance - 1979, Koyukuk3.4 Energy Balance - 1979, Russian Mission3.5 Energy Balance - 1979, Sheldon Point3.6 Energy Balance - 1979, Chuathbaluk3.7 Energy Balance 1979, Crooked Creek3.8 Energy Balance - 1979, Nikolai3.9 Energy Balance - 1979, Red Devil3-10 Energy Balance - 1979, Sleetmute3-11 Energy Balance - 1979, Stony River3-12 Energy Balance - 1979, Takotna3-13 Energy Balance - 1979, Telida3-14 Summary of Existing Conditions 1979/803-63-113-163-223-273-323-373-423-473-523-573-623-663-68LI~I~APA 20/T11viiir ' I i~

I "LIST OF TABLES(Continued)4.ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTJ1IJ IIJ I J I,JI'~l.~IJIUAPA 20/T124.1 Population Forecast - Buckland 4-74.1a Buckland Elect~ic Power Requirements 4-84.1b Buckland Heating Requirements, ResidentialConsumers 4-94.1c Buckland Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers4-104.2 Population Forecast - Hughes4-114.2a Hughes Electric Power Requirements 4-124.2b Hughes Heating Requirements, ResidentialConsumers 4-134.2c Hughes H~ating Requirements, OtherConsumers 4-144.34.3a~opulation Forecast - KoyukukKoyukuk Electric Power Requirements4-154-164.3b4.3c4.44.4a4.4bKoyukuk Heating Requirements, ResidentialConsumers 4-17Koyukuk Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers 4-18Population Forecast - Russian Mission 4-19Russian Mission Electric Power Requirements 4-20Russian Mission Heating Requirements,Residential Consumers 4-214.4c Russian Mission Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers 4-224.5 Population Forecast - Sheldon Point 4-234.Sa Sheldon Point Electric Power Requirements 4-244.5b Sheldon Point Heating Requirements,Residential Consumers 4-254.5c Sheldon Point Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers 4-26-ix-I

LIST OF TABLES(Continued)......4.6 Population Forecast - Chuathbaluk4.Ga4.GbChuathbaluk Electric Power RequirementsChuathbaluk Heating Requirements,Residential Consumers4.6c Chuathbaluk Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers4.7 Population Forecast - Crooked Creek4.7a Crooked Creek Electric Power Requirements4.7b "Crooked Creek Heating Requirements,Residential Consumers4.7c Crooked Creek Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers4.8 Population Forecast - Nikolai4.8a Nikolai Electric Pow.er Requirements4.8b Nikolai Heating Requirements," ResidentialConsumers4.8c Nikolai Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers4.9 Population Forecast - Red Devil4.9a Red Devil Electric Power Requirements4.9b Red Devil Heating Requirements, ResidentialConsumers4.9c Red Devil Heating Requirements, OtherConsumersPage4-274-284-294-304-314-324-334-344-354-364-374-384-394-404-414-42~jI.JiiItJ,I.J~iI~ri~~I~i~rIIai"~~.APA 20/T13-x-[~r(~r "~

JLIST OF TABLES(Continued)4.104.10a4.10bPopulation Forecast - Sleetmute 4-43Sleetmute Electric Power Requirements 4-44Sleetmute Heating Requirements, ResidentialConsumers 4-454.10c Sleetmute Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers4.11 Population Forecast - Stony River4.11a Stony River Electric Power Requirements4.11b Stony River Heating Requirements,Residential Consumers4-464-474-484-494.11c Stony River Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers 4-504.12 Populatiqn Forecast - Takotna 4-514.12.a Takotna El ectri c Power Requi rements 4-524.12b Takotna Heating Requirements, ResidentialConsumers 4-534.12c Takotna Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers 4-54. 1iI~4.13 Population Forecast - Telida 4-554.13a Telida Electric Power Requirements 4-564.13b Telida Heating Requirements, ResidentialConsumers 4-574.13c Telida Heating Requirements, OtherConsumers 4-58,I~IJIUAPA 20/T14-xi-

LIST OF TABLES(Continued)5.4.14 Annual Electrical Peak Load and EnergyRequirements4.15 Annual Heating Energy Requirements4.16 Annual Total Energy Requirements4.17 Capturable Waste Heat from AnnualElectrical GenerationRESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT4-604-614-624-63iI.JL5.1 Energy Resource Assessment, Buckland 5-75.2 Energy Resource Assessment, Hughes 5-85.3 Energy Resource Assessment, Koyukuk 5-95.4 Energy Resource Assessment, Russian Mission 5-105.5 Energy Resource Assessment, Sheldon Point5.6 Energy Resource Assessment, Chuathbaluk5.7 Energy Resource Assessm~nt, Crooked Creek5.8 Energy Resource Assessment, Nikolai5.9 Energy Resource Ass'essment, Red Devil5.10 Energy'Resource Assessment, Sleetmute5.11 Energy Resource Assessment, Stony River5.12 Energy Resource Assessment, Takotna5.13 Energy Resource Assessment, Telida5-115-125-105-145-155-165-175-185-19LLI~5.C.l Appropriate Energy Technologies5-407. ENERGY PLAN EVALUATION7.1, 20-Year Accumulated Present Worth ofPlan Costs and Benefits ($1,000)7.2 50-Year Accumulated Present Worth ofPlan Cost and Benefits ($1,000)7-87:"9APA 20/T15-xii-J~

Ji-\;...tIlIIJIJ• iJrIJI J1I JI JIIIiJ,1IjJ,,J!JrJJ)II!i.JIJIIJIAPA 20/T16U< 'TABLE OF CONTENTS(Continued)Page7.3 Evaluation Matrix 7-157.4 Evaluation Matrix 7-167.5 Evaluation Matrix 7-177.6 Evaluation Matrix 7-18-x;;;-

SECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONSA. SUMMARYThis study has been conducted to determine the energy resource alternativesfor thirteen western Alaskan villages (See Figure 1.1). The study consistsof establishing the following:WI , 'lI~fl~I, 1WI UJ\ 1.~I. 11.1o Energy Balance for 1979o Existing Power and Heating Facilities - 1980o Electric Power Requirements to the year 2000o Space heating requirement to the year 2000o Potential Energy and Electric Power Resourceso Evaluation of the Electric Power Resourceso Recommendations for the development or future studiesfor the 13 Western Alaskan villages of Buckland, Chuathbaluk, CrookedCreek, Hughes, Koyukuk, Nikolai, Red Devil, Russian Mission, SheldonPoint, Sleetmute, Stony River, Takotna and Telida.As diesel fuels are presently used to satisfy a major percentage of energydemands in the villages, emphasis in this study has been placed on possibleresources that can replace or at least supplement .the use of increasinglycostly fuel oil. Energy resources examined for the villages include:1) Diesel fuel oil2) Wood3) Coal4) Hydroelectric5) Wind6) Conservation and Passive Solar Heating7) Waste Heat Capture8) Oil and Gas development9) Geothermal10) Tidal Power11) Transmission Interties, IWAPA20/P 1-1

tJ'\:\c~c~OCE:~l\rINIIIII8rOoh~ / Lat, •'5r 0 Minchum,;,a"'~M~13 •12 8 ,fi~HoY.'G'ocl.,.\ ,\(T234'n 5..7y~~O~ . %:"P,~._ "'I>1>06A1oako Ito noe,SlonoDi,'rlclI\Oro_Hili11"0"rI." 4t'0,89I1011\1213\\BUCKLANDHUGHESKOYUKUKRUSSIAN MISSIONSHELDON POINTCHUATHBALUKCROOKED CREEKNIKOLAIRED DEVILSLEETMUTESTONY RIVERTAKOTNATHIDAGuH of A/adaPACIFICOCEANFIGURE 1.1ALASKA MAP13 WESTERN VILLAGESa

SECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS,JIIJI"WIJIIJ. IWJ, I'Wu~IIJ, I, I'1-1ITo obtain a comprehensive understanding of future energy requirementsfor each village, a control year - 1979 - was established from whichall projections have been made. Information related to village history,demographic and ecomomic conditions, plus information regarding villagegovernment, transportation, power and heating facilities, fuel requirements,etc., was collected for each village to provide the necessarybackground data to support these projections. Table 1.1 is a tabularizedsummary of selected data on existing conditions found in each of the studiedvillagesInvestigations of resources indicate that certain of the alternativeenergy options under consideration in this study are in an experimental/deve 1 opmenta 1 stage, and therefore a somewhat ge'nera 1 approach to futuredevelopment has been taken. The methodology utilized to select appropriatetechnologies for further investigation included the following majoractivities:APA20/P••Power and energy requirements were identified.An inventory of technologies for electrical energy generationwas made (Appendix D), identifying and evaluating them onarr order of magnitude ~cale, taking into account technical,economic, and environmental aspects.• From the energy ~eso,urcesidentified (Section 5), several wereselected for more detailed analysis in comparison to the basecase of diesel generation. Available technology and preliminarycost estimates established for these alternates had indicatedthat development could be economically feasible:•A more detailed analysis of these selected alternatives wasperformed including economic evaluation through the year 2000 'and discussion of environmental, land use, and safety aspects.1-3

APA 2889Tab Ie 1.1SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS - 1979/80Vi llageOeomgraphicPopulation ResidenciesEconomicType of EmploymentElectricHeating(Primary Fuel)Energy Consumption inBtu x 10 6 for (1979)ABCDEFVill ageSchoolBucklandlIughes16710241'17x X X X X XX X X X140'kW, 75 kW P 135 kW, 55 kW50 kW, 2-35 kW Po 0 0 0w woo18,2238,510KoyukukIl528X X X X X X2100 kW, 75 kW, 30 kWw woo11,666.Russian l1ission16740X X X X X X90 kW 1125 kW, 2-75 kWw/o w/o 0 016,361Sheldon Point14734X X X X X X120 kWw/o w/o 0 013,146Chuathbaluk11927X X X XX X22-50 Kww woo11,890Crooked Creek12431X X X X X X22-50 Kww woo12,756Nikolai9622X X X X X X75kW, SOkW. 15kWpw w 0 w/o11 ,169Red Devil5312X X X X X X50 kW, 75 kWo 0 0 07,543Sleetmute10924X X XX X22-50 kWw woo13,461Stony River67·12X X XX X22-50 kWw woo6,905Takotna8020X X X X X X40 kW, 20 kW Pw w0 w/o9,329Telida347X XX2-12 kWw w3,442INot inst.alledA - Subsistence2 Eleclrificat.ion scheduled for summer 1981 B - Schoolo = oi 1C - Governmentw wood D - Cityp - primary generation facility for vi llage E PrivateF - Assistance programsR - ResidentialQ - Small CommercialP - Public BuildingsS - School

JSECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS(Note: In villages with potential hydroelectric developments(i.e., Buckland, Hughes, Koyukuk, Chuathbaluk and Takotna),because of the 50~year economic life of the hydroelectricalternative, all analysis for these villages have been extendedto the end of the economic life of the hydroelectric project.)The energy alternatives which were selected for detailed analysis are aslisted below. These alternatives include proven technological forms,and less conventional forms presently under development (such as binarycycle generation l and wind generation)., ,. i~J( I,UIIIIrUw')'~I; 1WIUList of Alternatives Selected for Evaluation1) Diesel generation2) Waste Heat Recovery3) Binary Cycle generation using wood and/or coal fuel4) Hydroelectric generation5) Wi nd ge"nerat ion6) Passive solar heating7) Energy conservationFrom the list of alternatives selected for detailed evaluation, a combinationof alternatives or energy plans was formulated to meet the energyforcast requirements of each village. Each plan is formulated to meet theforecasted electrical energy requirements of the village plus additionalrelated requirements, such as space heating, where appropriate. Thecomponents of the various energy plan(s) are described briefly below:• A base case plan using diesel generation is formulated foreach village. This plan is used as the "control case ll todetermine the advantage or disadvantage of other alternativesas compared to diesel generation. Future village generationadditions assume that local schools which have sufficientinstalled generation capacity, will provide their own back-upcapability.1See Appendix 0, Section 3.6 for explanation of binary cycle generation.uAPA20/P 1-5

SECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONSr \~( "! I~• Binary cycle generation is presented for each village whensufficient coal and/or wood 'resources are available. Thisoption assumes construction of binary cycle generation facilitiesin the late 1980 l s as replacement for diesel generation. Invillages where both wood and coal are available, it has been concludedthat wood-fired generation would prove more advantageousbecause 1) wood is a relatively clean burning fuel as comparedto coal, and 2) wood is more suitable for small power plants thanis coal. Therefore, only binary cycle generators using the woodfired option has been i~vestigated for these vi11ages.. r :U( \I~• A waste heat capture analysis is included with all o~tions thatuse fossil fue1s for electrical generation (i.e., diesel generation ~employing engine jacket water cooling and binary cycle generation).• Hydroelectric and wind generators are investigated in the villageswhere these resources are available. Any additional benefits fromthese technologies, such as the use'of excess hydroelectric energyto provide inexpensive electric space heat, is also included.Table 1.2 lists those energy options which have been determined appropriatefor each village.I~Passive solar heating and energy conservation measures are availablein varying degrees in all villages. It is assumed that thesetwo alternatives will be implemented in all villages. These twooption~ are, therefore, not specifically listed in Table 1.2.APA20/P 1-6

I,wI!'JIWIJTable 1.2Appropriate Energy TechnologiesSECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONSIWIJI, \'WI~I{ ,( \~BinaryDiesel Waste Heat Cycle Hydro",: WindVi 11 age Generation Recovery Wood/Coal Electric GenerationBuckland X X X X XHughes X X X X UnknownKoyukuk X X X X X UnknownRussion Mission X X X X XSheldon Point X X X X XChuathbaluk X X X X XCrooked Creek X X X XNikolai X X X XRed Devil ,x X X XSleetmute X X X XStony River X X X XTakotna X Xl X X XTelida X Xl X X, 1,U!UI, 1~XImplies appropriate technology1Waste heat recovery available when liquid cooled diesel enginesare installed.r IWAPA20/P 1-7

B. EVALUATION RESULTSr '~SECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ( 1~[ \1. EconomicTable 1.3 is a summary of the 20 year economic evaluations (Appendix E)performed for those energy plans selected for detailed study. Table 1.4is a summary of the 50 year economic evaluation of the energy plans isthose five villages with potential hydroelec.tric development. These Tableslist the accumulated present worth of plan costs and the accumulated presentworth of the net benefits derived from non-electrical outputs, where:1) Plan costs r~present the cost for providing electricalgeneration, and2) Net benefits represent the savings derived from wasteheat capture or surplus hydroelectric energy used forelectric heating.i I~a. Twenty Year Evaluation Results:Results of the 20-year economic evaluation indicate, that of the energyplans studied, diesel generation with waste heat recovery provides themost economical method of providing electric generation in ten of thirteenvillages (Buckland, Hughes, and Russian Mission being the exceptions).The diesel generation with waste heat recovery and supplemented withwind generation energy plan proved to be the most economical method ofproviding-electrical energy in the villages of Buckland and RussianMission. This energy plan averaged approximately 5 percent less expensivethan diesel generation and waste heat recovery without supplemental windgeneration for these two villages. The small variation in cost betweenthese two plans represents an insignificant diff~rence in a reconnaissancelevel study, where costs cannot be precisely determined, and should not,however, be construed to indicate a definite cost advantage of one planover another.r ~. I-r'~f:.. ~APA 22-A/U 1-8[ \~

APA 22-A/W1LI-'Table 1.3 20-Year - Accumulated Present Worth of Plan Costs and Benefits ($1,000)DieselDiesel&&Diesel Binary Cycle Diesel WECS& & & &Village Waste Heat Waste Heat H,!(droelectric Waste Heat'Cost-Benefit Cost-Benefit Cost-Benefit Cost-BenefitBuckland 3817-450.0 4664-432.3 7253-149.4 3606-430.6Hughes 2238-250.1 2157-220.4 4284-117.2 N/AKoyukuk 1886-187.1 2357-136.2 4300-53.2 N/ARussian Mission 3080-380.9 3224-330.0 N/A 2977-336.0Sheldon Point 2759-307.6 2892~274.0 N/A 3817-234.3IChuathbaluk 2148-233.9. 2350-194.3 4572/99.7 N/A\.0Crooked Creek 2339-260.2 2453-226.3 N/A N/ANikolai 1841-210.0 2250-167.8 N/A N/ARed Devil 1314-108.7 1784-75.6 N/A N/ASleetmute 1695-162.9 2009-140:1 N/A N/AStony River 1282-122.9 1717-88.7 N/A N/ATakotna 2064-202.8 2250-186.1 9805-149.4 N/ATelida 964-73.9 1444-56.9 N/A 1111-50.8

SECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONSThe diesel generation plus binary generation with waste heat energyplan alternatives averages approximately 15 percent greater costs thanthe diesel generation plus waste heat recovery energy plan' in 12 of the13 villages studied. This energy plan did, however, prove to be the mosteconomical plan for supplying electrical energy in the village of Hughes.Hydroelectric generation is found to be the most expensive method of providingelectrical energy in all the five villages where it is potentially available.Passive solar and energy conservation have not been economically evaluatedin detail and they are, therefore, not listed in Table 1.3. Numerous paststudied have shown the value of conservation and passive solar heating. Anapproximate fifteen percent reduction in fossil fuel requirements due tothe implementation passive solar heating and energy conservation measures hasbeen built into the Village Heating Requirement'Forecast Tables listed inSection 4. It is assumed that these two methods of reducing energy usage willbe implemented in all villages.b. Fifty Year Evaluation Results:The results of the 50-year economic evaluation performed for the villagesof Buckland, Hughes, Koyukuk, Chuathbaluk and Takotna confirms hydroelectricgeneration as the most expensive method of providing electrical energyfor these five communities. The high cost of developing these potentialhydroelectric sites make the use of hydroelectric generation economicallyunrealistic.The results of the 50-year evaluation has reaffirmed the slight costadvantage of diesel plus waste heat recovery, supplemented with windgeneration over diesel plus waste heat for providing electrical energyin the village of Buckland. This evaluation has also reaffirmed thecost advantage of binary cycle generation versus diesel generationfor Hughes. The extended evaluation has, however, altered the findingsof the 20-year evaluation for Takotna and Chuathbaluk. The extendedevaluation indicates the diesel generation plus binary cycle generationwith ~aste heat energy plan will provide the most economical method ofsupplying electrical energy for these two villages.APA 22-A/U 1-10I :1.1.,'I .r :~r \IIJII.J:- 1I .1.1r \[ ,~I~r :1.1L

APA 22-A/W2Table 1.4 SO-Year - Accumula ted Present Worth of Plan Costs and Benefits ($1,000)DieselDiesel&&Diesel Binary Cycle Diesel WECS& & & &Waste Heat Waste Heat Hydroelectric Waste HeatCos t-Benefi t Cost-Benefit Cos t - Benefi t Cost-Benefitt-'It-'t-'Buckland 10509-1679.7 11538-1636.7 17171-818.6 9779-1543.2Hughes 5849-892.7 4641-825.1 10147-506.4 N/AKoyukuk 4821-696.9 5389-569.9 9241-46.0 N/AChuathbaluk 5977-911.6 5455-822.5 10854-539.4 N/ATakotna 5169-737.9 4883-685.0 20556-168,7 N/A(1) Extended evaluation for those villages with potential hydroelectric development.

.WLSECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENBATIONS2. Environmental and TechnicalThe results of the environmental and technical evaluations for thevarious energy plans investigated are listed in Tables 1.5, 1.6, 1.7,and 1.B. The overall environmental and technical ranking of thealternative energy plans as determined from this evaluation, is listedbelow .I ,-( 1W( \~. 1) Diesel electric plus waste heat2) Diesel p'lus hydroelectric3) Diesel electric plus waste heat with supplementalwind generation4) Diesel plus binary cycle generation with waste heatII'.'~I'I~rAPA 22-A/U 1-12

~: £'i t:=J ~ L:'~ L-: L. £___ C' L" L-J £-" £:._~ ~ ~. ~ t:.::-.-2 L-': ~APA 2866EVALUATION MATRIXApplicable. VillagesKoyukuk, Sheldon Point, Chuathbaluk,Crooked Creek, Nikolai, Red Devil,Sleetmute, Stony River, TakotnaTable 1.5Factor(A) Economic (Present Worth)(6) Environmental(1) Community Preference(2) Intrastructure(3) Timi ng(4) Air Quality(5) Water Quality(6) Fish and Wildlife(7) Land,Use(8) Terrestrial ImpactsTOTALDieselElectric+ Waste HeatB931422225Diesel + Diesel + Diesel + Waste HeatLocal Hydro Binary Generation Supplementalw/wo Electric Coal and/or Wood WindHeat With Waste Heat GenerationF C 01 4 54 5 65 7 31 5 31 4 25 4 16 4 36 4 329 37 26Environmental Ranking13 4 2(C) Technical(1) Safety(2) Re 1 i abi 1 ity(3) Availabil ityTOTAL22151 2 31 2 55 8 37 12 11TECHNICAL RANKINGOVERALL RANKING1B-12 4 3F-2 C-4 0-3

APA 28B7Applicable VillagesBuckland, Russian MissionTable 1. 6FactorDieselElectric+ Waste HeatEVALUATION MATRIXDiesel + Diesel + Diesel + Waste HeatLocal Hydro Binary Generation Supplementalw/wo Electric Coal and/or Wood WindHeat With Waste Heat Generation.....I.....(A) Economic (Present Worth)(B) Environmental(1) Community Preference 9(2) Infrastructure 3(3) Timing 1(4) Air Quality 4(5) Water Quality 2(6) Fish and Wildlife 2"'" (7) Land Use 2(8) Terrestrial Impacts 2TOTA .... 25 -Environmental Ranking 1CF 01 4 54 5 65 7 31 5 31 4 25 4 16 4 36 329 37 263 3 2(C) Technical(1) Safety 2(2) Reliability 2(3) Availability 1TOTAL 51 2 31 2 55 8 37 12 11TECHNICAL RANKING 1OVERALL RANKING C-12 4 2F-2 0-3 B-2r::=-:1: ___ -r-' r::::-: ~ £----: 1---.::--; .:-- £--- .::-- £-~~ L----: r--:J£----r:~r=:-

L ~ a=..J -=-~ ~ ~~ L- £=~_ f'_=" L- . C ~ CJ l_.~ £~~ -=-: £:...J LJ ~ ~ ~APA 28B8EVALUATION MATRIXApplicable VillageHughesTable 1. 7FactorDieselElectric+ Waste HeatDiesel + Diesel +Local Hydro Binary Generationw/wo Electric Coal and/or WoodHeatWith Waste HeatDiesel + Waste HeatSupp 1 ementa 1WindGenerationI--'II--'\J1(A) Economic (Present Worth)(B) Environmental(1) Community Preference(2) Intrastructure(3) Timi ng(4) Air Quality(5) Water Quality(6) Fish and Wildlife(7) Land Use(8) Terrestrial ImpactsTOTALC93142222-25F1 44 55 71 51 45 46 46 429 37BN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AEnvironmental Ranking12 3(C) Technical(1) Safety(2) Re 1 i abil ity(3) AvailabilityTOTAL22151 21 25 87 12N/AN/AN/ATECHNICAl'RANKINGOVERALL RANKING1C-12 3F-2 B-3N/AN/A

APA 28B9Applicable VillageTelidaEVALUATION MATRIXTable 1. 8FactorDieselElectric+ Waste HeatDiesel +Local Hydrow/wo ElectricHeatDiesel +Binary GenerationCoal and/or WoodWith Waste-HeatDiesel + Waste HeatSupplementalWindGeneration(A) Economic (Present Worth)(B) EnvironmentalBFDC(1) Community Preference(2) Intrastructure(3) Timing(4) Air Quality(5) Water Quality(6) Fish and Wildlife(7) Land Use(8) Terrestrial ImpactsTOTAL9314222225N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/A45754444375633213326Environmental Ranking142(C) Technical(1) Safety(2) Rel iabil ity(3) AvailabilityTOTAL225N/AN/A. N/A2281235311TECHNICAL RANKINGOVERALL RANKING1B-1N/AN/A3C-3

SECTION 1SUMMARY ANDRECOMMENDATIONSC. RECOMMENDATIONSAnalysis of both the ~O-year and 50-year economic, technical and environmentalevaluations indicate the three most promising energy plan alternativesfor the 13 villages, in order of preference, to be:1) Continued use of diesel generation supplemented with wasteheat recovery,2) diesel plus binary cycle generation supplemented with wasteheat recovery,3) diesel plus waste heat recovery supplemented with windgeneration.IIIIJ1UUUUII~IIJrU11. RECOMMENDATION PLAN - Diesel Generation Supplemented with Waste HeatRecov~ry - The 20-year economic evaluation indicates that diesel generationwith waste heat recovery will produce the most economical electric energyand return the largest non-electrical benefits of all the energy plansstudied in ten of the 13 villages.Furthermore, results of the 50-yeareconomic evaluation indicates this energy plan to be the most economicalof the various energy plans examined in two of the five villages withpotential hydroelectric developments.This energy plan also results inthe least significant environmental impact of all the plans addressed.It is recommended, therefore, that in all villages in which dieselelectric installations are placed (present or future), that studies beconducted to determine the feasibility of utilizing waste heat in eachspecific location.the following items for each case:APA 22-A/XSuch studies should include a definitive review ofa) availability of waste heatb) transportation of waste heatc) end use of waste heat1-17

SECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS2. FIRST ALTERNATIVE - Diesel Plus Binary Cycle Generation SupplementedWith Waste Heat Re.covery - The first alternative listed above, dieselplus binary cycle generation with waste heat recovery, will provide thelowest cost electrical energy in Hughes (20-year evaluation), and inHughes, Takotna and Chuathbaluk (50-year evaluation). This energy planalternative averages approximately 15 percent greater cost than therecommended plan in the remaining villages. Because the uncertaintiesin the costs associated with this alternative, such as the cost of woodor c~al fuel, equipment cost, etc .• which can not at present be asprecisely determined as for the recommended energy plan, it is concejvablethat this alternative could be cost competitive with the recommendedplan (i.e., diesel generation plus waste heat recovery), in other locations.II~( I~IIW,I~Because binary cycle generation is viewed as one of the few potentiallyviable energy alternatives which is suitable for future application inremote Alaska villages, it is recommended that feasibility of binarycycle generation in Alaska be future investigated in regard to:a) Equipment availabilityb) Technical feasibilityc) Economic aspectsd) Environmental aspectse) ConstraintsVillage size binary cycle equipment is, however, not expected to becomecommercially available until the late 1980 1 s.3. SECOND ALTERNATIVE PLAN - Diesel Plus Waste Heat Recovery SupplementedWith Wind Generation - Alternative #2 diesel plus waste heat recoverysupplemented with wind generation, is cost competitive with the recommendedplan in only two of the 13 villages (Buckland and Russian Mission).Because of the marginal reliability heretofore experienced in Alaskausing wind generation and the lack of a definite cost advantage of usingsupplemental wind generation over the recommended plan, this alternativeI~LI,~r .I :~r~APA 22-A/X1-18(I-.Ir '

1,J)) (l!~I!SECTION 1SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONSis not recommended. However, as existing wind technology is improved andfurther developed, periodic review of wind technology for possible implementationin Alaska villages is advised.4. COST FOR FURTHER STUDIESApproximate costs for determining the feasibility of the two most attractiveenergy resources for the 13 villages are:• Waste heat recovery ~ approximately $2500 per village• Binary cycle generation - approximately $2,000,000 whichwoul~ include the cost of a constructing and operatinga demonstration plant in Alaska.('J( II l.JiI II~IJI J. "l~II UJ.IU5. CONSERVATION MEASURESIt cannot be overemphasized that if the villages wish to stabilize andhopefully reduce the local cost of energy immediate short term conservationmeasures must be implemented. These conservation measures, which includeadded insulation, double glazing or solar film, arct{c entrances, weatherstripping, etc., can reduce current non-transportation fuel use on the orderof 15 percent over the 20-year period of this study.6. PERIODIC REVIEWIn addition, as existing technologies are being improved and furtherdeveloped and new existing technologies are introduced, results ofresource evaluation in the report may become obsolete and inadequate.Periodic review is therefore advised in order to maintain the usefulnessof this study.APA 22-A/X1-19U.S. Department of the Interior

SECTION 2INTRODUCTION

SECTION 2INTRODUCTIONThis study has been conducted under contract number AS44.56.010 for theState of Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development, Divisionof Alaska Power Authority. This study consists of establishing thefollowing:IWJIr ,:UIJ, IW• Energy Balance for 1979• Existing Power and Heating Facilities - 1980• Electric Power Requirements to the year 2000• Space Heating Requirement to the year 2000• Potential Energy and Electric Power Resources• Evaluation of the Electric Power Resources•Recommendations for the development or future studiesfor the 1~ Western Alaskan villages of Buckland, Hughes, Koyukuk, Te1ida,Nikolai, Takotna, Stony River, Sleetmute, Red Devil, Crooked Creek,Chuathbaluk, Russian Mission and Sheldon Point.Diesel fuels are presently used to satisfy the major percentage ofenergy demands on those villages.Emphasis on this study has therforebeen placed on possible resources that can replace or at least supplementthe use of increasingly costly fuel oil.To obtain a comprehensive understanding of future energy requirementsfor each village, a control year -1979- was established from which allprojections have been made.I~lI~, 1I~JII~JI, ~The villages included in this study were divided into two subgroups onthe basis of geography. Grouping the villages aided in determining theenergy requirements for each village, from which projects were accomplished.The villages were divided into the following two subgroups.APA23/a1 2-1I

SECTION 2INTRODUCTIONA.NORTH OF YUKON RIVERr 'l. Buckland2. Hughes3. Koyukuk4. Russian Mission5. Sheldon Pointr .~B.MIDDLE AND UPPER KUSKOKWIM6. Chuathbaluk7. Crooked Creek8. Nikolai9. Red Devil10. Sleetmute11. Stony River12. Takotna13. TelidaIWThe report is based on information available from existing reports,publications, maps and verbal communications with people familiar withthe area and from information obtained from villge residents duringthe public meetings conducted in each village.fWLWhere data was unavailable or conflicting dates were encountered,estimates and/or interpolations based upon existing data and conditionswere applied.r .~APA23/a2 2-2

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCE

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEA. INTRODUCTIONTo establish a base and understanding of energy use in the villages, anenergy balance has been compiled for the year 1979. Input energy formsare diesel, wood, propane, blazo, gasoline, and aviation gasoline. (SeeAppendix B for data on existing conditions and energy balance).Energy used in the village has been listed both by end use category(i.e., heating, transportation, and quantities used for electricalgeneration) and by consumer category to include residential, smallcommercial, public buildings, and large users (school), in subsequenttabl es.IJUw·wI,JIJT~ provide background data, information related to village history,demographic and economic conditions plus information regarding villagegovernment~ transportation, power and heating facilities is includedwhen available for each vill'age.The 13 villages included in this study were divided into two subgroupson the basis of geography. Grouping the villages aided in determiningthe energy requirements for each village, from which projects wereaccomplished. The villages were divided into the following two subgr.oups.a. North of Yukon Riverl. Buckl and2. Hughes3. Koyukuk4. Russian Mission5. Sheldon Pointb. Middle and Upper Kuskokwim6. Chuathbaluk7. Crooked CreekI( IUAPA23/B1 3-1

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE, '8. Nikolai9. Red Devil10. Sleetmute11. Stony River12. Takotna13. Telidar 'WB.NORTH OF YUKON RIVERl.Buckl anda. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory:The community of Buckland is located on thewest bank of the Buckland River about 75 miles southeastof Kotzebue. The settlement has existed at other locationsunder various names in the past, including Elephant Point,Old Buckland and New Site. The land around the townsiteof Buckland has been selected by the village corporationpursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)of 1971.The Buckland Village Corporation has merged withthe NANA Regional Corporation.r \WrWPopulation: The 1970 census showed a population of 104at Buckland. The 1975 population update by the State ofAlaska for revenue sharing purposes showed a populationof 145 and a total of 22 families. Population in 1980was 172 ~ith 41 households (estimated by village council).Population growth rate from 1970 through 1980 has averagedfive percent per year. In 1980, the average number ofmembers per household in the community was 4. 2 pers·ons.Economy:Buckland exists on a subsistence economy.In the fall people hunt caribou, while in the springbeluga whale and seal are taken at Elephant Point.APA23/B2 3-2

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEHerring, salmon, smelt, grayling, white fish, rabbit,ptarmigan, berries and waterfowl and their eggs supplementthe diet.IIrW, 1Permanent non-subsistence employment in the villageconsists of teachers, teacher aide, school cook, storeemployees, health aide, policeman and city office worker.Income is also earn~d from trapping and the sale ofpelts. In addition income from these enterprises issupplemented by public assistance payments.Government: Buckland was incorporated as a second-classci ty in 1966.- It has a mayor-council form of government,with the mayor appointed from the seven council members.The city has an administrator, policeman, magistrate anda volunteer fire department.! 1UTransportation: The community's location on the BucklandRiver allows barge and small boat travel as well as,access by air. Fuel·and other bulk supplies are transportedto Buckland by barge. Passengers, small cargoitems and mail arrive by air. Snowmachines are the primarymeans of inter-village transportation in the winter.Small boat travel is the major means of transportationin summer.There are no roads connecting Buckland with other communitiesin the region.I( 1Wub.ENERGY BALANCE (1979)The heating and ,electrical energy needs of Buckland aresupplied almost in their entirety by diesel fuel oil withonly negligible amounts of wood being used for heatingI )IUAPA23/B33-3

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEpurposes. Village heating requirements account for 57.8percent of the total energy usage, electrical generation26.5 percent and transportation 15.7 percent. Graph 3.1illustrates by consumer category the types the percentages •of energy forms used in the village. Table 3.1 tabularizesthis data in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power: The village operates the primary generatingfacility ~hich supplies power and energy to allelectrical consumers within the community. The villagegeneration facility consists of a modularized trailerunit housing a 140 kW and a 75 kW diesel generator set.This facility was installed in the spring of 1980 as areplacement for the old generation facility which wascompletely destroyed by fire,' The school maintainsstandby generation facilities consisting of a 135-KW anda 55-kW diesel-generator set.Lr~Distrjbution is of overhead triplex construction operatingat a voltage of 208/120 volts.Heating: ResideQtial, small commercial and publicbuildings are heated using individual oil-fired stoves,Residential users average about 1100 gallons of fuel oilper household. All residences use propane for cooking.Heating facility for the school is an oil-fired centralizedforced-air furnace. Propane is used at the schoolfor cooking.I~rI '•Fuel Storage: Diesei. bulk fuel 0;1 storage capacity in thecommunity (village + school) is approximately 96,700 gallons(DEPD, 1979 Energy Survey).APA23/B43-4

GRAPH 3.11979 ENERGY BALANCEBUCKLANDEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%TOTAL ENERGY (100%)LEGEND- RESIDENTIAL- SMALL COMMERCIALL-.----lI- PUBLIC BUILDINGS- LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (57.8%)BLAZO 0%PROPANE- 2.3%WOOD 0%DIESEL - 55.5%TOTAL - 57.8%TRANSPORTATION (15.7%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 15.7%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (26.5%)DIESEL 26.5%o2000 4000 6000800010,000BTU X 10 6 12,00014,00016,000 18,000 20,000

apa2S:a7ENERGY BALANCE - 1979BUCKLANDTable 3. 1CONSUMERTYPENO.DIESELGAL10 6 BtuIf[ ATINGWOODCORDS1Q6Btu---PROPANEPOUNDSl Q6"BTUENERGY FORM CONSUMEDBLAZOGAL10 6 BtuTRANSPORT ATIONGASOLINE AV GALGALlOG BtuGALIDS BtuEL ECTR I CALDIESE LGAL10 6 BtuTOTALlOG Btu% of TotalResidential 4145,1006,22320,00039022 , 5502,86413,0201,79711, 27 461. 9Small COOlmercial 33,3004553,1404338884.9Publ ic Bui ldings 52,7503806,0008281,2086.6Large User (school) 122,1003,0501,2002312,9101,7804,85326 . 6Tota 15073,25010,10821,20041322,5502,86435,0704,83818,223% of Total Btu55 .52.315.726.5100Wa s te Heat10'; Btu% of total Btu2,52713.91030:6£,1481l. 83,62919.88,40746.1Assumed efficiency: heating - 75%transportation - 25%electric generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE2. Hughesa. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: Hughes is located on the Koyukuk River approximately115 miles northeast of Galena. The village wasestablished in 1910 as a river landing "port of supply"for the Indian River gold diggings. Hughes is locatedwithin the boundaries of the Doyon Limited RegionalCorporation.Population: The 1970 census showed the population ofHughes at 85 residents.The 1980 population, as estimatedby members of the village council, is 102 with 17 households.This reflects an average annual population growth rate, overthe past decade, of ,I.7 percent. In i980, the averagenumber of members per household was 6.0 persons.Economy : The village of Hughes exists on a subsistenceeconomy. The main food staples in the village are mooseand salmon with rabbit, ptarmigan, grouse, berries andwaterfowl and their eggs supplementing the diet.Permanent non-subsistence employment in the villageconsists of teachers, teacher aide, school cook, andhealth aide . Income from these enterprises is supplementedby public assistance payments and from trappingand the sale of pelts.Transportation: The community's location on the KoyukukRiver allows access by both air and small boat travel.Passengers, cargo, supplies, fuel and mail arrive by air.APA23/B73-7

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCESnowmachines are used for winter transportation. Smallboats are the primary means of transportation in thesummer. There are no roads connecting Hughes with othercommunities in the region.b. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)Residential and small commercial heating requirements inHughes are supplied almost entirely from wood.Dieselfuel is used for heating public buildings and the school.Electric power and energy is supplied to the village andschool by the school diesel-generator sets.Heating requirements in Hughes accounts for 61.6 percentof the village energy usage with electric generationaccounting for 24.5 percent and transportation 13.9percent.Graph 3.2 illustrates by consumer category, thetypes and percentages of energy forms used in the village.Table 3.2 tabularizes this data in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITYElectric Power: Electric power to the village issupplied by the school owned and operated 50 kW and two35 kW diesel generator sets. The village does notpossess a centralized power plant. Distribution consistsof single phase overhead triplex construction operating ata voltage of 240/120 volts.Heating: Residential and small commercial heating areprimarily with wood stoves with the average residenceusing about nine cords of wood per year. All residencesuse propane for cooking. Heating of public buildings iswith fuel oil in small oil-fired furnaces or stoves. TheAPA23/B83-8

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEschool heating is supplied by a centralized oil-firedfurnace. Cooking at the school is accomplished with afuel oil-fired cook stove.Fuel Storage: Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (village + school) is approximately 30,000 gallons(estimated during site visit).APA23/B93-9

GRAPH 3.21979 ENERGY BALANCEHUGHESEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%LEGEND- RESIDENTIAL- SMALL COMMERCIALL.....--lI- PUBLIC BUILDINGS- LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (61.6%)BLAZO 0%PROPANE- 1.9%WOOD - 30.3%DIESEL - 29.4%------------------- TOTAL - 61.6%TRANSPORTATION (13.9%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 13.9%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (24.5%)DIESEL 24.5%I°I I I1000 2000 3000I4000I5000BTU x 1()6I6000I7000I8000I9000I10,000

apa28:a4Table 3.2ENERGY BALANCE - 1979HUGHESw,CONSUMERENERGY FORM CONSUMEDHEATING TRANSPORTATION ELECTRICALDIESEL WOOD PROPANE BLAZO GASOLINE AV GAL DIESEL TOTALGAL CORDS POUNDS GAL GAL GAL GAL 10 6 BtuTYPE NO . 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 1Ql>lIT"u 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu % of TotalResidential 17 2,600 153 8,200 9,400 2,630 4,677359 2,601 160 1,194 363 54 . 5Small Commercial 1 1,050 145145 1.7Public Buildings 1 1,400 1,200 359193 166 DLarge User (school) 1 14,300 10,300 3,3941973 1,421 39.6'-'...- Tota.l 20 18,300 153 8,200 9,400 15,180 8,5702,525 2,601 160 1,194 2,095% of Total Btu 29.4 30.3 1.9 13.9 24.5 100Waste Heat10 6 Btu 631 650 40 896 l,57l 3,788% of Total Btu 7.4 """"T.6 D.5 10.4 18 . 3 44 . 2Assumed efficiency: Heating 75%Transportation 25%Electric Generation 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE3. Koyukuka. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: Koyukuk is situated approximately 30 mileswest of Galena on the right bank of the Yukon River.Koyukuk was a trading post and Eskimo village listedwith a population of 150 in the 1880 census.Koyukuk islocated within the -Doyon Limited Regional Corporationboundaries.Population: The 1970 population of Koyukuk was 114residents. The 1980 population was estimated at 115 bythe city council. The population of Koyukuk has fluctuatedover the past few years, from a low of 100 in 1975to a high of 124 in 1978 before a declin~ to the 1980population level.The average population growth rate overthe past five years is less than one percent. In 1980,the average number of members per household in thecommunity was 4.1 persons.Economy: Koyukuk exists primarily on a sUbsistence economy.Moose and salmon are the most important food items withrabbit, ptarmigan, grouse, waterfowl and their eggssupplementing the diet.Permanent non-subsistence employment consists ofteachers, teacher aide, school cook, health aide, cityoffice workers, and store employees. Inc9me is alsoearned from trapping and the sale of pelts and furthersupplemented through public assistance payments._ Transportation: The community'5 location on the YukonRiver allows access by air, river barge and small boattravel. Fuel oil and other bulk supplies are transportedto the community by river barge. Passengers,small cargo items, supplies and mail arrive by air.APA23/B123-12

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCESmall boats are the primary means of transportationduring the summer month. Snowmachines are used for wintertransportation.There are no roads connecting Koyukuk with other communitiesin the region.b. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)The residential heating needs in Koyukuk are suppliedfrom wood.Public buildings and the school rely ondiesel fuel oil for heating.Village heating requirementsaccount for 63.7 percent of the total energy usageof the village, followed by electric generation at 19.5percent and transportation with 16.8 percent. Graph 3.3illustrates by consumer category, the types and percentagesof energy forms used in the village. Table 3.2tabularizes this data in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power: No centralized power generation facilitynow exists in Koyukuk. Construction of a village ownedand operated power and distribution facility is, however,expected to begin in the Spring of 1981.Presently the school maintains and operates its owngeneration facilities which supplies electrical power tothe school, the PHS building and other public facilitieswithin the villages. The school generation facilitiesconsist of a 100-kW, a 75-kW and a 30-kW diesel-generatorset.APA23/B133-13

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEHeating: Residential and commercial heating are almostentirely from wood fuel using individual wood stoves.Average usage per residence is approximately nine cordsof wood per year. Heating of the community hall, clinicand PHS building as well as the school is with fuel oil.Fuel Storage: Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (village + school) is approximately 53,000 gallons(estimated during site visit).APA23/B14~-14

GRAPH 3.31979 ENERGY BALANCEKOYUKUKEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%LEGEND- RESIDENTIAL1.....----.1 - SMALL COMMERCIALL----II- PUBLIC BUILDINGS1.....----1 - LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (63.7%)BLAZO - 1.1%PROPANE- 0.2%WOOD - 36.7%DIESEL - 25.7%TOTAL - 63.7%TRANSPORTATION (16.8%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 16.8%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (19.5%)DIESEL 19.5%o2000I4000 6000800010,000 12,000BTU X 10 614,00016,000 18.000 20,000

apa28:a l0Table 3.3ENERGY BALANCE - 1979KOYUKUKCONSUMERDIESELGALTYP[ NO . lO G BtuHFATING1-1000 PROPANECORDSPOUNDSlOG Btu lO ll BtuENERGY FORM CO NSUM EDlRANSPORTAT IONLECT RI CALBLAZO GASOLI NE AV GAL DIE SEl TOTALGAL GAL GA L GAl 10'; Btl!1O f, Btu lOt, Stu 10~ ~ % of TotalResidential 28252.4,2841,000 15 ,400 !!" 368129 l. 9!)5 54.5Sma 11 Comrnerc i a 1 2 1,1001521 ~2DPubl ic Bui ldings 3 2,200304~600 801~97 6.9w,....(J'!Large User (schoo l) 1 18,4602,54 7Tota 1 34 21,7603 ,0031,20023252 1,2004,284 2312,880 ~~1,777 37.31,000 15 ,400 16 480129 1;955 2,274 11 666% of To tal Btu 25.7-- ----Waste heat10 6 8tu 751% of total Btu 6.436.7 0.2l,Oll 69.2 (fl1.1 16 .8 19 . 5 10032 1,466 1,706 5 , 0320:3 12. 6 14.6 43.2Assuemd efficiency: Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE4. Russian Mission.a. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: Russian Mission is located in the Yukon,Kuskokwim Delta on the west bank of the Yukon River,65 miles southeast of St. Mary's.This settlement was established in 1837 as the firstRussian American Company fur trading post on the YukonRiver. It is listed in the 1880 census as "Ikogmute"with 143 inhabitants.Pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of1971, the Russian Mission Village Corporation was entitledto select 92,160 acres of Federal land . Russian Missionlies within the Calista Regional Corporation boundaries.Population:Date:Population:1880 1902 1929 1939 1950 1960 1970143 350 54 34 55 102 146The city administration estimated the population ofRussian Mission at 167 in 1979. The annual populationgrowth rate over the past twenty years has averaged2.5 percent.The 1970 census figures indicate that 94% of the populationis Native. In 1979, the average number of membersper household in the community was 4.3 persons.APA23/B173-17

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEEconomy:Employment opportunities in Russian Mission areconcentrated in commercial fishing and public employmentprograms. As of 1978, 18 gillnet permits had been issuedto residents in Russian Mission. Most residents of thecommunity are directly or indirectly involved in commercialfishing during the fishing season. In 1979, 8 yeararound emp10yment opportuniteis was provided by CETAPrograms.Six other full-time positions were availableat the ANICA Native Store.Income from these enterprises is supplemented by publicassistance payments and subsistence activities. Residentshunt moose, bear, ptarmigan, waterfowl and rabbit. Theyfish for salmon and other species of fish. Berries areharvested in the fall. Income is also earned fromtrapping and the ~ale of pelts.Government: Russian Mission was incorporated as a secondclass

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCESnowmachines are the primary means of inter-villagetransportation in the winter, while small boat travel isthe major means of transportation in summer.There are no roads connecting Russian Mission with othercommunities in the region.b. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)Residential and small commercial heating in RussianMission is a combination of fuel oil and wood fuel.Public bui l dings and the school are heated with fuel oil.Heating requirements represent 57.7 percent of the villageenergy requirements with electrical generation at25.1 percent and transportation at 17.2 percent. Graph 3.4illustrates by consumer category the types and percentagesof energy forms used in the village.Table 3.4 tabularizesth i s data in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power: Central station electrical power wassupplied throughout the village until 1980 whenmechanical failure of the diesel engine disruptedservice. Electrical power for the school is presentlybeing supp l ied by the school generator as is the electricalpower to public buildings. A new 90-kW generatoris currently awaiting installation in the village powerplant and should be operational by summer. Distributionconsists of overhead triplex construction throughout mostof the village. Additional poles have been installed(less conductors) for expansion of the distributionsystem withi n the village.APA23/B193-19

SECTION 3fXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEHeating: Residential heating is a combination of woodand fuel oil in individual wood and oil stoves. Averageconsumption per residence is 246 gallons of fuel oil and6.5 cords of wood per year. The sthool and public buildingsare heated primarily with fuel oil. The school alsoutilizes the waste heat from the school generators toheat the school hot water supply.Fuel Storage: Diesel bu·1 k fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (school + village) is estimated at 34,000 gallons(estimated during site visit).APA23/B203-20

GRAPH 3.41979 ENERGY BALANCERUSSIAN MISSIONEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%TOTAL ENERGY (100%)LEGEND- RESIDENTIAL- SMALL COMMERCIALL-----'I- PUBLIC BUILDINGSL---J -LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (57.7%)BLAZO 0%PROPANE- .7%WOOD - 27.0%DIESEL - 30.0%TOTAL - 57.7%TRANSPORTATION (17.2%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 17.2%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (25.1 %)DIESEL 25.1 %Io2000 4000 6000800010,00012,000BTU X 10 614,00016,000I18,000 20,000

apa 28: a12Tabl e 3.4ENERGY BAL ANCE - 1979RUSS IAN MISSIONCONSUME RrYP [NO.DI SE LGA L10" Bl uHEATINGWOODCORDSwB'i:UPROPANEPOU NDSl~ENERGY FORM CON SUMEDBLAZOGAL10 6 Bt uTRANSPORTATI ONGASOl iNE AV GALGA LGALW> Btu ~ELECTR ICAL--DIE SELGAL1Or.-st:U'TOTAL10" Btu% of T a ta IResidential 409,8 ~01, 3526 04 ,4 205, 0009820 , 0002,5402 ,2002796 , 210 9, 55?8~7 58.4Sma ll Co mmercial 35502141..,..150 6 ~9435 4.0PtJbl ic Bui ldings 42 2003044 ,800 96 666 2 5:" 9wIl arge User (school ) 122 0153,0 381, 2002315 ,460 ?, 1942,133 31. 7NNTo ta I 4835 6054,9142604,4206, 20012120 , 0002,5402, 20Q27929, 204, 087 16 ,361% of Tolal Blu30.027.00 7015.51.725.1 100Waste HeatlO I; Btu 1,229% of total Btu 7.51,1056.830o:z1, 90511. 6209D3,065 7,54 318. 7 46.1Ass umed effec i ency: liealing - 75%Tra nsportal ion - 25%Elec t r i c Ge nerali on - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCE5. Sheldon Pointa. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory:Sheldon Point is located in the Yukon-KuskokwimDelta at the mouth of the Yukon River where KwemelukPass runs i nto the Bering Sea, about 65 miles northwestof St. Mary's.This community is a relatively new Eskimovillage, as no mention of this site is made prior to1950 when the census recorded 44 inhabitants. Pursuantto the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, thevillage corporation is entitled to 92,160 acres.Theregional Native corporation is the Calista Corporation.Population: The population has risen steadily since theoriginal 1950 U.S. census. Census data showed 43 inhabitantsin 1950, 110 in 1960 and 125 in 1970. The 1979Municipal Services Revenue-Sharing Program report showedSheldon Point's population as 147 residents. Populatiorigrowth rate has averaged 4 percent since 1950.According to the 1970 census, approximately 98 percentof the inhabitants were Natives . In 1979, the averagenumber of members per household in the community was4.3 persons.Government: Sheldon Point was incorporated as asecond-class city in 1974. The city is governed by amayor who is selected from the 7-member city council.For non-city programs and services, Sheldon Point'sNative population is represented by a 5-member traditionalcouncil.APA23/B233-23

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCETransportation:The location of Sheldon Point affordseasy access by boat and barge during the summer months .Major barge lines deliver fuel and other bulk cargo tothe city.Because there are no roads connecting SheldonPoint wi th other population centers, other cargo,passengers and mail arrive by air.Snowmachines serve as the primary mode of transportationduring winter.Economy: Commercial fishing is the economic foundationof Sheldon Point. IIpick-up boats II from the Lower Yukonfish-buying companies come to the city to buy fish caughtby the residents. Twenty-two salmon gillnet permitsin Yukon District had been issued to the residents ofSheldon Point.Approximately ten year-round employment opportunities areprovided from various private and public sector jobs:general store, post office, health clinic, airlines andschoo 1 .Income from the above enterprises is supplemented bypublic assistance payments and by sUbsistence activities.Sheldon Point residents hunt beluga whale, seal, moose,waterfowl, rabbit and fish for salmon and other fishspecies.Additional income is obtained from trapping and the saleof pelts.b. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)Residential heating in Sheldon Point is accomplished withthe use of both fuel oil and driftwood. All other facilitiesuse fuel oil. Heating requirements account forAPA23/B24 3-24

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE63.4 percent of the village energy usage. Transportationrequires 18.1 percent and electric generation 18.5 percentof the village needs.Graph 3.5 illustrates by consumercategory the types and percentages of energy forms,used in the village. Table 3.5 tabularizes this datain additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power: No centralized generation facilityexists in Sheldon Point. A demonstration project toinstall individual wind generators at several residencesis currently under way. The electrical requirement ofthe school and several public buildings is supplied bythe school generators. No centalized generation facilityis planned for the immediate future.Heating: Residential and small commercial heating areprimarily with fuel oil, supplemented with driftwood.Heating of public buildings and the school is accomplishedwith fuel oil.Average consumption of fuel oil per residence is 490gallons. Average annual consumption of wood is 4.5cords per residence.Fuel Storage: Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (school + village) is approximately 45,000 gallons(estimated during site visit).APA23 / B253-25

GRAPH 3.51979 EN ERGY BALANCESHELDON POINTEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%LEGEND- RESIDENTIALL--I -SMALL COMMERCIAL1..-.------'1 - PUBLIC BUILDINGSL....---..I -LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (63.4%)BLAZO 1.7%PROPANE­ 1.1 %WOOD 19.8%DIESEL - 40.8%----------- -------------------- TOTAL - 63.4%TRANSPORTATION (18.1 %)GASOLINE + AV GAS 18.1 %ELECTRICAL GENERATION (18.5%)DIESEL 18.5%IoI2000 4000 6000800010,000BTU X 10 6I12,000 14,000 16,000I18,000 20,000

apa28: allTable 3.5ENERGY BALANCE - 1979SHELDON POINTCONSUMERENERGY FORM CONSUMEDHEATING TRANSPORTA TION ELECTRICALDIESEL WOOD PROPANE BLAZO GASOLINE AV GAL DIESEL TOTALGAL CORDS POUNDS GAL GAL GAL GAL 10 6 BtuTYPE NO. 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu % of TotalResidential 34 16,700 153 6,000 1,750 12,700 6,000 7,6182,304 2,601 117 222 1,612 762 57 . 9Small Commercial 3 1, 550 214214 1.6Public Buildings 4 2,200 4,800 967304 663 7.4Large User (school) 1 18 ,460 1,200 12,880 4,347w 2,547 23 1,777 33.1,tv-..JTotal 42 38,910 153 7,200 1,750 12,700 6,000 17,6805,369 2,601 140 222 1,612 762 2,440 13,146% of Total Btu 40 . 8 19 . 8 1.1 1.7 12.3 5. 8 18.5 100Waste Heat10 6 Btu 1,342 650 35 56 1,209 572 1,830 5,694% of Total 10 . 2 4.9 Q.3 0:-4 9.2 n 13.9 43.3Assumed Efficiency: Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEC. VILLAGE - MIDDLE AND UPPER KUSKOKWIM6. Chuathbaluka. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: Chuathbaluk is located 9.5 miles east of Aniakon the north bank of the Kuskokwim River in the Kulbuck­Kuskokwim Mountains.A Native settlement existed in thearea as early as 1883 and has been known as St. Sergie1sMission, Kuskokwim Russian Mission and Little RussianMission.This designation led to confusion between thiscommunity and the community of Russian Mission on theYukon River. As a result, within the past 20 years, theKuskokwim vi 11 age was renamed IIChuathbal ukll.word for IIbig blueberries. 1IThe EskimoPursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of1971, the Chuathbaluk village corporation was entitled to .92,160 acres of land. When the Chuathbaluk villagecorporation merged with 9 other Kuskokwim village corporations,this entitlement passed to The Kuskokwim Corporation(TKC), for consolidated ownership and management.Calista Corporation is the regional corporation.ThePopulation: There are no population data recorded forChuathbaluk before 1970, when the census counted 94 residentsin the village. The 1979 State Revenue-Sharingprogram reported 119 people - a 26 percent increase over1970. Natives comprised 96 percent of Chuathbaluk'~population in 1970. In 1979, the average number ofmembers per household in the community was 4.4 persons.APA23/B283-28

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEEconomy:Chuathbaluk's economy is heavily dependent onsUbsistence activities. Employment is found primarily inseasonal work during the summer through BLM and AVCP.Year-round employment is limited to the clinic, the city,the school district which employs 8 full-time employeesand the trading post.Other cash income in the communitycomes in the form of public assistance and from sale offurs caught during the trapping season. In addition, somewomen in the village sell beadwork, fur garments, etc.they make during the winter months.For the bulk of their livelihood, residents rely onSUbsistence activities. Most residents fish in thesummer months for salmon and other fish species and huntwaterfowl, rabbit, moose and bear. In the fall, familiesharvest several varieties of berries.Government:Chuathbaluk was incorporated as a secondclasscity in 1975. Chuathbaluk has both a mayor andadministrator. The mayor is selected from a 7-membercity council. For non-city programs and services,Chuathbaluk's Native population is represented by a7-member traditional council.Transportation:The Kuskokwim River serves as themajor transportation link to other villages in thearea.During the summer months, access to the communityis limited to barge, boat and float plane. Fuel and otherbulk cargo is delivered to the community by river barge .Most passengers, mail and cargo are relayed from the regionalcenter at Aniak by air, barge or mail boat.Snowmachines are used in the winter as the primary modeof inter-village transportation. No roads connectChuathbaluk with surrounding villages.APA23/8293-29

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEb. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)Approximately BO% of the residential and small commercialheating requirements of the village are supplied by wood.Village heating requirements account for 63.5 percent ofthe total village energy usage, electric generation 17.~percent, and transportation 1B.7 percent.Graph 3.6 illustrates by consumer category the typesand percentages of energy forms used in the village.Table 3.5 tabularizes this data in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power:facility in Chuathbaluk.There is no centralized power generationThe school maintains andoperates its own generation facility which consists oftwo 50-kW units.The school generation facility suppliespower to the school and to certain public buildings.Plans for electrifying Chuathbaluk are in progress, andelectrification of the community is expected to becompleted in the summer of 1981.No distribution facilities presently exist within the village.Construction of an overhead distribution system using triplexconstruction is scheduled for the, summer of 1981.Heating: Eighty percent of the heating requirements forresidential and small commercial consumers are suppliedby wood. Wood heating is supplemented by fuel oil asnecessary. Residential use averages approximately eightcords of wood and 120 gallons of fuel oil per year.Public buildings and the school use fuel oil-firedfurnaces for their heating needs.Fuel Storage: Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity is approximately 26,700 gallons (reference 27).APA23/B303-30

GRAPH 3.61979 ENERGY BALANCECHUATHBALUKEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%LEGEND_ - RESIDENTIAL- SMALL COMMERCIALL-----lI- PUBLIC BUILDINGS~~ - LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (63.5%)BLAZO - 1.7%PROPANE- 0.6%WOODDIESEL--30.9%30.3%TOTAL- 63.5%TRANSPORTATION (18.7%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 18.7%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (17.8%)1"1!!!~~~'"DIESEL 17.8%Io 2000 4000 6000800010,00012,000BTU X 10 614,00016,000 18,000 20,000

apa28:alENERGY BALANCE - 1979CHUATHB.I\LUKlaDle ).6CON SUMERENERGY FORM CONSUMEDHEAl ING TRAN SPORTATIO N ELEC1R ICAI Gr NER ATl ONDI ES L WO OD PROPAN E BLA ZO· GASOLl Nl AV GAL DI ESH TOi7\-L--GAL CORDS POLINDS GAL GAL GAL GAL l Ob Bt.ul Y[' E NO. lO r. Bt u lOG Bt u l Q1fBtU 10" Btu 10 6 !l tu lOG Btu lO"1IT'U % of lo lalResidential 27 3,200 216 2 ,4 00 1,625 17 ,050 500 NA § J22~442 3,672 47 206 2 ,165 54 5) SSma 11 Commercial 3, 700 5]1511 nPubl ic Bui luings 2 1. 400 ~" OO 5?4193 33 1 nv' ,La rge User (school) 1 17 ,800 1,200 12,900 4 2592 , 456 23 1,780 3S.8w.JTota 1 33 26,100 189 3 ,600 1,625 17 ,050 500 ]5, 3003,672 3,672 70 206 2,165 64 2, III11 .890% of Tota I Btu 30.3 30.9 0.6 1.7 18. 2 0.5 17.8 100Waste lIeat10 G Btu 901 918 17 52 1,624 48 .!.., 583 5,143% of Totdl Blu 7.6 7:7 ----o:l" D.4 13.7 D.4 13.3 43.2Assumeu Efficiency: Heating - 25%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE7. Crooked Creeka. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: The village of Crooked Creek is located on thenorth bank of the Kuskokwim River at its confluencewith Crooked Creek, 50 miles northeast of Aniak in theKilbuk-Kuskokwim Mountains. A trading post was establishedin 1914 a short distance upriver from the mouth of thecreek at an area known as the "Upper Vi llage" . Thesettlement of Eskimo and Ingalik Indians at the "lowervi llage" downriyer of the junction of Crooked Creek andthe Kuskokwim River was noted as early as 1850 . Thevi llage remains divided to this day with a communitycenter on each side of Crooked Creek.Pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of1971, Crooked Creek village corporation is entitled \to 92,160 acres of Federal land. When Crooked Creekvillage Corporation merged with 9 other Middle Kuskokwimvillage corporations, these entitlements passed · to TKCfor .consolidated ownership and management. CalistaCorporation is the regional corporation.Population: In 1939 a population of 48 was recorded forCrooked Creek. In 1950 the population was 43. Between1950 and 1960 the population increased by 92 percent to apopulation of 92. Over the next ten years, a decrease inpopulation of 36 percent was experienced, for a total of59 year-round residents in 1970. A 1979 estimate made bythe village. council shows 124 residents . Ac~ording tothe 1970 census, 93 percent of the population wereEskimo or Ingalik Indian. In 1979, the average numberof members per household in the community was 4. 0 persons.APA23/ B333-33

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEEconomy: Year-round employment opportunities inCrookect Creek are limited. Go~ernment programs, theKuspuk School District, which employes 5 full-timeemployees, and a minimum of support services provide theonly permanent positions in the village. Some seasonalemployment is available during the s ummer months . Thelargest seasonal employer is the Alaska Village CouncilPresident (AVCP) Employment and Training Program, whichemploys 7 - 10 village residents during the summer months.Income from these enterprises is supplemented by publicassistance payments and the residents' subsistencea~tivities .Crooked Creek residents hunt beaver, muskrat,game birds, rabbit, moose, caribou and waterfowl. Incomeis also derived from trapping and the sale of pelts.During the summer months residents fish for salmon andother species of fish. In the fall, cranberries, blueberriesand other varieties of berries are harvested.Government: Crooked Creek is not incorporated as aMunicipality under State law. Crooked Creek's Nativepopulation is represented by a 5-member traditionalcouncil.Transportation: The community's location on the KuskokwimRiver allows barge and small boat travel as well asaccess by air. Fuel and bulk supplies are transportedupriver to Crooked Creek by river barge. Passengers,other cargo and mail arrive primarily by air.A dirt road approximately 1. 5 miles long, connects thelower village, upper village and the airport. A suspensionbridge over Crooked Creek provides for onlypedestrians, snowmachine and motorbike access between thetwo parts of the village . No roads connect Crooked Creekwith surrounding communities.APA23/B343-34

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEIn the winter, when the river freezes, villagers relyon snowmachines for transportation.b. ENERGY BALANCEWood is the primary fuel used for residential and smallcommercial heating requirements. Fuel oi l 1S used tosupplement as necessary. Pub l ic buildings and the schooluse fuel oil to satisfy their heating needs. Fifty-sevenand four-tenths percent of the energy used in the villageis for heating, 30.2 percent is used for transporation and12 .4 percent is used for electric generation. Graph 3.7illustrates by consumer category the type and percentagesof energy forms used in the village. Table 3.7 tabularizes this data in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectrlc Power: No centralized power generation facilityexists in Crooked Creek. The sc hool generators (two50-kW un its) provide power to the school, satellite earthstation and three private consumers. The community halland clinic are lighted using a sma l l gaso l ine generatoras necessary. Planning for electrification of CrookedCreek is currently in progress. Electrification 1Santicipated for the summer of 1981.Heating: Heating for residential and small commercialconsumers is primarily provided by wood, supplemented byfuel oil. Residential uses average 7.5 cords of wood and135 gallons of fuel oil per year. The heating requirementsof public buildings and the school are provided byfuel oil.APA23/B35Fuel Storage: Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (school and village) is approximately 50,400 ga l lons(reference 27).3-35

GRAPH 3.71979 ENERGY BALANCECROOKED CREEKEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%TOTAL ENERGY (100%).5%LEGEND_ - RESIDENTIALt....-......;-----.. - SMALL COMMERCIAL1.-..---11- PUBLIC BUILDINGS1.---1 - LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (57.4%)BLAZO - 1.8%PROPANE- 0.4%WOODDIESEL--31.1 %24.1 %TOTAL- 57.4%TRANSPORTATION (30.2%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 30.2%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (12.4%)DI ESEL 12.4%Io2000 4000 6000800010,000 12,000BTU X 10 614,00016,000 18,000 20,000

apa28: aUTable 3. 7ENERGY BALANCE - 1979CROOKED CREEKCONSUMERENERGY FORM CONSUMEDHEATING TRANSPORTATION ELECTRICALDIESEL WOOD PROPANE BLAZO GASOLINE AV GAL DIESEL TOTALGAL CORDS POUNDS GAL GAL GAL GAL 10 6 BtuTYPE NO . 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu % of TotalResidential 31 4,200 233 1,600 1,850 17,050 1,200 7,124580 3,961 31 235 2,165 152 55 . 8Small Commercial 3 2,200 12,050 I 1,834304 1,530 14.4Public Buildings 2 1,100 1,200 318152 166 2.5wIw-.JLarge User (school) 1 14,760 1,200 10,300 3,4802,036 23 1,421 27 . 3Total 37 22,260 233 2,800 1,850 17,050 13,250 11,500 12,7563,072 3,961 54 235 2,165 1,682 1,587% of Total Btu 24 . 1 31. 1 0. 4 1.8 17 . 0 13 . 2 12.4 100Waste Heat10 6 Btu 769 990 14 59 1,624 1,262 1,190 5 908% of Total 6.0 7":8 --o.T D.5 12 . 7 9.9 9. 3 46 . 3IRental outlets and flyi ng serlliceAssumed Efficiency: Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE8. N i ko 1 a ia. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: Nikolai is located at the confluence of theSouth Fork of the Kuskokwim River and the Little TonzonaRiver about 46 miles east of McGrath. The IngalikIndian village has been located at the present sitesince 1925. The village was previously located milesupstream of the South Fork of the Kuskokwim. Nikolaiis contained within the Doyon Limited Corporationboundaries.Population: The population of Nikolai has fluctuateddramatically over the past decade. The 1970 censusshowed a population of 112. The population increased toa high of 152 in the mid-70 l s and subsequently decreasedto 96 in 1980 (estimated by village council). Nativescomprise all but a few percent of the population ofNikolai. In 1980, the average number of members per. household in the village was 4.4 persons.Economy: The economy of Nikolai is primarily dependenton sUbsistence activities. Employment is found in seasonalwork during the summer. Permanent employment is limitedto the clinic, the city, the school district, the storeand a few government or government-related jobs. Othercash income in the community comes in the form of publicassistance and from the sale of furs caught during thetrapping season. Nikolai residents hunt beaver, muskrat,game birds, rabbit, moose and waterfowl. Most residentsfish during the summer months for salmon and other fishspecies. In the fall families harvest numerous varietiesof berries.APA23/B383-38

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCETransportation: Nikolai1s location on the KuskokwimRiver allows delivery of fuel and bulk supplies byriver barge. An airstrip adjacent to the village providesair access. Passengers, small cargo items and mail arriveprimarily by air. Small boats provide inter-villagetransportation during the summer month. Snowmachinesare the primary method of transportation during the winterafter the river freezes.No roads connect Nikolai with surrounding communities.b. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)The heating requirements in the village of Nikolaiaccount for approximately 58.3 percent of the energyconsumed by the village, transportation needs are 13.7percent and electric generation 28.0 percent. Graph 3.8illustrates by consum~r category the types and percentagesof energy forms use~ in the village. Table 3.8 tabularizesthis data in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power: The village of Nikolai maintains andoperates a centralized electric generation facility.Generation capacity consists of a 25-kW, a 50-kW and a15-kW diesel-generator set. The school district does notmaintain a standby generation facility in Nikolai.The distribution system is overhead triplex constructionoperating at a voltage of 480 volts.APA23/B393-39

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEHeating: Residential and commercial heating areprimarily with wood fuel in individual wood stoves.Residential consumers average approximately 9 cords ofwood per year for heating. Public buildings and theschool heat mainly with fuel oil. The school, however,has recently installed a wood-burning stove and willattempt to heat one classroom with wood.Fuel Storage: Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (school + village) is estimated at 35,000 gallons(estimated during village visit).APA23/B403-40

GRAPH 3.81979 ENERGY BALANCENIKOLAIEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%TOTAL ENERGY (100%) .2%LEGEND- RESIDENTIAL- SMALL COMMERCIALL------lI - PUBLIC BUILDINGS- LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEAToHEATING (58.3%)BLAZO 0%PROPANE- 2.1 %WOOD - 30.1%DIESEL - 26.1%TOTAL - 58.3%TRANSPORTATION (13.7%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 13.7%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (28.0%)DIESEL 28.0%IoI2000 4000 6000800010,000BTU X 10 6 12,00014,00016,000 18,000 20,000

apa28: a8Table 3.8ENERGY BAl.AN CE - 1979NIKOLAICONSUflERDIESELGAlTYP NO . 10 (, BLuHEATI NGWOODCORDS10GBTuPROPANEPO UNDS10 BtuENERGY FOR M CONSUMEDBLAZOGAL10 6 BtuTRANSPORTA TIONGASOLINEAV GALGALGI\L10 Btu 10 Bt uEL ECTRICAL--DIESE LGALIQ'G BtuTOTI\LlO G Btu% of rotalRes i denti a 1 221983,36610 , 70020712,1001,5363 t 88Q 5,G44535 50.5Srna 11 COrnlllel"C i a 1 2 1,100152dQQ4G7315 4:2Publ~c Buildings 3 l ,5S02143 600 711491 6:"4wI-"'"Lal"ge User (school) 1 18, 4602 , 547Tota 1 28 21,1102 ,9131983,3661, 2002311,90023012 1001,536g,880 4,3471,777 38 .922 6403,1 24 11 , 169% of Total Btu 26. 130.12. 113.728 . 0 100Waste heatlOr. Btu 728% of Total Btu 6.5842D580:-51,15210.32,343 2.,Jfl21. 0 45.8Assumed Efficiency : Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electri c Generation 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE9. Red Devila. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: .The village of Red Devil is located on bothbanks of the Kuskokwim River at the mouth of Red DevilCreek, 73 miles east of Aniak. The village was namedafter the Red Devil Mine, which was established in 1921to mine quicksilver (mercury). The mine was last workedin 1971 when the mercury, cinnabar and antimony reserveswere depleted. With the abandonment of the mine andloss of the local economic base, the village has experienceda decline in population.Pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act ~f1971, the Red Devil Village Corporation was entitled toselect 69,120 acres of land. When the Red Devil VillageCorporation merged with 9 other Middle Kuskokwim villagecorporations, this entitlement passed to The KuskokwimCorporation (TKC) for consolidated ownership and management.Calista Corporation is the regional corporation.Population: The first population count for the villagewas taken in 1960, when the federal census reported apopulation of 152. Figures for 1970 recorded a 46 percentdecrease to a population of 81. Unlike other villages inthe Calista Region which are predominantly Native, Red Devilhas only a 27 percent Native population according to the1970 census. An estimate made by the village residentsin 1979 counted 53 residents. In 1979, the averagenumber of members per household was 4.1 persons.Economy: Since the closure of the mercury mine in 1971,employment opportunities in Red Devil have been limited.The Kuspuk School District retains two teachers, oneteacher aide and a cook. There is also one employee eachAPA23/B433-43

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEat the clinic and post office. Employees are also retainedby the roadhouse!bar!grocery/liquor store and flying service.The BLM provides seasonal employment through its summerfire-fighting program.Income from these activities is supplemented by publicassistance payments and residents' subsistence activities.Residents hunt beaver, muskrat, game birds, hare, moose,caribou and waterfowl. Income is also obtained fromtrapping. During the summer months salmon, along withother species of fish, are caught from the Kuskokwim andsurrounding rivers and creeks. In the fall, berries areharvested.Government: Red Devil is not incorporated as a municipalityunder State law and there is no borough governmentwithin the region. Red Devil's Native populationis represented by a 3-member traditional council.Although not ~aving the authority of a city or tribalcouncil, a 5-member village council represents residentsof Red Devil.Transportation: Red Devil's location on the KuskokwimRiver allows the village's fuel oil and bulk suppliesto be delivered by river barge. Quring the summer,the Kuskokwim River serves as the major transportationcorridor with other villages in the area. During thewinter, the frozen river serves as the major thoroughfarefor snowmachine travel. There are no roads connectingRed Devil with other villages in the region. The4,500 foot gravel runway at Red Devil ;s th~ longestrunway situated along the Kuskokwim River, in betweenthe two communities of Aniak and McGrath. Most smallcargo items, mail and visitors arrive ;n Red Devil by air.APA23/8443-44

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEb. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)The energy balance data for Red Devil show that themajority of the energy in the village or 50.3 percent isused for heating, 27.8 percent for transportation and21.9% for electrical generation. Graph 3.9 illustratesby consumer category the types and percentages of energyforms use d in the village. Table 3.9 tabulazizes thisdata in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power:No centralized power facility exists inRed Devil, and none is planned for the immediate future.The school maintains and operates its own generationfacility. The clinic and store maintain and operatesmall individual generators.Heating: The majority of residential and small commercialcon s umers use fuel oil for heating purposes.Because of the high cost of fuel oil, there is, however,a definite trend toward supplemental heating with wood bythese two consumer classes. Public buildings and theschool rely primarily on fuel oil for heating requirements.Fuel Storage:Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (village + school ) is 20,700 gal l ons (reference 27 ) .APA23 / B453-45

GRAPH 3.91979 EN ERGY BALANCERED DEVILEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75 %TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%TOTAL ENERGY (100%)6.5%LEGEND- RESIDENTIALL--~ -SMALL COMMERCIALL----JI - PUBLIC BU ILDINGS_ - LARG E USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEAT-;-- ,r, '. r--,.-;.--=-" .-- . - - - ---HEATING (50.3%)BLAZO 0.4 %PROPANE- 1.4 %WOOD 5.4%DIESEL - 43.1 %TOTAL - 50.3 %TRANSPORTATION (27 .8% )GASOLINE + AV GAS 27.8%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (21 .9 % )DI ESEL 21.9%IoI I I1000 2000 3000I4000I50006000 7000BTU X 10 6I8000I9000 10,000

apa28: a2Table 3. 9ENERGY BALNACE - 1979RED DEVI LCONSUMERENERGY FORM CONSUMEDHEATING TRANSPORTATION ELECTRICALDIESEL WOOD PROPANE BLAZO GASOLINE AV GAL DIESEL TOTALGAL CORDS POUNDS GAL GAL GAL GAL 10 6 BtuTYPE NO. 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 1Q6Btli 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu % of TotalResidential 12 10,300 24 3,500 250 1,940 2,5501,421 408 68 T2 246 3242,49933.1Small Commercial 1 1,100 1,000 10,980 1 1 ,840 1,926152 127 1,394 253 25.5Public Buildings 2 1,1001522,400 483331 6.5Large User (school) 1 11,080 2,000 7 , 730 2,635w 1,529 39 1,067 34.9., ,..., Total 16 23,580 24 5,500 250 2,940 13,53011,970 7,5433,254 40B 107 T2 373 1,7181,651% of Total Btu 43.1 5.4 1.4 0. 4 4.9 22.9 21. 9 100Waste Heat10 6 Btu 813 102 27 8.0 280 1,289% of Total 10:"6 1.3 Q.3 D.1 D 17.11 ,238 3,81916 . 4 49.51 Renta l outlet and fly i ng serviceAssumed Effi ci ency: Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE10. Sleetmutea. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: The village of Sleetmute is located on theeast bank of the Kuskokwim River; 1.5 miles north ofits confluence with the Holitna River and 78 miles'east of Aniak. "Sleetmute", meaning "whetstone people"was named for the nearby shale deposits.was founded by local Ingalik Indians.The villageThe Russian developed a trading post near the presentvillage site in the early 1830's. The trading post waslater moved, however, from Sleetmute to a site about100 miles down the Kuskokwim River.Pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Actof 1971, the Sleetmute Village Corporation was entitledto select 92,160 acres of Federal lands. When theSleetmute Corporation merged with 9 other Middle KuskokwimVillage Corporations, this entitlement passed to TheKuskokwim Corporation (TKC) for consolidated ownershipand management. Calista Corporation is the regionalcorporation.Population: The earliest recorded population data forthe site were obtained in 1907 when there were 150residents in the village. By 1939, the population haddeclined 42 percent to 86 residents. The 1950 censusfigures show a resurgence to a population of 120, whichremained stable through the 1960 census. The 1970 censusshows a 12 percent decline to a total of 109. Sleetmute'spopulation was 87 percent Native in 1970. A local estimateof population counted 109 residents in 1979 (bothsides of river). In 1979, the average number of membersper household in the community was 5.4 persons.APA23/B483-48

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEEconomy: Most cash employment in Sleetmute is derivedfrom public employment. The Kuspuk School District employsten people in full-time jobs during the school year.The BLM employs approximately 16 residents each summer asfire fighters. Other residents work in canneries outsidethe area during the fishing season. There is no commercialfishing activity within Sleetmute. Additionally there isa family owned and operated flying service located acrossthe river from the village. Additional income is derivedfrom trapping and the sale of furs and cash sUbsistenceprograms.Approximately 60 percent of the village's food is derivedfrom sUbsistence fishing, hunting and gathering.addition to salmon caught during the summer, numerousother sp~cies of fish are taken by area residents. Thearea residents hunt moose, bear, ptarmigan, waterfowl,porcupine and rabbit.variety of berries.InIn the fall, families harvest aGovernment: Sleetmute is not incorporated as a municipalityunder State law and, there is no borough governmentwithin the region. Sleetmute's Native populationis represented by a 5-member traditional council. A7-member village council represents the residents ofSleetmute.b. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)Residential and small commercial consumer heatingrequirements account for approximately 51.7 percent ofthe energy needs of the village. Transportation resultsin an additional 30.2 percent and electric generation18.1 percent. Graph 3.10 illustrates by consumercategory the type and percentages of energy forms usedin the village. Table 3.10 tabularizes this data inadditional detail.APA23/B493-49

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEc. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power:No centralized power system exists inthe village, but electrification of the village isscheduled for the summer of 1981.The Kuspuk SchoolDistrict maintains and operates the school generatingfacilities in Sleetmute (2 - 50 kW units) which supplypower to the school and to numerous public buildings inthe village. A combination retail outlet and flyingservice, located on the opposite side of the river,maintains and operates a small generator for its own use.Heating:Heating requirements for residential and smallcommercial consumers are satisfied primari ly with woodand supplemented with fuel oil .Average residentialrequirements for heat are 7.7 cords of wood per year and230 gallons of fuel oil. Public buildings and the schoolbuilding facilities use fuel oil for heating purposes .Fuel Storage:Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity is approximately 33,000 gallons (reference 27) .APA23/B503-50

GRAPH 3.10EFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%TOTAL ENERGY (100%)1979 ENERGY BALANCESLEETMUTE27.6%LEGEND_ - RESIDENTIAL- SMALL COMMERCIALL------II- PUBLIC BUILDINGS1.--1 - LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (51.7%)BLAZO - 1.4%PROPANE- 0.5%WOOD - 23.2%DIESEL - 26.6%TOTAL - 51.7%TRANSPORTATION (30.2%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 30.2%ELECTRICAL GEN ERATION (18.1 %)DIESEL 18.1 %IoI2000 4000 6000800010,000 12,000BTU X 10 614,00016,000 18,000 20,000

apa28:a5ENERGY BALANCE - 1979SLEETMUTETable 3.10CONSUMERTYPENO.DIESELGALHEATINGWOODCORD S10~PROPANEPOUNDS10 BtuENERGY FORM CONS UMEDBLAZOGALW Bt uTRANSPORTATIONGASO LINEAV GALGALGAL10 6 Bt u 101: BtuEUCTRI CALDIE S[ LGJl.lTOTAL10 6 Btu% 0 f T ota 1Residential 245,5007591843,1282,000391 , 500191U,2001,6761,8002296 02244 7Small Comrnercial 23 0004148,000 11 ,0169 ODD'1, 143-3,0704242 997if)Publ ic Bui ldings 31,6502283,60049 77255.4w,'"'"Large User (school) 1Total30li .. 7 ZQ2,17625 , 9203 ,5771843 , 128l,200233,200621,50019121, 2002,69210,8001,37211,0001,51817 ,G 702,439l2.!l27.613 ,4 61% of Total Btu26.623.20.51.420.010 . 218 1]00Waste Heat10 6 B til% of Total8946.67825:8160.1480. 42,01915.01 ,0297.61,82913.66,61749.11 Rental outlet and flying serviceAssumed Efficiency: Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCE11. Stony Rivera. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: The village of Stony River is located approximately100 miles east of Aniak on the north bank of theKuskokwim River 1.9 miles north of its confluence withStony River. The village began in 1930 as a trading postand river boat landing used to supply mining operationsto the north. These facilities were used primarilyby Eskimos and Indians who lived nearby. It was notuntil the early 1960 l s that local Eskimos and Indiansbuilt cabins near the store and established year-roundresidency in the village.Pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of1971, the Stony River Village Corporation was entitledto select 69,120 acres of Federal land.When the villagecorporation merged with 9 other Middle Kuskokwim VillageCorporations, this entitlement passed to TKC for consolidatedownership and management.the regional corporation.Calista Corporation isPopulation: First recorded in the 1960 U.S . census, thepopulation of Stony River was listed at 75 residents.The 1970 census reported 74 residents, 82% of which areNatives. A local count estimated the population of StonyRiver was 67 people in 1979. For 1979, the averagenumber of members per household was 5.6 persons .Economy: Stony River 1 seconomy is heavi ly dependent onsubsistence activities. Residents hunt moose, caribou,bear , waterfowl and small game. The fishing catch includessalmon and numerous other species of fresh-water fish. Inthe fall, berries are harvested by the residents.APA23/B533-53

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEMost cash income comes from public employment programs.Seasonal work is available through the BLM summer firefightingprogram . The regional school district retainsthree full-time employees. Some additional income isderived from government assistance programs. Income isalso derived from trapping.Government: Stony River is not incorporated as a municipalityunder State law and there is no organizedborough in the area. Stony River's Native populationis represented by a 5-member traditional council .Transportation: Stony River's location along the KuskokwimRiver affords easy access by boat in the summer months.Barge lines deliver fuel and bulk supplies to StonyRiver during the summer months via the Kuskokwim River.A gravel airstrip accommodates air traffic. Passenger,mail and small cargo items arrive primarily by air.During the winter months when the river is frozen, snowmachinesprovide the predominate mode of transportation.There are no roads connect~ng Stony River to other villageswithin the region.b. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)Approximately 62.5 percent of the energy requirements forthe village are for heating. Transportation requirementsare only 12.1 percent of the total, and electric generationaccounts for the remaining 25.4 percent of energy usage inthe village. Graph 3.11 illustrates by consumer categorythe types and percentages of energy forms used in the village .Table 3.11 tabularizes this data in additional detail.APA23/B543-54

SECTION 3EXIST I NG CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEc . EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power: No centralized power generation facilityexists in Stony River. Village electrification is scheduledfor the summer of 1981. The school district maintainsand operates two 50-kW diesel generators which supply theelectrical energy needs of the school and certain publicbuildings.Heating: Residential and small commercial consumerheating requirements are satisfied almost entirely withwood. The average annual residential usage of wood andfuel oil is 8 cords and 75 gallons, respectively. Thecommunity hall and clinic are heated with fuel oil as arethe school facilities.Fuel Storage:Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (school + village) is 28,000 gallons (reference 27).APA23/B553-55

GRAPH 3.111979 ENERGY BALANCESTONY RIVEREFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%LEGEND_ - RESIDENTIAL- SMALL COMMERCIALL-------II- PU BLIC BUILDINGS............ ~ - LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEAT50.5%HEATING (62.5%)BLAZO - 1.7%PROPANE- 0.3%WOOD - 23.6%DIESEL - 36.9%TOTAL - 62.5%TRANSPORTATION (12.1 %)GASOLINE + AV GAS 12.1 %ELECTRICAL G EN ERATION (25.4%)DIESE L 25.4%IoI I I1000 2000 3000I4000I5000BTU X 10 6I6000I7000I8000I9000I10,000

apa28:a6ENERGY BALANCE - 1979STONY RIVERTable 3.11CONSUMERENERGY FORM CONSUMEDHEATING TRANSPORTATION ELECTRICALDIESEL WOOD PROPANE BLAZO GASOLINE AV GAL DIESEL TOTALGAL CORDS POUNDS GAL GAL GAL GAL 10 6 BtuTYPE NO. 10 6 Btu 10 6 Btu 10S'Btu 10 6 Btu lOG Btu 10 6 Btu lOG Btu % of TotalResidential 12 900 96 900 5,400 1,200 2,708124 1,632 114 686 152 39 . 2Small Commercial 1 1,100 152152 ~2Publ ic Bui ldings 2 1,650 2,400 559228 331 8.1Large User (school) 1 14,800 1,200 10,300 3,486w, 2,042 21 1,421 50 . 5en-.JTotal 16 18,450 96 1,200 900 5,400 1,200 12,700 6,9052,546 1,632 23 114 686 152 1,752% of Total Btu 36.9 23.6 0.3 1.7 9.9 2.2 25.4 100Waste Heat10 6 Btu 637 408 6 29 515 114% of Total 9.2 5.9 D.1 0:4 7.5 1.71,31419.03,02343 . 8Assumed Efficiency: Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE12. Takotnaa. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: Takotna is located on the north bank of theTakotna River 14 air miles west of McGrath. In the past,Takotna served as a riverboat landing and supply point forthe Innoko placer district.is derived from the Takotna River.the regional corporation of the area ..Population:Takotna at 65 residents.The name of the communityDoyon Limited isA 1930 estimate listed the population ofpopulation at 50, with 17 residences.A 1978 estimate put theThe 1980 estimates~owed a population of 87, with 22 residences. Theaverage number of residence per household in the communityis 4.0 persons.Economy: Permanent employment in the village is limitedto government services, the regional school district andsupport services. A small number of civilians who areemployed at Tatalina AFS also live in Takotna. The economyof Takotna is also dependent on the seasonal gold miningoperations which exist in the mountains north and west ofthe community.Income from these enterprises is supplemented by publicassistance payments and residents' subsistenceactivities. Residents hunt moose, bear, rabbit, gamebirds and waterfowl. Income is also derived fromtrapping and the sale of furs. During the summer months,most residents fish for salmon. In the fall, familiesharvest numerous varieties of berries.APA23/B583-58

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCETransportation: Takotna's location affords easy accessby boat and river barge during the summer _months.Shipments of fuel and bulk supplies are delivered bybarge lines to the community during the summer. Takotnais surrounded by approximately 100 miles of road whichwere constructed to support mining operations in the area.The commun i ty is linked to its nearest neighbor, TatalinaAir Force Station by 9 miles of road, which is maintainedyear around. Several vehicles exist in the .communityand are used extensively for transportation. Additionaltransportation is accomplished in the summer by boatand in winter with snowmachines.A gravel airstrip provides access by aircraft.small cargo items and mail are primarily delivered byai r.Passengers,b. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)The heating requirements in Takotna account for approximately58.4 percent of the energy used in the village.Transportation accounts for 21.0 percent of the use andelectrical generation for an additional 20.6 percent.Graph 3.12 illustrates by consumer category the typesand percentages of energy forms used in the vil.lage.Table 3.12 tabularizes this data in additional detail.c. EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power: Construction of centralized generationfacilities in Takotna was completed in November of 1979.Installed generation units consist of a 40-kW and a 20-kWunit. All consumer categories, including public buildingsand large- power consumers (school), are being supplied bythe utility.APA23/B593-59

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEThe distribution system consists of overhead triplexconstruction operating at 240/120 volts.Heating:The majority of the residential and smallcommercial consumers in Takotna heat with wood supplementedwith fuel oil. Public buildings and the schoolfacilities are primarily heated with fuel oil.Residentialconsumers average approximately 7.2 cords of woodper year supplemented with 100 gallons of fuel oil peryear.Fuel Storage: Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage capacity in thecommunity (village + school) at about 30,000 gallons (estimatedduring village visit).APA23/B603-60

GRAPH 3.121979 ENERGY BALANCETAKOTNAEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%TOTAL ENERGY (100%)1.6%LEGEND- RESIDENTIALSMALL COMMERCIALL...-----'I- PUBLIC BUILDINGS""""-'---=--£J -.............. ~ - LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (58.4%)BLAZO - 1.0%PROPANE- 2.5%WOOD - 26.2%DIESEL - 28.7%TOTAL - 58.4%TRANSPORTATION (21.0%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 21.0%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (20.6%)DIESEL 20.6%IoI I I1000 2000 3000I4000I5000BTU X 1()6I6000I7000 8000 9000III10,000

apa28:a9ENERGY BALANCE - 1979TAKOTNATable 3. 12CONSUMERENERGY FORM CONSUMEDHEATING TRANSPORTATION ELECTRICALDIESEL WOOD PROPANE BLAZO GASOLINE AV GAL DIESEL TOTALTYPE NO .GAL10 6 BtuCORDS10 6 BtuPOUNDS10 6 BtuGAL10 6 BtuGAL10 6 BtuGAL10 6 BtuGAL10 6 Btu10 6 Btu% of TotalResidential 20 2,000 144 10,700 750 15,400 4,984276 2,448 209 95 1,956 53.4Small Commercial 2 1,100 152152 l.6Public Buildings 3 1,550 . - 3,600 711214 497 7.6w,0">IVLarge User (school) 1 14,770 1,200 10,300 3,4822,038 23 1,421 37.4Total 26 19,420 144 11,900 750 15,400 13,9002,680 2,448 232 95 1,956 1,918 9,329% of Total Btu 28. 7 26 . 2 2.5 1.0 21. 0 20 . 6 100Waste Heat10 6 Btu 670 612 58 24 1,467' 1,439 4,270% of tota 1 Btu D 6.6 D.6 0:3 15 . 7 15.4 45 . 8Assumed Efficiency: Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCE13. Tel idaa. GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATIONHistory: Telida is located on the bank of the SwiftFork of the Kuskokwim River, 50 miles northeast of Medfra.The village was established at its persent site about1916. Telida lies within the boundaries of Doyon LimitedCorporation.Population: L.T. J.S Herron, USA, visited Telida in 1899Iand gave its population at 17 persons.consisted of three families.the population around 30.In 1960 the villageThe 1979 estimates placeThe 1980 estimates obtainedduring the visit to the village ·placed the population at34 residents and seven families. The average number ofmembers per household in the community is 4.4 persons .Economy:, Telida's economy is heavily dependent on subsistenceactivities. Cash income in the community is frompublic assistance and from the sale of furs caught duringthe trapping season. Most residents fish and hunt waterfowl,rabbit, game birds and moose. In the fall, familiesharvest several varieties of berries.Transportation: Telida is not served by river barge.All passenger and supplies coming to the village aredelivered primarily by aircraft. A gravel airstrip islocated adjacent to the village. Small boats providea means of transportation with neighboring villagesduring the summer months. Snowmachines provide the primarymeans of transportation in the winter. There are noroads which connect Telida with surrounding villagesin the region.APA23 / B633-63

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDENERGY BALANCEb. ENERGY BALANCE (1979)All residential heating in Telida is accomplished withwood fuel. The heating load in the village accounts for56.9 percent of the energy consumed . Electric generationuses 28.3 percent, and transportation uses approximately14.8 percent. Graph 3.13 illustrates by consumer categorythe types and percentages of energy forms used in thevillage. Table 3.13 tabularizes this data in additionaldetail .c .EXISTING POWER AND HEATING FACILITIESElectric Power: There is no centralized power system inTelida. The school maintains and operates two 12-kWdiesel generation units to provide electrical energy tothe school. Three individuals in the community have a12-volt battery system instal Jed in their residences.Batteries are charged from the school generators . Theschool also provides power to the satellite earth station.Heating: Residential heating is accomplished entirelywith firewood. Telida residents average approximate 9cords per year per household . Because of the high costof heating with fuel oil in Telida, the school districtrecently removed the fuel oil furnace from the school andreplaced it with a wood-burning stove. Heating of theschool is now accomplished solely with wood.Fuel Storage:Diesel, bulk fuel oil storage in the communityis estimated at 5,000 gallons (estimated during vil l age visit).APA23 / B643-64

GRAPH 3.131979 ENERGY BALANCETELIDAEFFICIENCIES ASSUMED:HEATING - 75%TRANSPORTATION - 25%ELECTRICAL GENERATION - 25%TOTAL ENERGY (100%)----------------51 .4%.0%LEGEND- RESIDENTIAL- SMALL COMMERCIAL1....-----'1- PUBLIC BUILDINGS,---,--J -LARGE USERS (SCHOOL)- WASTE HEATHEATING (56.9%)BLAZO - 0.9%PROPANE- 1.4 %WOOD - 32 .1%DIESEL - 22.5%TOTAL - 56.9%TRANSPORTATION (14.8%)GASOLINE + AV GAS 14.8%ELECTRICAL GENERATION (28.3%)DIESEL 28.3%IoI I I1000 2000 3000I4000I5000BTU x 1()6I6000 7000I8000 9000I10,000

apa28:a3ENERGY BALANCE - 1979TELlDATable 3_13CONSUME RDI ESELGALTYPE NO_ lO r: BtuHEATI NGWOOD PROPA NECORDSlO r. BtuPOUNDSlOt BtuENERGY FORM CONSUMEDTRANSPO RTA nONELECTRICAL GENERATI ONBLAZO GASOLINE AV GAL DI ESEL TOTM--GAL GAL GAL GAL 10 6 Btu10 6 Btu 10 6 Blu lOt Btu 10 6 Bt u % of Tota lResidential63 5001,071 29250 3,000 1, 00032 381 1271,64047.6Small CommercialPublic 8uildings 1234~ 341-:0w,0'0>Large User (schoo I) 1 5 ,600773Tola 1 9 5,60077390018G5 L4001,105 47250 3,000 1,00032 381 1277,080 1, 768977 51. 47,080 3,442977% of Total Btu 22 _532_1 1.40_9 11. 1 3_ 7 28 _3 100Waste Heat10 6 Btu 193%o fTcital Btu 5.6276 12s:o D.38 286 95 733 1,603D.2 8.3 2.8 21. 4 46_6Assumed Efficiency: Heating - 75%Transportation - 25%Electric Generation - 25%

SECTION 3EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCED.SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONSI~"i~'JIJJI, 1iW1!~( I,wI,J{ IiJTable 3.14 is a tabularized summary of selected data onexisting conditions (1979-1980) found in each of the 13villages. The table outlines information concerningpopulation, economic conditions, electric and heatingfacilities and total energy consumption (1979) for each ofthe villages.APA23/B673-67

APA 2889Table 3.14DeomgraphicVi llage Population Residencies Type of EmploymentHeating(Primary Fuel)Energy Consumption inBtu x lOG for (1979)AB C D E FVillageR Q P SwI0>'"Buckland 167 41 X X X X X XHughes 102 17 X X X - XKoyukuk 1I5 28 X X X X X XRussian Mission 167 40 X X X X X XSheldon Point 147 34 X X X X X XChuathbaluk 119 27 X X X X' X XCrooked Creek 124 31 X X X X X XNi kolai 96 22 X X X X X XRed nevi! S3 12 X X X X X XSleetmute 109 24 X X X X XStony River 61 12 X X X - X XTakotna 80 20 X X X X X XTelida 34 7 X X X140 kW, 75 kW P 135 kW, 55 kW50 kW, 2-35 kW p2100 kW, 75 kW, 30 kW90 kW 1 125 kW, 2-75 kW120 kW22-50 Kw22-50 Kw75kW, 50kW, 15kWp50 kW, 75 kW22-50 kW2 2-50 kW40 kW, 20 kW p2-12 kW0 0 0 0101 101 0 0101 W 0 0101/0 101/0 0 0101/0 101/0 0 0101 W 0 0101 101 0 0101 w o 101/00 0 0 0101 101 0 0101 101 0 0101 101 o 101/0w - w w18,2238,57011,66616,36113,14611,89012,75611,1697,54313,4616,9059,3293,4421 Nol installed A - Subsistence2 Electrification scheduled for summer 1981 B - Schoolo ;:; oilC - Government101 ;:; wood D - CityP - primary generation facility for village E PrivateF - Assistance programsR - ResidentialQ - Small CommercialP - Public BuildingsS - School[

SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST-

IIQJJIJIIJJIJIIUlCil.JI:WI!JIIIIIJJJJJI.~IIIJJAPA 22-A a1 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTA. INTRODUCTION1.The fo 11 owi ng paragraphs descri be the factors and/or procedureswhich were considered in developing the energy requirements forecastfor each village.PLANNED CAPITAL PROJECTS AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY FORECASTa. PLANNED CAPITAL PROJECTS:Schedule developmentsInclude those projects which are currently under constructionor planned for construction within the next three years.These projects include additional HUD and AVep housing units,electrification, new or enlarged schools, airport improvements,etc.·Potentia1 developmentsI nc1 ude those. resource developments whi ch cou1 d havesignificant long-range impacts on the villages.. These developments include timber and/or peat harvesting,.coal mining, oil and gas exploration, etc.The most probableresource developments which could either directly orindirectly affect each village ar.e listed. In general,these projects are not expected to show any sUbstantialdevelopment until the late 1980·s.Economic Activity Forecast:The economic activity forecast presents a brief discussionof those factors which will effect, either.direct1y orindirectly, the economic activity within a village.These factors i nc1 ude both the near term schedul edevelopments, and long-range potential developments,which could have significant impact on the village.4-1

APA 22-A a2 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST2. POPULATIONlIWI 'I IIIIThe population forecast is based upon historic growth rateswhere available plus information on projected future regionalgrowth rates, taking into account the effects of economi cactivities and planned capital projects. Population data indicatesthat the growth rate in the villages varies from a lowof less than one percent to a high of a~proximatelythree percent.In villages where historical growth rates have averagedless than one percent per year, a growth rate of one percent peryear has, however, been used for population forecasting purposes.Population forecast are consistent with recognized State ofAlaska forecast.L"It is further assumed that the number of members per householdwill follow the overall Alaska tendency and ~ecrease from theaverage 1979 ratio (Section 3) found in each village to an averageof four by the year 2000. Therefore, the number of residentialenergy users will increase at a higher rate than the population.The number of small commercial energy users and public agenciesis assumed to increase in direct proportion to that of residentialconsumers.II.J3.END USE FORECAST!Electric Power Requirements: Use of electrical energy in the13 villages is low compared to other areas in Alaska. This ismostly attributed to a low IIhook-up saturation ll level as onlythree of the 13 villages presently have operating centralizedpower generation and distribution facilities, ,with one additionalvillage being supplied from the school. Of the nineremaining villages, six intend to install village electricalsystems during the 1981 summer construction season. Figure 4-1illustrates the typical seasonal electrical energy usage of-rural western Alaska villages.I:•1 See Appendix C for additional information4-2

(I)RURAL WESTERN ALASKA VILLAGESSEASONAL ELECTRIC ENERGY USE(TYPICAL)10%~~

APA 22-A a4 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTHistorical increases in use of electricity supplied by majorutilities in the region (Bethel, Kotzebue) have been approximately11 percent per year since 1970. This implies that onceelectric energy becomes available on a reliable basis, the usagewill increase not only with new consumer connections but alsowith increased use by the individual consumers. The rapidincrease in cost of electricity in the last few years has notcaused a reduction in consumption, mostly because the users inthe area are still in the process of applying electric energyto more and more tasks. Generally it can be assumed' that theuse of electricity will increase with the increase in familyincome if the annual bill remains within a certain percentage'range. A recently completed study for a southcentral utilityin Alaska showed that over a 35-year period the average energyuse by the individual residential consumers has increased by2700%. but that the monthly bill has remained constant between2.4 and 3.9% of the family income.f 'i ;--i .To determine future power requirements. it has generally beenassumed that a central station will supply electric energy.The effe~t of improved elect ri c serv i ce is ant i ci pated tobe an increase in the intensity of use as compared to individuallyoperated generators. Furthermore, with the sUbsistenceeconomy changing in many communities into a cash economy andsubsequent improvements in the quality ,of life, new electricloads will require service. For instance. HUD houses planoedfor various villages will be lar'ger than existing older housingand be equipped with more appliances using electricity.The average expected increase of electric energy for consumerclasses except large consumers (schools) has, therefore, beenassumed to be 4.5%/yearover the course of the study. Electricalenergy usage for large consumers is assumed to increase at thepopulation growth rate of the village.4-4

JIJIJIJIIJIJJIIII~JUIW,JIIJ:WI,~IIIIWJJAPA 22-A a5 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTHeating Requirements:Heating requirements for each consumercategory have been projected at the 1979 energy use levelthrough the year 1985.foss i 1 fue 1 requi rements wi 11Beginning in 1986 it is assumed thatdecrease at the rate of onepercent per year through the year 200q due to implementationof passive solar heating and technical improvements in bothheating equipment and improvements in bui·lding thermalcharacteristics.This assumption reflected in the heatingrequirements forcast tables presented in this section.assumpt i on results in an approximate 15 percent reductionin foss i 1 fue 1 requi rements for heating purpos es by theyear 2000.ThisA di screpancy may exi st for .a part i cul ar vi 11 age between thenumber of residential tonsumers listed in the electric powerrequirement table. and the residential heating requirementtable.This discrepancy is a result of certain residentialconsumers, whi ch are counted as part of the vi 11 age, bei ng.located at a locality (i.e., across a river), where theycannot be servi ced by the e 1 ectri ca 1 utili ty.These consumersare counted in the heating requirements forecast, butmay not be counted in the electrical requirements forecastfor the village.There is to a certain extent a substitutability between theenergy required to provide the electrical and heating requirementsof a village.For instance, the waste heat, whichmay be captured during the process of generating electricalenergy, can be used to displace fuel oil needed for heatingpurposes.This can be thought of as a form of substitutabilitybetween electrical requirements and heating requirements.Another form of substitutability is the use of excess hydroelectricenergy to provide low cost electric space heat, untilsuch time as village electrical requirements deplete thereserve of excess hydroelectric energy.4-5

LAPA 22-A a6 SECTION ~ .ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST[II1IIThe electrical and energy requirements forecast tables presentin this section do not reflect the substitutability betweenthe two energy requirements. These tables present the electricaland heating requirements' independent of one another.Table 4.17, Capturable Waste Heat from Annual ElectricalGeneration,' does however, list the percentage of totalvillage heating requirements which can be satisfied fromcapt-ured waste heat.The economic evaluations listed in Appendix E, do, however,account for the subst itutabil i ty between e 1 ectri ca 1 energyrequirements and heating requirements. This;s accomplishedby calculating the non-electrical benefits derived from wasteheat capture and/or use of excess hydroel ectri c energy toprovide space heating requirements...I '! I4-6

I JAPA 22-A a7 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTB. VILLAGES NORTH OF YUKON1. Buckland(a)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:I·JIr 1~Scheduled developments - 10 new HUD houses - replacementfor existing structuresPHS building.New runway and airport improvementsSchool classroom additionArmoryPotential developments - Hunter Creek Hydroelectric ProjectKugruk Creek Coal Mine operationEconomic Activity Forecast: With no known strategic mineralsor resources in the immediate area, sUbstantial improvement ineconomic activity is not expected in Buckland.(b)Population Forecast - BucklandThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.1Table 4.1II I,I.l1IUI)i'l~JIJYear 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 104 167 182 199 221 311It Residences 41 43 48 54 78II Small commercial 3 3 4 5 6It Public users 5 6 8 9 12It Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 3%4-7

apa22:a7C. End .Use ForecastThe end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.1a, 4.1b,and 4.1c.Table 4.1aPopulation(1) Number of residentialconsumersBUCKLAND ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTS197916741(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 225 1(3) MWh/year residentialconsumers(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 110.7198218243257132.6198519948293168.8,1990·22154365236.5200031178567530.7i 'rW~ii .-'(4) Number of small commercialconsumers 33456(I .~(5) Average kWh/mo/consumer 7438489681,2051,872(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer(4) x (5)x 12.+ 1000 26.730.546.572.3134.8(7) Number of public consumers -568912(8) Average kWh/mo/consumer 8509701,1071,3792,142(9) MWh/year public consumer(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 51.069.8106.2148.9308.4(10) Large (LP) consumer(school)11. 111(11) Average kWh/mo/LPconsumer 29,1409,98810,91312,65217,003(12) MWh/year Lp1s(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 109.7(13) System MWh/year(3)+(6)+(9)+(12) 298.1119.9352.8131. 0452.5151.8609.5204.11,178.0r '~(14) System load factor 0.400.400.400.450.50(15) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x1000 8510112915526912Estimated from generator load dataSchool at 3% growth rate4-8

~IJII~apa22:c7Table 4.1bBUCKLAND HEATING REQUIREMENTS 1RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERSIJ 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000(1) Population 167 182 199 211 311UJ(2) Number of resi-I dential users 41 43 48 54 78II'JW(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residence(6)+(2)+12 92 92 92 87 79(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 41 41 41 39 35(5) Wood - AverageIcords/mo/residence(8)+(2)+12 0 0 0 0 0JI (6) Diesel Gals 45,100 47,300 52 1800 56 1500 73 1900Btu x 10 6 6,224 6,527 7,286 7,797 10,198UI (7) Propane Lbs 20 1000 20,975 23 1400 25 1300 32 1800Btu x 10 6 390 409 457 493 640J (8) Wood CordsBtu x 10 6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AIIIJ(9) TotalBtu x 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 6,614 6,936 7,743 8,290 10,8,38,J (10) Annual per capitaJJI,~I,~consumptionBtu x 10 6(9)+(1) 39.6 38.1 38.9 39.3 34.81Assumes a one percent per year household decrease in fossil fuel requirementsbeginning in 1986'due to implementation of passive solar heating and technicalimprovements in both building design and heating equipment.IJI4-9JI

apa22-A:R1Table 4.1cr 'I [BUCKLAND HEATING REQUIREMENTS 1 1./OTHER CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000 ~(11) Small Commercialuser 3 3 4 5 6(12) DieselGals/Btu x 10 6 3300 3300 4400 5230 5682455 455 607 722 784 [ '(13) Publ ic Buildingsuser-.I5 6 8 9 12(14) Diesel Gals 2750 3300 4400 7988 10,138Btu X 10 6 380 455 607 1102 1399 ~(15) Large users r '(school) 1 1 1 1i '1~(16) Diesel equivalentr '~(diesel + wood)Gals 22 1100 22,100 22 1100 21 1017 19,028Btu x 10 6 3050 3050 3050 2900 2626(17) Propane lbs 1200 1200 1200 1141 1033\.JBtu x 10 6 "23 "23 "23 -U 20(18) Subtotal r :Btu x 10 6i.J(16)+(17) 3073 3073 3073 2922 2646(19) TotalBtu x 10 6(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 10,522 10,920 12,031 . 13,036 15,6671Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating technicalimprovements in both building design and heating equipment. ~r '~W,--,: ,W[ \Wr\r '-.Ir~r' ,~I:~r' ...~4-10W

APA 22-A/B1 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST2. Hughes, 1(a)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled improvements - Airport improvementsPotential developments - Timber harvest)~(b)Economic Activity Forecast: No substantial economic activityis forecast for the Hughes area except for possibly a small-scaletimber harvesting project to supply wood fuel for possible woodfiredelectric generation in the late 1980's.Population Forecast - HughesThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.2Table 4.21l1li, IWYear 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 85 102 105 107 113 12411 Residences 17 18 19 23 31II Small commercial 1 2 2 3 4/I Public users 1 2 3 3 4/I Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 1%I~IWil~, 14-11

J'lI ~apa22:c4Table 4.2bJ HUGHES HEATING REQUIREMENTS 1IRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000I JI (1) Population 102 105 107 113 124,~ (2) Number of residentialusers 17I18 19 23 31IJJ(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residence(6)+(2)+12 13 13 13 12 6(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 40 41 42 39 35: I~ (5) Wood - Averagecords/mo/residence: 1 (8)+(2)+12 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.71 0.65I W (6) Diesel Gals 2,600 2,750. 2,900 3,345 2,290Btu x 10 6 359 380 400 462 316{ i!U(7) Propane Lbs 8,200 8,760 9,550 10,650 13 zOOOBtu XiQ6' 160 171 186 208 254{ IUI(8) Wood Cords 153 162 171 197240I Btu x 10 6 2,601 2,754 2,907 3,349 4,080Ii(9) TotalI~ Btu x 10 6I (6)+(7)+(8) 3,120 3,304 3,493 4,018 4,650, 1I I~IIIIUJ 1WW(10) Annual per capitaconsumptionBtu x 10 6(9)+(1) 30.6 31. 5 32.6 35.6 37.5Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirementsbeginning in 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating andtechnical improvements in both building design and heating equipment.IJI 4-13IJ

APA 22-A q1Table 4.2cHUGHES HEATING REQUIREMENTS 1OTHER CONSUMERS! :W1979 1982 19851990 2000(11)Small Commercialuser1 2 23 4(12)DieselGals/Btu x 10°550761569 1894217 261iI..J(13)(14)Public BuildingsuserDiesel GalsBtu x 10 61 2 31400 1950 2500193 269 3453 42378 2626328 362(15)Large users(school)1 1 11 1(16)Diesel equivalent(diesel 1- wood)GalsBtu x 10 614 z 3Oo 14 z 300 14 z 3001,973 1,973 1,97313 z 599 12 z 3121,877 1,699(17)Propane lbsBtu x 10 6(18)(19)SubtotalBtu x 10°(16)1-(17)1,973 1,973 1,973TotalBtu x 10°(9)1-(12)1-(14)1-(18) 5,286 5,546 5,8871,877 1,6996,440 6,972r \~I ,iIJ1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirementsbeginning in 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating andtechnical improvements in both building design and heating equipment .. 4-14r \W

IIIWUJJIJIJI.JIJIIJI \WAPA 22-A/Cl SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST3. Koyukuk(a)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled improvements -Potential developments -Economic Activity Forecast:Airport improvementsElectrificationTimber harvestReopening of WilliamsCoal MineEmployment for several familiesfrom Koyukuk would result from the reopening of the WilliamsCoal Mine or timber harvest operation in the area for the purposeof supplying coal and wood for heating and electricalgeneration for Koyukuk and the Lower Yukon.Development ofthese resources is, however, not anticipated until the late1980's.immediate future.No significant economic activity is expected in theIIIIIJJJJJJJIJ(b) Population Forecast - KoyukukThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.3Table 4.3Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 114 115 117 121 127 140/I Residences 28 28 30 32 35II Small commercial 2 2 3 3 4II Public users 3 3 3 4 6/I Larg~ users '- I 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 1%4-15

apa22:a1oII.J(c) End Use ForecastThe end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.3a, 4.3b,and 4.3c.Table 4.3aKOYUKUK ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTS 1r I '1.11979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 115 117 121 127 140U(1) Number of residential..consumers 28 30 32 35 rI I(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 133 160 220 415(3) MWh/year residential consumers I(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 44.7 57.6 84.5 174.3 '-.I(4) Number of small commer- (cial consumers 2 3 3 4 1.1(5) Average kWh/mo/consumer 848 968 1,204 1,872(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 20.4 34.8 43.3 89.9 r 1I(7) Number of public consumers 3 3 3 4 6~(8) Average kWh/mo/consumer 850 970 1,107 1,379 2,142(9) MWh/year public consumer(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 30.6 34.9 39.9 66.2 154.2(10) Large (LP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1(school)(11) Average kWh/mo/LP 9,125 9,400 9,686 10,180 11,245consumer 2(12) MWh/year LP's(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 109.5 112.8 116.2 122.2 134.9(13) System MWh/year(3)+(6)+(9)+(12) 140.1 212.8 248.5 316.2 553.3(14) System load factor 0.6 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.50(15) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x100o 27 54 63 80 1261 Electrification scheduled for summer 1981 L2School at 1% growth rateI~II~LI1.i~~f,~C '~L4-16 c' ,I..J~

,~,JIapa22:c10JI Table 4.3b'JIJJJJUKOYUKUK HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000I (1) Population 115 117 121 127 140(2) Number of residentialusers 28 28 30 32 35(3) Diesel - Averagega 1 /mo/res i denceI(6)+(2)+12 0 0 0 0 0I(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 0 0 5 19 35(5) Wood - Averagecords/mo/residencer \(8)+(2)+12 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.71 0.64W (6) Diesel Gals0 0 0 0 0Btu x 106r 1I W (7) Propane Lbs 1,825 7,410 14 1675Btu'Xl'06 36 144 286'((8) Wood Cords 252 252 270 274 268WBtu x 10 6 4,284 4,284 4,590 4,658 4,556(9) Total: j Btu X 10 6'i.-Ii (6)+(7)+(8) 4,284 4,284 4,626 4,802 4,842i I(10) Annual per capitar~ consumptionI Btu x 10 6, 1 (9)+(1) 37.3 36.6 38.2 37.8 34.6~IJ" 1, II~r~11Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirementsbeginning in 1986 due to implementation fo passive solar heating andtechnical improvements in both building design and heating equipment.I ~ UI4-17{ 1I~

JIJAPA 22A: 01 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTI'JIJIJI,JIJIIUUr 1UI ,U4. Russian Mission(a) Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments -.Airport improvementsAVCP housingElectrification (install newgenerator)Potential developments - Reopening of Williams Coal MineCommercial fishingEconomic Activity Forecast: An anticipated increase in commercialfishing should provide improved economic conditions inthe area while reopening of the Williams Coal Mine upstreamon the Yukon coul d provi de"i ndi rect improvements in the economyby lowering energy costs in the village. Rapid economic development,however, is not expected for the area.I\J(b)Population Forecast - Russian MissionThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.4I \( IWIJIJIIIIW~JUTable 4.4Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 146 167 179 191 210 257fI Residences 40 42 44 50 64fI Small commercial 3 3 3 4 7fI Public users 4 4 6 8 11fI Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 2%4-19

. apa22.: a12C. End Use ForecastWThe end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.4a, 4.4b,I 'and 4.4c.I 'I.JTable 4.4ar:RUSSIAN MISSION ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREM'ENTSl.~1979 1982 1985 1990 2000I';Population 167 179 191 210 257 IIJ(1) Number of residentialconsumers 40 42 44 50 64(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 110 133 160 220 415r(3) MWh/year residential ~consumers(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 52.8 67.0 84.5 132.0 318.7!(4) Number of small commer- ~cial consumers 3 3 3 4 7(5) Average kWh/mo/con'sumer 743 848 968 1,209 1,872 ~(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer, I '·IJ(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 26.7 30.5 34.8 58.0 157.2(7) Number of public consumers 4 4 6 8 11 I '(8) Average kWh/mo/consumer 850 970 1,107 1,379 2,142U(9) MWh/year public consumer l(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 40.8 46.6 79.7 132.4 282.7 ~(10) Large (LP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1(school) ~.(11) Average kWh/mo!LP 10,950 11,620 12,331 13,614 16,596consumer2(12) MWh/year Lp1s(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 131.4 139.5 148.0 163.4 199.3(13) System MWh/year ~(3 )+( 6 )+(9 )+(12) 251. 7 283.6 347.0 485.8 957.9(14) System load factor 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.50 ~(15) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x1000 64 72 88 123 2191Installation of new generator scheduled for summer 19812 School at 2% growth rate4-20I.J! \~( .rI~~WW

IJapa22:c12IJTable 4.4bJI, IRUSSIAN MISSION HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000I ~ (1) Population 167 179 191 210 257{ ---,IJJ(2) Number of residentialusers 40 42 44 50 64(3) Diesel - Averagegal/rna/residenceI(6 )+(2)+12 21. 21 21 19 18I • (4) Propane - AverageI~lbs/mo/residenceI (7)+(2)+12 10 10 10 19 35I II~ (5) Wood - Averagecords/rna/residence(8)+(2)+12 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.52 0.47!U, 1(6) Diesel Gals 9,840 10 1335 10 t824 11 1697 13,556Btu x 10 6 1,358 1;426 1,494 1,615 1,872IU (7) Propane Lbs 5 1000 5,250 5,500 11 1580 26:835I Btu~ 98 102 107 226 523,J(8) Wood Cords 260 273 286 309 358Btu x 10 6 4,420 4,642 4,862 5,253 6,086\(9) TotalI~ Btu X 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 5,876 6,170 6,463 7,094 8,481\(10) Annua) per'capita.1.-IconsumptionBtu x 10 6(9)+(1) 35.2 34.5 33.8 33.8 33.0!f 1JIJ1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginning1 in 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical improve-I 'ments in both building design and heating equipment.I~r,~UI,U!4-21

apa22-A:R3Table 4.4cRUSSIAN MISSION HEATING REQUIREMENTSlOTHER CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000 W(ll) Small Commerci a 1 3 3 3 4 7 [ :user-.I-(12) Diesel 1550 1550 1650 2092 3315Gals/Btu x 10 6 214 214 228 289 457(13) Public Buil di ngsuser 4 4 6 8 11 I(14) Diesel Gals 2200 2775 5025 6919 9170I.JBtu x 10 6 304 383 693 955 1265i(15) large users I.J(school) 1 1 1 1 1(16) Diesel equivalent(diesel + wood)·WGals 22 2015 22 2015 22 1015 20 2936 18,955Btu x 10 6 3,038 3,038 3,038 2,889 2,616 11~(17) Propane lbs 1200 1200 1200 1141 1038Btu x 10 6 -----z3 -'23 -----z3 ---n 20 I ;\J(18) SubtotalBtu x 10 6(16)+(17) 3061 3061 3061 2911 2636 1(19) Total~Btu x 10 6(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 9,456. 9,828 10,445 11,249 12,8401Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginrning in 1986 due to implementati~n of passive solar heating and technical ...,improvements in both building design and heating equipment.;~I \l~..i 'III~I '~4-22~.L( \I.ir \~

IJIUAPA 22A: E1 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTI. 1JI,JIJ5. Sheldon Point(a) Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments - AVCP housingElectrification using individual windenergy systemsAirport improvementsPotential developments ~Reopening of Williams Coal MineCommercial fishing, \~Economic Activity Forecast: An anticipated increase in commercialfishing should provide improved economic conditions inthe area while reopening of the Wiliams Coal Mine upstream onthe Yukon could provide indirect improvements in the economy bylowering energy costs in the village. Rapid economic development,however, is not expected for the area.J\I,JI\J. 11-.1(b)Population Forecast - Sheldon PointThe population forecast is shown in the followint Table 4.5Table 4.5Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 125 147 150 162 179 218/J Residences 34 35 38 43 5511 Small commercial 3 3 3 4 611 Public users 4 5 5 6 10il Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 2%r 1u4-23

,I.Jc.apa22:a11End Use Forecast,I.iThe end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.5a, 4.Sb,and 4.Sc. i .1.1Table 4.SaSHELDON POINT ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTS!1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 147 ISO 162 179 218(1) Number of residential fconsumers 35 38 43 55 ~I ') !•(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 133 160 220 41S(3) MWh/year residential consumers W(2) x (1) x.12 + 1000 55.9 73.0 113.5 273.9{ ~(4) Number of small commercialconsumers 3 3 4 61.1(5) Average kWh/mo/consumer 848 968 1,204 1,872(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 30.5 34'.8 ,57.8 134.8(7) Number of public consumers 4 S 5 6 10(:(8) AveragekWh/mo/consumer 850 970 1,107 1,379 2,142 l.I(9) MWh/year public consumer r '(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 40.8 58.2 66.4 99.3 2S7:0 I~(10) Large (LP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1(sch,ool)r 'W(11) Average kWh/mo/LP 9,125 9,683 10,276 11,345 13,830consumer2(12) MWh/year LP's(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 109.5 116.2 123.3 136.1 166.0(13) System MWh/year LI(3)+(6)+(9)+(1,2) 150.3 260.8 297.5 406.7 831. 7(14) System load factor 0.6 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.5~(IS) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x1000 29 66 75 103 190 I~.1Assumes electrification in 19822 School at 2% growth rater \~4-24l.jI .WW~rL

IJIapa22:c11Table 4.5bSHELDON POINT HEATING REQUIREMENTS!RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 . 1990 2000(1) Population 147 150 162 179 218(2) Number of residentialusers 34 35 38 43 55(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residence(6)+(2)+12 41 41 41 39 35(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 15 15 15 19 35(5) Wood - Averagecords/rna/residence(8)+(2)+12 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.36 0.32I'~I\IJ(6) Diesel Gals 16 1700 17,190 18 z 665 20z085 23!260Btu x 10 6 2,305 2,372 2,576. 2,772 3,210(7) Propane Lbs 6,000 6,175 6 z 705 9,960 23 z 060Btu XJ::'(j"G" 117 120 131 194 450(8) Wood Cords 153 157 . 171 184 213Btu x 10 6 2,601 2,669 2,907 3,128 3,621(9)(10)TotalBtu x 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 5,023 5,161 5,614 6,094 7,281Annual per capitaconsumptionBtu x 10 6(9)+(1) 34.2 34.4 34.7 34.0 33.4Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical improvementsin both building design and heating equipment.4-25

apa22-A:R4Table 4.5cSHELDON POINT HEATING REQUIREMENTSlOTHER CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000( ,, '~r :I.Jr'W(11)(12)Small Commercial 3 3 3 4 6userDiesel 1550 1550 1650 2092 2841Gals/Btu x 10 6 214 214 228 288 392(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)Public Buildingsuser 4 5 5 6 10Diesel Gals 2200 2500 2775 4778 8201Btu x 10 6 304 345 383 659 1131Large users(school) 1 1 1 1 1Diesel equivalent(diesel + wood)GalsBtu x 10 6 18 14602,54718 z 4602,54718 z 4602,54717 15552,42215 18942,193Propane lbs 1200 1200 1200 1141 1038BtuX'TD6 -z3 -z3 -z3 22 ~SubtotalBtu x 10 6(16)+(17) 2570 2570 2570 2444 2213TotalBtu x 10 6(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 8,111 8,290 8,795 9,485 11,017rW(l.J!I I~I \~1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technicalimprovements in both building design and heating equipment.r ;~'f '~4-26L

:1I~IIWJIJIIIJUUJIr,UIAPA 22A:Fl SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTC. VILLAGES OF MIDDLE AND UPPER KUSKOKWIM6. Chuathbal uk(a)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments - School classroom additionElectrificationAirport improvementsPotential developments - Timber harvestPeat harvestFarewell coal fieldEconomic Activity Forecast: The economic activity in the areais greatly dependent on timber, peat and Farewell coal fielddevelopment,..none of which is anticipated.to become operationalbefore the late 1980's or early 1990's. It is expectedthat these resource developments would provide mostly indirectbenefits to the area by providing lower cost energy toconsumers. No significant economic activity is forecast forthe immediate future.(b)Population Forecast - ChuathbalukThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.6Table 4.6Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 94 119 129 146 169 228II Residences 27 29 32 38 57II Small commercial 3 3 3 4 6II Public users 2 3 4 5 6II Large users 1 1 1 I 1Population growth rate - 3%4-27

IIJJ, l\.Japa22:c1Table 4.6bCHUATHBALUK HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERSIIIIJ1979 1982 1985 1990 2000(1) Population 119 129 146 169 228J~W11U(2) Number of res;-dential users 27 29 32 38 57(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residence(6)+(2}H2 10 10 10 9 8(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 7 7 10 19 35(5) Wood - Averagecords/mo/residence/) (8)+(2)+12 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.63 0.57l.J..(6) Diesel Gals 3;200 3,420 3,775 4,265 5,790Btu x 10 6 442 472 520 588 799(7) Propane Lbs 2,400 2,580 3,900 8,800 23,900Btu\\ )x 10 6 47 50 76 172 466/ \ (8) Woo,d Cords 216 232 256 289 3931l.J Btu x 10 6 3,672 3,944 4,352 4,913 6,681J; 1· .JIIJiII/, 1lWJli~(9) TotalBtu x 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 4,161 4,466 4,948 5,673 7,946(10) Annual per capitaconsumptionBtu x 10 6(9)+(1) 35.0 34.6 33.9 33.6 34.91Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical improvementsin both building design and heating equipment.r-cJ!IJ4-29

apa22-A:R5Table 4.6crICHUATHBALUK HEATING REQUIREMENTSl ~OTHER CONSUMERS[ ;1979 1982 1985 1990 2000 ~(11) Small Commercial 3 3 3 4 6user(12) Diesel 3700 3700 3700 4042 4606 I IGals/Btu x 10 6 511 511 511 558 636 I ;(13) Public Buil di ngsuser 2 3 4 5 6 (',! '~! ': I~W-I 'IIIIJ(14) Diesel Gals 1400 1650 2775 3708 4327Btu x 10 6 193 228 383 512 597I '(15) Large users ~(school) 1 1 1 1 1r~(16) Diesel equivalent(dieselW+. wood)Gals 17 1800 19 1450 2 19 1450 18 1497 16,746Btu x 10 6 2,456 2,684 2,684 2,552 2,311 r :I !~(17) Propane lbs 1200 1200 1200 1141 1033Btu x 10 6. ~ ~ ~ ~ -W(18) SUbtotalBtu x 10 6(16)+(17) 2479 2707 2707 2574 2331(19) TotalBtu x 10 6'(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 7,344 7,912 8,549 9,317 11,5101Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements begin--n;ng in 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical r ;improvements in both building design and heating equipment.2New classroom addition~Ur '~r~W, '~4-30

IIIJJJI,JIJJAPA22-A:Gl SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST7. Crooked Creek(a)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments - New school buildingElectrificationAirport improvementsPotential developments - Timber harvestPeat harvestFarewell coal fielduEconomic Activity Forecast: The economic activity in thearea is greatly dependent on timber, peat and Farewellcoal field development, none of which is anticipated tobecome operational before the late 1980 ' s or early1990' s. It is expec:ted that these resource developmentswould provide mostly indirect benefits to the area byprov; di ng lower cost energy to consumers. No s igni fi canteconomic activity is forecast for the immediate future.(b)Population Forecast - Crooked Creek. Il\.iIThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.7Table 4.7Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 59 124 132 144 167 2241f: Residences 31 . 32 28 44 561f: Small conunercial 3 3 3 4 611 Public users 2 3 5 7 911 Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 3%4-31

apa22:a13, ,C. End Use Forecast 1.1f •The end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.7a, 4.7b,I ;and 4.7c.Table 4.7a r .CROOKED CREEK ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTSl1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 124 132 144 167 224(1)' Number of residentialconsumers 26 36 42 56 l..i(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 133 160 220 415 ! .~(3) MWh/year residential consumers(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 41. 5 69.1 110.9 278.9(4) Number of small commer- ~cial consumers, 3 3 4 6r'. (5) Average kWh/mo/consumer 848 968 1,205 1,872~(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 30.5 34.8 57.8 134.8(7) Number of public consumers 1 3 5 7 9 ['(8) Average kWh/mo/consumer 850 970 1,107 1,379 2,142 1.1(9) MWh/year public consumeri(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 10.2 34.9 66.4 115.8 231. 3 ~(10) Large (LP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1(LP)(11) Average kWh/mo/LP 7,300 9,971 3 10,896 12,631 16,975consumer 2(12) MWh/year Lp1s(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 87.6 119.7 130.8 151.6 203.7 I .(13) System MWh/year ~(3)+(6)+(9)+(12) 97.8 226.6 301.1 436.1 848.7(14) System load factor 0.6 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.50 L(15) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x1000 19 57 76 111 1941 Electrification scheduled for summer 1981.2School at 3% Growth Rate.3New School Building.4-32 .~: \~.-W~I 'Wl.wW~~

IJapa22:cl3IJI Table 4.7b'JIICROOKED CREEK HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000J(1) Population 124 132 144 167 224JJI .(2) Number of residentialusers 31 32 38 44 56(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residenceI (6)+(2)+12 11 11 11 11 10:U(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residenceI(7)+(2)+12 4 4 9 17 30J(5) Wood - Averagecords/mo/residenceI --oJ(8)+(2)+12 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.59 0.54I I(6) Diesel Gals 4,200 4,340 5,150 5,670 6,530Btu x 10 6 580 599 711 782 901, IU (7) Propane Lbs 1,600 1,685 4,005 8,815 20,310Btu""""XI0 6 31 33 78 172 396, 1! I (8) Wood- Cords 233 240 286 313 363U Btu x 10 6 3,961 4,080 4,862 5,321 ' 6,171, I(9) Total.J Btu x 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 4,572 4,712 5,651 6, 275 7,468J(10) Annual per capitaconsumptionIBtu x 10)oJ 6(9)+(1) 36.9 35.7 39.2 37.6 33.3IJ 1IJIiI JIJIJAssumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementatton of passive solar heating and technical improvementsin both building design and heating equipment.4-33

apa22-A:R6I~Table 4.7cCROOKED ~REEK HEATING REQUIREMENTSlOTHER CONSUMERS~i .~i ~1979 1982 1985 1990 2000 ~(11) Small Commercial 3 3 3 4 6user(12) Diesel 2200 2200 2200 2639 3315Gals/Btu x 10 6 304 304 304 364 457~(13) Public Buildings ~user 2 3 5 7 9(14) Diesel Gals llOO 1650 3900 5848 7232 r .Btu x 10 6 152 228 538 -S07. 998 ~(15) Large users(school) 1 1 1 1 1 ~(16) Diesel equivalent(diesel + wood)GalsBtu x 10 6 14 17602 1 03620 1160 22,78220 11602,78219 11722,64617 1 3582,395(17) Propa.ne lbs 1200 1200 1200 1141 1033Btu X 10 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ---w(18) Subtotal .~Btu x 10 6(16)+(17) 2059 2805 2805 2668 2415(19) Total ~Btu x 10 6(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 7,088 8,049 9,298 10,ll4 11,339U..r .I !~1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technicalimprovements in both building design and heating equi~ment.2New school building.IIILL~~•4-34~

IJIJIJIJIIJJIIIJ, IWJII WI'WAPA 22-A:H1 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST8. N"j kol ai(a)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments - Airport improvementsPotential developments - Farewell coal fieldTimber harvestEconomic "Activity Forecast:The village of Nikolai could be directly affected bydevelopment of coal mining activities in the Farewellarea of the Alas ka Range through an increase in emp 1 oymentopportunities in the area. Operation of such aventure, however, is not expected until the early 1990 IS.Indi rect benefits woul d result from lowered energy costsin the village as the result of possible coal fired electricgeneration. No substantial increase in economicactivity is expected, however, in the near future.IJ)WI,JIIIIJ~J, 1J(b) Population Forecast - Nikolai. The population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.8Table 4.8Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 112 96 98 101 106 129II Residences 22 22 23 25 29II Small commercial 2 2 2 2 2If Public users 3 3 4 4 5If Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 1%4-35

apa22:a8IC. End Use Forecast IJThe end uses of energy are shown ;n the following Tables 4.8a, 4.8b;and 4.8c.-I ~Table 4.8a INIKOLAI ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTSl1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 96 98 101 106 129 r '(1) Number of residentialconsumers 22 22 23 25 29 I '(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 125 1 133 160 220 415 ~(3) MWh/year residential flconsumersI.J(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 33.0 35.1 44.2 66.0 144.4(4) Number of small commercialconsumers 2 2 2 3 3(5) Average kWh/mo/consumer 810 848 968 1,204 1,872(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer c ,(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 19.4 20.4 23.2 43.3 67.4 I \, I•(7) Number of public consumers 3 3 4 4 5(8) Average kWh/mo/consumer 850 970 1,107 1;379 2,142 .(9) MWh/year public consumer(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 30.6 34.9 53.1 66.2 128.5 i ,(10) Large (lP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1(school)(11) Average kWh/mo/LP 9,125 9,400consumer29,686 10,180 11,245(12) MWh/year LP's(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 109.5 112.8 116.3 122.2 135.0~(13) System MWh/year(3)+(6)+(9)+(12) 192.5 203.2' 236.8 . 297.7 475.3~(14) System load factor 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.50 I :~(15) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x1000 49 52 60 76 109 r'1Estimated from uti;ity records ~2School at 1% growth rate~4-36iWr~~II.j-II \~~r 1~..~\,~

IJapa22:c8IJI Table 4.8bIJUJJJUJNIKOLAI HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000I (1) Population 96 98 101 106 129IIII(2) Number of residentialusers 22 22 23 25 32(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residence(6)+(2)+12 0 0 0 0 0(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 41 41 41 39 35(5) Wood - Averagecords/mo/residence(8)+(2)+12 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.71 0.65(6) Diesel Gals 0 0 0 0 0I Btu x 10 6i LJ(7) Propane ~ 10 1700 10 1700 11 1200 11 1580 13 1522Btu x 10 6 209 209 218 226 264U(8) Wood Cords 198 198 207 214 248Btu x 10 6 3,366 3,366 3,519 3,638 4,216(9) TotalUBtu x 10 6I (6)+(7)+(8) 3,575 3,575 3, 737 3,864 4,480I1WJJJ(10) Annual per capitaconsumptionBtu x 10 6(9)+(1) 37.2 36.5 37.0 36.5 34.7I 1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical improvementsin ·both building design and heating equipment.III~IJIU4-37

apa22-A:R7Table 4.8cNIKOLAI HEATING REQUIREMENTS ..- :OTHER CONSUMERSWr :I ,~r '11979 1982 1985 1990 2000 W(11) Small Commercial 2 2 2 3 3user:~(12) Diesel 1100 1100 1100 1569 1420Gals/Btu x 10 6 -152 152 152 216 196r :(13) Public Buildingsuser 3 3 . 4 4 5(14) Diesel Gals 1550 1650 2775 2639 3358Btu x 10 6 214 228 383 364 463(15) Large users i.J(school) 1 1 1 1 1(16) Diesel equivalent f'(diesel + wood) ~Gal s 18,460 18 2460 18 2460 17 2555 15,894Btu x 10 6 2,547 2,547 2,547 2,423 2,193 r ' :~(17) Propane "I bs 1200 1200 1200 1141 1033Bt'UX'l06 23 23 23 22 ~(18) SubtotalBtu x 10 6(16)+(17-) 2570 2570 2570 2445 2213(19) TotalBtu x 10 6(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 6,511 6,525 6,842 6,889 7,3521UAssumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technicalimprovements in both building design and heating equipment. -r-;IIjLf •U~~L4-38!: ..~~

IJJIJ IIIJJI JII'l~'lI:.'J[ 1J" 1JJJI~JAPA 22-A:I1 SECTION 49.Red Dev; 1(a)(b)ENERGY REQUIREMEN~SPlanned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments - New schoolAirport improvements•Housing constructionPotential developments - Timber harvestMercury mineBlM fire-fighting stationFarewell coal fieldOil and gas explorationFORECASTEconomic Activity Forecast:. Red Devil could benefit fromtimber harvest, peat harvest, development of the Farewell coalfield and possible oil and gas exploration in areas along theKuskokwim. Major developments of these activities are notexpected, however; until the late 1980's or early 1990 1 s. Noimmediate increase in economic activity is expected, however,in the near future.Population Forecast - Red DevilThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.9Table 4.9Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 81 53 54 56 59 65If Residences 13 14 15 15 16If Small commercial 1 1 1 1 2If Public users 2 2 2 2 3If Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 1%4-39

,~ ,apa22:a2C. End Use ForecastThe end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.9a, 4.9b,and 4.9c.i, ,'-.Ir '-.iTable4.9a ~RED DEVIL ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTSl1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 53 54 56 59 65(1) Number of residentialconsumers 8 9 " '1216(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 133 160 220 415(3) MWh/year residentialconsumers(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 12.8 17.3 31. 7 79.7(4) Number of small commercialconsumers 1 1 1 2WL~~~(5) Average kWh/mo/consumer 848 968 1,205 1,872(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 10.2 11.6 14.5 44.9(7) Number of'public consumers2 2 2 2 3 r \(8) Average kWh/mo/consumer 850 970 1,157 1,379 2,142W(9) MWh/year public consumer i(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 20.4 23.3 27.8 33.1 77 .1 -.I(10) Large (LP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1(School)(11) Average kWh/mo/LP 5,475 9,125 3 9,401 9,881 10,915consumer 2(12) MWh/year Lp1s(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 65.7 109.4 112.9 118. 5 131. 0(13) System MWh/year(3)+(6)+(9)+(12) 86.1 155.7 169.6 197.8 332.7(14) System load factor 0.6 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.5 f'I.J(15) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x1000 16 40 43 50 761Assume electrification 19822 School at 1% growth rate3 New school\ ~~W~~I...L~4-40'~

'-1, II~apa22:c2JTable 4.9bI JiRED DEVIL HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000JI (1) Population 53 54 56 59 65J(2) Number of resi-I dential users 12 14 15 15 16'I~(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residence(6)+(2)+12 66 66 54 40 17: 1(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 22 22 22 27 35IWIU(5) Wood - AverageIcords/mo/residencer 1(8)+(2)+12 0.15 0.15 0.21 0.32 0.51J(6) Diesel Gals 10,300 11,090 . 9,780 7,212 3,200( 1 Btu x 10 6 1,421 1,530 1,350 995 442i I'1..1 (7) Propane Lbs 3,500 3,770 4,040 4,780 6,710IBtu x 10 6 68 74 79 93 131I(, II •(8) Wood Cords 24 26 38 57 97~Btu x 10 6 408 442 646 969 1,649" 1JJ(9) TotalBtu x 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 1,898 2,046 2,074 2,057 2,221(10) Annual per capitaconsumption, \Btu X 10 6(9)+(1)W35.8 37.9 37.0 34.9 34.2, 1 1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginning.Jin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical ;mprovements;n both building desing and heating equipment.I JI~It -1I.JI J 4-41

apa22-A:R8,I.-Table 4.9cRED DEVIL HEATING REQUIREMENTSlOTHER CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000~(11) Small Commercial 1 1 1 1 auserL(12) Diesel 1100 1100 1100 1046 947Gals/Btu x 10 6 152 152 152 144 131(13) Public Buildingsuser 2 2 2 2 3(14) Diesel Gals 1100 1100 1100 1046 1420Btu x 10 6 152 152 152 144 196 r \(15) Large users ~(school) 1 1 1 1 1(16) Diesel equivalent U(diesel + wood)Gals 11 1080 18 1467 2 18 1467 17 1562 15:900Btu X 10 6 1,529 2,548 2,548 2,424 2,194(17) Propane 1 bs 2000 1200 1200 1141 1033Btu x 10 6 39 ~ ~ "22 ~ (1(18) Subtotal~Btu x 10 6(16)+(17) 1568 2571 2571 2446 2214~1.1..I \I I~WI ~~(19) TotalBtu x 10 6(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 3,770 4,921 4,949 4,791 ' 4,7621Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technicalimprovements in both building design and heating equipment.Lr '~W( ,,~L~4-42~

JiJAPA 22-A:J1 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST10. Sleetmute(a)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity forecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments - School classroom additionElectrificationAirport improvementsPotential developments - Timber harvestPeat harvestFarewell coal fieldOil and gas exploration, IUiUr 1iI.~I,,WI(b)Economic Activity Forecast: Sleetmute could benefit fromtimber harvest, peat harvest, development of the Farewell coalfield and possible oil and gas exploration in areas along theKuskokwim. Major developments of these activities are notexpected, however, until the late 1980's or early 1990 1 s. Noimmediate increase in economic activity is expected, however,in the near future.Population Forecast - SleetmuteThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.10Table 4.10I~riWIYear 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 109 109 112 116 122 134II Residences 24 25 26 29 34II Small commercial 2 2 2 2 2If Public users 3 3 3 4 6ff Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 1%4-43

apa22:a5I 'C. End Use ForecastJ 'The end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.10a, 4.10b, 1.14.10c., ,Table 4.10aSLEETMUTE ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTSl1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 109 112 116 122 134(1) Number of residentialconsumers 20 23 26 34I(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 133 160 220 415 1.1(3) MWh/year residentialconsumers(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 31. 9 44.2 68.6 169.3(5) Average kWh/rna/consumer 848 968 1,205 1,872(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 20.4 23.2 28.9 89.7. (7) Number of public consumers 3 3 3 4 6(8) Average kWh/rna/consumer 850 970 1,107 1,379 . 2,142U(9) MWh/year public consumer(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 . 30.6 34.9 39.9 66.2 154.2(10) large (LP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1(school)(11) Average kWh/mo/lP 7,800 9,400 3 9,686 10,180 11,245 ~consumer2(12) MWh/year lp 1 s. (~~(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 93.6 112.8 116.2 122.2 135.1(13) System MWh/yearr \(3)+(6)+(9)+(12) 124.2 200.0 223.5 285.9 548.3 III(14) System load factor 0.6 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.50 r:11.1(15) Sys tern demand kW(13)+8760+(14)xl000 24 51 57 73 1251Electrification scheduled for summer 19812 School at 1% growth rate3Addition of new school classroomWW~~(4) Number of small commer-cial consumers 2 2 2 4 ~i :WWU~4-44Lr1'~

IiJI..~ -1Table~l, Ii~apa22:c54.10bSLEETMUTE HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERSJ1979 1982 1985 1990 2000(1) Population 109 112 116 122 134J(2) Number of resi-Idential users 24 25 26 29 34n.~IW(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residence(6)+(2)+12 19 19 19 18 16(4) Propane - AverageIlbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 7 7 10 19 35(5) Wood - AverageI~ cords/mo/residence(8)+(2)+12 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.61 0.55j(6) Diesel GalsBtu x 10 6 5,5007595,7307915,9608226,3208726,710926i \, IW (7) Propane Lbs 2,000 2,080 3,170 6,715 14,260Btu x 10 6 39 41 62 131 278, i(8) Wood Cords 184 192 199 211 224J Btu x 10 6 3,128 3,264 3,383 3,587 3,808U(9) TotalIBtu x 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 3,926 4,095 4,267 4,590 5,012IWJI .II(10) Annual per capitaconsumptionBtu x 10 6(9)+(1) 36.0 36.6 36.8 37.6 37.4I 1 Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical improvementsin both building design and heating Jequipment.,-1JIUI,JIJ!4-45

Wapa22-A:R9Table 4.10c ,•,SLEETMUTE HEATING REQUIREMENTSlOTHER CONSUMERSII.lf "\W1979 1982 1985 1990 2000 W(11) Small Commercial 2 2 2 2 4user(12) Diesel 3000 3000 3000 2853 3056I 'Gals/Btu x 10 6 414 414 414 394 422~(13) Public Buil di ngsuser 3 3 3 4 6(14) Diesel Gals 1650 1650 1650 2639 4327Btu x 10 6 228 228 228 364 597iI(15) Large users ~(school) 1 1 1 1 1r !(16) Diesel equivalent~(diesel + wood)Gals 15,776 19 z 004 2 19 z 004 18 z 073 16,362Btu x 10 6 2,176 2,622 2,622 2,494 2,258(17) Propane 1 bs 1200 1200 1200 1141 1033Btu x 10 6 23 23 23 22 20(18) SubtotalBtu x 10 6(16)+(17) 2199 2645 2645 2516 2278(19) TotalBtu x 10 6f(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 6,767 7,382 7,554 7,864 8,309WU( ,WWU~1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements begin- r 1ning in 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technicalimprovements in both building design and heating equipment.~2 New classroom addition.~L~4-46~

IJIIJJAPA 22-A:K1 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST11. Stony Ri verIJIJIJIIJJIIJ\UI JiIJJIIJIIII, IWWJJ(a)(b)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments - School classroom additionElectrificationAirport improvementsPotential developments - Timber harvestEconomi c Activity Forecast:Peat harvestFarewell coal fieldOil and gas explorationStony Ri ver coul d benefi t . fromtimber harvest, peat harvest, development of the Farewell coalfield and possible oil and gas exploration in areas along theKuskokwim.Major developments of these aCtivities are notexpected, however, until the late 1980 l s or early 1990 1 s.immediate increase in economic activity is expected, however,in the near future.Population Forecast - Stony RiverThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.11Table 4.11Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 74 67 68 70 74 82II Residences 12 12 13 15 21II Small commercial 1 1 1 1 2II Public users 2 2 2 2 3II Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 1%4-47No

apa22:a6~\C. End Use ForecastI ,The end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.11a, 4.11b,~4.11c.f \Table 4.11aWSTONY RIVER ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTSl1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 67 68 70 74 82(1) Number of residentialconsumers 12 13 15 21i ':(2) Average kWh/rna/consumer 133 160 220 415 ~(3) MWh/year residential I:,consumers(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 19.2~25.0 39.6 104.6(4) Number of small commercialconsumers 1 1 1 2 ~• fWU(5) Average kWh/rna/consumer 848 968 1,205 1,872(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 10.2 11.6 14.5 44.9(7) Number of public consumers1 2 2 2 2 3(8) Average kWh/mo/consumer . 850 970 1,107 1,379 2,142WW~(9) MWh/year public consumer(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 20.4 23.3 26.6 33.1 77.1(10) Large (LP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1 i(school)I..(11) Average kWh/mo/LP 7,300 9,400 3 9,686 10,180 11,245consumer2(12) MWh/year Lp1s(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 87.6 112.7 116.2 122.1 135.0(13) System MWh/year(3 )+( 6)+( 9 )+(12) 108.0 165.4 179.4 209.3 361. 6-(14) System load factor 0.6 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.50 r '(15) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x1000 21 42 46 53 83~1Electrification scheduled for summer 1981.2 School at 1% growth rate.3Addition of new school classroom.4-48~~..r :~~

IIW:Uapa22:c6I Table 4.11b'-1'JSTONY RIVER HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERSI1979 1982 1985 1990 2000JI (1) Population 67 98 70 74 82JJ(2) Number of resi-I dential users 12 12 13 15 21III(3) Diesel - Averagegal/mo/residence(6)+(2)+12 6 6 6 6 51~(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence\(7)+(2)+12 5 10 19 35,~ (5) Wood - Averagecords/mo/residence, 1 (8)+(2)+12 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.63 0.58W(6) Diesel Gals 900 900 975 1,070 1,360Btu x 10 6 124 124 135 148 188, IU (7) Propane Lbs . 700 1,580 3,470 8,810Btu X1:(i'6" 14 31 68 172• WJ(8) Wood Cords 96 96 104 114 145Btu x 10 6 1,632 1,632 1,768 1,938 2',465(9) TotalIBtu x 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 1,756 1,770 1,933 2,153 2,824,UI(10) Annual per capitaconsumptionBtu x 10 6: 1(9)+(1) 26.2 26.0 27.6 29.1 34.4I~JII~rlI~1-I Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical improvementsin both building and heating equipment.'-Cii~I 4-49IJ

apa22-A:RI0Table 4.11c..STONY RIVER HEATING REQUIREMENTS!OTHER CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 . 2000 ~(11) Small Commercial 1 1 1 1 2user(12) Diesel 1100 1100 1100 1046 1420Gals/Btu x 10 6 152 152 152 144 196(13) Public Buil di ngs Luser 2 2 2 2 3(14 ) Diesel Gals 1650 1650 1650 1569 1891WBtu x 10 6 228 228 228 216 261(15) Large users r '(school) 1 1 1 1 1 I.J(16) Diesel equivalent(diesel + wood)GalsBtu x 10 6 14,8002,04219 1057 22,62919 z 0572,62918 21232.50116,4082.264(17) Propane lbs 1200 1200 1200 1141 1033Btu x 10 6 23 23 23 ----u ~U(18) Subtotal';" -,~Btu x 10 6(16)+(17) 2065 2652 2652 2523 2284(19) Total~Btu x 10 6(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 4, 201 4,802 4,965 5,036 5,565Wr "1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements begin- ~ning in 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technicalr 'improvements in both building design and heating equipment.2New classroom addition~;II.ir '~iLU~~~4-50r-.Jl

JI,JAPA 22-A L1 SECTION 4I 12. TakotnaI J(a)JPlanned Capital Projects:I1Potential developments - Timber harvest,.JPeat harvestGold miningincreased economic activity in the area.uI(b) Population Forecast - Takotna.I..j, I,I.fJTable 4.121ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTPlanned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastScheduled developments - HUO housingSchool classroom addition·Airport improvementsEconomic Activity Forecast: The numerous gold miningoperations surrounding Takotna offer some potential forSmall-scale timberand/or peat harvest to supply local energy needs is a possi~ilityfor development. Neither of these two activitiesshould, however, be expected to be developed until the late1980 1 s. Rapid economic growth in the area ;s not anticipated.The population forecast is shown in the following TAble 4.12Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 80 88 96 106 12911 Residences 20 22 24 27 . 32# Small commercial 2 2 2 2 3IF Public users 3 3 4 4 5, II Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 2%4-51

apa22:a9C. End Use Forecast ~The end uses of energy are shown in the following Tables 4.12a, 4.12b,and 4.12c.Table 4.12aTAKOTNA ELECTRIC POWER REQUIREMENTSl ~1979 1982 1990 2000 'Population 80 88 96 106 129~(1) Number of residentialconsumers 22 24 27 32(2) Average kWh/mo/consumer 225 1 257 320 497(3) MWh/year residential ~consumers(2) x (1) x 12 + 1000 59.4 74.0 103.7 190.8I(4) Number of small commer-~cial consumers 2 2 2 3(5) Average kWh/mo/consumer 848 968 1,204 1,872 L~r 'rI~~(6) MWh/year small commercialconsumer(4) x (5) x 12 + 1000 20.4 23.2 28.9 67.4W(7) Number of public consumers 3 3 4 4 5 I ':! I11/(8) Average kWh/mo/consumer 850 970 1,107 1,379 2,142r '(9) MWh/year public consumer(7) x (8) x 12 + 1000 30.6 34.9 53.1 66.2 128.5~(10) Large (LP) consumer 1 1 1 1 1(school)(11) Average kWh/mo/LP 7,300 7,747 9,975 3 11,013 13,426r Iconsumer2~(12) MWh/year LP's(10) x (11) x 12 + 1000 87.6 92.9 119.8 132.1 161.1(13) System MWh/year(3)+(6)+(9)+(12) 118.2 207.6 270.1 330.9 547.8(14) System load factor 0.6 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.50(15) System demand kW(13)+8760+(14)x1000 22 53 69 84 1251 Estimated from utility records. ,2 School at 2% growth rate. I3 Addition of new school classroom. ~~~LL4-52 I '~

I~Iapa22:c9JI Table 4.12bIJTAKOTNA HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS. 'J1979 1982 1985 1990 2000I (1) Population 80 88 96 106 129IJ(2) Number of residentialusers 20 22 24 27 32(3) Diesel - Average~gal/mo/residenceI (6)+(2)+12 8 8 8 8 7IU(4) Propane - AverageIlbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 45 45 45 42 38'n.~I.J(5) Wood - Averagecords/mo/residence(8)+(2)+12 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.57 0.52(6) Diesel Gals 2,000 2,200 2,400 2,570 2,755I Btu x 10 6 276 304 331 355 380iJ (7) Propane Lbs 10,700 11,755 12 1840 13 2740 14,745BtuX106 209 229 250 268 288: 1 (8) Wood Cords 144 158 172 184 198I11IIIBtu x 10 6 2,448 2,686 2,924 3,128 3,366J(9) TotalBtu x lOSI (6)+(7)+(8) . 2,933 3,219 3,506 3,751 4,034JJJJ(10) Annual per capitaconsumptionBtu x lOS(9)+(1) 36. 7 36.6 36.5 35.4 31. 3I1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to imp1ementation of passive solar heating and technical improvementsin both building des;ng and heating equipment.I1I"10JJ4-53

~:JIJI'JIJIJIJIJII, IW, I. I~, IAPA 22-A:Ml SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECAST13. Telida(a)(b)Planned Capital Projects and Economic Activity ForecastPlanned Capital Projects:Scheduled developments - Airport improvementsPotential developments - Small-scale timber harvestEconomic Activity Forecast:No substantial economic activityis forecast for the Telida area except for possibly a small-scaletimber harvesting project to supply wood fuel for possible woodfiredelectric generation in the late 1980's.Population Forecast - TelidaThe population forecast is shown in the following Table 4.13l~Table 4.l3Year 1970 1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Population 34 35 36 38 411} Residences 7 7 8 8 101} Small commercial 1 1 1 1 11} Public users 1 1 1 2 2II Large users 1 1 1 1 1Population growth rate - 1%4-55

IiJIapa22:c3I J Table 4.13bIIJTELIDA HEATING REQUIREMENTSlRESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000J(1) Population 34 35 36 38 41J(2) Number of resi-I dential users 7 7 8 8 10(3) Diesel - Average~ gal/mo/residence(6)+(2)+12 0 0 0 0 0IIIJJ,. IWJ(4) Propane - Averagelbs/mo/residence(7)+(2)+12 18 18 18 26 35(5) Wood - Averagecords/mo/residence(8)+(2)+12 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.72 0.65(6) Diesel Gals 0 0 0 0 0Btu x 10 6(7) Propane Lbs 1,500 1,500 1,710 2,540 4,190Btu x 10 6 29 29 33 50 82W (8) Wood Cords 63 63 72 69 78Btu x 10 6 1,071 1,071 1,224 1,173 1,326UJ(9) TotalBtu x 10 6(6)+(7)+(8) 1,100 1,100 1,257 1,223 1,408(10) Annual per capitaconsumptionJBtu x 10 6(9)+(1) 32.4 31.4 34.9 32.2 34.3: II I.l 1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginning, 1 in 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technical improvementsin both building design and heating equipment .. ~Ini ~II JI, 1 4-57W(

apa22-A:R12( ,(11)Table 4.13cTELIDA HEATING REQUIREMENTSl .. OTHER CONSUMERS1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Small Commercial 1 1userr '\.Jr \I '-.Ir '(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)Diesel 214 474Gals/Btu x 10 6 30 65Public Buil di ngsuser 1 1 1 1 1Diesel Gals 214 474Btu x 10 6 30 65Large users(school) 1 1 1 1 1Diese'l. equivalent(diesel + wood)GalsBtu x 10 6 5 1600773 ,5 16007735,6007735,3267354,822666Propane 1 bs 900 900 900 856 775Bt'liXl0 6 18 18 18 16 15SubtotalBtu x 10 6(16)+(17) 791 791 791 751 681TotalBtu x 10 6(9)+(12)+(14)+(18) 1,891 1,89l ' 2,048 2,034 2,219..( ,! !1Assumes a one percent per year decrease in fossil fuel requirements beginningin 1986 due to implementation of passive solar heating and technicalimprovements in both building design and heating equipment.r i~4-58

APA 22-A:N/1 SECTION 4ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FORECASTD. Energy and Peak Load Forecast SummaryA tabularized summary of existing and forecast energy uses and, 1possible waste heat capturability for each of the 13 villages,~.is listed in Tabl~s 4.14-4.17 (assumes electrical energy available1in all villages by 1982).I~Table 4.14 lists by village the annual electrical peak load inkilowatts and energy requirements in MWh and the quantity of fuelJIrequired for electrical generation in 10 6 Btu's. This assumes8.5 kWh/gallon generation efficiency.. .JTable 4.15 lists the annual heating energy requirements in 10U6 Btufor each village.ITable 4.16 shows the total annual non-transportation energy requirementsof each village (i.e., electrical energy requirements plus heating requirements)in 10 6 Btu's.Table 4.17 lists the capturable waste heat in 10u6 Btu's from annualelectrical generation requirements, listed in Table 4.14, in each ofthe villages. In addition, the percentage of space heating requirementsin each village which waste heat could supply if completely'w!utilized is also listed (assumes 30% of input energy used for electricalgeneration can be captured as waste heat; transportation lossesnot considered).JJIJII~JI 4-59I.JI ,

--~-----~----- - ----._--- ---------- ------------_._-------------------_.-APA 22-A/O-l(1) Annual Electrical Peak load and Energy Requirements (kW/MWH/Diesel fuel required for generator's 10 6 Btu I )Table 4.14Vi 11 age1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Buckland 85/298.1/4840 101/352.8/5728 129/452.5/7346 155/609.6/9897 269/1178.0/19125Hughes 33/129.2/2098 41/162.6/2640 49/192.6/3127 64/251. 4/4082 104/455.0/7387Koyukuk 27/140.1/2275 54/212.8/3455 631248.5/4034 80/316.2/5134 126/553.3/8983Russian Mission 641251. 7/4086 72/283.6/4604 88/347.0/5634 123/485.8/7887 219/957.9/15552Sheldo.n Point 29/150.312440 66/260.8/4234 75/297.5/4830 103/406.7/6603 190/831. 7/13503Chuathbaluk 25/129.9/2109 57/225.0/3653 69/272.4/4424 96/376.6/6114 182/798.1/12957,c,.I Crooked Creek 19/97.8/1588 57/226.6/3679 .' 76/301. 1/4888 111/436.1/7080 194/848.7/137790\0Nikolai 49/192.5/3125 52/203.2/3299 60/236.8/3845 76/297.7/4833 109/475.3/7717Red Devil 16/86.1/1398 40/155.7/2528 43/169.6/2754 50/197.8/3211 76/332.7/5401Sleetmute 24/124.2/2016 51/200.0/3241 57/223.5/3629 73/285.9/4642 125/548.3/8902Stony River 21/108.0/1753 42/165.4/2685 46/179.4/2913 53/209.3/3398 83/361. 6/5871Takotna 22/118.2/1919 53/207.q/3370 69/270.1/4385 84/330.9/5372 125/547.8/8894Telida 8/42.5/690 15/59.2/940 17/65.3/1060 23/91. 0/1477 35/137.2/22271 Assumes 8.5 kWh/gallon generation efficiency. 138,000 Btu/gallon diesel fuel.

-== ~. t=:_~APA 22-A/0-l.--- ,R...__J(2) Annual Heating Energy Requirements(l06 BTU)Table 4.15.t:>I()\t-'Vi 11 ageBuckland 10,522Hughes 5,286Koyukuk 7,311Russian Mission 9,456-Sheldon Point 8,111Chuathbaluk 7,344Crooked Creek 7,088Nikolai 6,511Red Devil 3,770Sleetmute 6,767Stony River . 4,201Takotna 5,360Telida 1,8911982 1985 1990 200010,920 12,031 13,036 15,6675,546 5,887 6,440 6,9727,311 7,729 7,828 7,9139,828 10,445 11,249 12,8408,290 8,795 9,485 11,0177,912 8,549 9,317 11,5108,049 9,298 10,114 11,3396,525 6,842 6,889 7,3524,921 4,949 4,791 4,7627,382 7,554 7,864 8,3094,802 4,965 5,036 5,5655,660 6,848 6,929 7,1111,891 2,048 2,034 2,219

APA 22-A/0-1(3) Total Annual Energy Requirements, Electrical and Heating (l06 BTU)Table 4.16Vi 11 age1979 1982 1985 1990 2000Buckland 15,362 16,648 19,377 22,933 34,792Hughes 7,832 8,186 9,014 10,522 14,359Koyukuk 9,566 10,766 11,763 12,962 16,896Russian Mission 13,542 14,432 16,079 19,136 28,394Sheldon Point 10,551 12,524 . 13,625 16,088 24,520Chuathbaluk 9,453 11,265 12,973 15,431 24,467Crooked Creek 8,686 11,728 14,186 17,194 25,118*" INi ko 1 ai 9,636 9,824 10,687 11,722 15,0690'1i'V Red Devil 5,168 7,449 7;703 8,002 10,163Sleetmute 8,783 10,629 11,183 12,506 17 ,211Stony River 5,954 7,487 7,878 8,434 11,436Takotna 7,279 9,030 11,233 12,301 16,005Telida 2,581 2,852 3,108 3,511 4,44~L

.-- ,L...._--'APA 22-A/0-1[--- [ ---(4) Capturable Waste Heat from AnnualElectrical Generation (10 6 BTU/% of Total village Heating requirements)(l)Village_Table 4.1719791982 1990 2000,to.I(J\wBuckland 1452/14Hughes 629/12Koyukuk 683/9Russ-ian Mission 1226/13Sheldon Point 73219Chuathbaluk 633/9Crooked Creek 476/7Nikolai 938/14Red Devil 419/11Sleetmute 605/9Stony River 526/13Takotna 576/11Telida 207/111718/16 2204/18 2969/23 5738/37792/14 938/16 1225/19 2216/321037/14 1210/16 1540/20 2695/341381/14 1690/16 2366/21 4666/361270/15 1449/16 1981/21 4051/371096/14 1327/16 1834/20 3887/341104/14 1466/16 2124/20 4134/36990/15 1154/17 1450/21 2315/31758/15 826/17 963/20 1620/34974/13 1089/14 1393/18 2671/21806/17 874/18 1019/20 1762/321011/18 1316/19 1612/23 2668/38288/15 318/16 443/22 668/30(1) Assumes 30% of input energy capturable in the form of waste heat.

SECTION 5RESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

))~I,0JJI J~lI~JAPA22-A/P2 SECTION 5RESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTA. ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENT1.The energy resources which are determined to be available for eachof the II villages are summarized in tabularized form tn Tables 5.1- 5.13. Information concerning approximate quantity, quality, availability,cost, source of data and important comments is included.The energy resources specifically addressed include diesel generation,wind, hydroelectric potential, waste heat utilization, energyconservation, coal, solar, timber and peat potentials. Energy resourceswhich are not available for use ;n the 13 villages and aretherefore not addressed include geothermal, ~ol;d waste, oil and gasand tidal power. Narrative concerning the ,energy resources availablein the 13 villages ;s presented below.Diesel fuel - Diesel fuel oil for heating and generation of electricityis available in all 13 villages. Prices per gallon in thevillages range from a low of $1.44 to a high of $2.31 per gallon.Electric generation in the villages (school or village plant) ispresently provided exclusively with diesel fuel. Average heat contentper gallon is assumed at 138,000 BTU/gallon.I; IWJ2.Wood fuel - Wood for fuel is readily available in ten of the thirteenvillages studied, and residences in nine out of these ten villagesuse wood as the primary fuel for heating. Wood is used to supplementfuel oil for heating in three of the four remaining villages. Thelarge quantities of readily accessible timber surrounding many ofthe villages make wood heating the most practical and economic methodfor residential heating when available.f 1Wood for use as a fuel to provide electrical generation ;s estimatedto be available at $92.00 or $132.00 per cord, dependent upon thescale of the timber harvest activity. Medium-scale harvest activityis estimated to provide wood at $92/cord and small-scale harvestactivity at $132/cord. Prices listed reflect 1981 costs. The quan-'tity of wood available as listed in Tables' 5.1-5.13 indicates theI, 1~J5-1

APA22-A/P2 SECTION 5RESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTamount of available timber from productive forest within lands locateda 10-mile radius of the village, except for the villages of Chuathbaluk,Crooked Creek, Red River, Stony River and Sleetmute.The quantity ofwood listed for these five villages is the summed total of the woodavailable in a lO-mile radius around each of the five individualvillages. Because of the proximity of these five villages to oneanother, it is assumed that wood could be readily transported betweenthese villages via the Kuskokwim River.,\,\J \ \.I~I \, I~The quality of wood gives an average heat content per cord which iscalculated ~t 14.6 x 10 6 BTU/cord. 1•Although sufficient quantity of wood is available in many villagesto provide fuel for electrical generation, it is estimated that commerciallyavailable wood-fired generation units suitable for use inthe villages will not be available until the late 1980's. Furthermore,it should be realized that the quantity.of wood necessary tosupply the electrical energy of a typical village with a peak loadof 100 kW and energy requirement of 394 MWh per year is 58,000 cu. ft.,or 30 acres of standing timber per year assuming wood with a heatcontent of 14.6 x 10 6 Btu/cord.3.Coal fuel - The use of coal as a fuel for heating and electricalgeneration is considered possible in eleven of the thirteen villages.Buckland could be supplied from coal deposits in the Kugruk Riverarea. Villages on the Yukon River (i.e., Koyukuk, Russian Missionand Sheldon Point) could be supplied coal from the Williams Minelocated near the village of Koyukuk. Villages along the KuskokwimRiver could be supplied coal (except Telida) from a potential minedevelopment in the Alaska Range near Farewell or from coal mined atHealy, Alaska and shipped via ocean barge to Bethel and then transportedupriver to the villages.lHeat content as stated in Appendix G for a typical "base cord."5-2LW

)c'J(DIJiIIIIUJJ'WIJI .UAPA22-A/P2 SECTION 5RESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTThe cost is estimated at a high of $258/ton to a low of $llO/ton,depending on location.These costs are based on small-scale operationfor providing coal to the village and/or the cost of Healy coal.If large-scale mining operations were to develop in the Farewellarea, it is conceivable that coal could be available for $50/tonalong the Kuskokwim.The cost of coal listed in the village resourcesummaries however, does not reflect this possibility.above reflect 1981 costs.)(All pricesThe quality of the coal available reflects the heat content of thecoal. The BTU value per pound and per ton is shown in Table 5.1 -5.13.As with wood-fired generation, it is not expected that commercialcoal-fired generation units suitable for village application will beavailable until the late 1980's. The quantity of coal required tosupply the electrical energy needs of a village with a peak load of100 kW and energy requirements of 394 MWh/hr is in the neighborhoodof 375 tons per year of coal with a 17 x 10 6 Btu/ton heat content.\ 1II.iI WJJIJIIJJIJ4.Waste heat recovery - Waste heat recovery is available in virtuallyevery village with electrical generation facilities. (Waste heatcapture can recover .30% of the energy content contained in each gallonof diesel (or equivalent) used for electric generation and which isnormally lost as heat to the environment. That is, waste heatequivalent to approximately 41,400 Btu per gallon of fuel oilconsumed by the diesel engine can be easily captured using enginejacket water waste heat recovery equipment (i.e. no exhaust wasteheat capture). Waste" heat can be used to supplement spacing heatingrequirements in the village and altho~gh the heat could be usedto heat residences; a more practical approach would use the capturedwaste heat to satisfy the large, more centralized heating demandsin the villages such as the school, clinic, city offices, etc.Use" of waste heat suffers from the disadvantage of being directlydependent upon the generator loading. That is, if the generator is5-3I

APA22-A/P2 -SECTION 5RESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTfully loaded, waste heat output ;s high; with low load, the wasteheat output ;s low. In Alaska, however, our electrical systems arewinter peaking and will, therefore, provide the maximum amount ofwaste heat in the winter when the heating demand is highest.Waste heat recovery from electrical generation ;s one of the few.energy resources available for immediate exploitation in all villageswhich operate liquid cooled diesel engine driven generators.Waste heat recovery from heating and/or transportation usage is,in general, impractical and will not be discussed..1r '~iI~Tbe potential savings in dollars per million Btu available fromwaste heat capture is listed in the cost column in the followingtables. These savings are approximate and may vary significantlybecause of numerous variables such as distance from source to user, .quantity of waste heat. transported, etc. The savings per millionBtu have, however, been included to provide an estimate of the potentialsavings associated with waste h~atrecovery.r ; I~(I iI.J5.Hydroelectric potential - The use of hydroelectric power is sitespecific. Villages in this study which are located near potentialhydroelectric developments are:Buckl andHughesKoyukukChuathbalukTakotnarI~The extremely high cost associated with constructing the aboveprojects, which range between $49,600 and $89,600 for installed kilo­_ watt, make it highly unlikely, however, that development will occur.r)~5-4I!1.1r '~

IJ5-5APA22-A/P2 SECTION 5is very site specific.power.7.iUdegrees for all villages.\i iEnergy conservation:IIJ\Passive solar heating:applicable within limits in all villages.~IrlWIJJIIJIr~1IJIU. I1-'1I~IJII~JIJRESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT6. Wind potential - The use of wind power, like hydroelectric power,Villages with potential for use of wind powerrequire average annual wind speeds in excess of 10 mph. Even ifsufficient wind is available, numerous technical and economic constraintsfurther limit the usefulness of wind power.Wind energy conversion systems (WECS) are generally not suitablefor stand alone systems, except for some small individually ownedunits, and require backup generation, which is normally diesel, toprovide a reliable system and energy on days the wind does not blow.WECS would then be primarily used to displace fuel oil during timeswhen the wind blows with sufficient velocity to provide electricalThe cost for displacing one million BTU equivalent ofdiesel fuel using WECS is listed in the appropriate village resource.summaries.Conservation and Solar Heating - The following two energy resources(passive solar and energy conservation) are available in varyingThese two items will be addressed in thefollowing paragraphs and will not be included in the energy resourcetable for each village.Energy conservation can be applied to virtuallyall construction, new and future, in all villages by the incorporation.of im.proved or additional insulation in structures, energyconservative designs, higher efficiency equipment, etc.Application of passive solar heating isPassive solar heating,as with energy conservation, requires proper structure designs,improved insulation and proper site selection and buildi~g orientation.

I :,WLAPA22-A/P2 SECTION 5RESOURCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT\~\It is assumed that the use of passive solar heating and energyconservation will be implemented in all the 13 villages. Furthermore.it is assumed the implementation of passive solar heating andenergy conservation measures will reduce fossil fuel heat requirementsby about one percent per year beginning in 1986. This assumptionresults in a reduction in village fossil fuel requirements of ' aboutfifteen percent by the year 2000. This fifteen percent reduction isincorporated into the village heating requirements forecasts tableslisted in Section 4.I'~r \~I~-ri5-6

LJ L L' c~ ..LJAPA22-A S13Table 5.1ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTBUCKLANDENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor supplierKotzebue#2 diesel138,000 Btu/gal$1. 76/gal Arctic'$12.76/10 6 Btu Li terageDelivered costat villageWood fuelN/AN/AN/AN/ACoal fuelKugruk River70 miles westUnknown;late 1980's6500 Btu/lb13xl0 6 Btu/ton$198-$258/ton$15.23-$19.84/10 6 BtuAppendix HDelivered costat village.Waste Heat lRecoveryHydroelectricPotentialWind potentialHunter Creek30% of fuel used forelectrical generation;'upon installation238 kW, 556 mwh/yrUpon installationRecoverable heat41,400 Btu/galdiesel equivalent.11.3 mph averageannual wind speed#38$450/kW installed Appendix Ddiesel fuel displaced.$52,400/kW Reference$19.72/10 6 Btu 2installed$1450/kWins ta 11 edAppendix DRegional profilesCost assume heat deliverywithin 100 ft radiusof plant. Availabilityvaries with generatorloading. Maintenanceat$ll/kW/yr.18 kW WECS1 Assumes $1.76/gal diesel fuel cost 0.45 load factor.2 Assumes 80% utilization factor.< > saving per million Btu recovered.

APA22-A S1Table 5.2ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTHUGHESENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor supplierNenana112 diesel138,000 Btu/gal$2. 31/gal Nenana Fuel$16.75/10 6 Btu DealerDelivered costat village.

.~APA22-A S2ENERGYRESOURCE ASSESSMENTTable 5.3KOYUKUKENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATARESTRICTIONSDiesel fuelWood fuelCoal fuelMajor suppliersNenana10-mile radiusWilliams Mine29x10 6 cu ft;late 1980's14,000 tons minimumlate 1980's#2 diesel128,000 Btu/gal14.6x106 Btu/cord11,000 Btu/lb22x10 6 Btu/ton$1. 56/gal$11. 31/10 6 Bt,u$132/cord$9.04/10 6 Btu$220/ton$10.00/10 6 BtuNenana FuelDealerAppendix GAppendix HDelivered costat village.Delivered costat village.Delivered costat vill age.UlI Savings per million Btu's recovered.

--- -----~~~~-------~--~-~~---~----- -~~--~~APA22-A S3ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTable 5.4RUSSIAN MISSIONENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFOATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor SupplierNenana112 diesel138,000 Btu/gal$1. 7Ugal Nenana Fuel$12.40/10 6 Btu DealerDelivered costat village.Wood fuel10-mile radi usUnknownlate 1980's14.6x10 6 Btu/cord$ 132/cord Estimated based$9.04/10 6 Btu on Appendix GDe livered costat village.Coal fuelWilliam's MineYukon River14,000 tonslate 1980' sminimum11,000 Btu/lb22x106/Btu/to~$220-250/ton Appendix H$10.00-11.36/10 6 BtuDel ivered costat village.U1I...oWaste Heat lRecoveryHydroelectricPotent i alN/A30% of fuel used forelectric generation;upon installationN/ARecoverable heat41,400 Btu/gal dieselequivalent.N/A$450/kW Installed Appendix 0diesel fuel dlsplacedN/A Reference 1138Cost assumes heatdeliverywithin a 100 ft radius of powerplant. Availability variesw/generator loading.maintenance at $ll/kW/yr.Wind PotentialUpon installation1 Assume $1. 71/gal diesel fuel cost 0.45 load factor2 Assumes 80% utilization factor< > savings per million Btu's recovered11.4 mph averageannual wind speed$1450/kW installed Appendix 0$19.72110 6 Btu lldiesel equivalentRegional profiles18 kW WECSl. ~.[

[-~APA22-A S4Table 5.5ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTSHELDON POINTENERGYRESOURCEQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor SupplierSt. Mary's#2 diesel"13B;000 Btu/gal$1. 71/ga 1$12.40/10 6 BtuVi 11 age Counc i1Delivered costat village.Wood fuelInsufficient quantities available for electric generation.Coal fuelWilliam's MineYukon River14,000 tons minimumlate 1980's11,000 Btu/lb22xl0 6 Btu/ton$220-250/ton Appendix H$10.00-$11.36/10 6 BtuDelivered costat village.Waste Heat l30% of fuel used forelectrical generation;upon installation onschool generators.Recoverab 1 e heat41,400 Btu/galdiesel equivalent$450/kW installed Appendix 0diesel fuel displaced.Cost assumes heat deliverywithin a 100 ft radiusof plant. Availabilityvaries with generatorloading. M~intenance at$l1/kW/yr.HydroelectricpotentialN/AN/AN/A Reference #38Wind potentialUpon installation13mph averageannual wind speed$9030/kW installed Appendix D$80. 88/10 6 Btu 2diesel equivalentAssumes individual1.5 kW WECS similar tothose presently beinginstalled.I Assumes $1.71/gal diesel fuel cost 0.45 LF2 Assumes 80% util ization factor< > saving per million Btu's recovered.

APA22-A S5Table 5.6ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTCHUATHBALUKENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor supplierBethel#2 diesel 138,000Btu/gal$1. 44/gal.$10.44/10 6 BtuUnitedTransportationBethelDelivered costat village.Wood fuelMiddle Kuskokwim167x10 6 cu ftlate 1980' s14.6x10 6 Btu/cord$921cord$6.30/10 6 BtuAppendix GDe 1 i vered cos tat vill age.Coal fuelHealy, Al'askaLate 1980's8500 Btu/lb17x10 6 Btu/ton$llO/ton$6. 47110~ BtuAppendix HDelivered costat village.1ftI......IVWaste Heat 1Recovery30% of fuel used for Recoverable heatelectrical' generation; 41,400 Btu/gal dieselupon installation equivalent$450/kW installed Appendix Ddiesel fuel displacedCost assumes heat deliverywithin a 100 ft radiusof plant. Ayailabilityvaries with generatorloading. Maintenanceat $ll/kW/yr.HydroelectricPotentialMission Creek125 kW, 295 mwh/yrestimated; Estimatedon 1 ine 1986$58,900/kWinstalledReference #38Wind PotentialAssumes $1.44/gal diesel fuel cost, 0.45 LF< > Saving per million Btu's recovered.8 mph averageannual wind speed.Average annual windspeed insufficient forwind generation.r £-.[ ---- ..[

(APA22-A S6ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTable 5.7ENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYCROOKED CREEKQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelWood fuelMajor supp 11 erBethelMiddle Kuskokwim112 diesel138,000 Btu/gal167> saving per million Btu recovered.

APA22-A S7ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTable 5.8NIKOLAIENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYCOSTSOURCE OFDiesel fuelMajor supplierMcGrath!l2 diesel $1. 67/gal Village138,000 Btu/gal $12.11/10 6 Btu CouncilDelivered costat villageWood fuel1D-mile radius42.9x10 6 cu ft 14.6x10 6 Btu/cord $132/cord Appendix GDelivered costlate 1980's$9.04/10 6 Btuat vi llage.Coa I fuelHealy, AlaskaLate 1980's 8500 Btu/lb $120/ton Appendix H17x10 6 Btu/ton$7.06/10 6 BtuDelivered costat village.'" I.....Waste Heat lRecovery30% of fuel used for Recoverable heat $450/kW installed Appendix 0electrical generation; 41,400 Btu/gal upon installation diesel equivalent diesel fuel displacedCost assume heat deliverywithin 100 ft radiusof plant. Availabilityvaries with generatorloading. Maintenanceat $ll/kW/yr.HydroelectricN/AN/A N/A N/A Reference 1138N/Apotentia IWind potential Villagers indicate insufficient wind in village for wind power. No wind data ava·i1able.1 Assumes $1.67/gal diesel fuel cost 0.45 load factor.< > saving per million Btu recovered.

LLL_APAll-A S8ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTable 5.9RED DEVILENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor suppl ierBethelIII diesel138,000 Btu/gal$1.46/galUnited$10.59/10 6 Btu TransportationBethelDelivered costat villageWOiJd fuelMiddle Kuskokwim167x10 6 cu ftlate 1980's14.6x10 6 Btu/cord$911cord$6.30/10 6 BtuAppendix GDelivered costat village.Coal fuelHealy, AlaskaLate 1980's8500 Btu/lb17x10 6 Btu/ton$110/ton$6.47/10 6 BtuAppendix HDe livered cos tat village.U1I.....U1Waste Heat lRecovery30% of fuel used forelectrical generation;upon installationschool generator.Recoverable heat41,400 Btu/galdiesel equivalent$450/kW installed Appendix Ddiesel fuel displacedCost assume heat deliverywithin 100 ft radiusof plant. Availabil ity ".varies with generatorloading. Maintenanceat $l1/kW/yr.HydroelectricpotentialN/AN/AN/AN/A Reference 38N/AWind potential1 Assumes $1.46/gal diesel fuel cost 0.45 load factor.< > saving per million Btu recovered.7.0 mph averageannual wind speedRegionalprofi lesAverage annual windspeed sufficient forwind generation.

APA22-A S9ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTable 5.10SLEETMUTEENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelWood fuel,Coal fuelMajor supplierBethelMiddle KuskokwimHealy, Alaska#2 diesel13B,OOO Btu/gal167x10 6 cu ft 14.6x10 G Btu/cordlate 1980'sLate 1980"58500 Btu/lb17x10 6 Btu/ton$l.46/gal$10.59/10 6 Btu$921cord$6.30/10 6 Btu$1l0/ton$6.47/10 6 BtuUnitedTransportationBethel.Appendix GAppendix HDelivered costat villageDelivered costat village.Delivered costat village.'t'I-''"Waste Heat 1RecoveryHydroelectricPotentialN/A30% of fuel used for Recoverable heatelectrical generation; 41,400 Btu/galupon installation of diesel equivalentnew power p I ant.N/AN/A$450/kW ins ta 11 ed Append ix Ddiesel fuel displacedN/A'Reference #38•Cost assume heat deliverywithin 100 ft radiusof plant. Availabilityvaries with generatorloading. Maintenanceat $ll/kW/yr.Wind potentialIAssumes $1.46/gal diesel fuel cost 0.45 load factor.< > saving per million Btu recovered.6.8 mph averageannual wind speed.RegionalProfilesAverage annual windspeed insufficient forwind generation.r:: . 'rl

L-=-... ,APAZZ-A 510ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTable5.11STONY RIVERENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor supplier#2 diesel$1. 47/galUnitedOe livered cos tBethel138,000 Btu/gal$10.66/10 6 BtuTransportationat vi llageWood fuelMiddle Kuskokwim167x10 6 cu ft14.6x106 Btu/cord$92/cordBethel.Appendix GOe Ii ve red cos tlate 1980's$6.30/l0 6Btuat village.Coal fuelHealy, AlaskaLate 1980"s8500 Btu/lb$llO/tonAppendix HDelivered cost17x1Q6 Btu/ton$6.47/10 6 Btuat village.Was te Heat 130% of fuel used for Recoverable heat$450/kW installedAppendix DCost assume heat deliveryRecoveryelectrical generation;41,400 Btu/galwithin 100 ft radiusupon installation ofdiesel equivalentdiesel fuel displacedof plant. Availabilitynew power plant.varies with generatorloading. Maintenanceat $ll/kW/yr.Hydroe I ec t ricN/AN/AN/AN/A Reference #38PotentialWind potential5.7 mph averageRegionalAverage annual windannual wind speed.Profi lesspeed insufficient forwind generation.IAssumes $1.47/gal diesel fuel cost 0.45 load factor.< > saving per mil~ion Btu recovered.

APA22-A 511Table 5.12ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTAKOTNAENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYSOURCE OFDATACOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor supplier#2 diesel$1. 65/galVi llageDelivered costBethel138,000 Btu/gal. $11.96/10 6 BtuMeetingsat villageWood fuel10-mile radius10.8xl0 6 cu ft14.6xl0 6 Btu/cord$921cord 2Appendix GDellvered costlate 1980's$6.30/1OS Btuat village.Coal fuelHealy, AlaskaLate 1980's8500 Btu/lb$I20/tonAppendix HDelivered cost17xl0 6 Btu/ton$7.06/10 6 Btuat village.Waste Heat l30% of fuel used for Recoverable heat$450/kW installedAppendix DCost assume heat delivery

APA22-A S12ENERGY RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTElIDATable 5.13ENERGYRESOURCELOCATIONQUANTITY/AVAILABILITYQUALITYCOSTSOURCE OFCOMMENTSDiesel fuelMajor supplierMcGrathi/2 diesel138,000 Btu/gal$2. 311gal$16.75/10 6 BtuWood fuel10-mil e radi us28.8d0 6 cu ftlate 1980's14.6x10 6 Btu/cord$1321cord 2$9.04/10 6 BtuAppendix GDelivered costat village.Coal fuelN/AN/AN/AN/AAppendix H -U1II-'Waste Heat 1Recovery30% of fuel used for Recoverable heatelectrical generation;41,400 Btu/gal$450/kW installed\.0' upon installation of diesel equivalent. diesel fuel displacedliquid cooled dieselengines.Appendix DCost assume heat deliverywithin 100 ft radiusof plant. Availabilityvaries with generatorloading. Maintenanceat $ll/kW/yr.Hydroelectric.PotentialGanes Creek1200 kW, 2838 mwh/yr 89,600/kWinstalledReference i/38Hydro site wouldservice Takotna, Ophirand McGrath.Wind potential Villagers indicate insufficient wind in village for wind power. No wind data' available.IAssumes $1.65/gal diesel fuel cost; 0.45 load factor, future diesel generator sets water cooled.2 Lowered cost due to substantial road network surrounding Takotna.< > saving per million Btu recovered:

APA 23/QB. SURVEY OF TECHNOLOGIESThe fo 11 owi ng paragraphs contain a bri ef abstract of thetechno 1 ogi es 1 i sted below and whi ch were exami ned to determinetheir possible application in each of the villages.A more thorough exp 1 anat i on of these techno log; es as we 11as information on several additional technologies can befound in Appendix D.r 1UI 'Wr'~•••••Direct fired coal for electricalDirect fired wood for electricalGoethermalDieselGas turbine• Low Btu gasification• Wind energy conversion systems• Waste heat recovery•Geothermal heatingBinary cycle for electrical generation• Single wire ground return transmission•Hydroelectric generation• Electric heatingPassive solarConservation••generationgeneration(I .~r 'II.jr 'IIrI[I~5-20

5.B.1COAL1. DIRECT FIRED COAL FOR ELECTRICAL GENERATION(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedCoal is ground to roughly less than 2 inch diameter -chunks andmechanically loaded onto a boiler grate after which it iscombusted in the boiler to heat incoming water to steam. Thesteam is then expanded in a turbine which drives a generatorto produce electricity., 1uI J,WIIIIIJJQJ, 1W2apa19/a2) Current and future availabilitySteam plants account for the majority of electrical generationin the United States today. ~lthough steam plants can accommodatea wide range of loads, U.S. economies of scale indicate thatthe cost per unit increases sharply in sizes below about 50MWe. It should be noted that European coal-steam generationunits are employed in the less than 10 MWe range.5-2l

( \I :~5. B. 2 [ \WOOD ~2. DIRECT FIRED WOOD FOR ELECTRICAL GENERATION(A)General Description1)Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedWood can be directly fired in traveling grate or stoker typesteam boiler~to provide steam for a conventional steam turbinecycle. The two major sources of wood fuel are forest residuesand wood wastes from industrial operations.(I~2)Current and future availabilityExisting commerci.al systems are roughly in the 1-50 MWe range.Economics of small scale plants are generally prohibitivebe~ause of the economics of operation and maintenance requirementsfor full time, highly skilled labor. Numerous U.S. manufacturers~\~do produce wood fired boilers suitable for generating electricityin the 250-1000 kWe range.r ~I .IIJ-II.Jr \~~~apa19/b 5-22rI.Jr :IIJ~

5.B.3GEOTHERMAL3.GEOTHERMAL - ELECTRIC (FLASHED STEAM)(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involved, 1W, IJGeothermal electric generation in Alaska would be by thefl ashed steam or bi nary processes.The bi nary conversi ontechnology is discussed generically in another profile. Theflashed steam process applies to liquid dominated geothermalreservoi rs such as those thought to exi st inA 1 aska. Hotliquids are brought to the surface and partially converted tosteam in flash vessels where the fluids· undergo pressurereduction.The separated steam componeht is used to power asteam turbi ne-generator and spent and separated fl ui ds arereinjected into the earth to. minimize potential subsidenceproblems.2)Current and future availabiltiy!JIUNot currently in commercial practice in the United States, butover 140 MWe in operation in foreign countries. U.S. environmentalrestrictions are much more severe, in general.I:JIIJ,]\apa19/c 5-23

,W5.B.4DIESEL4. DIESEL(A)General Description1)Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedIn the diesel engine, air is compressed in a cylinder to ahigh pressure. Fuel oil is injecte~ into the compressed air,which is at a temperature above the fuel. ignition point, andthe fuel burns, converting thermal energy to mechanical energyby driving a piston. Pistons drive a shaft which in turndrives the generator.(~I~2)Current and future availabilityDiesel engines driving e~ectrical generators are one of themost efficient simple cycle converters of chemical energy(fuel) to electrical energy. Although the diesel cycle intheory will burn any combustible matter, the practical fact ofthe matter is that these engines burn only high grade liquidpetroleum or gas, except for multi-thousand horsepower engineswhich can burn heated residual oil. Diesel generating unitsare usually built as an integral whole and mounted on skidsfor installation at their place of use.r~rl.apa19/d5-24

5.B.5GAS TURBINE5. GAS TURBINE(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involved1:I.JI, )Wi, 1, I..J2)In simple cycle gas turbine plants incoming air is compressedand injected into the combustion chamber along with the gas orvaporized liquid fuel. The combusted gas, at relatively hightemperature and pressure, expands through and drives the turbine,which drives the generator and the air compressor. Fuel istypi~ally natural gas or very high grade distillate oil.Current anq future availabilityII !~JGas turbine power plants are a proven, established technology,chiefly in peaking applic~tions.,II..J\~iJIapa19/e5-25

5.6.6LOW - BTU GASIFICATION6. LOW - STU GASIFICATIONri'IIWCA)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedSo-called low-Btu gas (about 200 Btu/Scf) can be manufacturedfrom coal and biomass in commercially available equipment.However, the use of this gas for power generation is a verycomplex process.2) Current and future availabilityr '~The prospect of. gasification contributing to Alaska power inthe next 10 years ;s remote for other than demonstration typepl?nts. Existing commercial facilities are far too large forvillage applicat;on~.apal9/i5-26

5.B.7WECS7.WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS (WECS)(A)General Description -1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involveduuI.tJ ,\I~J\2)The thermodynamic process involved stems from the sun, theprimary energy source which produces the wind.This windenergy cannot be stored is intermittent, somewhat unpredictable.The process relies on wind flow over an air foilassembly to create differential pressures along the air foil.This differential pressure results in rotation of the assemblyaround a fixed axis to which it is attached. Power from thewind is transmitted through the connection shaft and accompanyinggear box to an electrical generator.Three types of generators are presently in use wi th wi ndenergy systems. These are the DC generator, the AC inductiongenerator and the AC synchronous generator. Of the threetypes, the AC induction generator is the most widely used becauseof its simplicity and low cost.An induction generator is nota stand-alone generator and must be connected to an externalpower system of relatively constant frequency and voltage tooperate properly.Current and future availabilityAvailability of the- wind at useful velocities require longterm records to estimate the portntial energy.records provide less credible estimates.Lesser2apa19/q 5-27

5.B.7WECSAvailability of small size units ;n the 1.5 kW to 20 kW rangeis good. Large units in the lOO-200kW range are currentlyundergoing tests in both the government and private sector andshoul d be avail abl e in the near future.multi-megawatt sizes are in process.Demonstrations of( 1~L,ll2apa19/q5-28

JIJI5.B.8WASTE HEAT8. DIESEL WASTE HEAT RECOVERY(A)General Description1)Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedI\UI 'U: IWIWIJIJIJIIWJ2)apa19/sThe present use of fossil fuels (coal, gas, oil) in Alaska (asel sewhere) to produce more useful forms of energy (heat,electricity. motive power) is less than 100 percent efficient.For example, if a machine burns a certain quantity of fossilfuel and produces useful output (shaft horsepower, electricalenergy, steam, hot water or air for space heating) equivalentto 30% of the fue 1 burned, the energy represented by therema i ni ng 70% of the fuel wi 11 . appea r as unused or "was te"heat. Such heat most often appears as hot exhau·st gas. tepidto warm water (65°F-180°F), hot air from cooling radiators, ordirect. radiation from the machine in question such as a furnace,steam power plant, diesel engine, etc.Diesel waste heat can be recovered from engine cooling waterand exhaust, or either source separately. the waste heat istypically transferred to a water-glycol circulating system inAlaskan applications. The heated circulating fluid can be usedfor space, water, or process heating.Current and future availabilityRecovery of diesel waste heat in Alaska is growing as aresult of sharp increases in diesel fuel costs. Recovery ofjacket water heat only is the most common in Alaska.Diesel waste heat availability is directly related to thelocation and. operation cycles of the engine installation.5-29

I \W5.B.9GEOTHERMAL HEATINGf 'I1.19. GEOTHERMAL HEATING(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedHot geothermal liquids can be used'for direct applications. including: space and water heating, process heating, andagricultural growth. Of primary interest for village applicationsis space and water heating. The geothermal fluids are typicallypumped from geothermal wells and run through heat exchangersprior to surface or subsurface disposal. A clean circulatingfluid is heated in the heat exchanger and piped through insulatedpipes to space heaters or water heating applications prior toreturn t~ the .heat exchanger.( .~2) Current and future availabilityDistrict (here: village) heating is extensively practiced inIceland, is practiced in Hungary and France, has beencommerci ally practiced for many years in Boi se, Idaho, andseveral, U. S. systems are i'n various stages of construction.Heating of buildings with heat loads comparable to smallvillage requirements is practiced in Klamath Falls, Oregon.apa19/t 5-30

JJI .JJI J10. BINARY CYCLE FOR ELECTRICAL GENERATION(A) General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involved5.B.10BINARYII, )~WW, IU: 1W· IJJJ· \· '1IIIW· jI~I WoJapa19/vIn the binary conversion process. a heated primary fluid ofinsufficient quality for direct use in electrical productionpasses through a heat exchanger to transfer heat to a workingfluid. The working fluid has a lower boiling point than waterand is vaporized in the heat exchanger. The vaporized workingfluid then expands through a turbine or cylinder piston arrangement,is condensed, and returns to the heat exchanger. Theprimary fluid is returned to its heat source following heatexchange. .2) Current and future availabilityCurrent commercial availability is restricted to unit sizesin excess of village power requirements as determined in thisstudy. Binary cycle generation equipment is unit sizes suitablefor village applications is not expected to be availableuntil the late 1980 1 s.5-31

11. SINGLE WIRE GROUND RETURN (SWGR) TRANSMISSION(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involved5.B.11SWGRA Single Wire Ground Return system (SWGR) can best be described asa single-phase, single wire electrical transmission system using theeirth as the return conductor.The single wire configuration can be designed for·minimum cost byutilizing high-strength conductors that require a minimum number ofstructures and still retain the standards for high reliability.I \~r :.~I '.~L! .~2) Current and future availabilityA demonstration project to supply Bethel central stationelectricity to the village of Napakiak, a distance of 8.5miles is presently in operation. This project has provided ademonstration of the technical and cost feasibil ity of theSWGR system.r .,apal9/w 5-32

IJII~J!JI1I~JIJ'JII JIJ12.(A)HYDROELECTRIC GENERATIONGeneral Description5.B.12HYDROELECTRIC1. Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedIn the hydroelectric power development, flowing water isdirected into a hydraulic turbine where the energy in thewater is used to turn a shaft, which in turn drives a generator.In their action, turbines involve a continuous transformationof the potential and/or kinetic energy of the waterinto usable mechanical energy at the shaft. Water stored atrest at an elevation above the level of the turbine (head)possesses potential energy; when flowing, the water possesseskinetic energy as a function of its velocity. The return ofthe used water to th~ higher elevation necessary for functioningof the hydroelectric machinery is powered by the sun tocomplete the cycle - a direct natural process using solarenergy.The ability to store water at a useful elevation makesthis energy supply predictable and dependable.2. Current and future availabilityHydroelectric developments in the United States, as of January1978, totaled 59 mi 11 ion kil owatts, produci ng an estimatedaverage annual output of 276 billion kilowatt hours accordingto the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).about 10% of Alaska's electric energy needs.Hydropower providesDevelopmentsrange in size from over a million kilowatts down to just a fewkilowatts of installed capacity.Hydropower is a time provenmethod of generation that offers unique advantages.Fuelcost, a major contributor to thermal plant .operating costs, isel im; nated.APA/26/B 5~33

[ \U5.8.13ELECTRIC HEATING13. ELECTRIC HEATING(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes invplvedElectricity is passed through resistance wiring and gives offheat in encountering such resistance. The heat is transferredto air or water.2) Current and future availabilityElectric heat is clean, noiseless, easily controllable andrelatively efficient. Electric heat is recognized as a soundmeans of heating buildings where heat losses are held to asound, economical ,level and the cost of electricity is notprohibitive.I "~, ,~I ;f 'I I~I '~!Ia.JI '! ;~i II :iIIW{'~APA26/C5-34I 1~

II o1I~JI. l~IIJI~I-,J14. PASSIVE SOLAR HEATING(A)General Description5.B.14SOLARPassive solar heating makes use of solar energy (sunlight) throughenergy efficient design (i.e. south facing windows, shutters, addedinsulation) but without the aid of any mechanical or electricalinputs. Space heating is the most common applicatidn of passivesolar heating. Because iuch solar heating is available only whenthe sun shines, its availability is intermittent (day-night cycles)and variable (winter~summer -cloudy-clear).IJ, )!~JI• 1II~IJIIWapa19/u 5-35

5.B.15CONSERVATIONIIIIJ15. CONSERVATION..((A)General Description1)Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedConservation measures for the 13 villages considered here aremainly classified as IIpassive". Passive measures are intendedto conserve energy without any further electrical, thermal, ormechanical energy input. Typical passive measures are insulation,double glazing or solar film, arctic entrances andweather stripping. Energy conservation characteristics ofsome passive measures degrade with time, which must be consideredin the overall evaluation of 'their effectiveness foran intended life cycle. Other conservation measures includesimprovement in efficiency of utilization devices (such as motors)and "doing without", energy by disciplines (turning offlights, turn~ng down thermostats)...( :(~2)Current and future availabilityPassive me~sures are commercially available and increasing inuse allover the United States due to the rapidly escalatingcost of energy.f •IAPA26/L5-36

APA 19/ee 116. OTHEROther technologies which are presently in various stages of researchand development can be found in Appendix D. Technology Profiles.Section 3.9.'\I.JJI,LJII: 1W, "I• , I.~IIJJ I, II~UIJI,JI .5-37

APA 20 0-1C. APPROPRIATE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIESi 'i~Investigations of resources indicate that certain of the alternativeenergy options under consideration in this study are in an experimental/developmental stage, and therefore a somewhat general approach tofuture development has been taken. The methodology utilized to selectappropriate village technologies for further investigation includedthe following major activities:• Power and energy requirements were identified.I~•An inventory of technologies for electrical energy generationwas made (Appendix D), identifying and evaluating them onan order of magnitude scale, taking into account technical,economic, and environmental aspects.• From the energy resources identified for each village(SectionS-A), several resources were selected for moredetailed analysis in comparison to the base case of dieselgeneration. Available technology and preliminary costestimates established for these resources indicate thatdevelopment could be technically and economically feasible.•A more detailed analysis of these selected alternativeswas performed including economic evaluation through theyear 2000 and discussion of environmental, land use, andsafety aspects. (Note: In villages with potentialhydroelectric developments (i.e., Buckland, Hughes,Koyukuk, Chauthbaluk and Takotna), because of the50-year life of the hydroelectric alternative, allanalysis for these villages have been extended to theend of the economic life of the hydroelectric project.)These selected alternatives which are listed below include proventechnological forms, and less conventional forms presently underdevelopment such as binary cycle generation and wind generation.5-38(I~

IJIAPA 20 0 1List of selected Alternatives For Evaluation1) Diesel generation2) Waste heat recovery3) Binary cycles using wood and/or coal fuel4)5)6)Hydroelectric generationWind generationPassive solar heating7) Energy conservationTable S.C.1 lists which of the above selected technologies are appropriateto each village.JPassive solar heating and energy conservation measures are availablein varying degrees in all villages. It is assumed that these twoalternativ'es will be implemented in all villages. These two optionsare, therefore, not specifically listed in Table S.C.1.IJir.~I, 1!IJ, IWIWIJ5-39

APA 20 a 1Table 5.C.l,i~II~Appropriate Energy TechnologiesBinaryDiesel Waste Heat Cycle Hydro- WindVi 11 age Generat ion Recovery Wood/Coal Electric GenerationBuckland X X X X XHughes X X X X UnknownKoyukuk X X X X X UnknownRussian Mission X X X X XSheldon Point X X X X XChuathbaluk X X X X XCrooked Creek X X X XNikolai X X X 'XRed Devil X X X XSleetmute X X X XStony River X X X XTakotna X Xl X X XI .Telida Xl X XXImplies appropriate technologyLI~!~I I.JLL1Waste heat recovery available when iiquid cooled diesel engine installed.f '5-40f :~

Section 6Energy Plans

I JAPA 22-A/TSECTION 6ENERGY PLANSIJA. INTRODUCTIONThe approach to the energy plans formulated for each village isexplained in this section. From the list of energy alternatives selectedfor.detailed evaluation (Section 5) a combination of alternatives orenergy plans was formulated to meet the energy forecast requirementsfor each village. Each plan is formulated to meet the forecasted electricalenergy requirements of the village plus additional related requirements,such as space heating, where appropriate., \A base case plan using diesel generation is formulated for each village.This plan is used as the "control case" to determine the advantage ordisadvantage of other alternatives as compared to diesel generation.Future village diesel generation additions assume that local schools,which have sufficient installed generation capacity, will provide theirown back-up capability. The school will, however, rely on the centralizedvillage power plant for their primary supply of electrical powerand energy.1iII~\), IIJJBinary cycle generation is presented for each village when sufficientcoal and/or wood resources are available. In villages where both woodand coal fuel are available, it has been concluded that wood-firedgeneration would prove more advantageous than coal because; 1) wood isa relatively clean burning fuel as compared to coal; 2) wood is moresuitable for small power plants than coal. Binary cycle generationusing only the wood-fired option is, therefore, investigated for villagesin which both wood and coal fuel ;s available.Diesel fuel oil-fired binary cycle generation is also possible, butprovides no significant cost or technical advantage over diesel enginepowered generation. Fuel oil-fired binary cycle generation is, therefore,not included in the formulated energy plan for each village.III'l1.1JJ6-1

. APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANSA waste heat capture analysis is included with all options thatuse fossil fuels for electrical generation (i.e., diesel generationemploying engine jacket water cooling and binary cycle generation).Lr 'Wr .Hydroelectric and wind generators are investigated in'the villageswhere these resources are available. Any additional benefits fromthese technologies, such as the use of excess hydroelectric energyto provide inexpensive electric space heat is also included.6-2

APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANSB. VILLAGES NORTH OF YUKON RIVER1. Buckl anda.Base Case Plan1) Plan components - Diesel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of system additionsDiesel - 1983 - 100 kWj 1994 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 140 kW, 1985 - 100 kW,1994 - 100 kW, 1~JIb.3) Plan description - This plan assumes continued useof diesel driven generators throughout the study andimplementation of waste heat recovery.Alternative Plan A1) Plan components - Diesel and binary cycle generationusing coal fuel and waste heat recovery.2) Timing of additionsDiesel - 1983 - 100 kW "Binary Cycle - 1989 - 250 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 140 kW; 1989 - 250 kW3) Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof coal-fired binary cycle generation facilitiesin the late 1980·s as a replacement for dieselgenerators and the implementation of waste heatrecovery.c)Alternative Plan B1) Plan components - diesel and wind generator andwaste heat recovery.6-3

APA 22-A/T2) Timing of additions -Diesel - 1983 - 100 kW; 1994 - 100 kWSECTION 6ENERGY PLANSWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 140 kW, 1994 - 100kWWind - 1983 - 2 - 18 kW WECS; 1990 - 45 kW WECS,1997 - 45 kW WECS3) Plan description - This plan assumes diesel generatorsaugmented by the installation of a WECS facilityto displace diesel fuel oil and the implementationof waste heat recovery...r 'I Ir .~d.Alternative Plan C1) Plan components - Diesel and waste heat recoveryand hydroelectric.2) Timing of additionDiesel - 1983 - 100 kW; 1994 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 140 kWHydroelectric - 1986 - 238 kW, 556 mWh/yr.! :..i3) Plan description - This plan assumes construction ofa hydroelectric project on Hunter Creek, 25 miles;;>southwest of Buckland (Ref. 37) as partial replacementfor diesel ,generation. Estimated 1980 constructionof the hydroelectric project with transmission lineis $12,471,000 (Ref. 37)...[ 1I I6-4

l, 1oJ, lI~IJJ, 1APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS2. Hughesa) Base Case Plan1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of system additjons -Diesel - 1982 - 75 + 50 kW; 1991 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW; 1991 - 75 kW3) Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the studyand the implementation of waste heat recovery.b. Alternative Plan AII, iI I~~ IWU, 1'~I'). i, II..fI JI~Wc.1)2)Plan components - Diesel and Binary cycle generationusing wood fuel and waste heat recovery.Timing of additions -Diesel - 1982 - 75 + 50 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 150 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW; 1989 - 150 kW3) Plan description - This. plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilitiesin the late 1980 l s as a replacement for dieselgeneration and the implementation of waste heatrecovery.Alternative Plan B1) Plan components diesel and waste heat and hydroelectric, 1~,6-5

iWAPA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS2) Timing of additionsDiesel - 1982 - 75 + 50 kWWaste heat - 1983 - 75 kWHydroelectric - 1986 - 45 kW, 85 mwh; 1988 - 45 kW,100 mWhr 'Wr 'I ,~3) Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof two possible hydroelectric sites located west andnorthwest of Hughes (See reference 37) as partialreplacement for diesel generation. Estimated 1980construction cost of two hydroelectric projectsplus transmission line are as follows (ref. 37).\ 'W1. Site west of Hughes - $3,402,8002. Site northwest of Hughes - $3,426,400\r ;~., .~6-6

JIJAPA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANSIIIWJ'WIIIIJJ, IU, IU, IUJIi..JIIJJ3. Koyukuka) Base case plan1. Plan components - Diesel and waste heat recovery2. Timing of system additionsDiesel 1981 - 75 + 50 kW, 1986 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW, 1986 - 75 kW3. Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of d i ese 1 dri ven gener.at i on throughout thestudy and the implementation of waste heat recovery.b. Alternative Plan A1. Plan components - Diesel and binary cycle generationusing wood fuel and waste heat recovery_2. Timing of additions -Diesel - 1981 - 75 + 50 kW, 1986 - 75 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 150 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW, 1986 - 75 kW,.1989 - 150 kW.3. Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generator facilitiesin the late 1980's as a replacement for dieselgeneration and the implementation of waste heatrecovery.c. Alternative Plan B.1. Plan components - diesel and hydroelectric6-7

APA 22-A/T2.Timing of additionsSECTION 6ENERGY PLANSI 'WDiesel - 1981 - 75 + 50 kW, 1986 - 75 kW .Hydroelectric - 1986 - 157 kW, 440 mWh/yr3.Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof a hydroelectric project on the east tributary tothe NUlato River (Ref. 37) as replacement for dieselgeneration and to provide supplemental electric'space heating during three years wh~nsurplushydroelectric energy is available. Estimated 1980construction cost of the hydroelectric project andtransmission line is $7,792,900 (Ref. 37).r '~6-8

ENERGY PLANSI 6-9APA 22-A/T SECTION 64. Russian Missiona. Base Case Plan1) Plan components - Diesel + waste heat recoveryr 1b. Alternative Plan Au2) Timing of system additionsDiesel - 1981 - 90 kW; 1982 - 90 kWr 1W3) Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof coal-fired binary cycle generation ~acilitiesin the late ~980'S as a replacement for dieselgeneration and the implementation of waste heatrecovery.r 1I iIJIc. Alternative Plan B.J1) Plan components - diesel and wind generation andIwaste heat recovery.WI2) Timing of system additionsDiesel - 1981 - 90 kW; 1982 - 90 kW; 1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 90 kW; 1989 - 100 kW3) Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the study.and implementation of waste heat recovery.1) Plan components - Diesel and binary cyclegeneration using coal fuel and waste heat recovery.Binary cycle - 1989 - 250 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 90 kW. 1989 - 250kW

lWrlW: \APA 22-A/TSECTION 6ENERGY PL~NSI\.jf ')2) Timing of additionsDiesel - 1981 - 90 kW; 1982 - 90 kW; 1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 90 kW, 1989 - 100 kWWind - 1983 - 18 kW WECS, 1986 - 18 kW WECS,1994 - 45 kW WECS3) Plan description - This plan assumes diesel generationaugmented by the installation of WECS facility todisplace fuel oil and the implementation of wasteheat recovery.~r \~r iWI 'I..J..r 1I I6-10

JIJAPA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANSIIJJ5. Sheldon Pointa. Base Case Pl an1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recoveryIJIIIJJI Wb.2) . Timing of system additionsDiesel - 1982 - 100 + 75 kW;1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 100 kW, 1989 - 100 kW3) Plan description - This, plan assumes the use of dieseldriven generators throughout the study and the implementationof waste heat recovery.Alternative Plan AI IU1) Plan components - diesel and binary cycle generatorsusing coal fuel and waste heat recovery.II iUI iII.jIIJJJII~JIJc.2) Timing of additionsDiesel - 1982 - 100 + 75 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 200 kWWaste Heat Recovery 1983 - 100 kW, 1989 - 200 kW3. Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof coal-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980 l s as a replacement for diesel generationand the implementation of waste heat recovery.Alternative Plan B.1) Plan components - diesel and wind generation andwaste heat recovery.6-11I

DDAPA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS2) Timing of additionsDiesel - 1982 - 100 + 75 kW; 1995 - 100 kWwaste heat equipment - 1983 - 100 kWwind - 1982 - 10-1.5 kW WECS; 1983 - 10 - 1.5 kWWECS; 1985 - 18-1.5 kW WECS; 1990 - 5 - 1.5 kWWECS; 1995 - 6 - 1.5 kW WECS; 2000 - 6 -1. 5 kWWECS.i ,i .~I \Wr '~u3.Plan description - This plan assumes individual1.5 kW wind generators for residential users andthe use of diesel generation with waste heat recoveryto supply electrical energy to other consumer groups.rI .i..J6-12

JIJII JJIAPA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANSC. VILLAGES - MIDDLE AND UPPER KUSKOKWIM6. Chuathbaluka. Base Case Plan1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of system additions .Diesel - 1981 - 60 kW + 100 kW, 1991 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 100 kW, 1991 - 100 kW· IW·JJ3) Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the studyand the implementation of waste heat recovery.b) Alternative Plan A1) Plan components - diesel and binary cycle generationusing wood fuel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of additions -Diesel - 1981 - 60 kW + 100 kWBinary unit - 1989 - 200 kWWaste heat recovery - 1983 - 100 kW, 1989 - 200 kWII· 1W· I~~IJc.3) Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980 l s as a replacement for diesel generationand the implementation of waste heat recovery.Alternative Plan B.1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recoveryand hydroelectric generation.II• 1U6-13

APA 22-AI.T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANSI •~I ;ij.j2) Timing of additions -Diesel - 1981 - 60 kW + 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 100 kWHydroelectric - 1986 - 125 kW; 195 mWh/yr estimated3) Plan description - This plan assumes construction ofa hydroelectric project in Mission Creek 2.5 mileseast of Chuathbaluk as partial replacement for dieselgeneration (Ref. 38). Estimated 1980 cons~ruction costof th"e hydroel ectri c project and transmi 55 i on 1 i neis $7,360,000 (Ref. 38). /i 1I1.1ur :~r !6-14

APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS7. Crooked Creeka. Base Case Plan1) Plan components - Diesel and waste heat recoveryZ) Timing of system additionsDiesel - 1981 - 60 kW + 100 kW; 1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment 1983 - 100 kW; 1989 - 100 kW3. Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the studyand the implementation of waste heat recovery.b.Alternative Plan A1) Plan components - diesel and binary cycle generationusing wood fuel and waste heat recovery.( 12) Timing of additions -Diesel - 1981 - 60 kW + 100 kWBinary units ~ 1989 - 200 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 100 kW, 1989 - 200 kW3)Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980 1 5 as a replacement for diesel generationand the implementation of waste heat recovery.6-15

APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS8. NikolaiI~[,i~, ' , 'a.Base Case Plan1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recoveryIiI I~2) Timing of system additions -Diesel - 1986 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW3) Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the studyand the implementation of waste heat recovery.I~b.Alternative Plan A1) Plan components - diesel and binary cycle generationusing wood fuel and waste heat recovery.r 'I )~2) Timing of additionsDiesel - 1986 - 75 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 125 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW, 1989 - 125 kW3) Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980's as a replacement for diesel generationand the implementation of waste heat recovery.I'I ;f 1~6-16

APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS9. Red Devi 1a.,Base Case Pl an1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recoveryI~JIWI( 1U, ,b.2) Timing of system additions -Diesel - 1982 - 75 + 50 kWj 2000 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW2000 - 75 kW3) Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the studyand the implementation of waste heat recovery.Alternative Plan A1) Plan components - diesel and binary cyclegeneration using wood fuel and waste heat recovery.2) Timing of additions -, 1~Diesel - 1982 - 75 + 50 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW, 1989 - 100 kWJJ3)Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980's as a replacement for diesel generationand the implementation of waste heat recovery.6-17

APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS10. Sleetmutea. Base Case Pl an1) Plan components - di.esel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of system additions -Diesel - 1981 - 60 kW + 75 kW; 1991 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW; 1991 - 100 kW..I \I :i 1WI~3) Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the studyand the implementation of waste heat recovery.b. Alternative Plan A1) Plan components - diesel and binary cycle generationusing wood fuel and waste heat recovery., 2) Timing of additions -:---\I :UI !--Diesel - 1981 - 60 kW + 75 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 150 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW, 1989 - 150 kW3)Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980's as a replacement for diesel generationand the implementation of waste heat recovery.6-18

APA 22-A/T· SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS11. Stony Ri vera. Base Case Pl an1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of system additions -Diesel - 1981 - 60 + 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW3) Plan description - This plan assumes the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the studyand the implementation of waste heat recovery.b.Alternative Plan A1) Plan components - diesel and binary ·cycle generationusing wood fuel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of additions -IIII( 1WJJJJ, III~JIJIDiesel - 1981 - 60 + 75 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW, 1989 - 100 kW3) Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980 ' s as a replacement for diesel generationand the implementation of waste heat recovery.6-19

APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS12. Takotnaa.Base Case Planf '~1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of system additions -Diesel - 1982 - 75 kW; 1984 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1984 - 75 kW; 1986 - 75 kWI~3)Plan description - This plan assumes installation of aliquid cooled diesel generator in 1982 (replacement forexisting air cooled diesels) and the continued use ofdiesel driven generators (liquid cooled) throughout thestudy and the implementation of waste heat recovery.b.Alternative Plan A1) Plan components - diesel (liquid cooled) and binarycycle generation using wood fuel and waste heat recovery.2) Timing of additions -Diesel - 1982 - 75 kW; 1984 - 75 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 150 kWWaste heat equipment - 1984 - 75 kW, 1989 - 150 kWI~3)Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980 l s as a replacement for diesel genera~tion and the implementation of waste heat recovery.r II .~6-20

APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANSc. Alternative Plan B.J! ...i I(lI~J!l.2.3.Plan components - diesel and hydroelectricTiming of additionsDiesel - 1982 - 75 kWHydroelectric - 1986, total capacity - 1200 kW,2838 mWh/yrPortion allotted to Takotna - capacity - 240 kW- 567 mWh/yrPlan description - This plan assumes constructionof a hydroelectric project. on Ganes Creek, 4 milessoutheast of Ophir as replacement for dieselgeneration in Ophir, Takotna and McGrath (Ref. 38).and to provide supplemental electric space heatingduring these years where surplus hydroelectric energy;s available. Estimated 1980 construction costof the hydro~lectric project is $107,565~000 (Ref. 38).The cost of the project allocated to each communityis based upon the estimated percentage of the totalannual energy available from the project which willbe supplied to each community. These percentagesand cost allocation are as follows:CommunityOphirTakotnaMcGrathPercentage of total 15%20%75%EnergyAllocated Cost$ 5,378,25021,513,00080,673,7501Based upon 1979 population data6-21

APA 22-A/T SECTION 6ENERGY PLANS13. Tel idaII'~a.Base Case Plan1) Plan components - diesel and waste heat recovery2) Timing of system additions -Diesel - 1982 - 50 + 30 kWWaste heat equipment ~1983 - 50 kWb.3)Plan description - This plan assumes installation ofliquid cooled diesel generation in 1982 (replacementfor existing air cooled engine) and the continueduse of diesel driven generators throughout the studyand the implementation of waste heat recovery.Alternative Plan A( ,I 'I '...1) Plan components - diesel (liquid cooled 1982) andbinary cycle generation using wood fuel and wasteheat recovery2) Timing of additions -Diesel - 1982 - 50 + 30 kWBinary cycle - 1989 - 50 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 50 kW, 1989 - 50 kW• j1.1L3)Plan description - This plan assumes constructionof wood-fired binary cycle generation facilities inthe late 1980's as a replacement for diesel generationand the implementation of waste heat recovery.c. Alternative Plan B1) Plan component - Wind generation6-22Lr~j'~

'1:uIIIIIJJUWI U'II~.~APA 22-A/T2) Timing of additions -Diesel - NoneWind generators - 1982 - 7 - 1.5 kW WECS;1985 1-1.5 kW WECS; 2000 2-1.5 kW WECSSECTION 6ENERGY PLANS3) Plan description - This plan assumes individual 1.5 kWwind generators for residential users and the continued useof the presently installed air-cooled diesel generatorfor supplying power to the school.I, 1~, 1UIf II UIIIII, IUWJJJU I J, lIIJ6-23

SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATION

JIJIJJJJ,IWUIU!,JIWA. ECONOMIC EVALUATION PARAMETERS1. MethodologySECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONEnergy plan costs are calculated for each year of the planning periodand are discounted to the base date at 3% discount rate. Discountedannual costs are summed to give the present worth of plan costs. If aplan offers outputs in addition to electrical generation (for example,space heating) the net benefits of that output in terms of dollar savingsare estimated by year using the same economic ~ssumptions. The presentworth of these additional benefits is then calculated as of the basedate using the 3% discount rate. Thus, each plan is characterized bythe present worth of plan cost and, if applicable, a present worthbenefit of the plan's non-electrical output.The following paragraphs outline the parameter used in performing theeconomic evaluation of the 'appropriate technologies investigated in eachvillage. (See Appendix E for the detailed economic evaluations based onthese parameters:)2. .Parametersa. Study Per; odThe study period used in 20 years with a base year of 1981 for allvillages which do not at present have any identified potential hydroelectricsites. In villages with potential hydroelectric developments(i.e., Buckland, Hughes, Koyukuk, Chuathbaluk and Takotna), because of the50 year economic life of the hydroelectric alternative, all study plansfor these villages have been extended to the end of the economic life ofthe hydroelectric projects. This i~ actomplished by taking the plan costs,which appear in the twentieth year of the economic evaluation period andextending these costs through the economic life of the hydroelectricproject.WIJIJAPA 22-A/U 7-1I

. Power Demand and Energy ReguirementsThe data listed in Section 4 has been utilized concerning village electricpower demand, electric energy requirements, and space heating requirements.iWr I~SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONc. Energy Source and SupplyFirm capacity is assured by assuming the largest unit in the system isnon-operational.In villages where school generation is installed, firmcapacity has been evaluated based on the assumption that the schoolgenerators will supply the school load during the periods when thelargest generation unit is non-operational.d. Existing Plant V~lues (1981.and Prior Installations)All costs (i.e., investment costs, equivalent annual costs, maintenance,etc.), associated with village power plants installed prior to 1981 areneglected for the purpose of this ·study.Village plants installed in1981 are assigned an investment cost at $630/kW installed 1 , but .theequivalent annual costs associated with these plants are neglected forthe purpose of the study.r .,We. Inflation1) Fuel CostAn inflation rate of 3.5% per year is used in the study forpetroleum fuels only.2)All Other CostsAn inflation rate of zero percent is assumed for all other cost.(i.e., coal, wood, labor, construction, maintenance, etc.) inthe study.3)LaborPlant labor cost are estimated at $20,000/year (one full-timeoperator) for diesel generation, $30,000/year for hydroelectricgeneration and $100,000 per year (four full-time operators) for1 Based on current lnstallation cost in four villages along MiddleKuskokwim.APA 22-A/U 7-2

'II~IJIJJIJIIi,~If. Fuel CostSee Section 5SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONbinary cycle generation included in this study. Labor costallocated to diesel generation ;s assumed as zero once binarycycle or hydroelectric generation becomes operational. Nodirect labor costs are allocated to wind or waste heat recovery(see maintenance materials). Taxes, insurance, and all fringebenefits are included. These costs are based on estimatesof cost for similar size communities evaluated in past studies.JWJJII JI JjIUWIJJAPA 22-A/U 7-3

w·SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONI~g. Generators and Waste Heat Capture EfficienciesThe following assumptions are made in regard to generating and waste heatcapature efficiencies.1) Heat content per gallon diesel fuel - 138,000 Btu/gal2) Heat content per cord of wood fuel - 11.0 x 10 6 Btu/cord(Btu content assumes approximately 35% moisture content.Wood used for electrical generation will in general be lessseasoned (dried) than wood used for heating and will,therefore, have a significantly lower heat contentper cord.3) Heat content per ton of coal - site specific see Append1x E4) A diesel generating efficiency of 8.5 kWh/gal diesel (21%)in the villages.5) Binary cycle generating efficiency 21% (i.e., 8.5 kW/ ga'ldiesel equivalent).6) .Waste heat capture efficiency - 30% of input energy.Usable waste heat is assumed to be 40% of capturedwaste heat at the time of initial installation,increasing to 75% of captured waste heat by the year 2000.WDr~h. New Plant Costs1) Diesel - cost of installing future diesel generation is estimated at$800 per installed kW.2) Binary Cycle - cost of installing binary cycle generation isestimated at $1600 per installed kW.3) Hydroelectric - see Section 64) Wind Generation - 1.5 kW - $13,54518 kW - 26,00045 kW - 51,300..IAPA 22-A/U 7-4

JIIIJJSECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATION5) Waste heat equipment - estimated at $450 per installed kW. (Includesdelivery within 100 feet of powerhouse.) Electric Heating equipmentestimated at $5,000 per large consumer installation.i. Operating SuppliesCalculated at 10% of fuel cost for diesel and binary cycle generation.Included in fuel cost calculations.j. Maintenance MaterialsI: 1~J,I IWJiI UIJIJI. 1I JI~IIJJ1) Diesel - estimated at $7.00 per mWh2) Hydro - estimated at $0.60 per-mWh3) Binary Cycle ~ estimated at 5.0% of investment per year4) Waste Heat Equipment - estimated at 2.5% of investment per year. 15) Wind 1 1.5 kW - $2100/yr18 kW45 kW -2700/yr3300/yrk. Discount RateA discount rate of 3 percent has been used in all cases for presentworth calculations.1. Economic LifeThe following economic lives are assumed:1) Diesel - 20 years2) Binary Cycle - 20 years3) Hydroelectric - 50 years4) Waste Heat Equipment - 20 years5) Electric Heating Equipment - 10 years.6) Wind Generation - 20 years.1 Includes both maintenance materials and labor.APA 22-A/U 7-5

SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONB. ECONOMIC EVALUATION RESULTS1. I nt roduct ionTable 7.1 is a summary of the 20 year economic evaluations (Appendix E)performed for those energy plans selected for detailed study. Table 1.4is a summary of the 50 year economic evaluation of the energy plans forthose five villages with potential hydroelectric development. These Tableslist the accumulated present worth of plan costs and the accumulated presentworth of the net benefits derived from non-electrical outputs, where:, ,WI~1) Plan costs represent the cost for providing electricalgeneration, and2) Net benefits represent the savings derived from wasteheat capture or surplus hydroelectric energy used forelectric heating.2. Resultsa. Twenty Year Evaluation Results ~ Results of the 20-year economicevaluation indicate, that of the energy plans studied, diesel generationwith waste heat recovery provides the most economical method of providingelectric generation in ten of thirteen villages (Buckland, Hughes,and Russian Mission being the exceptions).LThe diesel generation with waste heat recovery and supplemented withwind generation energy plan proved to be the most 'economical method ofproviding electrical energy in the villages of Buckland and RussianMission. This energy plan averaged approximately 5 percent less expensivethan diesel generation and waste heat recovery without supplemental windgeneration for these two villages. The small variation in cost betweenthese two plans represents an. insignificant difference in a reconnaissancelevel study, where costs cannot be precisely determined, and should not,however, be construed to indicate a definite cost advantage of one planover another.APA 22-A/U7-6

IIIJJIJIIJJ~II~I~IIJUII WU, 1IISECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONThe diesel generation plus binary genefation with waste heat energyplan alternatives averages approximately 15 percent greater costs thanthe diesel generation plus-waste heat recovery energy plan in 12 of the13 villages studied. This energy plan did, however, prove to be the mosteconomical plan for supplying electrical energy in the 'village of Hughes.Hydroelectric generation is found to be the most expensive method of providingelectrical energy in all the five villages where it is potentially available.Passive solar and ~nergy conservation have not been economically evaluatedin detail and they are, therefore, not listed in Table 7.1. Numerous paststudied have shown the value of conservation and passive solar heating. Anapproximate fifteen percent reduction in fossil fuel requirements due tothe implementation passive solar heating and energy conservation measures hasbeen built into the village Heating Requirement Forecast Tables listed inSection 4. It is assumed that these two methods of reducing energy usage willbe implemented in all villages.b. Fifty Year Evaluation Results:The results of the 50-year economic evaluation performed for the villagesof Buckland, Hughes, Koyukuk, Chuathbaluk and Takotna confirms-hydroelectricgeneration as the most expensive method of providing electrical energyfor these five communities. The high cost of developing these potentialhydroelectric sites make the use of hydroelectric generation economicallyunrealistic.The results of the 50-year evaluation has reaffirmed the slight costadvantage of diesel plus waste heat recovery,- supplemented with windgeneration over diesel plus waste heat for the village of Buckland andthe cost advantage of binary cycle generation versus diesel generationfof Hughes. The extended evaluation has, however, altered the findingsof the 20-year evaluation for Takotna and Chuathbaluk. The extendedevaluation indicates the diesel generation plus binary cycle generationwith waste heat energy plan will provide the most economical energy forthese two villages.APA 22-A/U 7-7

APA 22-A/W1Table 7.1 2Q-Year - Accumulated Present Worth of Plan Costs and Benefits ($1,000)Diesel&DieselDiesel Binary Cycle Diesel WECS& & & &Village Waste Heat Waste Heat Hydroelectric Waste HeatCost-Benefit Cost-Benefit Cost-Benefit Cost-Benefit&--.JI(X)Buckland 3817-450.0 4664-432.3 7253-149.4 3606-430.6Hughes 2238-250.1 2157-220.4 4284-117.2 N/AKoyukuk 1886-187.1 2357-136.2 4300-53.2 N/ARussian Mission 3080-380.9 3224-330.0 N/A 2977-336.0Sheldon Point 2759-307.6 2892-274.0 N/A 3877-234.3Chuathbaluk 2148-233.9 2350-194.3 4572/99.7 N/ACro·oked Creek 2339-260.2 2453-226.3 N/A N/ANikolai 1841-210.0 2250-167.8 N/A N/ARed Devil 1314-108.7 1784-75.6 N/A N/ASleetmute 1695-162.9 2009-140.1 N/A N/AStony River 1282-122.9 .1717-88.7 N/A N/ATakotna 2064-202.8 2250-186.1 9805-149.4 N/ATelida 964-73.9 1444-56.9 N/A 1111-50.8

APA 22-A/W2Table 7.2 50-Year - Accumulated Present Worth of Plan Costs and Benefits ($1,000)Diesel&DieselDiesel Binary Cycle Diesel WECS& & & &Village Waste Heat Waste Heat Hydroelectric Waste HeatCost-Benefit Cost-Benefit Cost-Benefit Cost-Benefit&--.JIillBuckland 10509..-I679.7 11538-1636.7 17171-818.6 9779-1543.2Hughes 5849-892.7 4641-825.1 10147-506.4 N/AKoyukuk 4821-696.9 5389-569.9 9241-46.0 N/AChuathbaluk 5977-911.6 5455-822.5 10854-539.4 N/ATakotna 5169-737.9 4883-685.0 20556-168.7 'N/A(1) Extended evaluation for those villages with potential hydroelectric development.

APA 288 SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONC. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION( ,1. INTRODUCTIONThe assessment of the environmental impact in each of the 13 villagesis limited to thos~ technologies which have been selected for possibleimplementation in the villages. These include:• Diesel Electric Generation• Binary Cycle Electric Generation (coal and wood)• Hydroelectric Generation• Wind Generation• Waste Heat Recovery• Passive Solar• ConservationTo simplfy the evaluation procedure, the assessment process is dividedin two categories; general evaluation and numerical evaluation. Thegeneral evaluation category will address the environmental issues whichare general to the use of each particular technology. The numericalevaluation will rank the impact of the technologies on the villagesthrought the use of an Evaluati~n Matrix. The Matrix assesses theeconomic, environmental, and technical factors associated with eachtechnology in each village.i '~r .I~7-10

I J!, 1JIII.iJI JI J,~APA 28B SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATION2. GENERAL EVALUATIONSa. DIESEL ELECTRIC GENERATIONThe use of diesel generation results in no significant negative environmentalimpact in the villages. Exhaust emissions for diesel generationare low, and the exhaust noise is readily muffled. With the possibleexception of fuel oil spills associated with the transportation and/orstorage of the fuel oil, no significant environmental impact is anticipatedfrom diesel generation.b. BINARY CYCLE ELECTRIC GENERATION· 1JI, "II i-W• 1· II~JJCOALBecause coal will not be openly mined within the immediate vicinityof any village in this study, no significant terrestrial impactin or near the villages will result from using coal fuel forelectrical generation.A major problem associated with burning coal ;s the disposal ofsolid wastes, which are about 10% of fuel burned, such as slag,bottom ash, scrubler sludge. Current environmental regulationsre.garding gaseous emission, especially sulfur dioxide (SOX)emission from conventional coal-steam plants generally requireabatement processes which can significantly increase the cost of. such plants, depending upon the quality of coal used. Otherconsiderations include impact of transportation and storage of thecoal, risk of spontaneous combustion and coal pile r.un-off.For. coal at 8500 Btu per pound and plant efficiency at 16,200 Btu/kwh(8.5/ kwh/gal diesel equivalent) about 1.9 pounds of coal is neededper kWh. Fora 100 kW plant, operating with a 0.45 load factor,this equates to 375 tons of coal per year.7-11

APA 2BB SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATION. WoodUse of wood as a fuel to fire electric generation will have significantimpact (though not necessarily a negative impact) near villageswhere timber harvest is accomplished. (Clear cutting can, in fact,improve game habitat in a mature forest).A typical 100 kW plant operating with 0.45 load factor will requireabout 580 cords of wood per year, assuming 11.0 x 10 6 Btu/cord.This equates to about 45-50 acres of standing timber in the typicalforest found along the Kuskokwim and due to the slow growth ratefound in the region, about 70 years will be required to reforest.Problems associated with using wood fuel include impact of transportationand storage of fuel, risk of spontaneous combustionand wood·pile run-off. Residual ash from wood-firing is however,not classified as a hazardous waste; firing wood waste actuallydecreases the amount of solid waste.Wood is, however, a relatively clean burning fuel, and is moresui tab 1 e for small plants than" is coal. As these small er sizedplants are more suitable to much of Alaska's power developmentneeds, wood or a source of energy cannot be overlooked.f 'W•I ". j, jc. HYDROELECTRIC GENERATIONA suitable site for any hydropower development must, of course,be found. Requirements include an adequate water supply and areasonable proximity to the load center (consumers). Sitepreparation for a hydropower development involves modificationof the existing. terrain and results in changes in both thetopography (cuts and fills), and in the natural or existingdrainage pattern. The project boundary (the outer limits ofthe land directly affected by the project) may encompassseveral hundred acres. The impacts of a hydropower developmentcover a wide spectrum. They affect man, vegetation, wildlife,and fisheries. The special advantage of a hydropower developmentis that it is effectively non-polluting.7-12

, 1!APA 28B SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONPublic safety, legal liabilities, insurance, and land use issuesmust be addressed prior to construction of a hydropower development.d. WIND GENERATIONLittle environmental impact is anticipated when operating onlya few machines within a small geographic area. Public safety,legal liabilities, insurance and land use issues must, however,be addressed prior to installation of a utility owned andoperated WECS.e. WASTE HEAT RECOVERYI JII< i~JIJJWaste heat recovery should have little environmental impact whenproperly installed. Use of waste heat recovery should in factresult in a po~itive impact by reducing dependency on other fuel(i.e., wood, coal, or fuel oil); need for heating in the village.f. PASSIVE SOLAR AND CONSERVATIONThe implementation of these two technologies should result inpositive environmental impact by reducing the dependence of thevillage on fossil fuel for their space heating requirements.g. ELECTRIC HEATThe use of excessive hydroelectric energy to supply electricalspacing heat requirements will result in no measureable environmentalimpact.~I~I J'1I~7-13

APA 28B SECTION 7ENERGY PLAN EVALUATIONI '~3. EVALUATION MATRIXThe Evaluation Matrix uses the following numerical values in rankingqualitative factors.Value1 Best2Inter~retation3 Above Average45 Average (Neutral Value)67 Below Average89 Worst10 UnacceptableEconomic factors are ranked aphabetically IIAII through lip', IIA" beingbest.Due to the similarities between the villages studied in this report;four Evaluation Matrices, consisting of Tables 7.3, 7.4, 7.5 and 7.6,are sufficient to numerically rank the selected technologies for allthe villages. Each table lists the names of those villages for whichthe table applies.r ~i IIiIIIII .I.Jf ''iiir 'iI !I.Jr '~r '~r'7-14r 'IIaJ

Lj £~~ -=-:.J r-_~ ~ L:-: ~ l:_APA 28B6Table 7.3Factor(A) Economic (Present Worth)(B) Environmental(1) Community Preference(2) Intrastructure(3) Timi ng(4) Air Quality(5) Water Quality(6) Fish and Wildlife(7) LandUse(8) Terrestrial ImpactsTOTALDieselElectric+ Waste HeatB9314222225EVALUATION MATRIXApplicable VillagesKoyukuk, Sheldon Point, Chuathbaluk,Crooked Creek, Nikolai, Red Devil,Sleetmute, Stony River, TakotnaDiesel + Diesel + Diesel + Waste HeatLocal Hydro Binary Generation Supplementalw/wo Electric Coal and/or Wood WindHeat With Waste Heat GenerationF C 01 4 54 5 65 7 31 5 31 4 25 4 16 4 36 4 329 37 26Environmental Ranking13 4 2(C) Techn'ical(1) Safety(2). Reliabi1.ity(3) AvailabilityTOTAL2251 2 31 2 55 8 37 12 11TECHNICAL RANKINGOVERALL RANKING1B-12 4 3F-2 C-4 0-3

APA 28B7A~~licable VillagesBuckland, Russian MissionEVALUATION MATRIXDiesel + Diesel + Diesel + Waste HeatTable 7.4 Diesel Local Hydro Binary Generation SupplementalElectric w/wo Electric Coal and/or Wood WindFactor + Waste Heat With Waste Heat Generation--.JII-'())(A) Economic (Present Worth) C F D B(8) Environmental(1) Community Preference 9 1 4 5(2) Infrastructure 3 4 5 6(3) Timing 1 5 7 3(4) Air Quality 4 1 5 3(5) Water Quality 2 1 4 2(6) Fish and Wildlife 2 5 4 1(7) Land Use 2 6 4 3(8) Terrestrial Impacts 2 6 3TOTAL 25 29 37 26Environmental Ranking 1 3 3 2(C) Technical(1) Safety 2 1 2 3(2) Re 1 iab; 1 ity 2 1 2 5(3) Availability 1 5 8 3-TOTAL 5 7 12 11TECHNICAL RANKING 1 2 4 2OVERALL RANKING C-1 F-2 D-3 B-2

Applicable VillageHughesEVALUATION MATRIXTable 7.5FactorDieselElectric+ Waste HeatDiesel + Diesel +Local Hydro Binary Generationw/wo Electric Coal and/or WoodHeatWith Waste HeatDiesel + Waste HeatSupplementalWindGeneration(A) Economic (Present Worth)C(B) Environmental(1) Community Preference 9(2) Intrastructure 3(3) Timing 1(4) Air Quality 4(5) Wat~r Quality 2(6) Fish and Wildlife 2..-JI2I-'..-J(7) Land Use(8) Terrestrial Impacts 2TOTAL 25F1 44 55 71 51 45 46 4B6 4-29 37N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AEnvironmental Ranking 12 3(C) Technical(1) Safety 2(2) Reliability 2(3) Ava il abil ity 1TOTAL 51 21 25 87 12N/AN/AN/ATECHNICAL RANKING 1OVERALL RANKING C-12 3F-2 B-3N/AN/A

--_.. ,~'"-~-----_._--'"".-.""--APA 28B9AEElicable VillageTelidaEVALUATION MATRIXDiesel + Diesel + Diesel + Waste HeatTable 7.6 Diesel Local Hydro Binary Generation SupplementalElectric w/wo Electric Coal and/or Wood WindFactor + Waste Heat Heqt With Waste Heat Generation(A) Economic (Present Worth) B F 0 C(B) Environmental(1) Community Preference 9 N/A 4 5(2) Intrastructure 3 N/A 5 6(3) Timing 1 N/A 7 3(4) Air Quality 4 N/A 5 3(5) Water Quality 2 N/A 4 2(6) Fish and Wildlife 2 N/A 4 1(7) Land Use 2 N/A 4 3--.II (8) Terrestrial Impacts 2 N/A 4-3I-'illTOTAL 25 37 26Environmental Ranking 1 4 2(C) Technical(1) Safety 2 'N/A 2 3(2) Re 1 i abil ity 2 N/A 2 5(3) Availability 1 N/A 8 3TOTAL 5 12 11TECHNICAL RANKING ,I N/A 4 3OVERALL RANKING B-1 N/A 0-4 C-3

SECTION 8RECOMMENDATIONS

I~uI'JIJIIIJJWIiQIIuJI. lJIIU,UIIIUJUII~JIJIA. INTRODUCTIONSECTION 8RECOMMENDATIONSAnalysis of both the 20-year and 50-year economic, technical and environmentalevaluations indicate the three most promising energy plan alternativesfor the 13 villages, in order of preference, to be:1) Continued use of diesel generation supplemented with wasteheat recovery,2) qiesel plus binary cycle generation supplemented with wasteheat recovery,3) diesel plus waste heat recovery supplemented with windgeneration.B. RECOMMENDED PLANS1. RECOMMENDATION PLAN - Diesel Generation Supplemented with Waste HeatRecovery - The 20-year economic evaluation indicates that diesel generationwith waste heat recovery will produce the most economical electric energyand return the largest non-electrical benefits of all the energy plansstudied in ten of the 13 villages.Furthermore, results of the 50-yeareconomic evaluation indicates this energy plan to be the most economicalof the various energy plans examined in two of the five villages withpotential hydroelectric developments.This energy plan also results inthe least significant environmental impact of all the plans addressed.It is recommended, therefore, that in all villages in which dieselelectric installations are placed (present or future), that studies beconducted to determine the feasibility of utilizing waste heat in eachspecific location.the following items for each case:Such studies should include a definitive review ofa) availability of waste heatb) transportation of waste heatc) end use of waste heatAPA 22-A/X 8-1

SECTION 8RECOMMENDATIONS2. FIRST ALTERNATIVE - Diesel Plus Binary Cycle Generation SupplementedWith Waste Heat Recovery - The first alternative listed above, dieselplus binary cycle generation with waste heat recovery, will provide thelo~est cost electrical energy in Hughes (20-year evaluation), and inHughes, Takotna and Chuathbaluk (50-year evaluation). This energy planalternative averages approximately 15 percent greater cost than therecommended plan in the remaining villages. Because the uncertaintiesin the costs associated with this alternative, such as the cost of woodor coal fuel, equ~pment cost, etc., which can not at ·present be asprecisely determined as for the recommended energy plan, it is conceivablethat this alternative could be cost competitive with the recommendedplan (i.e., diesel generation plus waste heat recovery), in other locations.Because binary cycle generation is viewed as one of the few potentiallyviable energy alternatives which is suitable for future application inremote Alaska villages, it ;s recommended that feasibility of binarycycle generation in Alaska be future investigated in regard to:I'~f 'WWf \~r i~a)b)c)d)e)Equipment availabilityTechnical feasibilityEconomic aspectsEnviro~mentalConstraintsaspectsVillage size binary cycle equipment is, however, not expected to becomecommercially available until the late 1980 1 s. ~3. SECOND ALTERNATIVE PLAN - Diesel Plus Waste Heat Recovery Supplemented ~With Wind Generation - Alternative #2 diesel plus waste heat recoverysupplemented with wind generation, is cost competitive with the recommendedplan in only two of the 13 villages (Buckland and Russian Mission).Because of the marginal reliability heretofore experienced in Alaskausing wind generation and the lack of a definite cost advantage of usingsupplemental wind generation over the recommended plan, this alternativeI \~0'I I~APA 22-A/X 8-2

IJIJIJIJ,JI:UIIJIU'w IUSECTION 8RECOMMENDATIONSis not recommended. However, as existing wind technology is improved andfurther developed, periodic review of wind technology for possible implementationin Alaska villages is advised.4. COST FOR FURTHER STUDIESApproximate costs for determining the feasibility of the two most attractiveenergy resources for the 13 villages are:• Waste heat recovery - approximately $2500 per village• Binary cycle generation - approximately $2,000,000 whichwould include the cost of a constructing and operatinga demonstration plant in Alaska.I,~IJIIJWII~JIJIAPA 22-A/X 8-3

APPENDI X ACOMMUNITY MEETINGS

APA23/LAPPENDIX A'II1--IQJ, 1WI, ' 1, IWA village meeting was conducted in eleven of the thirteen villages(Russian Mission a.nd Telida the exceptions) to obtain certain informationconcerning energy usage in the village and to inform the villagersas to the purpose and nature of the energy resource alternatives study.The village meetings provided information concerning energy usage in eachvillage" to include coal, wood, oil, propane, blazo, aviation gas,information concerning potential alternative resources in the area, andcommunity preferences in regard to providing reliable low cost electricalenergy in the village.Due to unforeseen circumstances, village meetings were not conducted inRussian Mission and Telida, but several persons were interviewed in eachvillage to obtain the general information as outlined above.Community preference in all thirteen villages was unanimious in thathydroelectric generation was the preferred option for supplying electricalenergy to the village. This is, however, because village residents tendto associate hydroelectric generation with inexpensive, reliable electricalenergy, while diesel generation by villagers is viewed as a very expensivemethod of producing electrical energy.The following pages contain brief narratives describing general informationobtained during the community meetings and visits at each village.Additional information concerning existing conditions and energy usagein each village can be found in Appendix B.:11.1JjA-l1

APA23/LBUCKLANDA letter was sent to the City Council notifying the village of themeeting scheduled for November 20, 1980 .. Shortly after our arrivalin the village, a meeting was conducted at the city office. The village'was represented at the meeting by the ci ty council members shownlisted on the attendance roster. Information concerning fuel cost,fuel storage, average size of houses, fuel usage, possible alternater'esources in the area, etc., was obtained at the meeting.I...Ii~I-..I Ii~Following the meeting, a survey of the town was conducted to obtainadditiona1 information. The -school principal was also visited toprocure information on energy consumption at the school.Heating in the community is accomplished almost entirely with fueloil as no wood or coal is available.I~r ;UA new electrical generation plant had been installed in the springof 1980 to replace the old plant which had been destroyed by fire.Distribution is overhead triplex construction operating at 208/120volts.r "~..IA-2

'11-{Jt1IIt.i ,APA23/LATTENDANCE ROSTERBUCKLANDNovember 20, 1980JIiIi/ 11l1liI~,JIUJ: 1WI,JI~li~II, Ii..-II.-,JJ1I~iJIIJNAMENathan D. Hadley Sr.Connell A. ArmstrongLouis Sadley, Sr.Steven BallotWillie P. ThomasRaymond E. Lee Sr.David Thomas Jr.Glenna ThomasFrank BettineCity Council MemberCity Council MemberCity Council MemberCity Council MemberCity Council MayorCity Counci 1 Member'City Council MemberCity Council SecretaryRWRAA-3

APA23/LHUGHESI 'i--.The community of Hughes was visited on November 2-1, 1980. A letterhad been previously mailed to the City Council notifying them of theplanned visit. Upon our arrival in Hughes, the City Major was visitedand a time of 12:30 was established for the meeting to be held at theschool. Prior to the meeting, a survey-of the community was accomplishedto estimate the size and number of houses, number of public building, etc.The village is supplied electricity from the school generators.Distribution is overhead triplex operating at 240/120 volts.Only three members of the community attended the meeting scheduledat 12:30 p.m. Information concerning fuel cost and usage, availablelocal resources, etc. was obtained at the meeting.~\II~LWood is used as the primary fuel for heating in the community.school i.,s the major user of fuel oil in the community.Ther .I )~A-4

[JIJIJIJIJAPA23/LATTENDENCE ROSTERHUGHESNovember 21, 1980IIJI JI JIJIJII. \WJNAMEArt AmbroseRalph WilliamsLavine Willams (Comments on water and creek)Frank BettineRWRA• 1WIJIJIJIIIIWJJA-5

APA23/LKOYU.KUKI 'I~'A meeting was conducted in Koyukuk in November 19, 1980. A letterhad been sent to the village notifying them of the meeting. A meetingwas conducted in the Community Hall a short time after our arrivalin· the v ill age. A survey of the v i1 1 age was conducted pri or to themeeting to estimate the size of houses, number of public buildings, etc.The school principal was also visited to obtain information concerningthe usage of energy by the school.No centralized electric power generation facility exists in Koyukuk,I~although the~e are plans for electrification of the village in 19~1.The school. generators provide electric power to its buildings, the. satellite earth station, clinic,PHS building and the community hall.The villagers primarily heat with wood.The main users of fueloil in the community are the school, clinic, and PHS building ..f ;...A-6

IJAPA23/LIJIJIJATTENDENCE ROSTERKOYUKUKNovember 19, 1980IJIIU'I~QIJII, 1JI JI.~IJIJNAMEJosie R. JonesEffie KempLawrence DaytonHarold HuntingtonMari lyn DemoskiMartha NelsonLeonard HuntingtonEuphiasia DaytonWilliam PilotMarie DaytonElaine SolomonFrank BettineRWRAII JI JJIJIIJA-7

APA23/Li':RUSSIAN MISSIONA visit was made to Russian Mission on November 13, 1980. Letters hadbeen sent to the mayor and President of the Russian Mission NativeCorporation notifying. them of a meeting to be held in their village.Upon arrival in the village it was discovered that many of the villagecouncil members were out of town. Instea~ of a village meeting it wasdecided to conduct a house-to-hQuse survey to obtain as much informationas possible. (Persons visited during the survey are listed in thefollowing page.)The village consists of an old section and a new section. The newsection consists of 27 new AVCP (Association of Village Council Presidents)residences located on higher ~round behind the older part of thevillage. An electric distribution system has been installed to servethe lower part of the vi 11 age. The.1 i ne has not yet been extended tothe. new AVCP housing development. At the time of the visit the electricdistribution system was not in service because the generator had brokendown about a year ago. The village -is in the process of installing anew 90 kW unit but still has considerable work to do.I~i 'r .The school provides electric power to its buildings as well as a satelliteearth station and telephone. The school uses the waste heat fromthe generator to augment the school's hot water heating system.The villagers heat with a combination of wood and fuel oil. Wood isthe primary fuel because of the abundant supply covering all the surroundingland.11./Villagers mentioned a number of possible small hydro sites in the nearby. area. In particular they indicated that Kako Creek about 5 miles upriverwas an especially good candidate because of its swift year longopen water.The village of Russian Mission operates a central water supply system.A-8

("". )("-I JAPA23/LHouse-to-House Survey RosterRussian MissionNovember 13, 1980rljillWII~, I!~l...N i c k Pit ka, Sr.Jim HauslerPeter AlexyNi ck As koakPatty. InterviewerMayorPresident, Russian Mission Native Corporationvillage council memberPostmasterSchool PrincipalJ; m La rd, RWRA .: 1I\.Ji~I'1I~IIWIA-9

\APA23/L~\SHELDON POINTOn November 12, 1980 a village meeting was conducted in Sheldon Point.The villagers were originally notified of the meeting through letters tothe mayor and village corporation president. The meeting time andlocation were also advertised by sending home notices with school children.Approximately 20 villagers attended the meeting.A combination of wood and oil is used for heating in Sheldon Point.Wood is collected as driftwood from the Yukon River. The supply ofdriftwood is not abundant. Villagers must often travel long distancesupriver to collect an adequate supply of wood. Some villagers complainedof the expense in time and gasoline costs in collecting the driftwood.[ 'I..WLLSheldon Point has no central electric generation. The school has adiesel generator. The school generator also supplies electricity tothree teacher residences and the Public Health Service water plant, aswell as unof~icially serving the village store, village shop, and nearbyresidences. A satellite earth station and telephone is also poweredfrom the school generator.In the near future a number of village residences are going to participatein an experimental project to supply household electric power usingindividual wind generators and battery systems.A-10

APA23/L. 1~JJIJIUII~,)IWIU. IWNAMEFlorence Ignatiu~Josephine CharlieMargaret MurphyJulia AfcanTom PrinceMaria PrinceLeonard KobukLucy CamilleAndy CorbaskiRusaline RaphaelBernard PeteJohnny MurphyJoseph AfcanSolomon AfcanJohn F. CarlaskyJim MartinRose IsidoreMarcel Isidore #1Jim LardAttendance RosterSheldon PointNovember 12, 1980RWRA\JI, )I~IJI.~III')~JA-ll

WAPA23/LCHUATHBALUK..., IA village meeting at Chuathbaluk was conducted on December 4,1980.Approximately 15 villagers attended.There is no electric power in the village except at the school. Mostvillagers heat with wood as it is readily accessible from the nearbyhills.The villagers of Chuathbaluk were not aware of any energy resources orenergy alternatives in their immediate area with the exception of apotential hydroelectric site on Mission Creek located 2.5 miles east. of the village.Presently, plans are being made to install in Chuathbaluk a small dieselpowered electric system that is intended to provide electric service toeach villager in the community.Following the meeting a survey of the village was conducted to obtaininformation on full storage facilities, average house size, etc.rWri~r :~rI )~r '~A-12~,•~ir 'I.l" ~

,APA23/LATTENDENCE ROSTERCHUATHBALUKDecember 4, 1980, INAMEGergie PhillipsSi nka Sakar Sr.Wass i i e Aranwe 11Philip '5. PhillipsNick C. KameroffSophie K. SakarGabriel PitkaArnold SimsonMary J. KameroffMarie KameroffAlice AvakumoffNick PhillipsJohnny AvakoumoffEric MorganPenelope HorterDavid MarshallFrank BettineJim LardKNA DirectorRWRARWRAIJ. 1JIUI, 1WA-13

APA23/LCROOKED CREEKA village meeting at Crooked Creek was held on December 3, 1980. Themeeting was held at the village community hall. Sixteen villagersparticipated in the meeting.! '1 ,~r "I~Wood is the primary fuel source the villagers use. A few buildings areheated by fuel oil - specifically the community hall/clinic, the villagestore and lodge.The village of Crooked Creek is spread over a wide area with the streamof 'Crooked Creek ' dividing the north and south parts of town. CrookedCreek 'rlOrth ' consists of 7 AVCP houses, a Russian Orthodox Church,community hall, clinic, public airport, and a few cabins. Crooked Creek'south' consists of the old townsite. The store, lodge, private air-.strip, disco, and most village residences are located in the old townsite.There are a few dwellings located even further to the south butthese are not connected to the townsite by an established trail. Crooked'north' and Crooked 'south' are connected by a small cable ,suspensionbridge that spans Crooked Creek. The bridge ;s wide enough to permittravel by foot or snowmachine only.At the meeting the villagers were questioned as to what energy resourcesmight be available in the area. The only source available for developmentappeared to be the nearby wood supply. Even the wood supply wasnot very, abundant and the terrain presented transportation problems., , ,I~The stream of Crooked Creek does not appear to be a prime candidate forhydro because the current ;s slow and it freezes over in the winter.A-14

I, lIJUII~JIJuAPA23/LNAMEEvan SaborGerald Phi" ipsWassilie WaskeyOllie M. PepperlingEllen M. PetersDavid B. PetersMislilea AnderanoffDennis R. ThomasSophie PetersAnna OlexieAgnes AuderanoffWas s i " i e SakojMartha M. JohnOlinka SakarAnnie GregoryMary M. SakarFrank BettineJim LardATTENDENCE ROSTERCROOKED CREEKDecember 3, 1980Village AdministratorSecretary-Treasurer - CouncjlVillage Public Safety OfficerPresident - CouncilRWRARWRA: jWII~IA-15

APA23/LI 1NIKOLAIA meeting was conducted in Nikolai on November 6, 1980 at 11:00 a.m.Severa 1 vi 11 agers attended the meeting. Dur; ng the course of themeeting, the vil~agers indicated that substantial coal deposits occurredin the Alaskan range about 35 miles south from, Nikolai. The coal comesto surface in Windy Fork River area location, 62°28 ' N., 154°14 ' W. Exposedcoal seam run is 300-400 feet long and 20-30 feet high in this area. Thevillagers said coal can be set on fire with a match. Supposedly, the areawas examined and coal found to be of high grade (from villagers).Wood is, however, because of the abundant nearby supply, used as theprimary fuel for heating in the community, The school, cl inic and Cityoffices used fuel oil for heating, The school ;s installing a wood stovein one classroom, and will attempt to heat the classroom using wood.The school principal estimates the yearly wood requirement for heating theclassroom at about 10 cords, at a price of ap'proximately $100/cord.I 1I~I 'I.Jr 'UThe village owns and operates a centralized electrical generationsystem ope rat i ng at 480 volts. The di stri but; on is of overheadtriplex construction using step-down transformers to supply 24'0/120volts to consumers.r "A-16r 1~

JI, 1I~JIlI~:-'~IWII ~, 1i~JI, IAPA23/LNAMEJim NikolaiNi ck A 1 exi aNick PetruskaIgnatti PetruskaJeff StokesMr. EsaiNick DemitPhilip EsaiPete GregoryFrank BettineJim LardATTENDENCE ROSTERNIKOLAINovmeber 6, 1980RWRARWRA, 1I ~A-17

APA23/LII'RED DEVILA village meeting was conducted at Red Devil on December 3, 1980. Themeeting was held at the home of the postmaster/health aide. Six citizensattended.There is no centralized electric power system in Red Devil although anumber of individual residences do maintain a small generator, particularlythe larger; business related residences, such as VanderpoollsLodge and the clinic/postmaster h9use.The small population of RedDevil coupled with its widely separated layout precludes for the presentany centralized power system to serve the entire community.One concern voiced by th.e villagers at Red Devil was that their vi1lagewas being passed over when allocations for development of energy resourceswere made.Red Devil residents heat primarily with oil, supplemented with wood.Woodis available in quantity on the surrounding land, but some residents preferthe convenience of fuel oil.in getting permits to cut wood.Also, villagers mentioned there were problemsLand use restrictions were not popular.Poss i b 1 e alternate energy sources mentioned by the vi 11 agers i ncl uderich peat deposits up the Holitna River and numerous prospective smallhydro sites on creeks in the nearby vicinity.about 1/4 mile south of the Vanderpool Lodge.One particularly attractivehydroelectric location discussed was the George River.One small creek runsThe GeorgeRiver has the drawback of being a large fish migration st~eam. It isabout 18 ill; 1 es downr; ver from Red Devil and 10 mil es upri ver fromCrooked Creek.project.Any development of the George River would be a majorRed Devil residents expect their community to grow.for 3 new res i dences.Plans are underwayThe Bureau of Land Management is cons i der; ng.putting a fire-fighting station at the airport.high school is planned.Also, a new Red Devilr :~i .~..r:I ir 'rr 'r '~A-18

APA23/LIJJI [-1IlJII~U, 1I~IuRed Devil can claim to be a transportation hub of the area because ithas a wide, 4,500 foot runway. But villagers say the runway urgentlyneeds mai ntenance, improvements. and 1 i ght i ng or the runway wi 11 soondeteriorate into a state of disrepair.( 1\ IIWIWIr 1A-19II W

APA23/L!I..iATTENDENCE ROSTERRED DEVILDecember 3, 1980u..I ~I !NAMELarry E. BassRobert VanderpoolRichard WilmasthCarl HeneryPenelope HorterDavid MarshallFrank BettineJim LardPostmasterKNA DirectorRWRARWRAI '~! 'I ,I.jr ;~r 'i..JI !I .I.lr 11 :.,J,A-20r 1~

APA23/LSLEETMUTEOn December 2, 1980 a village meeting was held at Sleetmute.was held at the schoolhouse. Thirteen villagers attended.The meetingAll the villagers are using wood to heat their homes. The only exceptionsto wood heat are the school, clinic, community hall, and teachers'quarters, which use oil.~resently the school generator supplies power to the village communityhall, the clinic, and to the teachers ' residences. Plans are now underwayto install in Sleetmute a small di-esel powered electric system tobring electric power to each residence throughout the village.IJIIW: 1, III.JIFive Sleetmute households are located on the oppos~te side of the riverfrom the townsite proper. Notably Mellick's Trading Post and Lodge arelocated on the west bank of the Kus.kokwim. All of the cross-riverdwellings will probably be left out of any energy development that thevillage of Sleetmute experiences due to the difficulties of river crossingsand also the disperse natur~ of the house locations.The villagers mentioned several suspected coal deposits on creeks thatemptied into the Kuskokwim between Sleetmute and Crooked Creek. Substantiationof these claims was not possible at the time. Also a number ofnearby cre~ks were mentioned as possible small hydro sites, particularlyVreeland Creek. Another energy alternative discussed at the meeting wasthe existence of peat banks along the Holitna River.I JJIJJA-21

.u.APA23/LATTENDENCE ROSTERSLEETMUTEDecember 2, 1980f ,NAMEPeter ZaukarPhi 1 i p CaswellMolga AlexieMoxie AlexieGus Mell ickVernon ZaukarNick ZaukarGary JacobsonYaka T. CraneDavi d MarshallPenelope HorterN i c k Me 11 i c kJohn HelhuningtonJim LardFrank Betti neTrade Council PresidentResidentVillage Council MemberVillage Council PresidentResidentResidentResidentTeacherResidentConsultantKNA Executive DirectorArea PrincipalRWRARWRAf 'I .--i .U• ( 1.~•A-22

UI, 1~IJAPA23/lSTONY RIVEROn December 2, 1980 a village meeting was conducted at Stony River. Themeeting was held at the village community hall. Approximately 20 villagerswere present at the meeting.All the village residences use wood for heat with the exception of oneres; dence that uses 0; 1. The expense of fuel 0; 1 versus the readyavailability of wood makes wood a-clear preference. The clinic andvillage community hall use fuel oil for heating. The community hall isonly irregularly used.The school has the only electric generation in the village at the presenttime. The village community hall. clinic. satellite earth station. anda couple of village residences are also connected onto the school power.I UJ: i'W!JThe villagers were not able to identify any alternate energy resourcesin the immediate vicinity with the one,exception of an abundant woodsupply.I( ,, II~I JIW:JIA-23

APA23/LATTENDENCE ROSTERSTONY RIVERDecember 2, 1980NAMEMisku ZaukarMarvara ZaukarIgnatti MacorrNick MacarFritz DonhamserMax ColeAggie A. ZankarIgnatti BobbyGusty MichealMary J. GustyIyana GustyPete MacarBarbra GustyAlxie GustyPaul BobbyNattie DonhauserNancy MiddlemistJeannie EvanNastasia Evan .Prurlzerhorter­Chris GoldenAgrafuie K. GoldenFrank BettineJim LardMember MKECHighschool TeacherVillage SecretaryTrad. Council TreasureTrad. Council PresidentCouncil MemberKNA Exc. DirectorMemberMemberRWRARWRAi~rII.ji 1~fI 'i.Jr~r '1A-24

IIIIIJ~JUi~W, 1I ''~!~ II \I'~, 1UI~APA23/LTAKOTNAThe village of Takotna was visited on November 6, 1980 and a villagemeeting was conducted early in the evening.Takotna has a new generationand distribution system which was installed in November 1979.Thissystem supplies the 240/120 volts, 10 distribution system in the village.Th~rehave TV's.is a satellite earth station in the village and several peopleBecause of the high cost of oil, most residents are heating, or convertingto wood, for heat. The school, which heats primarily with oi 1, hasinstalled a wood heater in one classroom.There are at present, five new HUD houses in the village.There is thepossibility of additional HUD housing being built. A small creek runsthrough the village which serves as the water supply. Several 'peoplethink that this creek might be dammed and used for hydro power.of interest expressed during the meeting were:1. Villagers wish to see transportation costs lowered2. Subsidies for electric costItems3. Unleaded gas is non-existent in the village but all new cars requireunleaded gas.4. More competition on river and with Wien for freight rates.,A-25

APA23/LATTENDENCE ROSTERTAKOTNANovember 6, 1980, ', ,NAMEBetsy McGuireDick NewtonJan NewtonFrank TauerLewis W. WhalenBeverly SchuppDouglas Sherrer.Rosalie EdwardBi 11 EverlyChris KillgoreSandra EverlySteve VallertenDean JaroshFrank BettineJim LardRWRARWRAOther people interviewed in village:Pat Coffield (Principal - Teacher)u! 'I1..1I~r 1~f I~A-26

APA23/LJIIJ,JITELIDANovember 10, 1980The village of Telida was visited in November 8, 1980. No meeting washeld in this village. A meeting was scheduled for November 7, 1980 butwa~ cancelled because weather (snow storm all day on the 7th) preventedus from departing Takotna for Telida. Most of the men in the villagehad departed the village when we arrived on Saturday and so no meetingwas held but the persons listed on the following page were visited:I 1I •~,JITe 1 ida has no centrale 1 ect ri c power generat. i on but the school hasdiesel electric generation. Three families have battery for lights andradio. The batteries are recharged at the school. People interviewedsaid they would be safisfied with 14-volt battery power if they couldkeep the batteries charged. Wind power had been used by one resident inprevious years to supply power for a battery charger. Residents usedthe "Wilderness Home Power System" (Popular Mechanics) to obtain .infor-. mation on how to wire homes on battery power. Villagers would like awalk-in freezer in community to store moose. Satellite earth station isinstalled and operates from school power during the school year. Thereis no telephone in summer when school generation system shut down.Wood, because of its abundance and modest expense, is used to heat allbuildings in the village (i.e., residences, church, and school.)1,JI,~ 1I J,~II JA-27 .

uAPA23/LHouse-to-House Survey RosterTelidaNovember 10, 1980Winchell TicknorMrs. TicknorSteve EhiskaMr. NilokaiAlen DickCouncil PresidentCouncil President'sCouncil MemberCounc; 1 MemberSchool Teacherwifer

...........APPENDIX B....---...........

apa20:mJAPPENDIX BDATA ON EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENERGY BALANCEA. Data on Existing Conditions (1979/1980)Tabularized below is a summary of the data gathered in November andDecember 1980 during the field trips to the thirteen villages includedin this study on existing village conditions.This data was compiled from on-site inspections in each village, throughinterviews with .villagers, school teachers, village mayors, etc., andfrom comments and notes recorded during the meetings conducted at eachvillage. The data concerning physical conditions which exist in eachvillage (i.e.• generator sizes and types, number of housing units andtypes, etc.), was recorded by engineering personnel during their on-sitevisits and is considered accurate and reliable. Additional dataregarding village fuel requirements, population, etc., was gleemedfrom interviews with various villagers and is considered reasonablyaccurate.. \II.i! UJIJThe energy balance data present in the following pages represents a database on energy usage compiled from the information obtained during thefield trips to the thirteen villages. This data base does not reflectany adjustments which might be necessary after correlation of this database with other available sources of information related to energyusage in the villages.This energy data base is used in conjunction with other sources of informationto provide the basis for development of the 1979 energy balancefor each village.IIUJ, 1;\.JIB-1

1.~OPULATION•POPU-RESI-LATION DENCESRESIDENTIAL liND BUILDiNG OATAOHlER BUILDiNGSRESIDENCESOIHERBuck land172 411- church1- community hall, 1- city office1- school, gym1- store (bulk storage of fuel)1- clinicframe constructionaverage size: 600 ft'frame constructionHughes102 111- school, ~ gym1- clinic1- community halllog cabinsaverage size: 400-500 ft2schoolother -frame constructionlog' 400 ft'Koyukuk115 2S1- community hall, school supplied housing1- cl inlc for teachers and old1- church school 30'x30'xB'1- PHS building1- school (new), ~ gymlog cabinsize: 400-500 ft2 .school - frame constructionchurCh frame - 600 ft'other - log - 400 ft'Telida341- school1- church6- log cabin1- frame constructioncabins - 400 ft 2frame :=SOO ft2schoo 1churchframeframe - 600 ft2Nikolai96 221- community hall, 1- store1- clinic, 1- city office1- school, gym, 1- church .log cabinsize: - 500 ft2school - framecl inlc + city office - frame -church - frame: 600 ft'1,000 ft'Takotna87 221- school, getting gym, 1- bar1- PHS building (new) 1- church1- store (in house) 1- clinic1- community centerlog cabin : ~ totalsize: 600-ft2frame - ~ totalsize: - 600 ft'school - frameclinic frame - 600 ft'community center frame - 600 ft2Stony River67 121- school1- community hall (store in community hall)1- clinic1- churchlog cabinsize: : 400-500 ft'school frameother - log: 500 ft2Sleetmute110 19+ 5 otherside ofriver1- school, ~ gym, auxiliary office building1- commun i ty ha 111- old school teacher's quarter & storage)1- cl inlc 1- churchlog cabin - 15size: : 500 ft2frame --4size: - 600 ft'school - frameother - log: 500 ft2Red Devil53 8+ 5 otherside ofriver1- school, ~ gym1- el inlc1- storeframe800 ft'school - framecl inie - frame - 600 ft'store frame - 600 ft'Crooked Creek124 25+ 6 eastup river+ 2 acrossriver1- elinic 1- church1- community hall 1- store1- store 1- lodge1- school (new school being built)log cabin - ~- 600 ft2frame - ~- 700 ft>c li nle, church - frame: 600 ft2school - frame -1- store frame - 400 ft 2\- lodge frame - 600 ft'Chau thba 1 uk126 23+ 3 up& 3 downriver2- school bui ldings, plus gym1- commun i ty ha 111- PHS building1- clinic 1- churchlog cabin - 15- 600 ft2frame construction - 8: 800 ft'schoo I - framechurch frame 600 ft2c. h. log - : SOO~ft2cl inic - - 600 ft' other frameRuss Ian Mi ss ion173 402- stores 1- clinic2- schoo I, It gym2- churches (old and new)log cabin - 28 (moving toAVCP hous i ng)size: - 600 ft2AVCP frame - 27: 800 ft'schoo 1 -otherframeframeSheldon Point116 272- school buildings1- church 1- store1- PHS 1- cl inic1- community hall8-2log cabin - 14size: - 600 ft2AVCP - frame - 13size: : SOO ft'schoo I - frameother - frameB-3r-

L.JrJ2, ELECTRICAL DATAVIllAGE POIIER PLANT"II LOADkllh/CONS/MO,COST/kllhGENERATORFUEL CONSUMPIION/YEARSCIiOOl GENBuckland140 kll rad i ator75 kll cooledOperated 3~35 kll11120/80(see school)$87,50/lIIonthflat charge forfami Iy residence£stimated 1,000 gal/month 135 kll, 55 kllor 12,000 gal/year single phase(radiator cooled)peak load - 36 kll35,000 gallonsHughesno (school suppIied)(see school)$40,00/monthfirst 100 kll50 kll and 2-35 kll(radiator cooled)School supplies powerto to'ol"Peak load 30 kllUnknownKoyukukno(see school)100 kll, 75 kll, 30 kW(radiator cooled)load 11119/8035 kll47,000 g. lIons (inc ludes PIIS)6,700 ga lIons - Sept -Nov forelectrical gen. shutdown in summerTelidano(see scho~l)3 familiesbattery 1 i ghtsrecharged f.-olllschool generators2-12 kll units (air cooled)Load 11/10/809 kll£stimated 30 gallons/dayfor 9 months (shutdown in summer)8,500 gallons/yearNikolai75 kll, 50 "II(radiator cooled)15 kllOperated 31160 kll winter From utilityr-ecords]5 kll su .... er 125 kllh av high10 kllh av 10;"residence ollly35¢/kllhEstimated from utilityrecords 21,000 gallonsestimated by school11,000 gallons heating onlyelectricity from villageTakotna40 kll, 20 kll (30)air cooled,operated 1025 kll ma~10 "II minRes i denU a 1200 kllh/colls/mo25¢ /kllhEstimated fuel needs11,000 gallons/yearNo generatorunknownStony Riverno(See school'>2-50 kll, 30 using 1 0radiator cooledload 12/2/80 - 35 kll12,900 gallons (low)Sleetmuteno(See school)2-50 kll, 3 0 using 1 0(radiator cooled)load 12/2/80, 2 kll25,000 gallonsRed Devi Ino(See school)-'50 kll 3 ~, using 1 ~(radiator COOled)78 "II 3 0 using 1 010/3/80 6 kll, seems low12,000 gallons (low)Crooked Creekno(SeO? schoo 1 )2-50 kll, 1 ~ generator(radiator coo 1 ed)load 12/3/80 40 kllobtained frolll school districtChauthbalukno(See school)2-50 kll, 3 ~ using 1 ~(radiator cooled)load 12/4/80 - 30 kll'obtained from school districtRussian Mission 90 kll not installed(See school)125 kll, 2- 75 kll(radiator cooled) 1-15 kllusually one 75 kll wi 11lIaste Heat Recoverycarry load18,000 gallonSheldon Pointno(See school)8-4120 kll(radiator cooled)8-525,000 gallons pillS PHS

'j'3. FUEL AND COSI DAIA I8ucldand505,000 gallonsvillage Mating12.000 gallon'}.Pf!r yral" g .. neratorsand school usagE'.$1.16sso g31100$oper housf':hold$1.18Hughes1,400 gallonsvi nag-e cI inic!.p~ schoo 1 usaqe$2.318-10 cord,ppr res idtmceall heat 'With wood82 bottles vi 11 age12 bollhps ,,>chool6SO gallonsper househo' d$2.31 - 3.60I(oyukuk.2' ,SOO gallonsvi 11 age'See schoo 1 usag~$1.566-10 cordsper res i denceall heat with lIIOod600 9a lIonsper houspho td$1. 58200-5 g.llon.cans for villageof 8lcHoSIR.OO/canT .. I idasee schoo1 usage2,31 (estimated) 8-10 cordsper yearat I residencesplus school15 bottlestor ylthge4,000 gal laosvi Ilage$2.65 - 3.20 gallon50-5 gall.ncan for v; llage1,2S.001canNikolai22.0009.111005vi llagegp.neralion plus$1.618-10 cordsper residenceall heal witt'}woodschool usinqwood inone c I assrOOftl100 botll .. vlllige12 bott les school600 gallonsper rPS idence$1.69toI'-JT akotoaStony RiverSleetJaute{stimette 10.000 school8,000 gallons to" newPHS building6.000 gat IonsrUt~l oilset' schoo I u~age2.500 gallons/yearcHnic - c.h.see schoOl usage8,000 gallons for .... 111ck(estimated)$1.65$~.41SI.468-10 cords/yearmost res ldences heatlitith ,.,.,odS-IOcords/yearAll heat litith wo~8-10 cordsper yearper householda 11 heal with )fOod100 boUlt's ... ill.age $llOlboltle12 botUes schoolschool 12-15 SlSO/bottl,boUlu"school-IO bottl,. $140/botll,S fallil ies·4 bottles each100 gallonsppr hOllseho ld550 SSO gallonsper family(180 barrels forvillage)S50 - 82S gal.onsper familyU.6SSI.49cans/ypar$1.48180 5 gallon300-5 galloncan/ypar$23. OOIc~nfor vi llagf!$23/can($4 00/9allon)6.600 qallofll> $1.6412.000 gallons $1.63(~11 iclr.s)Red Vevi I1,000 gallon$/hou~ehold $1.46connrl tng11.000 9 .. 11ons for villa9@' . lo woodsee school usage5 hou.e.-35 bottle. $140/bolll.school - 20 bottles1,000 gallonsper family$I.4a6,000 901 Hons 'L 63pf!r yearCrooked Creet. Slor'e sold e,ooo $1.45 8-10 cords9.0UO gallonspe r res i dencesee o;,chool usagefM)sl heal wi th litood4 households $1J5/bottl,20-25 bott les Anak600 gallonsper, fami tyStore sold10,000 gals 'ast yparSI.4932S~5 gallon cans81alO45-S gal cansKerosene$2015 gal$23/5 9.110,000-11.000 gal $1.63per Yf!

apa20:mB. Energy Balance DataWhere energy usage had to be estimated for the 1979 base year thefollowing data has been used:Annual UsageuResidentialGasoline.PropaneHeating (75% efficiency)(1) North of Yukon River (112.4x10 6 Btu) diesel(2) Lower & Upper KuskokwimwooddieselwoodElectric(125 kWh/mo.) - supplied by central plant dieselSchoolsa. SmallHeating (1010 x 10 6 Btu, 75% Efficiency) DieselElectric (52,000 kWh/year) Dieselb. MediumHeating (1850 x 10 6 Btu, 75% Efficiency) DieselElectric (105,995 kWh/year) DieselSmall CommercialHeating (57.8 x 10 6 Btu, 75% Efficiency) DieselElectric(743 kWh/mo.) - supplied by central plant Diesel550 gal487 lbs/user1,100 gal9 chords1,000 gal8 chords172 gal diesel9,800 gal6,100 gal17,874 gal12,470 gal558 gal1,048 galPublic BuildingsHeating (75% efficiency, diesel)(1) community center (53.4 x 10 6 Btu)(2) health center or city office (114.5 x 10 6 Btu)(3) PHS building (114.5 x 10 6 Btu)·Electric (850 kWh/mo) - supplied by central plantdiesel525 gal1,125 gal1,125 gal1,200 galB-8

apa20:mr 'The derivation of the above usages is explained in detail in thefollowing sections of this appendix.Fue 1 uses for e 1 ectri c generation have been assumed at differentgenerating efficiencies for generators larger and smaller than 20 kW.Central Generator Pl ant eff; ci enci es are assumed at 8.5 kWh/Gal. (basedon AVEC Cost of Service Study, 1977) for plants larger than 20 kW.WLGenerators efficiencies are assumed at 6.0 kWh/Gal. for engines lessthan 20 kW.The energy conversion factors used in this study were as follows:i~1.2.3.4.5.6.138,000 Btu/gallon for diesel fuel127,000 ~tu/gallon for gasoline.91,000 Btu/gallon for propane, 19500 Btu/lb.127,000 Btu/gallon for AV gas.127,000 Btu/gallon for Blazo and Kerosene.17 x 10 6 Btu/cord for wood fuel.iI ,...B-9I~I '...

,JI,JIapa20:m1. Family ResidenceAssumptions made in approximatingfuel and electrical consumption ifsite specific data not availableBuilding Size 25 1 x 20 1 X 12.5 1A. Heat loss calculations and fuel use500 sq. ft.Area of windows = 1/10 total wall areaArea of wallsArea of roofArea of fl oorAssume walls of 211 x 411 constructionR-12 inSUlation U Factor 0.08. Roof2" x 8" or 211 x 12" on 16" centers.of insulation U Factor 0.09, 0.5 airU = 0.45 for windows.Heat Loss = r Area x U Factor113 sq. ft.1,125 sq. ft.500 sq. ft.= 500 sq. ft.on 16 11 centersand floorUnheated attic 6"changes per hour.Heat loss walls 1,125 ft2 (0.08) = 90.0 Btu/hr b.THeat loss windows 113 ft2 (0.45) = 50.9 Btu/hr b.THeat' loss roof 500 ft2 (0.09) = . 45.0 Btu/hr b.THeat loss floor 500 ft2 (0.09) = 45.0 Btu/hr b.TSUbtotal Heat Loss230.9 Btu/hr. b.THeat loss due to air change of 0.5 air changes/hour =~ (6 250 ft3)hr '(.24 Btu) = 56.3 Btu/hr. b.T16.b.T'JIJI( IUTotal heat loss = 287.2 Btu/hr. b.TFuel Calculations(1) North of Yukon River.Degree heating daysBtu/year = 287.2 Btu/hr.b.T x 2~a~rBtu/year = 112.4 x 10 6 Btuyear16,039 (Kotzebue)x 16,039 degree daysB-10

apa20:m..r( IFuel UsedD· 1 112.4 X 10 61 e se = Btu1 x 1 gallon used==-=--;,.....;,;~~~~yearx 138,000 Btu/gal .75 gallon effectiveI 1~Wood= 1,085 gallons/year/gamily (use 1,100)112.4 x 10 6 Btu 1= Year x 17 x lOb Btu/cord x= 8.82 cords/year/family (use 9)1 cord used.75 cordeffective(2) Middle,and Lower KuskokwimDegree heating days - 14,487 (McGrath)24 hrBtu/year = 287.2 Btu/hr. ~T x day x 14,487 degree days99.9 X 10 6 BtuBtu/year = .;;..;..;...;;......;..;.....~----";....;,..,;..yearFuel usedO· 1 99.9 X 106 Btu 1 1 gallon usedyear 138,000 Btu/gal .75 gallon effective1 e s e = x x --==-=-..... -~..;,..,,;;..;..;......;:~..;;;.,-,....-Wood= 965 gallons/year/family (use 1,000)99.9 x 10 6 Btu 1 1 cord used= year x 17 x 10 6 Btu/cord x .75 cord effectiv~= 7.8 cords/year/family (use 8).I '~B-11

IJ, 1I~IIJJJIJapa20:mB. Electrical Energy use for villages with new or pending centralizedpower systems.Assume:1,500 kWh/family/year (125 kWh/month)This estimate is based on 1979 data supplied by the Alaska VillageCooperative and from kWhestimates calculated as shown below usinginformation obtained from potential consumers interviewed duringfield trips.IIIII!JWJU, IUUJIJIJIIIIIJWJJAeeliance kWh/mo Months/Year Used kWh/YearFreezer 138 x - 8 = 704Lights 60 x 8 480Radio 7 x 12 = 84C.B. 7 x 12 = 84Washing machine 9 x 12 = 108Total kWh/year = 1,460Fuel usage1 460 kWh x 1 gal = 172 gallons, year 8.5 kWhC. Proeane UsageD.Average kWh/month = 1,460 = 12212Assume 487 pounds/family/yearfor those residences which use propane for cooking.This is an av~rageapproximation compiled from data obtained duringfield trips to the villages included in this study.Gasoline UsageAssume 550 gallons/family/year.This is an average approximation compiled from data obtained duringfield trips to the villages included in this study.8-12

apa20:mr \2. SMALL SCHOOLAssumptions Made in ApproximatingFuel and Electrical Consumptoinr'i I~Several buildings constitute the school, including the school itself,teacher housing, a storage shed and a generator shed. It is assumedthe generator shed and storage shed are not heated. The generatorsize for a small school ;s also assumed to be less than 20 kW.r 'WBuilding size:School 32,000 cu. ft.Teacher Housing 12,500 cu. ft.A.Heat Loss CalculationsArea of windows in schoolArea of walls in schoolArea of roof in schoolArea of floor in schoolArea of windows in teacher housingArea of walls in teacher housingArea of roof in teacher housingArea of floor in teacher housing200205030002500132135314001000Assume U of windows = .45, U of Walls = .07U of roof and floor = .23sq. ft.sq. ft.sq. ft.sq. ft.sq. ft.sq. ft.sq. ft.sq. ft.Subtotal Heat Loss = I Area x U Factor Btu/Hr. aTSubtotal Heat Loss = 2205 Btu/Hr.aTHeat Loss Due to Air Change of 1.5 times per hour =1.5 Air Changes X 44500 ft.3 X .075 lb. X .24 BtuHour 'Ft.3 lb.aT= 1201.50 Btu/Hr. aTTotal Heat Loss = 3406.5 Btu/Hr. aT..i i'I.jI ..J1:l13

I~I JIJI JJIWapa20:mFuel Use Calculation:Average Temperature 31°F.Assumed buiiding interior temperature 65°F.Btu _ 3406.5 Btu X 24 Hr. X 365 day'Year - Hr. ~T day YearX (65°F - 31°F) = 1.01 X 10 9fuel Use = 1.01 X 10 9 Btu XBtu/Year1 gallon138000 BtuX 1 gallon used _.75 gallons effective 9800 gallonsB. Electrical 'UsekWh ~ 52 000Year '(- ~ of data for medium school)Fuel Use:IIWJJJJAssume 8.5 kWh/gallon52000 kWh X 1 gallon - 6100 gallons dieselYear 8.5 kWh =Small school total fuel usage = 15,900 gallonsYear6-14

apa20:mf )3. MEDIUM SCHOOLAssumptions Made in ApproximatingFuel and Electrical Consumptionf 'Several buildings constitute school including the school itself, teacherhousing, storage shed and generator shed.Buil di ng Si ze:SchoolTeacher HousingStorage ShedGenerator Shed40000 cu.ft.20000 cu.ft.7500 cu. ft.9000 cu. ft.(i ,~r~A.Heat loss calculationArea 'of windows in school = 280 sq. ft. Area of walls inschool = 2120 sq. ft. Area of roof in school = 4200 sq. ft.Area of floor in school = 3750 sq. ft.Area of windows in teacher housingArea of walls in teacher housingArea of roof in teacher housingArea of floor in teacher housingArea of windows in storage shedArea of walls in storage shedArea of roof in storage shedArea of floor in storage shedArea of windows in generation shedArea of walls in generation shedArea of roof in generation shedArea of floor in generation shed==========260 sq. ft.1540 sq. ft.1950 sq. ft.1500 sq. ft.60 sq. ft.1040 sq. ft.900 sq. ft.750 sq. ft.60 sq. ft.1140 sq. ft.1050 sq. ft.900 sq. ft.Assume U of windows = .45, U of walls = .07, U of roof andfloor = .23Subtotal heat loss = r Area x U FactorSubtotal Heat loss = 4155.3-Btu/Hr.aTBtu/Hr.aTi'Iri~r 'i 1~11UB-15'

Heat loss due to air change of 1.5 times per hour =1.5 air changes x 76500 Ft.3 x .7~t~~· x .24 BtuHourLb. WT_ 2065.5 Btu- Hr. WTTotal Heat loss = 6220.80 Btu/Hr. WTFuel Use Calculations:Average outside Temperature 31°FAssumed building interior temperature 65°F.Btu/year = 6220 Btu x 24 Hr. x 365 days~r. WT . day Yearx (65°F - 31°F) = 1.85 x 109BtuYearFuel Use ;; 1.85 x 109 Btu x 1 §allonYear . 1380 0 Btux1 gallon used.75 gallon effective;;17874 gallonsYearB.Electrical UseYearkWhestimate is actual use of'small school in New Stuyahok;; 105995 kWhYear(AVEC 1977)Fuel use for electric energy generation:c 1I..Assu e 8.5 kWhm gallon105995 kWh x 1 gallon = 12470 gallonsYear 8.5 kWh YearMedium School Total Fuel Use ;; 303~:a~allons8-16APA 20/M 19

( ,apa20:mSMALL COMMERCIALASSUMPTIONS MADE IN APPROXIMATINGFUEL AND ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTIONA. Heat Loss Calculationsr !W( I: i~f:~Small commercial vendors are generally either attached to orincorporated into a residence. Assume an additional 300 sq. ft.increase in residential structure size due to business.Heat loss neglecting air changes are ~ those for a house =[ ,I '-.I230.9 Btu/hr t.T2= 115.5 Btu/hr. t.THeat loss due to assumed 0.75 air changeAir changes (3,750 ft3) (.075 lb) (.24 Btu) = 50.6 Btu/hr.6T0.75 hour ft 3 16.07Total heat loss = 166.1 Btu/hr.6TBtu/year = 166.1 Btu/hr.6T x 24 hr./day x 14,500 1 degree days =57.8 x 10 6 Btu/year.Fuel used = 57.8 x 10 8 Btu x 1 gallon 1 gallonyear 138,000 Btu x .75 gallon effectiveFuel used = 558 gallons (use 550 gallons)i 'I '1.1I~1 Averaged for,all villagesB-17

:1I~JIJI~JIQapa20:mB. Electrical usageUse 8,916 kWh/year/small consumer (743 kWh/mo)Averaged from 1979 year end AVEC data for smallcommercial consumers categoryFuel used for electric energy generation:Assume 8.5 kWh/gallon for central plant generation1 _8,916 kWh/year x 8.5 kWh - 1,048 gallons.I:JI~JIUu( Ii !I..I J, 1iIJ8-18

apa20:mf ;PUBLIC BUI LDINGSASSUMPTIONS MADE IN APPROXIMATINGFUEL AND ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTIONSr :I i~Community center, health center, city office, PHS, etc.Building Size 20' x 3D' X 12.5'A. Heat loss calculationsArea of windows = 1/10 total wall areaArea of wallsArea of roofArea of floorAssume walls of 211 x 4" construction on 16" centersR-IO insulation U Factor 0.1. Roof and floor2" x 8" or 2" x 12" on 16" centers. Unheated attic 6" .of insulation U Factor 0.13,0.75 air changes per hour.U = 0.45 for windows.Heat Loss = ~Area x U Factor==-=600 sq. ft.125 sq.1,250 sq.600 sq.600 sq.Heat loss walls 1,250 ft2 (0.1) = 125.0 Btu/hr 1:.THeat loss windows 125 ft2 (0.45) = 56.3 Btu/hr 1:.THeat loss roof 600 ft2 (0.13) = 78.0 Btu/hr 1:.THeat loss floor 600 ft2 (0~13) = 78.0 Btu/hr 1:.TSubtotal Heat Loss337.3 Btu/hr. 1:.THeat loss due to air change of 0.75 air changes/hour =0.75 air changes/hour (7,500 ft3) (0.075 lb/ft3) (.24 Btu/hr.1:.T) =101. 3 Btu/hr.1:.TTotal heat loss = 438.6 Btu/hr. 1:.TFuel CalculationsAverage heating degree days for region = 14,500 1Btu/year = 438.6 Btu/hr.1:.T x 24 hr/day x 14,500 degree daysft.ft.ft.ft.[ ,~rlI .'.JI' ..,fl1 I~D1 Averaged for all villagesB-19

IoIJIJIJIIJWI'JIWI:JIIIUWUIJIIIIJJJ'WI, Japa20:mBtu/year = 152.6 x 10 6 Btu/yearFuel use = 10 6 / 1 gallon 1 gallons used152.6 x Btu year x 138,000 Btu x .75 gallons effectiveFuel use' = 1,474 gallons/year (use 1,500)(1) Community centerPercentage of time heated = 35%Fuel used = 0.35 x 1,500 = 525 gallons(2) Health Center or City OfficePercentage of time heated - 75%Fuel used = 0.75 x 1,500 = 1,125 gallons(3) PHS BuildingPercentage of time heated - 75%Fuel used = 0.75 x 1,500 = 1,125 gallonsB. Electrical UsageUse 10,200 kWh/year/building (850 kWh/molAveraged from 1979 year and AVEC data for public consumer category.Fuel used for electric energy generation:Assume 8.5 kWh/gallon as these consumers are either supplied by acentral village plant or the village school generator.10,200 kWh/year x 1 gallon = 1,200 gallons8.5 kWhC. Post OfficeAssume the post office is located in a residence and has the same'heating and electrical load.See average home electrical use.B-20I, '1I~

APPENDIX CENERGY FORECASTING PROCEDURE AND CALCULATIONS

I~JI~ lI~JIJIIIWI~U1W( IWAPA 22-A v(a)APPENDIX CENERGY FORECASTING PROCEDURES AND CALCULATIONSPopulationThe population forecast projections are based upon historicgrowth rates and, where available, information on projectedfuture regional growth rates [30], [31], [32], [45], [56].1Population data {ndicates that the historical growth rates inthe villages varies from a low of less than one percent to ahigh of approximately three percent. In villages where historicalgrowth rates have averaged less than one percent per year, agrowth rate of one percent per year has, however, been used forpopulation forecasting purposes. The population forecast is consistentwith previous State of Alaska population forecast.It is further assumed that the number of members per householdwill follow the overall Alaska tendency and decrease from theaverage 1979 ratio found in each village, which presently rangesfrom a high of 6 to a low of 4 (see Section 3), to an average offour members per household by the year 2000. Therefore, thenumber of residential energy users will, in certain villages,increase at a higher rate than the population. The number ofsmall commercial energy users e.g., stores and shop facilitiesand public agencies is assumed to increase in direct proportionto that of residential consumers.(b)End Use Forecast( 1I.JJIWIJI .JIElectric Power Requirements: Use of electrical energy in the13 villages is low compared to other areas in Alaska. This ismostly attributed to a low IIhook-up saturation" level as onlythree of the 13 villages presently have op~rating centralizedpower generation and distribution facilities, with one additionalvillage being supplied from the school. Of the nineremaining villages, six intend to install village diesel.electrical systems during the 1981 summer construction season.1 [ ] number referencesC-1

APA 22-A vI'Historical increases in use of electricity supplied by majorutilities in the ~region (Bethel, Kotzebue) have been approximately11 percent per year since 1970. This implies that onceelectric energy becomes available on a reliable basis the usagewill increase not only with new consumer connections but alsowith increased use by the i ndi vi dua 1 consumers. The rap; dincrease in cost of electricity in the last few years has notcaused a reduction in consumption, mostly because the users inthe area are still in the process of applying electric energyto more and more tasks. Generally it can be assumed that theuse of electricity will increase with the increase in familyincome if th~ annual ~ill remains within a certain percentagerange. A recently completed study for a southcentral utilityin Alaska has s,hown that over a 35-year period the average energyuse by the individual residentia.l consumers has increased by2700%, but that the monthly bill has remained constant between,2.4 and 3.9% of the family income.i.JI .I.JI ·~To determine future power requirements, it has generally beenassumed that a central station will supply electric ~nergy.The effect of improved electric service is anticipated tobe an increase in the intensity of use as compared to individuallyoperated generators. Furthermore, with the SUbsistenceeconomy changing in many communities into a cash economy andsubsequent improvements in the quality of life, new electricloads will require service. For instance, HUD houses plannedfor various villages will be larger ~han existing older housingand be equipped with more appliances' using electricity.Based on available data, the average expected increase of electric energyuse has therefore been assumed to be 4.5%/year for all consumer classesexcept large consumers (schools). This growth rate is expected if theState of Alaska continues to provide some form of electric power productionsubsidies to rural residents, and if the continued use of diesel generationincreases the cost for electrical energy at the present prevailing r'ate ofescalation.C-2LWr .

iIJJJIJI, J'IJAPA 22-A vThis growth rate of 4.5%/year is applied to the average annual electricalenergy usage (as determi ned from AVEC IS 1979 year end reports). forresidential, small commercial and public consumers to project energyusage for these consumer categories through the year 2000. The followingtab 1 eli sts the klNH/mo/consumer for the vari ous consumer categori es,which have been derived from 1979 AVEC data. The table also lists theenergy forecast projections for the year 2000 based on the 1979 energyfigures and increases at 4.5% per year growth rate.IJThese figures were used to construct the electrical energy forecast tablesin Section 4 except as noted. in the following paragraphs.kWH/Mo/Consumer.Consumer Category1979 2000ResidentialSmall CommercialPublic Buildings165 415743 1,872850 2,142In villages with new or pending cen~ralized power systems the residentialenergy requirements in 1981 is assumed at 125kWH/mo/consumer. (See' Appendix8). This figure is escalated at such a rate as to achieve 415/kWH/mo/consumer by the year 2000 to coincide with the forecast usage by residentialAVEC consumer.In villages with operating utilities, residential consumer usage isbased on utility records if available. Present usage is escalated at.4.5% per year through the year 2000. If the projected increase inenergy usage is 1 ess than 415 kWH/mo/consumer, the growth rate isadjusted to achieve 415 kWH/mo/consumer in the year 2000 to coincide with.the forecast energy usage by residential AVEC consumers.C-3

APA 22-A vI'Electrical energy usage (i.e., Kwh/mo) for both small commercial and publicbuildings has been averaged from 1979 AVEC data. This usage rate ;s appliedto all 13 villages and escalated at 4.5% per year through the year 2000.(See above table). Electrical energy usage for large consumers (school) .is projected to increase at the population growth rate of the village.The load factors in the vil)ages is forecast to improve slowly (0.45 to0.50) by the year 2000. This is due to the expand consumer base in thecommunities, plus anticipated future advancements in techniques forregulating consumer load demand by the year 2000. The marked decreasein load factor (0.6 to 0.45) in certain villages beteewn 1979 and 1982is attributable to village electrification: ,The 1979 load is composedprimarily of the school load which have historically had a high loadfactor (i.e.0.6). The 1982 load is a composite village load (i.e.,residential, small commercial, public buildings, school), which historicallyhave had a load factor of approximately 0.45. Hence the decreasein load factor between 1979 and 1982.Calculation procedures, number of consumers, energy consumption percons umer, etc, is out 1 i ned in deta i1 inSect ion 4 and wi 11 not beduplicated in Appen'dix C.Heating Requirements: Heating requirements for each consumercategory have been projected at the 1979 energy use level, asdetermined from existing data, through the year 2000 except forpropane. All residencies have been forecast to use propane bythe year 2000. Beginning in 1986 it is assumed that fossil fuelrequi rements wi 11 decrease at the rate of one percent per yearthrough the year 2000 due to technical improvements in heatingequipment and improvements in building thermal characteristics,(Le., implementation of passive solar heating, additional insulation,etc.)'. This assumption results in an approximate fifteenpercent decrease in fossil fuel requirements by the year 2000 and;s reflected ;n the heating requirement tables listed in Section 4.Calculations details concerning heat requirements can be foundin Section 4 and will not be duplicated in Appendix C.) Calculationsfor heating requirements assume the following:C-4I-.Jr 'I 'IIIl

APA 22-A v1) Heat content per gallon diesel fuel - 138,000 Btu/ ga 12) Heat content per cord of wood - 17.0 x lOs/chord3) Heat content per lb of propane - 19,500 Btu/lb4) Heat contribution from burning blazo to provideillumination ;s neglected.IIJJJIJNOTE:The actual heat content per cord of wood will vary significantlydue to type of wood (i.e., spruce, birch, balsam) used for fueland moisture content.JI JC-5

APPENDIX 0TECHNOLOGY PROFILESAPA 24/CC

I JI J,JIJIJI1•JSECTION123TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTIONEXPLANATORY NOTESTECHNOLOGY PROFILES3.1 Steam - Electric Technologies3.1.1 Coal3.1. 2 Wood3.1.3 Geothermal3.2 Petroleum - Electric Technologies3.2.1 Diesel3.2.2 Gas Turbine3.3 Low-Btu Gasification3.4 Wind Energy Conversion Systems3.5 Heating Technologies3,5.1 Diesel Waste Heat Recovery, W 3.5.2 Geothermal HeatingIIWJI J, 1I~I J3.6 Binary Cycle Technologies3.7 Single Wire Ground Return Transmission3.8 Hydroelectric3.8.1 Hydroelectric Generation3.8.2 Electric Heating3.9 Conservation3.10 Other Technology Summaries3.10.1 Two Speed Gear Box3.10.2 Low Power Nuclear Heating3.10.3 Chemical Heat Storage3.10.4 Fuel Cells3.10.5 Photovoltaic Cells3.10.6 Passive Solar Heating3.10.7 Biogas Generation3.10.8- 3.10.9Waste ConversionPeat- i -PAGE1-12-13.1.1-13.1.2-13.1.3-13.2.1-13.2.2-13.3-13.4-13.5.1-13:5.2-13.6-13.7-13.8.1-13.8.2-13.9.1-13.10.1-13.10.2-13.10.3-13.10.4-13.10.5-13.10.6-13.10.7-13.10.8-13.10.9-1

SECTION 1INTRODUCTION:IJIc 1,r 'IiU!· I .I~· 1I ,I~· I .• 1..1, I,~1II1III( JI J· 1I~I:lI~ ,

SECTION 1INTRODUCTIONJI JThe energy technology profiling effort involves the development of aconsistent set of assumptions in order to provide a truly comparabledata base. Although at 1 east several data sources are avail ab 1 e foreach technology, the data generally is quite variable (often based onincompatible assumptions) and, perhaps more important, does not apply tosystems which could be utilized in Alaska in general and in the 13villages of this study in particular. Data discrepancies for theso-called alternative,energy technologies are also strongly influe~cedby the simpl~ lack of experience in constructing and operating facilitiesutilizing these technologies.The technology profiles which follow are an attempt to provide a consistent,appropriate data base.: iWIJJJI J"I ~JJIapa19/hl 1-1

IJIIIWJJIJSECTION 2EXPLANATORY NOTESI.~IIIWWr 1I~I: I~,WIJJIJIIJIJI~JIJI

SECTION 2EXPLANATORY NOTESFor this preliminary sUbmittal) expJanatory notes are numbered consecutively.WIwUJJ II, lI!I~WnI~l.2.3.Factors that cause differences in electrical generating plantcapital costs per kW include:o project scopeooooooregulatory requirementslocal cost variationsplant sizesingle versus multiple unit plantsconstruction timeinterest ratesThe availability factor is used as a measure of reliability and isthe percentage of time over a specified period (typically one year)that the power plant was available to generate electricity. Creditfor availability is not given if the plant is shut down for anyreason.Net Energy as used here is typically referred to as the IIheat rate llin the case of electric generation and is expressed as the ratio ofBtu in to kWh out in this case. For direct heat application cases)this ratio is Btu in to Btu out.IUapa19/m1 2-1

I.JIIJJIIIJJWIJSECTION 3.1STEAM - ELECTRIC TECHNOLOGIESIIi 1W. \W, ,, I,WJJ. 1I~IIJI JJI~IJIIJ

I, I'~JI·0II _ JlI~UI1°JIJu3.1.1(A)DIRECT FIRED COAL FOR ELECTRICAL GENERATIONGeneral Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedCoal is ground to roughly less than 2 inch diameter chunks andmechanically loaded onto a boiler gr~teafter which it iscomb us ted in the boiler to heat incoming water to steam. Thesteam is then expanded in a turbine which drives a generatorto produce electricity.steam power cycle.2) Current and future availabilityFigure 3.1.1-1 shows a rudimentarySteam plants account for the majority of electrical generationin the United States today.3.1.1COALAlthough steam plants can accomodatea wide range of loads, U.S. economies of scale indicate thatthe cost per unit increases sharply in sizes below about 50MWe.It should be noted that European coal-steam generationunits are employed in the less than 10 MWerange.IW(8) Performance Characteristics1) Energy outputa) Quality - temperature, formI~~IJI,JIElectricityapa24/a1 ' 3.1.1-1

I~3.1.1COALi~b) QuantityTypically 5-50 MWe; rarely as small as 1 MWe(1000 kWe).c) Dynamics - daily. seasonal, annual2) ReliabilityCoal fired steam plants are typically used for base powerwithout respect to time of year.a) Need for back-up65% availability .factorb) Storage requirementsTypical storage is sufficient supply for 90 days ofoperat i on. For vi 11 age areas, up to 9 months worth ofcoa 1 storage may be requ; red to guarantee cont; nuoussupply irrespective of weather~3) Thermodynamic efficiency(I\.II': )~I I...I \~I11.1up to 33%4) Net energyf :I'-I9,500 - 17,500 Btu/kWhLapa24/a2 3.1.1-2

3.1.1COALJI,WI~I(C) Costs (1980 $)1)2)Capitalo $860/kW (Bristol Bay 4000 kW, 1979 $ x 1.13)o $1350/kW (Kotzebue 5000 kW)Assembly and installationoo$860/kW (Bristol Bay 4000 kW, 1979 $ x 1.15)$770/kW (Kotzebue 5000 kW)IJr \J3)Operationoo$450,000/year (Kotzebue 2500 kW and 5000 kW)Fuel cost for $65/ton, 6800 Btu/lb, and 17,500 Btu/kWhworks out to 8.4¢/kWh (Kotzebue us i ng Chi cago Creekcoa 1).I\.JI;wI,J!; 14)Maintenance and replacementooo2% of investment per year (Bristol Bay maintenance)2.5% of investment per year (Kotzebue mainte~ance)9.4% of investment per year (replacement @ 7% for20 years).I 'I~;JI:lJIJJ5) Economies of scaleEconomies of scale favor larger scale plants, particularlywith respect to coal handling facilities. (Upcoming plants inthe lower 48 are typically of 500 MWe size.) Economies ofoperator requirements.also favor large plants~apa24/a3 3.1.1-3

1,3.1.1COAL(D)Special Requirements and Impactsw( ,1)2)/ 'Siting - directional aspect, land, heightCoal plants require space for storage of fuel. Cooling wateris not required for Alaska conditions as air condensers can beused. If the plant is sited at the mine, handling and storagerequirements are lessened; storage of a month's fuel is adequate.Resource needsa) RenewableN/AI :I '~( ;~r .,W( \Wb) Non-renewableTypical Alaskan coal ranges from 6500 to 8000 Btu perpound.I i~3)Construction and operating employment by skillRequires highly skilled construction and operation personnel.4)Environmental residualsoooSolid wastes: include slag, bottom ash, scrubber sludge.Gaseo~s wastes: NO x' SOxCurrent environmental requlations regarding sulfur dioxideemissions from conventional coal-steam plants generallyrequire abatement processes which significantly increasethe cost of such plants.r '~r .~apa24/a43.1.1-4

3.1.1COAL5) Health or safety aspectsJCoal fired plants emit the following, as yet unregulated,atmospheric pollutants: toxic and carcinogenic trace elements,radionuclides, and organic and metal-organic compounds.Considerations include impact of transport and storage offuel, risk of spontaneous combustion, and coal pile run off.(E)Summary and Critical Discussion.1) Cost per million BTU or kWhI J, 1IU2)o 20.3¢/kWh (Kotzebue 2500 kW busbar cost in 1984).Resources, requi rements, envi ronmenta 1 res i dua 1 s per mi 11 ionBTU or kWh! I~J3)oooooFor coal at 6800 Btu per pound and plant at 17,500, Btu/kWh,2.6 pounds of coal are needed per kWh.NO xemissions are about 0.15 lbs/million Btu.SOx emissions are about 0.067 lbs/million Btu.Particulate emissions are about 0.006 lbs/million Btu.Solid wastes are about 10% of fuel burned.Critical discussion of the technology, its reliability andits availabilityIn general, the conventional boiler-fired steam turbine systemis the most economi c and techno 1 ogi ca lly developed systemavailable to the power industry. Operational economics requirea minimum plant size of 5 MWe, however.' Lead time is significantlylonger that for diesel or gas turbine installation.apa24/a53.1.1-5

! 'i~STEAM HEADERr---~-------,III ,I EXHAUSTlOUTIIIIIITURBINE..r \I,( •,iiil.jWOOD ORCOAL INBOILERASHOUTr '~STEAMCONDENSERLCONDENSATEDIAGRAM OF RUDIMENTARY STEAM POWER PLANTr 1~

IIUU, 1.~IIIIJJJI WI~JIJIWi iIIJI JJ!JII~JIJI3.1.2(A)(B)DIRECT FIRED WOODGeneral DescriptionFOR ELECTRICAL GENERATION1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedWood can be directly fired in traveling grate or stoker typesteam boilers to provide steam for a conventional steam turbinecycle.The two major sources of wood fuel are' forest residuesand wood wastes from industrial operations. Figure 3.1.2-1shows a wood-steam plant flow diagram.2) Current and future availabilityExisting commercial systems are roughly in the 1-50 MWerange.Economics of small scale plants are generally prohibitive3.1.2WOODbecause of the economics of operation and maintenanc'e requirementsfor full time, highly skilled labor.Numerous U.S. manufacturersdo produce wood fired boilers suitable for generating electricityin the 250-1000 kWe range.Performance Characteristics1) Energy outputa) Quality - temperature, formEl ectri cityapa24/bl 3.1.2-1

3.1. 2WOODI, Ib) Quantityr 'Plant sizes vary from 0.5 to 50 MWe, although most econom'iesof operation suggest a minimum size plant'of 3-5 MWe.c) Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annualFuture supplies can be adversely impacted by: economiccompetition, distance of supplies, and needs fo~ sustainedforest yield levels.!'2)Re 1 i ab il i tya) , Need for back-upAvailability factor.b)Storage requirementsAs for a coal plant, ninety days of fuel ;s typicallystored; up to 9 months storage is required if climateonly permits a few months of harvesting and transportation.i )3) Thermodynamic efficiencyup to 21%4) Net energyI~r 'i '~16,000 - 30,000, Btu/kWhapa24/b2 3.1.2-2LL

3.1. 2WOOD(C) Costs (1980 $)1) Capitaloo$1220/kW (Kake 1500 kW)$2200/kW (Angoon 400 kW)2) Assembly and installationoo$1220/kW (Kake 1500 kW)$2200/kW (Angoon 400 kW)3) OperationJo $450,OOO/year (Kake 1500 kW) + 10% of fuel costs.o $350,000/year (Angoon 400 kW)4) Maintenance and replacementI i.. 1! JJIJI5)o 2.5% of investment per year (Kake 1500 mai ntenance)o $90,000/year (Kake 1500 kW maintenance)o 9.4% of investment per year (replacement at 7% for 20years)Economies of scaleEconomies of scale favor plants in the 15-50 MWe range basedon fuel handling facilities and operator requirements.I~IJIJapa24/b3 3.1.2-3I

3.1. 2WOOD(D)Special Requirements and Impacts1)Siting - directional aspect, land, heightWood storage area is the major land use.eliminate cooling water requirements.Air condensing canIL.2)Resource .needs.a) .Renewable8,000 Btu/lb dry; 4,500 Btu/lb in typical wet conditions.This translates as at least 2 dry pounds per kWh generated.The mass of wood required. for a 500 kWe plant is on theorder of 6x10 6 pounds of dry wood per year.Lb) Non-renewableN/A3) Construction and operating employment by skill4)Requires highly skilled construction and operation personnel.Environmental residualsl \~oooSolids: Ash, particulatesAir: SOx' NO xImpacts of harvestingLLapa24/b43.1. 2-4~

I~J3.1. 2WOODa5) Health or safety aspectsI~I JU IIUJ!, ,uI .II, IJI~I JIJIJI . 1I~I J(E)Considerations include impact of transport and storage offuel, risk of spontaneous combustion, and wood pile run off.Summary and Critical Discussion1) Cost per million BTU or kWho 8.1¢/kWh (California 30 MWe levelized busbar cost)o 4.7¢/kWh (Literature 50 MWe levelized bus bar cost)2) Resources, requi rements, envi ronmenta 1 res i dua 1 s per mi 11 ionBTU or kWh3)oooooPer (0)2) above, at least two pounds of dry wood arerequired per kWh; three to four pounds/k~hNO xemissions are about 0.25-1.18 lbs/million BtuSOx emissions are about 0.07-0.18 lbs/million Btuis more probable.Particulate emissions are about 0.02 lbs/million BtuResidual ash from wood firing is not classified as ahazardous waste; firing wood waste actually decreases theamount of solid waste.Critical discussion of the technology, its reliability andits availabilityAlthough dry wood (at about 8000 Btu/pound) has about the samepotential heat content as much of Alaska's coal, most wood ;ssufficiently moist to reduce this heat value by 40 to 50percent.In addition to the moisture content, the relativevolume to weight ratio of wood is disadvantageous as comparedapa24/b5 3.1.2-5

3.1. 2WOODi 'to coal, with consequent increased material handling requirements.Also, as compared to coal, the fuel gathering and transportationprocesses result in the expenditure of significantly greateramounts of energy.Wood, a relatively clean burning fuel, ;s suitable for smallersteam power plants than is coal. As these smaller sizedplants are more suitable to much of Alaska's power developmentneeds,this source of energy cannot be overlooked.IWiI1.1r '~,iILLapa24/b63.1.2-6LI..

STACKPOLUTIONCONTROLWOOD. trRANSPORlWASTEWASTEFUELPREPARATIONCONVEYFUELSTORAGECONVEYFUELBOILERSTEAMPIPINGTURBINEGENERATORPOWERTRASHREMOVALWATER CONDENSER r.-ASHHANDLINGCOOLINGFLUIDWOOD FIRED STEAM POWER PLANT FLOW DIAGRAMFIGURE 3.1.2-1

3.1. 3GEOTHERMAL3.1.3 GEOTHERMAL - ELECTRIC (FLASHED STEAM)(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering process~s involvedGeothermal electric generation in Alaska would be by thefl ashed steam or bi nary processes. The bi nary conversi ontechnology is discussed generically in another profile; theflashed steam technology is profiled here as shown schematicallyin Figur.e 3.1.3-1. The flashed steam process applies to1 i qui d ,domi nated geothermal reservo; rs such as those thoughtto exist in Alaska. Hot liquids are brought to the surfaceand partially converted to steam in flash vessels where thefluids undergo pressure reduction. The separated steam componentis used to power a steam turbi ne-generator and spent andseparated fluids. are reinjected into the earth to minimizepotential subsidence problems.2) Current and future availabiltiyNot currently in commercial practice in the United States, butover 140 MWe in operation in foreign countries. U.S. environmentalrestructions are much more severe, in general.(8) Performance Characteristics1) 'Energy outputI 'I...r '~r 1~r '(i.Iapa24/c1 3.1. 3-1

3.1. 3GEOTHERMALa) Quality - temperature, formElectricityb) QuantityEconomic plant sizes are in the range of 35-50 MWe. Apilot California plant is being constructed at 10 MWesize.J. u"I.Jc) Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annual2) Re 1 i abil ityGeothermal electric plants are generally used for base(continuous) loads .a) Need for back-up. 1ooNo back-up required with a proven resource, althoughstandby wells are common .70% availability factorJI(lI~I JIJIapa24/c2b) Storage requirementso No speci a 1 storage requi red; reservo; r prov; desessentially unlimited storage.3.1.3-2

liIIIJ3.1. 3GEOTHERMAL3) Thermodynamic efficiencyo Up to 12% (10-12% typical) overall plant efficiency;turbine efficiency alone is around 22%.4) Net energyr ;I :III( "o27,000 - 34,000 Btu/kWh(C) Costs (1980 $), ,1) Capita 1o$1125/kW installed (California 50 MWe)2) Assembly and installationoN/A - Available data ;s for 50 MWe plant.3) OperationoN/A - Available data is for 50 MWe plant.4) Maintenance and replacementoN/A - Available data is for 50 MWe plant.5) Economies of scaleEconomies of scale are generally advantageous over about 30MWe and .are i ncreasi ngly di sadvantageous below that si ze.apa24/c33.1. 3-3

IJII JJIJ(D)Special Requirements and Impacts3.1. 3GEOTHERMAL!JIJ1) Siting - directional aspect, land, heightTypically, 3-5 acres of land with geothermal resource isneeded for each MWe; 90% of this area ;s open space betweenwells and plant facilities.2) Resource needs. 1I-a) RenewableAssuming geothermal is considered a renewable resource,the fluid would have typical characteristics of 340 0 F @115 psia.b)Non-renewableIIJJN/A3) Construction and operating employment by skillHighly skilled construction and operational personnel arerequired.I, 1!IJ1I~JIJJ4)apa24/c4·Environmental residualso Air: H 2S is the major problemo Cooling water: a function of quality of water used3.1.3-4

3.1. 3GEOTHERMAL( ,I ,~I'~5) Health or safety aspectsr )I(E)Noise pollution can be a problem, with levels greater than 100dB for well venting and related activities. Other considerationsinclude disposal of spent fluids, H 2 S ("rotten egg" smell),and possible surface subsidence.Summary and Critical Discussion1) Cost per million BTU or kWh9.84¢l.kWh levelized busbar cost (California 50 MWe)r I,~r '~I'I :1.1( ,W2) Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBTU or kWhooSolid wastes are a function of geothermal fluid compositionand can be zero.Environmental residuals for The Geysers (Californiasteam) geothermal electric production are:WaterBicarbonate: 0.06 pounds/million BtuNO : x0.02 pounds/million BtuSO . 0.02 pounds/million Btux'Solids: 0.13 pounds/million BtuOrganics: 0.03 pounds/million BtuAirCO 2: 6.66 pounds/million BtuAmmonia: 0.11 pounds/million BtuMethane: 0.42 pounds/million BtuH 2S: 0~41 pounds/million Btuapa24/c53.1. 3-5

3.1. 3GEOTHERMAL3)Critical discussion of the technology, its reliability andits availabilityo Geothermal designs are nearly always site specific -technology is not necessarily transferrable.o Requires a proven resource.o While small «100 kW) organic cycle geothermal generationis a small scale possibility, the current state of theart for flashed steam plants indicates a minimum economicplant size of about 35 MW, far too big for village application., 1W, \JJIIJIWIJIJapa24/c63.1.3-6I

GENERATORr \i ...f 'If \i \...STEAMCOOLINGTOWERMAKEUP,..--'-----..........., WATER( ,~I '~FLASH,..---.... -+ VESSELBRINEBRINEREINJECTIONPUMPDIRECTCONTACTCONDENSERBLOWDOWN ~PUMPFROMPRODUCTIONWELLSTO REINJECTIONWELLSGEOTHERMAL POWER PRODUCTION BY THEFLASHED STEAM PROCESSFIGURE 3.1.3-1r '.~

SECTION 3.2PETROLEUM - ELECTRIC TECHNOLOGIESiI \J,: iI ~I. iI~11--I JIW~IJIIJ

IJ~lI~IIJJJIJ3.2.1 DIESEL(A) General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involved3.2.1DIESELII~I UIJJJUIJIJIn the diesel engine, air is compressed in a cylinder to ahigh pressure. Fuel oil is injected into the compressed air,which is at a temperature above the fuel ignition point, andthe fuel burns, converting thermal energy to mechanical energyby driving a piston. Pistons drive a .shaft which in turndrives the generator.2) Current and future availabilityDiesel engines driving electrical generators are one of themost efficient simple cycle converters of chemical energy(fuel) to electrical energy. Although the diesel cycle intheory will burn any combustible matter, the practical fact ofthe matter is that these engines burn only high grade liquidpetroleum or gas, except for multi-thousand horsepower engineswhich can burn heated residual oil. Diesel generating unitsare usually built as an integral whole and mounted on skidsfor installation at their place of use.IJ IUIWIJ(8)Performance Characteristics1) Energy outputapa24/d1 3.2.1-1IJI

W3.2.1DIESELI~f ;a)Quality - temperature, formIn addition to electricity, diesel generators produce twokinds of capturable waste heat: from the c~olingand from the exhaust.waterThe cooling water normally is inthe 160-200 o F range, but it can be 250°F or higher withslight engine modification. Engines today are usuallyI 1run at the cooler temper?tures because of design simplicity, ~simpler operating routines, and first cost economy. Theexhaust heat ina di ese 1 is of hi gher temperature andconsequently more easily uS'ed than the cooling waterheat, but higher initial costs and increased operatingcomplexities are encountered when attempting to recoverenergy from the exhaust gases.( 1~b)QuantityTypically ,30% of the fuel energy supplied to a diesel-electricset is converted to electricity, 30% is transferred tocooling water, 30% is exhausted as hot gas, and 10% isradiated directly from the engine block. Typical Alaskadiesel installation range from about 50 to 600 kWh.f 'Wc)Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annual( :)Diesel units are typically base loaded ( not subject todynamic variations).apa24/d23.2.1-2

IIWIJ3.2.1DIESELJ2)Reliabilitya) Need for back-upHigh reliability of low speed diesels is advantageous forrural Alaskan areas. Although most Alaskan installationsare of higher speed ranges (>1800 rpm), proper installationand maintenance allow continuous .loading.b) Storage requirementsIIJJ, \UJJIJTanks located ~earby the power plant.3) Thermodynamic efficiencyo typically 17-31% overall plant efficiency4) Net energyo 11,000 - 20,000 Btu/kWh(C) Costs (1980 $)1) CapitalIIJIIIIJJJJapa24/d3ooo$400/kW (AVEC)$230-460/kW (Bristol Bay 1979 $ X 1.15 for units up to500 kW)$416/kW (Bristol Bay, 60 kW, 1980 $)3.2.1-3 .

3.2.1DIESELII :1.12) Assembly and installationooo$400/kW (AVEC)$200-600/kW (Bristol Bay 1979 $ X 1.15)$950/kW (Kake capital and installation)3) Operation4)o4-8% of investment per year (Bristol Bay operation)Maintenance and replacemento 2% of investment per year (Bristol Bay maintenance)o $7.44/mWh (THREA records, maintenance)o 9.4% of ; nvestment per year (replacement at 7% for20 years)5) Economies of scaleI~f 1~lJ..r :.r I-.J.Diesel electric units range from around 1 kWe to around 1 MWe.(D)Special Requirements and Impacts1) Siting - directional aspect. land. heightr '~An 100 kWe unit is typically skid-mounted, weighs about 2tons, is about 5 feet high, 3~ feet wide, and 9 feet long.The unit requires foundation, enclosure, and ~r6vision forcooling and combustion air.r \~apa24/d43.2.1-4

(lI~~ 1I"JIJ2) Resource needs3.2.1DIESELa) RenewableN/Ab) Non-renewableNo.2 diesel fuel is typically used for stationary 100 kWinstallations.3) Construction and operating employment by skillConstruction cao be done with supervised typical local laborand equipment. Operation requires an operator/mechanic.4)Environmental residuals, \, I~, Il..lI: I11.1, 1IWJIUIQI5)apa24/d5The composition of the exhaust is a function of the air-fuelratio and the hydrogen-carbon ratio of the fuel. Residualsinclude: carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and tracesof nitrogen oxides and unburned hydrocarbons.Health or safety aspectsFuel tanks require spill protection, often difficult in remoteinstallations. Major consideration is potential impact fromsuch spills.3.2.1-5

(',-.IL3.2.1DIESEL(w(E)Summary and Critical Discussion1) Cost per million BTU or kWh (Fuel & lube oil costs only)oo10-11¢/kWh (Kotzebue and Bethel)22-25¢/kWh (Small Villages)( ,~2) Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBTU or kWhooFrom 0.07 to 0.12 gallons of fuel per kWh.Environmental residuals per million Btu: N/A.( ;~3) Critical discussion of the technology. its reliability andits availabilityDiesel units are typically stocked by several manufacturersand, as such, have relatively short lead times for use. Whilethis technology is a widely used bush application, lack ofqualified operators and availability of spare parts have posedproblems in Alaska.r ,.I ,I 'I.jL( "\ II.ir i~apa24/d63.2.1-6

DRAFT 3.2.2GAS TURBINE3.2.2 GAS TURBINE(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedIJ)i..J( \WIn simple cycle gas turbine plants (see Figure 3.2.2-1),incoming air is compressed and injected. into, the combusionchamber along with the gas or vaporized liquid fuel. Thecombusted gas, at relatively high temperature and pressure,expands through and drives the turbine, which drives thegenerator and the air compressor. Fuel is typically naturalgas or very high grade distillate oil.2) Current and future availabilityGas furbine power plants are a proven, established technology,chiefly in peaking applications.(B)Performance Characteristics1)Energy outputIUa) Quality - temperature, formElectricity and waste heat"'II~UIJIIWapa24/e1b) QuantityWaste (exhaust) heat is at about 800°F (typically) andamounts to 40 to 50% of the Btu value of fue 1 input.3.2.2-1

DRAFT3.2.2GAS TURBINEc) Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annual2)Typically used for (daily) peaking loads because operatingcosts are high relative to fixed costs.Rel i abil ity(Wa) ,Need for back-upReliability of petroleum based fuel supply is an issue.Normally no back-up for peaking appl ications as peakingunits have high reliability and low installation leadtime.b) Storage requirementsr '~Natura 1 gas is typ i ca lly prov; ded by pi pe 1 i ne.oil fuels require tank storage.Di st ill ater 1~3) Thermodynamic efficiencyo4) Net energySimple cycle turbines have overall thermal efficienciesof about 28 percent.( ,~o9,000 - 22,000 Btu/kWhf'~Lapa24/e2 3.2.2-2r "~

I: I:~IJI'l, II~I JIJIWn1111I UDRAFT 3.2.2GAS TURBINE(C) Costs (1980 $)1) Capital2)o $330/kW (800 kW manufacturer's estimate, 1977 $ times1. 39)o $313/kW (Kotzebue 800 kW, 1978 $ times 1.27)o $456/kW (800 k~ manufacturer's estimate, September 1980)Assembly and installationo $135/kW (800 kW manufacturer1s estimate, 1977 $ times1.39)o $130/kW (Kotzebue 800 kW, 1978 $ times 1.27)..iI I3) OperationN/A: III-J, .wIU4)Maintenance and replacemento 2%'of investment per year (maintenance)o 9.4% of investment per year (replacement at 7% for20 years)1\I~~'1I~!UIJIU5)apa24/e3Economies of scaleUnits range in size from 30 kWe to over 100 MWe.3.2.2-3

DRAFT 3.2.2GAS TURBINEI '~..I ;l I(D)Special Requirements and Impacts1) Siting - directional aspect, land, heightA typical 180 kWe gas turbine weights around 900 pounds, is 3~feet long and wide, and about 3 feet high. The unit requiresenclosure, fuel, and air supplies.( ,~2) Resource needsa) RenewableN/Af '.Wb)Non- renewab 1 eNatural gas is a near ideal fuel. Light distillate oilsare also satisfactory. Corrosion is caused by fuelscontaining sulfur, vanadium, or other metals.3) Construction and operating employment by skillConstruction can be performed with supervised typical locallabor and equipment. An operator/mechanic is required.4) Environmental residualsLJ-.I'rW0 Oil fired turbi nes: NO x' SOx' particulatesapa24/e40 Gas fired turbines: NO x0 Since gas turbines require clean burning fuels, moststack gas emissions are negligible except for NO x'3.2.2-4Lr I-.J

IIJJDRAFT3.2.2GAS TURBINE5) Health or safety aspectsIntegration of gas turbine generating units in a communityrarely causes any significant negative health or impacts.Highest safety danger is potential of flammable and explosiveaccidents related to use of gas as fuel.. (E)Summary and Critical Discussion1) Cost per million BTU or kWho '22~/kWh (Califor~ia about 50 MW)2) Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBTU or kWhIJIJ, 1WIUIIIIIIJJ~JU3)ooNeed 9-22 cubic feet of natural gas per kWhEnvironmental residuals per million Btu: N/ACritical discussion of the technology, its reliability andits ava il abil ityGas turbines are a well established technology in the U.S.generating mix, accounting for about 10% of U.S. installedcapacity. Their operation has been proven in much of Alaska,although time required for maintenance and parts acquisitiontend to take longer than in the lower 48.In its simplest form, the gas turbine is compact and relativelylight, does not require cooling water, runs unattended, andIcan be remotely controlled. In order to be most efficient,however, gas turbi nes shoul d be run at or near full load.apa24/~5 3.2.2-5

I 'WFUELINI ,COMBUSTIONCHAMBEREXHAUSTAIR._~ ..........IN( '~SHAFTGENERATORLi~SIMPLE OPEN CYCLE GAS TURBINEFIGURE 3.2.2-1

'I,I..fSECTION 3.3,:{~~II WI: iII-JI.,I,j..j. ,.~II !! .J. \i.; \ IIjII, ,WIIJIUJIWI JJI" II~I~i I\LOW - BTU GASIFICATION

JI, 1SECTION 3.3LOW - BTU GASIFICATION3.3 LOW - BUT GASIFICATION(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involved" IUIJ. 1W\ I'-'J1,WI1;1.1IJI;1

i '. SECTION 3.3LOW -' BTU GASIFICATIONfI~c) Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annualGasifiers are best operated on a continuous basis.2) Reliabilitya) Need for back-upFossil power systems displaced by gasification wouldtypically be used for back-up.b) Storage requirementsLike coal-ste.am plants, a three month coal supply istypical. Extreme climates may require up to 9 monthsworth of storage.( .1.1r 1W3)Thermodynamic efficiencyo around 90% (range is 65% to 95%)4)Net energy1.09 Btu of coal in to 1.00 Btu of gas out (for raw gas);about 1.25:1 for treated gas.I •\.Ii ,(C)Costs1) CapitalN/Aapa24/i2 3.3 -2Lr•

II~LOW - BTU GASIFICATIONSECTION 3.3JIJI. 12) Assembly and installationI~N/A, JI3) Ope rat ionIJN/AJI4) Maintenance and replacementI~1N/AI5)JEconomies of scaleII Sma 1111(D) Special Requirements and ImpactsJ1) Siting - directional aspect, land, heightIWIJAsrequirement.I to 30 days.IJA 1000 kWI8-10 feet in diameter.JIJI,JIIJapa24/i3 3.3 -3JIcommerci a 1 units produce about 2 bill i on Btu per day.for coal-steam plants, fuel storage is the major landGasification at the mine can cut storage requirementsgasifier is reported to be about 60 feet high and

SECTION 3.3LOW - BTU GASIFICATIONi .Wi'2)Resource needsa) RenewableWood and other cellulosic biomass can be utilized. Otherbiomass includes: straw, almond shells, and peach pits,for example.b) Non-renewableCoal of virtually any. quality can be utilized.i'-.JI .( .. ~3)Construction and operating employment by ski,ll4)Highly skilled construction and operating personnel are required.Environmental residualsooSolids: ash, sulfurAir: S02 and particulatesoI .~5)Health or safety aspectsThe low Btu gas is highly flammable and contains high amountsof toxic carbon monoxide.r,'\~I i...Lapa24/i43.3 -4

IIJIJJIJ(E)Summary and Critical DiscussionSECTION 3.3LOW - BTU GASIFICATIONI,JIJI,~I'WIJ!IIIJ, ;JJWIJIJJIII~JI J1) Cost per million BTU or kWhLower 48 costs of a "small" commercial unit is $3.00 pe'rmillion Btu per a manufacturer's estimate for 5 billion Btuper day. This cost should be multiplied by 2-3 for Alaska.2) Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBTU or kWho Need about 1.1 Btu in fuel for each Btu of gas generated.o Environment residual figures are bas'ed on an ash agglomeratingfluidized bed low-Btu gasification process:Sulfur: 2.77 pounds/million BtuNO x0.02 pounds/million BtuSO x0.04 pounds/million BtuPartiulates: 0.14 pounds/mill ion BtuCO:0.01 pounds/million BtuSolids: l3 pounds/million Btu3) Critical discussion of the technology, its reliability andits availabilityWhile coal could be gasified in a so-called synthetic fuelplant, the state of the art and associated economics make itappear doubtful that a fuel facil ity would be constructedsolely for the purpose of providing fuel for limited electricalgeneration.Suitable low-Btu gasifiers are air blown units of the fixedbed type operating at atmospheric pressure. These units areapa24/i5 3.3 -5

SECTION 3.3LOW - BTU GASIFICATIONi'I.1./"sma"": daily production is less than 2 billion Btu of hot,raw gas. Low-Btu gas is economically attractive only ifproduced near its usage - nominally within a half mile. Thecost of the gas in the lower 48 typically ranges from about$2.50 to $4.00 per million Btu under most conditions. Actualcost at a specific location is influenced by the price of coal(about half the cost), the load factor, the gas cleanup requirementsfor specific process use, and clean air requirements.It should be noted that the problems associated with burninglarge volumes of low-Btu gas in gas turbines are more difficultto so 1 ve than burn; ng th is gas in boi 1 ers because of sizelimits on turbine combustion chambers.r \~i 'r '~Low - Btu gas can be burned' in" dua 1 fue 111 engi nes (90% gas,10% diesel fuel), but the gas must be cleaned to removeparticulates and ~ars.apa24/i63.3 -6

----AIR'-~--~T-U-R-8-IN-E--------------------------~EXHAUST....--------------1..- H 2 S GASTARSATURATOR, IWCOOLERTARCOAL ------< GASIFIER ----I~.ASHFEEOWATER---~AIRSTEAMCLEAN FUEL GAS FROM COAL FOR POWER GENERATIONFIGURE - 3.3-\

I~lI~,JIJIIWI JJIWIJSECTION 3.4WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMSII JIIJ, ILJ, IU,WIIJI! JJIIIWJIJ

nWJ3.4WECS3.4 WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS (WECS)( l.\JI'1I~'lI~WJiU(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedThe thermodynamic process i.nvol ved stems from the sun", theprimary energy source whi ch produces the wi nd. Thi s wi ndenergy cannot be stored, is i ntermi ttent, somewhat unpredictableand thereby undependable. The process relies on windflow over an ai r foil assembly to create differentialpressures along the air foil. This differential pressureresults in rotation of the assembly around a fixed axis towhich it is attached. Power from the wind is transmittedthrough the connection shaft and accompanying gear box to anelectrical generator. (See Figure 3.4-1).: II~I1U1I I~I~, )I~JIJIJI2)Three types of generators are presently in use wi th wi ndenergy systems. These are the DC generator, the AC inductiongenerator and the AC synchronous generator. Of the threetypes the AC induction generator is the most widely used: aninduction generator is not a stand-alone generator and must beconnected to an external power system of relatively constantfrequency and voltage to operate properly.Current and future availabilityAvailability of the wind at useful velocities require long­~erm records to estimate the potential energy. Lesserrecords provide less credible estimates.apa24/q1 3.4-1

I i3.4WECSAvailability of small size units in the 1.5 kW to 20 kW rangeis good. Large units in the 100-200 kW range are currentlyundergoing tests in both the government and private sector andshould be available in the near future. Demonstrations ofmulti-megawatt sizes are in process.r,'(B)Performance Characteristics1) Energy outputa) Quality - temperature, formElectricityI~r 'r 'I.wb) QuantityAnnual kWh output for following machine sizes for averageannual wind speed of 12 mph.1.5 kW18 kW45 kW3,120 kWh20,000 kWh50,000 kWHSee Figure 3.4-2 for energy output at other wind speedsfor an 18 kW machine.c)Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annualOutput of WECS dependent on seasonal wind flow patterns.I,..r~apa24/q23.4-2

1,.JJIJ2)Reliabilitya)Need for back-up3.4WECSI'1I~J!JI, 1Wi" I~J1b)In general, except for the small single dwelling windsystems, wind power generation is not a stand alonesystem. Diesel or another form of back-up generationmust be provided for days the wind does not blow withsufficient velocity to produce energy from the WECS.Storage requirementsBattery storage or possibly pumped hydro can be used forstorage, both of which constitute considerable expense.Today the consensus is that the most cost effective wayto use wind power is on a utility grid to displace fuelonly when the wind b.lows and not try to store the windenergy.3)Thermodynamic efficiencyN/A4)Net energyI, 1~JN/AWIJIl-apa24/q33.4-3

-.J(~3.4I 'WECS' ~(C) Costs (1980$) W1) CapitalUMachine size Cost $/kWl.5 kW $ 6,095 1 $4060(W18 kW 16,500 920 r!45 kW 33,000 730 ~2) Assembly and installationUl.5 kW - $ 7,50018 kW - $ 9,500 U45 kW - $18,3003) Operationl.5 kW - N/A18 kW - N/A45 kW - N/A ~WU4) Maintenance and replacementUnit Size Maintenance Replacement 2 Total/Yr.l.5 kW $2100 $1280 $328018 kW $2700 $2450 $515045 kW $3300 $4840 $8140r i~1 Includes cost of conversion equipment.2 Depreciation, 20 years at 7%apa24/q4 3.4-4

JI•3.4WECS5)Economies of scaleEconomi es of scale favor ins ta 11 at ion .0 f 1 arge central i zedwind generators over the small individually owned wind generators.Units sizes are, of course, restricted by village power requirementsand, because of electrical system stability limitations, thetotal installed WECS instantaneous output should not exceed 25percent of the total syste~ load.1) Siting - directional aspect, land, height, 1l~II JJ,J2)Siting required the selection of a location with an averageannual wind speed in excess of 10 mph. Height of the mountingtower will vary depending on location and machine size, butwill generally exceed 30 feet in height.Resource needsa) RenewableAverage annual wind speed in excess of 10 mph.b) Non-renewableN/A3)Construction and operating employment by skillCertain aspects of construction (i.e. foundation, tower installation)could be performed by unskilled labor under close supervision.An dperator would not be required as the WECS is designed tooperate unattended.apa24/q53.4-5

3.4WECS( 1!I.l4)Environmental residuals5)L itt 1 e envi ronmenta 1 impact is anti ci pa'ted when ope rat i ng onlya few machines within a small geographic area.Health or safety aspectsi '~Public safety, legal liabilities, insurance and land useissues must be addressed prior to installation of a utilityowned on operated WECS.( i~(E)Summary and Critical Discussion1) Cost per million BTU or kWhThe 1980 cost per kWh for the vari ous system sizes is asfollows.f IWr \, IIII1.5, kW - $1.05/kWh18 kW - $O.25/kWh45 kW - $0.16/kWhSee Figure 3.4-3, WECS versus Diesel Generation, to determinethe breakeven diesel fue,l cost at which an 18 kW WECS becomeseconomically competitive with diesel generation.2)Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBTU or kWhN/A3) Critical discussion oJ the technology, its reliability and,its availabilityapa24/q6 3.4-6

II~'JIiJI1=I JnI~IWIi~Ur ~t3.4WECSWi nd power suffers from one obvi ous di sadvantage; Theintermittent and fluctuating nature of wind. A small utilitymust install sufficient primary generation at additional coststo meet demands on those days when the wind does not blow withsuffi ci ent velocity to produce rated output of the WECS.Besides the fickleness of local wind conditions, technical,environmental, and social problems must be addressed.Technical and social barriers that must be dealt with includepower system stability; voltage transients, harmonics;fault-interruption capability; effects on communications andTV transmissions, public safety; legal liabilities and insurance,and land use issues.11./JJWJ1IJI JUiDII Japa24/q73.4-7

BRAKEHIGHSPEEDSHAFTr , ' IWI 'r-]l1liTHRUST IEARINGSECONDARY ~ITCHCONT ACTUATORI NBOARD PROFILED11~.rI .~nI !~WIND TURBINE GENERATORFIGURE 3.4 - IL

J70,00060,000zol­e.>g 50,000oex:CI..ex::;)o:I:/J/r 1l-I- 40,000

1.00r-----------,------------.------------.------------r------------r-----------~----------~DIESELGENERATIONAT 8KWH/GAL.~ OJ5r---~------~~-----------_+----~------~------------~------------~------------~~--------~:.£""'-"*z>­...IZo~0.~0~----------~~-----------4-------------+------------~~----------~--r-·-o 60% ($0.43/KWH)...IW::>u..80% ($ 0.32 /KWH)--T--100%($ 0.26/KWH)0.25F=-===:..===--=t==-:===-===:..:;;t2!:==-===--=;~22=-====-==-=t==-=-=-=:.::::-=-=-..:==t:_=~=-===--==+====-===-==_:lDIESELGENERATIONAT 12 KWH/GAL.O~----------~----------~----------~-----------L----------~------------L---------~o 2 3 4 5 67DIESEL FUEL COST IN $/GALLON(1) UTILIZATION FACTOR IS DEFINED AS THE PERCENTAGEOF AVAILABLE ELECTRICAL ENERGY PRODUCED BY THEWECS WHICH IS ACTUALLY UTILIZED.WECSvSDIESEL GENERATION18 KW INDUCTION GENERATIONFIGURE 3.4 - 3

IJI'JIJIIJJSECTION 3.5HEATING TECHNOLOGIESIWII~IDJII ; 1UI,JIIJI; IWIJIJIJIWIJIIJ

3.5.1WASTE HEAT3.5.1 DIESEL WASTE HEAT RECOVERYJWII~oI{ 1WJU{ 1I JIQI.JII~JIU(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedThe present use of fossil fuels (coal, gas, oil) in Alaska (aselsewhere) to produce more useful forms of energy (heat,. electricity, motive power) is less than 100 percent efficient.For example, if a machine burns a certain quantity of fossilfuel and produces useful output (shaft horsepower, electricalenergy, steam, hot water or air for space heating) equivalentto 30% of the fuel burned, the energy represented by theremaining 70% of the fuel will appear as unused or "waste"heat. Such heat most often appears as hot exhaust gas, tepidto warm water (65°F-180°F), hot air from cooling radiators, ordirect radiation'from the machine in question such as a furnace,steam power plant, diesel engine, etc.Diesel waste heat can be recovered from engine cooling waterand exhaust (as shown in Figure 3.5.1-1), or either sourceseparately. The waste heat is typically transferred to awater-glycol circulating system in Alaskan applications. Theheated circulating fluid can be used for space, water, orprocess heating.2) Current and future availabilityRecovery of di ese 1 waste he,at ; n Alaska is growi ng as a resul tof sharp increases in diesel fuel costs.I~IIJapa24/s1 3.5.1-1

3.5.1WASTE HEATL; \Recovery of jacket water heat only is most common in Alaskaand ;s shown in Figure 3.5.1-2.Diesel waste heat availability is directly releted to thelocation and operating cycles of the engine installation.I~(B)Performance Character.istics1) Energy outputa) Quality - temperature, 'formCooling water is typically 160-200 o F. Exhaust heatvaries with engine speed and load and ranges from about300-600 o F.b) QuantityDiesel engines generally produce about 30% shaft powerwhich can be converted to electricity, 30% cooling waterheat, 30% exhaust heat, and 10% radiation. All of thecooling water heat, about half of the exhaust heat, andall of the radiation can be usefully captured if spaceheat needs are in economic proximity.IW:1Figure 3.5.i-3 shows the available waste heat for generators ~of different capacities at various load levels whileTable 3.5.1-1 indicates the annual recoverable waste heat Wfor various diesel unit sizes and generating efficiencies(ie. kWh/gal and heat rates in Btu/kWh) and assumes that r ':one-third of the fuel heat is recoverable. ~apa24/s23.5.1-2

'1~IJ3.5.1WASTE HEATTABLE 3.5.1-1WASTE HEAT AVAILABILITyl10 6 Btu/year Available at Indicated Generating EfficiencykWkWh/.year14 kWh/gal(9,900 Btu/kWh)12 kWh/gal(11,500 Btu/kWh)10 kWh/gal(13,800 Btu/kWh-)8 kWh/gal(17,250 Btu/kWh)I J, 1,\JIJ5075100200175,200262,800350,400700,800575.6863.41151.22302.4671. 61007.41343.22686.4805.91208.91611. 83223.61007.41511.12014.8 '4029.61Assumes 138,000Btu/gal fuel,0.40 load factorc) Dynamics- daily, seasonal,annualWaste heat is available whenever the electrical generationsource it is dependant upon is in operation.2) Reliabilitya) Need for back-upHeat recovery systems require a back-up heat source incase of system shutdown. Th.is is typically provided byboilers and heaters than exist prior to installation ofthe recovery system and consequently idled by it.apa24/s33.5.1-3

3.5.1WASTE HEATb) Storage requirementsr 1i II.jWaste heat is generally utilitzed as it is recovered;storage of heat is currently atypical.3)Thermodynamic efficiencyN/AI~.4)Net energy(C)N/ACosts1) CapitalI )~I~As an example of the potential savings associated with wasteheat recovery, consider the following. A power plant with a100 kW peak load, 40% load factor and 8 kWh/gallon fuel ratewould require 43,800 gallons of fuel per year. If one-thirdof the waste heat was recovered, it would reduce oil requirementsfor heating by 14,600 gallons, per year. With fuel oil pricesat a $1.80 per gallon this represents a potential savings of$26,280 per .year. Because some of the heat is produced in thesummer when it is not needed, it is not practical to use allof it, but this does give the reader a feel for the scale ofwaste heat production at such plants.L[ :I.JWaste heat uti 1 i zat i on, however. is not free, even thoughthere may not actually be a direct charge for the heat. Theapa24/s43.5.1-4

3.5.1WASTE HEATI~.jIJWDJJJJ1Jjequipment for utilizing this heat requires a sizeable capitalinvestment and is feasible only when the cost for associatedequipment is less than the cost of the fuel saved.The cost of heat exchangers, waste heat boilers and associatedequipment depends on the generator installed at the location.These costs can be be determined by contacting the generator'smanufacturer and obtaining the price .of tne specific models ofwaste heat recovery equipment specifically designed for thatgenerator. Using some typical prices as a guideline, we canestimate that the component price for a heat recovery silencerwill range from $3700 for aSS kW engine-generator set to$16,000 for an 850 kW engi ne-generator. These uni ts woul dallow capture of waste heat equivalent to approximately onesixth of the fuel supplied to the engine-generator. To theseprices must be added the cost of installation and auxiliaryequipment.A heat exchanger for the jacket water system will range from$900 for the 55 kW engine-generator set to. $3800 for the 950kW engine-generator set. These theoretically can capturewaste heat. equivalent to approximately one third the fuelsupplied to the engine-generator.2) Assembly and installationFor a complet~ installation, inclu~ing labor and auxiliarydevices, the above prices should be multiplied by a factor of3 or 4.apa24/s53.5.1-5

3.5.lWASTE HEATr '~r '3) OperationN/A4) Maintenance and replacemento,02% of capital investment per year (maintenance)9.4% of investment per year (repl acement at 7% for20 years)( ,.\.5)Economies of scaleSmall systems may be as beneficial economically as very largesystems because required equipment is less sophisticated 9ndconsequently less costly. Cost of redundancy requirements istypically lower (per unit recovered) in smaller systems, also.(0) Specia~ R~quirements and Impacts1)Siting - directional aspect, land, height2)Should be immediately adjacent to diesel engine (or other heatsource) .Resource needsa) Renewabler :! '•Waste heat. accordi ng to the Thi rd Law of The.rmodynami cs,is a continually increasing resource (a II self-renewingJ/resource).apa24/s63.5.1-6

I J3.5.1WASTE HEATI~JII~II~flI~IJI iI~,WIJ~I1I~, 1I~(E)b) Non-renewableN/A3) Construction and operating employment by skillJacket water heat recovery systems are installable and operableby local personnel qualified for similar work with dieselgenerators.4) Environmental residuals5)apa24/s7Environmental residuals are only those associated with themeans of electrical generation employed.Health or safety asp~ctsNo negative health or safety aspects except those associatedwith the heat source.Summary and Critical Discussion1) Cost per million BTU or kWhMaterial and Construction Cost for a "typical" 100 kW dieselunit jacket water heat exchanger and 100 feet of Arctic piping.MaterialsJacket Water Heat Exchanger and Valves $ 3.500Piping and Miscellaneous(within powerhouse)Modifications to He~ted BuildingSubtotal3.5.1-76.0001,500$11.000

3.5.1WASTE HEATArctic Pipe @ $30/ftSupport System for Pipes @ $10/ftSubtotalTotal MaterialsLaborInstallation of Heat Exchanger andPiping (within powerhouse)Installation of Arctic Pipeand SupportsTotal LaborTOTAL COST$ 3,000.1,000$ 4,000$15,000$22,000S,OOO$30,000$45,000r .~r 'W2) Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBTl! or kWhThese items are whatever ;s attributable to the heat sourcetechnology.rW3)Critical discussion of the technology, its reliability andits availabilityWaste heat capture, while not a fuel for generation, canprovide savings in overall fuel use.Waste heat uti 1 i zat; on, however, ; s not free, even thoughthere may not actually be a direct charge for the heat. Theequipment for utilizing this heat requires a sizeable capitalinvestment and is feasible only when the cost for associatedequipment is less than the cost of the fuel saved~apa24/sS3.5.1-S

IJIJIJIJI,JIIIW~I0JI,.U: Iw, IJJ, IIIIJJJ~I,JIIJapa24/s93.5.1WASTE HEATFor economic reasons it is seldom justifiable to install wasteexhaust heat recovery equipment on the small diesel generatorsizes found in the Alaskan bush.Bush village power plant generators should be 'equipped withcooling water heat exchangers. The heat recovered from the'cooling water can then be piped to replace or supplementheating fuel in schools, community centers, city halls, watersystems and sewer systems where economic proximity exists. Insma 11 er communi ties where it is pract i ca 1, cons i derat ionshould be given to moving the ~ower plant ne~rer other publicfacilities so that waste heat can be used to advantage. Bydoing this, we could conservatively expect to reduce heatingoil requirements by an amount equal to one third to one fourthof the oil consumed by the power plant.Cooling water can be used in t~o ways: 1) the hot coolant fromthe engine or industrial process can be piped directly toradiators in the space to be heated, or to other process whichcan use the heat; or 2) the hot coolant can, via a heat exchanger,heat a medium, probably water, which will be used for spaceheating or other processes.Most engine manufacturers are very adamant in the "NO" on No.1. A leaking radiator can destroy the engine, whereas in thesecond system the eng; ne wi 11 be unaffected. Engi ne watermust be soft and free of lmpurities that could reduce the heattransfer in the engine. This can be controlled in a smallsystem using the same water over and over, but is much moredifficult in a system where engine water is c~rculated throughthe heating system.3.5.1-9

3.5.1WASTE HEAT( \I '1.1No. 2 causes an additional inefficiency because heat exchangerslose up to about 20 degrees while transferring the heat fromthe heat producing loop to the heat using loop. This is,however, the most common method employed when utilizing thewaste heat from the engine cooling water.uThe cri t i ca 1 poi nt of any effort to evaluate waste heatrecovery 'is that point at which the equivalent annual cost ofrecovering heat will be less than the cost of generating heatby . other means. Low grade waste heat cannot be transportedvery far for its actual resale value. The price of deliveredtimely heat to a user at his ra~iators, water system, etc.,must be less than his heating fuel cost. Figure 3.5.1-4 canbe used to provide the economic distance over which a givenquantity of waste heat may be transported.The following assumptions were used in construction of thegraph in Figure 3.5.1-4:a.b.Diesel fuel cost of $1.80/gallon, no escalationHeat content of 138,000 Btu/gallon of dieselc. Fuel oil stove efficiency at 60%d. Powerhouse and heating building installation and modificationcosts of $33,000e. Arctic pipe installed at cost of $120/footr ;~Before the economics of utilizing waste heat can be considered,it must be determined that the available waste heat is sufficientto meet the heating demand under cons i derat ion duri ng thevarious conditions of heating and electrical load. This canapa24/s103.5.1-10

~ ,r~~JII JIJIJJI WI~[I~JJ, IWI 1i iW1I U, '1: iI~IUI'1. ~IWI W.JIapa24/s113.5.1WASTE HEATbe determined by the use of the Figures and Tables found inthis profile and used in the manner illustrated by the followingexample.ExampleIt is desired to heat. a village community hall located nearBethel using jacket water from a 75 kW diesel engine-generatorset. Dimensions of the hall are 40'x40'x10i. The hall islocated 100 feet from the powerplant. Coldest air temperatureis estimated at -40°F, lowest expected generator loading ;s40% of full load, 8 kWh/gal efficiency.1. Determine cubic feet of building.40 ' x40 ' x10 ' = 16~000 cubic feet.2. Use Figure 3.5.1-5 to determine required BtlJ per hourheating requirements.For a 16,000 Cu. Ft. buil di ng at -40°F thi s equates toapproximately 90,000 Btu/hr.3. Using the generator size and the 40% load curve in Figure3.5.1-3, read the available Btu/hr from the engine. Inthis case 175,000 Btu/hr is available engine waste heat.4. Compari son of the results obtai ned inSteps 2 and 3indicate that there is sufficient waste heat availa,ble(175,000 Btu/hr available vs 90,000 required) to meetdemand at minimum electrical power generation.3.5.1-11

3.5.1WASTE HEATi ', '~r '~5.Comparison of Tables 3.5.1-1 and 3.5.1-2 (following text)indicates that (from Table 3.5.1-1) 1511.1 x 10 6 Btu/yearare available from the engine while (from Table 3.5.1-2)6 16 , 000 ft 3 6175 x 10 x 10,000 ft3 or 280 x 10 Btu are requiredannually for heating. Clearly sufficient Btu of wasteheat is available for heating of the community hall.6. From Figure 3.5.1-4, it is now possible to determine themaximum "economic distance the required heat can be transferredfor payback periods of 5 and 10 years and interest ratesof 5%, 10% and 15%. For instance, the maximum economicdistance to transport 280 x 10 6 Btu with a payback periodof 10 years at 5% interest is 95 feet.IWFinding that the above system appears feasible does not meanthat materials should be purchased and construction started.The system must still be engineered for the particular locationand situation. The previous simplified analysis has merelyjustified a more detailed study be performed to accuratelydetermine the feasibility and costs associated with the project.apa24/s12

IIIIIIIIJJJJJJ~. ~IJII JI( iIIWUI JLocationAnchorageBarrowBethelCordovaFai rbanksJuneauKing SalmonKotzebueNomeTABLE 3.5.1-2DETERMINATION OF AVERAGE ANNUAL HEAT LOAD3.5.1WASTE HEATAverage "'Average AnnualDegree Temperature Heat LoadDays (oF) (Btu x 10 6 )10,814 35.24 147.920,174 9.73 256.413,196 28.85 175.09,764 38.25 135.114,279 25.88 187.79,075 40.14 127.011,343 33.92 153.516,105 20.88 209.014,171 26.18 186.4"'Based on a "standard" 10,000 ft. 3 building, 35 1 x 35 1 X 8. Walls of 2"x 4" construction on 16" centers, with R-11 insulation, U factor .07.Roof and floors 21 x 8" or 2" x 12" on 16 11 centers, unheated attic, 6inches of insulation, U factor .07. Two 24" x 40" windows, 1~ airchanges per hour.apa24/s13 3.5.1-13

Wr 'WI \I !~I~FROM REMOTE(HEAT LOOPEXHAUST GASCHEAT "RECOVER >,S I LE NCE R . L.r-----. __"'------'".... ......--t-II 1EXPANSIONTANKRADIAToRAIRFLoW...r .r •~.. ..r i• I~BOOSTERPUMPTHERMOSTATICCONTACTOR "f'II.lr '~r .JACKET WATER a EXHAUST WASTE HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEMFIGURE 3.5.1-1

SPACE HEAT----- -PUMPTHERMOSTATICVALVEI I THERMOSTICVALVEENGINE \I•)FANMOTOR .1j~RA0IAT0R-AIRFL0WTHERMOSTAc...:....:...T..:....::.IC~SWITCHJACKET WATER WASTE HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEMFIGURE 3.5.1- 2

17.5r------------,-----------.------------,{ ')I'~I \,\.I15·9r----------------~---------------------+-----------~~--~l- e:(UJ::rUJtiie:(:.t:::r:0a::Il..UJ..J'm«..Je:(>«10Qxa::::r.......:;:)I- m12.510.07.5/"////I~r \r )~///70%LOAD5.0r-----------------r--r-~r_-------------~--~~--------------_;/'/"40% "'" /'LOAy '/"/"/"/'2.5r------~~~-----1-/"~~---------------~---------~----;[ :-.1I.O~----~----~~----~----~-----..J-------o 50 100 150 200 250 300GENERATOR CAPACITY (KW)AVAILABLE WASTE HEAT VS GENERATOR CAPACITYL( 17,250 BTU/KWH EFFICIENCY FULL LOAD)FIGURE 3.5.1-3

______________________JI JJ400r---------.---------~----------r_--------._--------~5 YEAR PAYBACK$1.80/GALLON FUEL COSTS300r---------~--------_+----------~--------~--------_1200r---------~--------_+----------r_--------~------_,~,//"/'/"100~--------~--------_+------~~~--~----4_~------_1JI.tJUZ~Cf)o OL-________ ~uiozoUI.tJ::IE:::l!Ilx

i~uWI \I'~100,000r-;--,-,-r----------...,...----""T"""-------.....,.....,...~1""Ip() -f-~. 50pOOr-+-~_r----------_r----~---_r~~~---~L·ILl~~..J0>(.!)~0..J=>a:J 10,000LJ5,000r-+-~_r---~ __ ~~~--_r----~----------~·UL,1,000'--'±-'"-~ ....... ----------~----...J....---------~.....1000 0000 00_ 0_ ~ 0..ID ~ 2 g10STU/ HR HEATING REQUIREMENTSBUILDINGVOLUME VS BTUI HR HEATING REQUIRE MENTSFIGURE 3.5.1-5L

IIJJIJ•IIIJJWII~IDJI,UIIJJIWIJSECTION 3.6BINARYIJ

3.6BINARY3.6 BINARY CYCLE FOR ELECTRICAL GENERATIONf 1.. II~J, 1JJJWIJ Ii(A)(B)General Description1)2)Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedThe binary conversion process requires only heat quantity(heat energy/unit time) and qual ity temperature to providepower.A heated primary fluid of insufficient quality fordirect use in electrical production passes through a heatexchanger to transfer heat to a working fluid.The workingfluid has a lower boiling point than water and is.vaporized inthe heat exchanger. The vaporized working fluid then expandsthrough a turbine, or in a cylinder-piston ~rrangement,condensed. and returns to the heat exchanger. The pri maryfluid is returned to its heat source following heat exchange.Figure 3.6-1 shows a generalized binary cycle.Current and future availabilityCurrent commercial availability is restricted to unit sizesin excess of village power requirements as determined in thisstudy.Binary cycle generation equipment in unit sizessuitable for village applications in not expected to beavailable until the late 1980 1 s.Performance Characteristicsis1) Energy output,J(JI, 1II.ra) Quality - temperature, formEl ectri ci tyapa24/v1 3.6-1

3.6BINARYI 'I ..Jb) QuantityA function of unit size.r \~c)Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annualPower can be generated whenever the heat source isavailable.2) Reliabilitya) Need for back-upWhen powered by waste heat, binary cycles are typicallyused for peaki ng. If used for base loads, the bi narysystemwould typically be backed up by the fossil systemit displaces.b) Storage requirementsFuel storage requirements are those of the heat sourcetechno logy.3)Thermodynamic efficiencyr \~o around 10% to a reported 27%o the organic Rankine diesel or Homing binary. cycle canincrease plant output power by 15%4) Net energyWU3-10 units in to 1 unit out. apa24/v2 3.6-2

II~JIJIUI1I~lI~I~,JIIWIUIJIU( ,JII WIIIJJ~JI'lI~(C)(D)Costs1)2)3)4)apa24/v3CapitalN/AAssembly and installationN/AOperationN/AMaintenance and replacementN/A .5) Economies of scale3.6BINARYCommercially utilized systems range from 1 to about 100 kWe.Special Requirements and Impacts1) . Siting - directional aspect, land, heightUnits are relatively small and light and require only anenclosure and connection to the (nearby) heat source.3.6-3

3.6BINARY( ,I ,~2)Resource needsa) RenewableBinary cycles per se have no resource needs as heat isprovi ded from some other resource technology profil ed'herein. Hence, solar, geothermal, nuclear, and radiation,as . we 11 . as any combusti on mater; a 1, such as wood or ,coal are potential fuels.I~r ':b) Non-renewable3)N/AConstruction and operating employment by skillr 1U,Inftial village installations wou'ld involve factory personnelfor most work. Operation can be relatively unattended, althougha qualified mechanic should be available.4) Environmental residualsf '~5)Closed binary cycles in and of themselves cause no environmentalresiduals; residuals are a result of the heat source. Sealfailures would cause leakage of the binary working fluid.Health or safety aspectsSeal failures cause release of gases which are generally toxicand/or flammable.Lr 'I~apa24/v43.6-4

3.6BINARY(E)Summary and Critical Discussion1) Cost per million BTU or kWhoo10.0¢/kWh (California, 10-50 MWe)3-5 year investment payoffs have been reported for dieselbottoming cycles.2) Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBTU or kWhNo resources are required other than those required for thesource of heat (typically diesel -for engine-generators) norare any additional environmental residuals created.I1U3)Critical discussion of the technology, its reliability andits availabilityThere are both domestic and foreign suppliers of appropriatesize binary cycle systems and product development is beingvigorously pursued.Binary cycles for village electrical application could involveso-called diesel IIbottoming ll - use of exhaust gas heat. BothRankine and Stirling cycle equipment in the less than 100 kWerange are available and at least two manufacturers are seekingfunding and assistance for an Alaska demonstration.Binary bottoming cycle equipment is in operation on the Trans­Alaska Pipeline utilizing waste heat to produce electricity.apa24/v5 3.6-5

'W3.6BINARYSpecific manufacutrers ' data gathering for appropriate equipmentis still in process at the time of submittal of this preliminarytechnology profile.An attractive Alaska demonstration concept involves firing oflocal coal for low pressure direct heating of the binary fluidfor electrical production, avoiding the need for steam firedelectricity with its inherent operational complexities andcosts.I '~rI~i 'I~apa24/v63.6-6f '..,

•PUMPPRIMARY FLUIDWORKINGFLUIDGENERATORHOTFLUIDSUPPLY'1,UI,JiHEATEXCHANGER,JI ,WI, ,JPUMPCOOLING FLUIDCONDENSERi~IJII~GENERALIZED BINARY CYCLEFIGURE 3.6-1

SECTION 3.7SINGLE WIRE GROUND RETURN TRANSMISSION

3.7SWGR3.7 SINGLE WIRE GROUND RETURN (SWGR) TRANSMISSION(A)General Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedA Single Wire Ground Return system (SWGR) can best be describedas single-phase, single wire transmission system using theearth as a return circuit. SWGR is not a new technology asthousands of miles of line have been in successful operationfor more than thirty years - mostly outside the United Statesi.e., India, New Z-ealand, Australia, Canada and in areas ofthe USA during W.W. II.r 11-i iIIJI~WIJ, 1~II ' WJIThe SWGR lines suggested here are point-to-point connectionswith a carefully estab 1 i shed groundi ng system at each endpoint. (See Figure 3.7-1). The design of these end- pointgrounding systems would comply with presently accepted standardsfor limiting potential ground gradients and would be similarin design to a grounding system found in today's high voltagesubstation. The substation established at each end would thenconnect to the conventional multi-grounded distribution systemas commonly used today throughout Alaska and the other 49states.A presently envisioned SWGR system would be used to connectseveral small outlying vi,llages within a given geographicalarea to a centrally located, larger, more efficient, generation'facility thereby eliminating the need for each small villageto operate their own generating facility.apa24/w1 3.7-1

3.7SWGRI-.J, I'-.lLack of a road syste~, permafrost~ and limited or no accommodationsfor construction crews throughout most of the regionbei~gstudied establish some limitations that must be dealt withto find appropria~e solutions. Conventional construction techniquesand line designs might be used - but at premium costs.A design believed most adaptable to these limitations is basedon the use of an A-frame structure shown in the followingsketch labeled Figure 3.7-2. The arrangement is well suitedto the SWGR design.r ;I '-.Ir :The single wire configuration can be designed for minimum costby utilizing high-strength conductors that require a minimwmnumber of structures and still retain the standards for highreliability.2) Current and future availabilityA demonstration project to supply Bethel central stationelectricity to the village of Napakiak, a distance of 8.5mil es is presently in operati on.Thi s project has provideda demonstration of the technical and cost feasibility of theSWGR system.I'(B)Performance Characteristics1) Energy outputSingle Phase Electrical Power Transmission.apa24/w2 3.7-2

I,JI .. 1J3.7SWGRI Ja) Quality - temperature, formThe electrical characteristics for various size conductorsat 60 HZ and 25 HZ are shown in Table 3.7-1 (followingtext). Three phase equipment can be successfully operated. .from this system by the use of rotary phase converters.b) QuantityIJ1Transmission line transfer capacity is as shown on Table3.7-2. Three phase transmission at 60 HZ and SWGRtransmission at 60 HZ and SWGR transmission at 60.HZ and25 HZ are included to allow comparisons. Use of thelower 25 HZ operating frequency increase~ the allowabletransmission distance for a specified line loading and/orvoltage drop.III~IWWI JJIWIJJI2)apa24/w3c)Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annualN/ARe 1 i ab il i tya) Need for back-upTransmission line reliability generally exceeds 95 percent.Diesel generators, which are currently installed in mostvillages, would provide backup should the transmissionline be temporarily out-of-service.3.7-3

3.7SWGRr '~f '~b) Storage requirementsN/A3) Thermodynamic efficiencyThe thermodynamic efficiency within a give geographical areacould be improved through the introduction of SWGR transmissionlines. The improvement in efficiency would result from theincreased use of larger more efficient diesel engines at acentralized generating facility versus village generationusing smaller less efficient engines.4)Net energy;- ";Line loss should not exceed 3-5% of gross energy transfer.See Table 3.7-2 for line transfer capacity.f '~, ,I 'apa24/w43.7-4r :--

IJI3.7SWGR(C) Costs (1980 $)Single Wire Ground Return up to 40 kV.2 pole structure, 700 ft spans, (7.5 structures/mile)IUI JJStructures(15) 30 ft treated poles @ 75.00 ea7#8 Alumoweld 5280 ft @ $300/1000 ft(7.5) Insulators (40 kV Post) @ $75 ea(7.5) Angle iron braces (10'X4"X4 I1 X4 11 ) @ $75 ea(7.5) Vibration Dampers @ $25 ea(2) Storm Guys (2 @ 70 ft, $300/1000 ft)(2) Anchors $ @ $50 ea .(1) Anchor plate assembly @ $25.00 ea(8) Strain insulators @ $35 ea(7.5) Misc. Hardware @ $25/structureSubtotal1980 $/Mile1125158456356318842 ,10025280188$4658 1OtherFreight @ 1000 lb/struct~re X 30¢/lb2250Survey1000Clearing 25% mile @ $1000/1000 ft1320Equipment Rental (Power Auger, Line Tools etc.) 1000Helicopter Rental 6 hr. @ $400/hr2400(2) Linemen 120 hrs @ $50 hr. + $140/day subsistencefor 6 days 6840(1) Engineer 60 hrs @ $45/hr. + $100/day SUbsistencefor 6 days 3300Local labor 310 hrs @ $20/hrEngineering at 5% (rounded)1 Fob AnchorageSubtotalTotalUse62001000$25,310$29,967$30,000apa24/w5 3.7-5

3.7SWGRI 'f )! :(D)Special Requirements and Impacts1) Siting - directional aspect, land, heightThe gravity stabilized A-frame line design using long spanconstruction (700') will provide excellent flexibility toadapt to the freezing - thawing cycles of the tundra andshallow lakes of the region.The structure has transverse stability from gravity alone andneed not penetrate the earth (permafrost in thi s regi on).Longitudinal stability is obtained through the strength andnormal tension of the line conductor. This allows for use ofthe shortest. height structure (approximately 30') to providethe ground clearances needed for safety. Additional longitudinalstability would be provided by fore and aft guying at suitableintervals.r .,I!~r 1( !~r 1..J2)Resource needsTransmission of electrical energy generated from either renewableor non-renewable resources.3) Construction and operating employment by skillConstruction can be performed by unskilled local labor supervisedby a qualified lineman and engineer...Ir~apa24/w63.7-6, Ij ,~

3.7SWGR4) Environmental residualsRight-of-way clearing in forested areas, minimum impact otherwisedue to wintertime construction and minimum soil disturbancerequired during installation.5) Health or safety aspectsThe use of the earth as the return circuit as proposed hereinwould in no way create an operating system with lesser safetythan those now accepted.(E)Summary and Critical Discussion, 11) Cost per million BTU or kWhI J UIIUI i~I W,JII~I~,JIJThe relative cost per kWh for single vfllage generation versusdelivery of electrical energy to a village from a centralizedpower plant over a 10 mile long SWGR line is as shown:Village plants 1.00SWGR Line 0.67Maximum economic distance for construction of a SWGR line to avillage with a peak load of 100 kW is estimated at approximately30 miles.Resources. requi renients, envi ronmenta 1 res i dua 15 per mi 11 ionBtu or kWh.N/Aapa24/w7 3.7-7

! 1WI ,'...3.7SWGR!, '3)Critical discussion of the technology, its reliability andits availabilityThe successful construction and operation of the SWGR transmissionline between Bethel and Napakiak has proven the technicalfeasibility of the SWGR concept. Additional operation of theline should prove the reliability of the line design, enhance.potenti~l user confidence and encourage additional construction.Materials used in the construction of the line are, for themost part, standardized distribution and transmission linehardware. Materials are generally available from manufacturerswithin a reasonable time period., \WfI1.1r 'Wf '~apa24/w8

IJIJIIJIJJI.~I~I.~IJTable 3.7-160 Hz IMPEDANCES AND SHUNT CAPACITIVE REACTANCESR GMR(Ft)Z9(ohm,per mile)(Ohm Diam. p - 100 P - 1000Conductor Size Per Mile) (inch) Ohm-m Ohm-m7#8 Alumoweld 2.354 .0116 2.449 + 2.449 +.385 j 1. 504 j 1. 643. 266.8 MCM .35 .0217 .445 + .445 +ACSR .642 j 1. 428 j 1. 567397.5 MCM .235 .0278 .33 + .33 +ACSR .806 j 1. 397 j 1. 53725 Hz IMPEDANCES AND SHUNT CAPACITIVE REACTANCES,R ZGMR(Ft) 9 (ohm pet mile)(ORm Diam. p'- 100 P - 1000Conductor Size Per Mil e) (inch) Ohm-m Ohm-m3.7SWGRX(Meg 8hinPer Mile).244.229.222X(MegCohmPer Mile)IIuc 1U. 1U~ 1UIJ'7#8 Alumoweld 2.354 .0116 2.394 + 2.394 +.385 j .649 j .707266.8 MCM .35 .0217 .390 + .390 +ACSR .642 j .617 j .675397.5 MCM .235 .0278 .275 + .275 +ACSR .806 j .604 , j .663The line data have been calculated with the following assumptions:Height above ground:Earth Resistivity:30 feet100 Ohm-m (swamp),1000 Ohm-m (dry earth).586.549.533IJGround Electrode Resistance:0 Ohms of each endIIWJIJapa24/w9 3.7-9I

CONDUCTORSIZE(AWG~266.8 ACSR397.5 ACSR556.5 ACSR40 kV7#8 Alumoweld 25266.8 ACSR 7,0397.5 ACSR 75556.5 ACSR 8040 kV7#8 Alumoweld 40266.8 ACSR 110397.5 ACSR 135556.5 ACSR 150-TABLE 3.7-2TRANSMISSION LINE TRANSFER CAPACITY3.7SWGR"MEGAWATT MILES FOR 5% VOLTAGE DROP @ .9 P. F.THREE PHASE60 Hz34.5 kV 69 kV 138 kV78 29594 353 1359108 401 1535SWGR. 60 Hz66 kV 80 kV 133 kV65 95180 265 720200 290 800215 315 860SWGR25 Hz66 kV 80 kV 133 kV105 150300 440 1200360 540 1440410 600 1640I \,uwULiI.i: 1I 'I ,III( :~UW,1• iI IIIIapa24/w103.7-10

~IJIJII JGENERA TlONSWGRTRANSIoIISSIO.NVILLAGEDISTRIBUTIONiI-25KV -40KVMULTL-GROUNOEO NEUTRAL: j!~I J,UI ,I J,JI ,JIJ,JInI~IJ!JISIMPLIFIED SWGR TRANSMISSION SYSTEMFIGURE 3.7-1

i 1W. ,I 'rl'-O"'------'~-- I 5" DIA. -- ~-I 1 _________________________\\ IO'X4"X4" X '14" ANGLE IRON..,....-- 4.75" DIA.( i~L..fI :30'-0"31'-8"wuf '10" DIA.I •27'-0"IIA" FRAME STRUCTUREPOST INSULATORSFIGURE 3.7-2r 1~

, II WI, JI ,I~'l,iii!JIJIJ-ISECTION 3.8HYDROELECTRIC'JI, 1I J:JII U'JII J!U: 'J, 1I II~,

PRECIPITATIONRUNOFFDRAFTWATERSTORAGERESERVOIRWATERCONDUITGENERATORHYDRAULICTURBINESHAFTt--__ .... POWERTAILRACETAILWATERH 'r'D ROE LEe T RIC POW E R D EVE LOP MEN T D I A G RAMFIGURE 3.8.1-1~II JIIJJII~JIJI

5.B.12HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION3.8HYDROELECTRICf.W(A)General Description1. Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedIn the hydroelectric power development, flowing water isdirected into a hydraulic turbine where the energy in thewater ;s used to turn a ~haft,which in turn drives a generator.In their action, turbines involve a continuous transformationof the potential and/or kinetic energy of the waterinto usable mechani ca 1 energy at the shaft.Water stor:ed at·rest at an elevation above the level of the turbihe (head)possesses potential energy; when flowing, the water possesseskinetic energy as a function of its velocity. The return ofthe used water to the higher elevation necessary for function-,ing of the hydroelectric machinery is powered by the sun tocomplete the. cycle -energy.a direct natural process using solarThe ability to store water at a useful elevation makesthis energy supply predictable and dependable.2. Current and future avai labil ityHydroelectric developments in the United States, as of January1978, totaled 59 million kilowatts, producing an estimatedaverage annual output of 276 billion kilowatt hours accordingto the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).about 10% of Alaska's electric energy needs.Hydropower providesDevelopmentsrange in size from over a million kilowatts down to just a fewkilowatts of installed capacity.Hydropower;s a time provenmethod of gene rat i on that offers uni que advantages.Fuelcost, a major contributor to thermal plant operating costs, iseliminated., \I :I~i :I~uUr ', ,I~APA!26/B 3.8.1-1r :~

3.8HYDROELECTRICI~IJIJJIWII~I JW(B)Another advantage of hydropower developments is that they lastmuch longer than do other plant types. Hydropower deve 1 opmentsare, however, initially costly and require around5 years of lead time, from reconnaissance to start-up. Licensingprocedures, particularly for smaller projects, are beingstreamlined. Streamlining licensing procedures can significantlyreduce the amount of lead time needed to bring a projecton-line.Performance Characteristics1. Energy outputa) Quality - temperature, formHydropower provides readily regulated electricity. Waterquality is not affected. A ~light temperature differentialmay exist between discharge water and the receivingwaters. The effect of the temperature change on spawningsalmon normally requires investigation.b)QuantityApproximately 60% of the energy stored in the water willresult in saleable electricity. The remaining 40% willbe lost in the water conduit, turbine, generator, stationservice, transformers, and the transmission line. Typicalinstalled capacities in Alaskan power plants range from1-20 MW.c)Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annualHydropower plants can be base loaded and/or peak loaded.In smaller installations, the operating mode may beadjusted seasonally, depending on the availability ofwater and the demand for electricity.APA/26/B 3.8.1-2J

3.8HYDROELECTRICr '2.Rel iabil itya)Need for back-upThe reliability of the hydroplant itself is very high.The transmission lines are often routed through veryrugged terrain and are consequently subject to a varietyof natural hazards. Repairs to damaged lines can usuallybe accomplished relatively quickly. It is customary toprovide sufficient installed diesel generation capacityto provide emergency electricity to the utility's customersin the event that the transmission line or the powerplantshould go down. The'amount of backup required canbe ,reduced by building an alternate transmission line.wcb)Storage requirementsA reservoi r is usually used to store water except forrun-of-river plants. Typical reservoirs will range insize from a few acres to several hundred acres.3.Thermodynamic efficiencyNot appropriate.4. Net energyApproximately 4800 kWh/installed kWwill be generated annually.Saleable energy will be about 10% less when stationservice, transformer, transmission line and other losses areiflcluded.APA/26/B 3.8.1-3

3.BHYDROELECTRIC, )(C)Costs1.CapitalI~'JIJ'W I''1I . II~I ; 1I~1i U2.3.o $14,OOO/kW installed Lake Elva near Bristol Bay(feasibility estimate)o $l,BOO/kW installed - Solomon Gulch near Valdezo $50,000/kW installed (reconnaissance estimate)o $5,000/Kw installed for hydro along Cordova-Valdezintertie routeo $3,500/kW installed for Crater Lakeo $3,300/kW installed for Power Creek first stageAssembly and installationSee above.OperationOperation and maintenance costs are normally combined whenevaluating a hydropower development.4. Maintenance and replacementJJ, l~IJIJIAPA/26/BOperation and maintenance costs for a hydroelectric developmentnormally depend on the size of the installation and themethod of operation. Most large installations (76,000 kW)will be attended full-time while many of the smaller installationsare operated remotely and visited only occasionally formaintenance. Estimated annual operation and maintenance costfor large installations is $100.00 + $7.00/kW. For small plantsthe estimated cost is $25,000 + $7.00/kW.Annual replacement cost for a hydroelectric plant with 50-year economic life ;s $3.00 per kW installed.3.B.1-4

-5. Economies of scale3.8HYDROELECTRICr '~, 1The cost per kW installed generally decreases for largerinstallations. Further economics of scale can be realizedwhen the operation of several small hydropower developmentscan be integrated.(D)Special Requirements and Impacts1. Siting - directional aspect, land, heightr 'l.JA suitable site for. any hydropower development must, of course,be found. Req~;rements include an adequate water supply and areasonable proximity to the load center (consumers). Sitepreparation for a hydropower development involves modificationof the existing terrain and results in changes in both thetopography (cuts and fills), and in the natural or existingdrainage pattern. The project boundary (the outer limits ofthe land directly affected by the project) may encompassseveral hundred acres. The impacts of a hydropower developmentcover, a wi de spectrum.wildlife, and fisheries. Thepower development is that itThey -affect man, vegetation,special advantage of a hydroiseffectively non~polluting.2. Resource needsa) RenewableWater.b)Non-renewableSome of the construction and maintenance resources (suchas steel and lube oil) are non-renewable resources.APA/26/B3.8.1-5

3.8HYDROELECTRIC3.Construction and operating employment by skillConstruction of a hydropower development requires the employmentof both highly skilled individuals experienced in thedesign and construction of this type of project and lessexperienced individuals who usually come from the local workforce.Operators of hydroplants are often local diesel powerplant operators who receive a minimal amount of additionaltraining to qualify them to work as hydroplant operators.4.Environmental residuals( 1U5.NoneHealth or safety aspectsPublic safety, legal liabilities, insurance, and land useissues must be addressed prior to construction of a hydropowerdevelopment.(E)Summary and Critical Discussion1. Cost per million Btu or kWhSee Appendix B for cost per kWh.2. Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBtu or kWh .. N/A.3. Critical discussion of the technology. its reliability and itsavailabil ity.APA/26/B 3.8.1-6

3.8HYDROELECTRICHydroelectric power generation is a well established technology.Each project, and many of its components, are "custom lldesign jobs. Because of this and because of the large scaleand the long lead time associated with a project, hydropoweris a capital intensive investment with high fiel,d explorationcosts. Few utilities alone can afford to provide long termand interim financing. The State of Alaska, the Rura~ ElectrificationAdministration, and others provide assistance to utilitiesto bring worthwhile projects forward.Hydroplants 'can be remotely operated from a central station.An operator is usually stationed at the power plant to takecare of routine maintenance. Safety of hydropower developmentshas long been a concern of the Federal and State governments.Criteria .for safe design and operation of hydropowerdevelopments are well established and major failures are veryrare. The hydraulic turbine, and its component parts, isdesigned and are buiJt to exacting specifications and ;sextremely reliable; the turbine has a useful life of upwardsof 30 years.r ,i IWf 'W.I 'I ~..tr 1WI '~r ,~r '~APAl26/B3.8.1-7

3.8.2, ,, !l IliIIjJI, I~!ELECTRIC HEATING

IJI, 11"-JIJ1J5.B.13(A)ELECTRIC HEATINGGeneral Description1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involved3.8.2ELECTRIC HEATINGElectricity is passed through resistance wiring and gives offheat in encountering such resistance. The heat is transferredto air or water.2) Current and future availabilityIUr 1UI 1,W'WIJIJ(B)Electric heat is clean, noiseless, easily controllable andrelatively efficient. Electric heat is fecognized as a so~ndmeans of heating buildings where heat losses are held to asound. economical level and the cost of electricity ;s notprohibitive.Performance Characteristics1) Energy outputa) Quality - temperature, formHeat or hot water for space heating applications.b) Quantity1, 1I~JIJ3413 Btu in per kWh out. Typical residential furnacesare of capacities in the range of 20,000 to 120,000 Btuper hour.I,JIJAPA26/C 3.8.2-1

3.8.2ELECTRIC HEATINGc) Dynamics - daily, seasonal, annualf \2) ReliabilityAvailable whenever there is electricity.f )IIIIla) Need for back-upTypically, none.1 'I\.jb) Storage requirementsNone.3) Thermodynamic efficiencySo far as the conversion of electric energy into heat isconcerned, all types of electric resistance heaters are equallyefficient. They all produce 3413 Btu per kilowatt-hour ofelectrical energy used~ From a thermodynamic efficiencystandpoint, electric heaters are 100 percent efficient.However, different types of heaters differ in effectiveness;the effectiveness ;s determined by the means used to transferthe heat generated into the area that is to be heated.I '~r 1: il.J-II4) Net energyOveral], say about 1.02 ~nitsin to 1.00 unit out.•[ 1(C)Costs1) CapitalAbout $800-1000 for a central home unit.APA26/C 3.8.2-2

J, 1~-3.8.2ELECTRIC HEATING2) Assembly and installation1I~IJIAbout equal to capital cost.3) OperationA function of the cost of electricity.'~IJIIJ,, II WJUIJ(D)4) Maintenance and replacementVirtually maintenance free; replacement life estimated to be20 years.5) Economies of scaleNot appropriate.Special Requirements and Impacts1) Siting - directional aspect, land, heightIn typical residential installations, a metal casing, in thesame confi gurat i on as convent i ona 1 baseboard along wall s,contains one or more heating elements placed horizontally.The vertical dimension is usually less than 9 inches, andprojection from wall surface is less than 3.5 inches. Unitsare available from 1 to 12 feet long with ratings from 100 to400' watts per foot of length and are designed to be fittedtogether to m~ke up any desired continuous length or rating.JI .APA26/C3.8.2-3

2) Resource needsa) Renewable3.8.2ELECTRIC HEATINGHydroelectricity is currently the only cost effectiverenewable resource.b) Non-renewableFossil fuels used for electrical generation., 'i 'r \Wwur .W3)Construction and operating employment by skill4)Simple to install and effectively automatic.Environmental residualsNone.u5) Health or safety aspectsNone.(E)Summary and Critical Discussion1)Cost per million Btu or kWhCost is a function of the cost of electricity.APA26/CThe most economica1 electric heating systems from an operatingstandpoint are of a decentralized type, with a thermostatprovi ded on each unit or for each room. Thi s permits each3.8.2-4r 'I I....-I :

! 1I~I'iJIWI,~IUI2)3)3.8.2ELECTRIC HEATINGroom to compensate for heat contributed by sources auxiliarysuch as sunshine, lighting, and appliances.This arrangementalso gives a better diversity of the power demand due tononcoincidence of electric load from all units of an installation.Manual switches are often provided to permit cuttingoff heat or reducing temperature in rooms when not in use.When such operation is practiced, consideration should begiven to proyide extra time for warm-up.Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBtu or kWhA function of the resource used to generate electricity. Seeappropriate Appendix C profiles.Critical discussion of the technology, its reliability and itsavailabilityIf \JuJf \II JII~JIrlUI'JIrJIAPA26/CIn summary, a simple list of so~. of the benefits and advantagesof electric heat includes the following:0 Dependable0 No fuel deliveries0 No fuel storage problems0 Clean0 No venting required0 No oxygen consumption0 Individual room-by-room control0 Quiet0 Easy to install0 Space-saving0 "Flameless"3.8.2-5

SECTION 3.9CONSERVATION( \,UI, \,J( Il.IJIJIIIJJI,~I:JII, I'~

J, lI~I JI. II~JIWI"WI! 1WJ: )\.J3.9.1 CONSERVATION(A)General DescriptionSECTION 3.9CONSERVATION1) Thermodynamic and engineering processes involvedConservation measures for the 13 villages considered here aremainly classified as IIpassive ll • Passive measures are intendedto conserve energy without any further electrical, thermal, ormechanical energy input. Typical passive measures are insulation,double glazing or solar film, arctic entrances andweather stripping. Energy conservation characteristics ofsome passive measures degrade with. time, which must be consideredin the overall evaluation of their effectiveness foran intended life cycle. Other conservation measures includesimprovement in efficiency of utilization devices (such as motors)and "doing without lf , energy by disciplines (turning offlights, turning down thermostats).2) Current and future availabilityPassive measures are commercially available and increasing inuse allover the United States due to the rapidly escalatingcost of energy.(B)Performance CharacteristicsI J, II~JIIIW'l~J1) Energy outputa) Quality - temperatures, formNo energy output per se; rather a reduction of energytypes input.b) QuantitySee above.APA26/L 3.9.1-1

c) Dynamics - daily. seasonal, annualSECTION 3.9CONSERVATION..I 'i 'Passive conservation measures lIoperate liyear round.2) Reliabilitya) Need for back-upNone required.I 1Uuf :b) Storage requirementsNone required.3) Thermodynamic efficiencyNot appropriate.4) Net energyuf ;~Not appropriate.(C)Costs1) CapitalResidential installations run from several hundred to severalthousand dollars.2) Assembly and installationSee above.APA26/L 3.9.1-2LrWr~

•SECTION 3.9CONSERVATION3) OperationNone.4) Maintenance and replacementEffectively maintenance free; 10-15 year life.5) Economies of scaleAmenable and appropriate to single dwellings or large industrialcomplexes.(D)Special Requirements and Impacts1) Siting - directional aspect, land, heightu: jW2)No ~pecialResource needsa) Renewablerequirements.Solar insolation.b) Non-renewableMaterials used for conservation modes employed.3)Construction and operating employment by skillCan often be installed by the resident; locally specializedservices (for example, insulation skills) may be employed. Nooperation required.APA26/L 3.9.1-3

SECTION 3.9CONSERVATION4)5)Environmental residualsNone.Health or safety aspectsNone except care should be taken to assure proper air changerates for occupant health.I'..i ~;I ;I \~(E)Summary and Critical Discussionr :~1) Cost per million Btu or kWhNot available.2) Resources, requirements, environmental residuals per millionBtu or kWhI~Not available.3)APA26/LCritical discussion of the technology, its reliability and itsavail abil ityResidences generally require the availability of energy at alltimes. Before 1973, the cost of energy was 3 to 10% of totalannual expenses; now that percentage has soared to perhaps40%.Although some dynamic measures (notably solar energy) meritconsideration in this class of structure, the prime emphasisshould be on passive 'energy conservation measures. As awhole, this market is not geared to sophisticated or costlyequipment or to any measure that requires special operating ormaintenance procedures or attention. Generally, simplicityand low cost, with moder.ate energy benefits, should be pursued.3.9.1-4r :-.I( ,~Lr :~

II J,JJ-1.JiJ, I~,SECTION 3.9CONSERVATIONThe State of Alaska has high interest in energy conservationby weatherization (passive conservation), particularly forresidences.The State has a $5,000, 5% loan program forupgrading residences for conservation of energy.I ~I WIi~Ii..J\I1..1.UIJ'\'~I. ,\:I.li" }!~I;l'IlliII JI JAPA26/L3.9.1-5

-SECTION 3.10OTHER TECHNOLOGIESIJ( :, II~J! UJIUIJI, 1(,\.I,I

JI; 1-.JI3.10.1 TWO SPEED GEAR BOX3.10.1TWO SPEED GEAR BOX(A)General DescriptionnI~UI( 1JJ,I 'U{ ", I!~The operation of diesel engine generator sets at extremely lowloads for an extended period is detrimental to the engines.In general these units should not be operated at less than 25%load and, more prudently, at not less than 50% load.One solution would be to shut down the big unit and start up asmall unit to be run during the low load period.an II automat i c devi cell or a person to do thi s shifting' ofunits, and incurs the cost of an additional engine generatorset, its services, switchgear and synchronizing controls.This r~quiresA possible economy could be achieved by some mechanical methodsof matching the IIbig engine U to small' loads. In generaldiesels can idle at low speeds with minimum wear and "hot end"problems (carboning up, slobbering, etc.) and will use relativelylittle fuel at th~se lower speeds. The engines will producelittle power at these lower speeds without being IIlugged", butcan produce small power efficiently at these lower speeds.One means to do thi sis a two speed gear box between theeng; ne and alternator. The gear box, by means of a simpleclutch, would allow direct drive for high load and lowerengine speed for part load, with the alternator always turningat the appropriate speed. (See Figure 3.10.1-1).Space would cause no severe size limitations, so the gear boxcould be a cheaply made countershaft design and could be, bychanging gear sets, tailored to each application to keep theapa19/x13.10.1-1

L3.10.1TWO SPEED GEAR BOXr 'i ,~engine in a "best rangel!. The low load gear sets could bechanged in the field in a few hours to get the most from theengine.(B)Performance CharacteristicsEstimates of added life are difficult to obtain because enginemakers simply advise that it is abusing an engine to run itfull speed at near zero load for a great part of its life.However, it seems safe to opine that an engine loaded 0% to10% full power, but runni ng 600 RPM for 5000 hours and 50% to100% power at 1800 RPM for 1000 hours, would still .be a reliableworking machine, whereas a similar engine supporting the sameloads but kept at 1800 RPM for all 6000 hours would probablyhave been overhauled twice. Life increase due to "not-turnedrevolutiontlis 2!..{ times for the slowed down engine.iI~(C)CostsIt is estimated that fuel efficiency for engines running at 5%load, but at lowered speed, could be up to three times as goodas for higher speed engines running at the same load.r '~apa19/x23.10.1-2

~I,IUI, 1'I.jI,,~IJ, ,. ,iI..J",JI'1i~J'I"1..r,~IiI~IJ2·SPEED GEARBOXGENERATOR SET WITH TWO-SPEED GEARBOXFIGURE 3.10.1 - I1i~!

I , l:~rI'I1--I)! 'JiI' 1' ..!IJ!Jii~I!0I~IU, ,W3.10.2NUCLEAR, ,,\.II;1!~:I JJI.JI !,UI!IJI J

3.10.2NUCLEAR3.10.2 LOW POWER NUCLEAR HEATING REACTORS(A)DescriptionI~'jwI,JI,JI, 1The Canadian government owned nuclear company is developingthe cheapest and smallest reactor ever designed for commercialuse. The reactor, known as Slowpoke, is being developed byAtomic Energy of Canada (AEC) and will be used to produce hotwater for buildings. The Canadians claim that the reactor isso safe that it can literally be put in basements to replaceconvent i ona 1 furnaces. The idea of us i ng small reactors toprovide heat is also being explored in France, Scandinavia andthe Soviet Union.The reactor is modeled after small, pool-type research reactorsused at many universities. Its vessel is a 25-foot. deepconcrete-lined po~l dug in the ground. The small fuel core isimmersed directly in the water filled pool. The nuclearreaction heats the water in the pool to 190°F, and the heat isremoved through a double loop of heat exchangers that isolatethe heated water from the radioactive core.(8) Performance CharacteristicsSlowpoke, which stands for "Safe low-power critical experiment",will generate a scant 2 thermal MW of power, just enough toheat a large hotel or building complex.Unlike commercial power reactors, Slowpoke does not generatethe high temperatures typical of large reactors. As a result,the reactor does ,not need to be pressurized, eliminating the,need for expensive and potentially faulty safety systems. Norapa19/y1 3.10.2-1

I1aJ'3.10.2NUCLEARdoes the fuel contain enough plutonium to be practical forweapons production.Slowpoke is designed so that the reaction cannot continueunless hydrogen atoms present in the water reflect nuclearparticles back into the fuel rods. If the water overheats andbegins to boil, the bubbles formed would reduce the amount ofwater around ,the core and the reaction would slow automatically. ~Moreover', if the water boils completely away, the nuclearreaction would be unable to continue, and the remaining heatri'~could .be dissipated into the air without any additional coo11ng.(C)CostsThe Canadian government foresees a use for the reactor in manyparts of the ~orld where heating with petroleum base productsis becoming prohibitvely expensive.Although the concept is still in the test stages, the companyestimates that it can build the reactor for as little as$850,000. This works out to $425 a thermal kW.Lapa19/y23.10.2-2

~ II~I ~j3.10.3CHEMICAL STORAGE.~I!~I'l,"i!~ 1:WIIJIw

; 1I~JI1~-]-I.JIJJ, 1IUI J-II ~JI~I JJ3.10.3 CHEMICAL HEAT STORAGE(A)(B)Description3.10.3CHEMICAL STORAGEThe basic Tepidus chemical heat storage system consists ofwell insulated tanks containing sodium sulfide, heat exchangersand a controlled source of water vapor.The key to the system operation is the sodium sulfide, whichis a hygroscopic salt: when it absorbs moisture, it heats up.The water molecules chemically combine with the salt, forminga hydride and releasing heat. Sodium sulfide has an addedadvantage in that is doesn1t dissolve if it is just dampenedwith water vapor. A tank full of damp salt can provide a bankof stored heat for warming a house and heating water. Oncethe salt cools, it can be IIrecharged ll by solar energy, wasteheat, or other heat sources. Heat dries the salt, giving itthe potential to reabsorb moisture and regenerate chemicalheat.A Tepidus heat storage system using sodium sulfide (NaSz) hasbeen on trial near Stockholm, Sweden, since November 1979.The system is claimed to have a remarkable energy conversionefficiency of 95% and wiry high energy density compared toother storage medi a such as water, rocks or phase-changi ngsalts.Performance CharacteristicsThe Tepidus system has a high energy density capacity. Onekilogram (2.2 pounds) of sodium sulfide can store and regenerateone kilowatt-hour (3413 Btu) of heat. In practical terms thisapa19/z1 3.10.3-1

3.10.3CHEMICAL STORAGErWmeans that 10 tons (550 cubic feet) of the dry material candeliver 10,000 kWh (34,130,000 Btu), which ;s enough heatenergy to meet about ~ the annual heating demands of a smallwell insulated house located in Western Alaska ..'(C)Furthermore, the system can be switched off for an indefiniteperi od and allowed to cool to room temperature. When itsstarted up again, only four or five percent of the tqta1energy is used for reheating.Costs( ,~( .I .~One major disadvantage of the Tepidus system ;s the highinitial cost as~.oc;ated with the system. Initial costs are.estimated to be 3-5 times higher than a conventional oil firedfurnace although exact cost figures are as yet unavailable.Additional operation and costing information for the Tepidussystem can be requested from the manufacturer: Tepidus AB,Box 5607, 5-114 86, Stockholm, Sweden, Telex 798-2929.r \~apal9/z23.10.3-2

'II~I:JII(JIIJ3.10.4FUEL CELLS1i~I; I:J\,iW1~'JI . 1~, 1,UIiIII..J, 1IWI. II ~:I J, 1iIJI!, )JW I1I ~I J

3.10.4FUEL CELLS3.10.4 FUEL CELLS(A)General DescriptionThe fuel cell (FC) is a device for directly converting fuel intoelectrical energy, heat and water.The FC is similar in operation to a primary (non-rechargeable)battery, as used in a flashlight, differing only in that t~e electrodematerials are not consumed. In fact, the FC electrode material andthe electrolyte serve only to contain the reactant gases while thepower-producing electrochemical reaction is taking place. Figure3.10.4-1 shows the components and the voltage output of a cell.Modern FC designs have stacked cells to provide greate.r outputvoltage.JiJ IJIIJIJJIIJ(B)Electrodes are thin, porous, and electrically conduction, andcatalysts are included to speed up the reaction and generate reasonableamounts of power. The electrolyte may be acidic ~or basic; it maybe a molten salt; or it may be a solid. The fuel and oxidant mustbe in gaseous form.Figure 3.10.4-2 illustrates the basic fuel cell power system conceptand indicates inputs and outputs of each component.Performance CharacteristicsThe FC concept seems to have virtually everything in its favor andlittle to its discredit.The most visible (and audible) advantage is that a fuel cell installationis compact and almost silent.apa19/aa1 3.10.4-1

3.10.4FUEL CELLSPerhaps its chief engineering advantage is that, unlike a heatengine, a fuel cell is not limited by the Car not cycle.A typical fuel cell will convert 40% of fuel input into electricalenergy and 60% to heat.Fuel cells, because of their elevated operating temperatures;produce reject heat that can be put to use making steam or hotwater. Cogeneration of electricity is therefore an excellentpossibility, particularly using steam at temperatures up to 10000Fgenerated by the,near 1200 0 F discharge temperature of the MC cell.f'~With proper configuration, beneficial use of 85-90 percent of thefuel input can be obtained. This makes the fuel cell one of themost efficient energy converting devices available.' However, thefue 1 cell requi res pure gaseous hydrogen for operation and theoverall system efficiency must take into account the energy expendedin converting any fuel into a form usable by the fuel cell. Thepresent short-term goal is to produce a fuel reformer w'th a thermalefficiency of 87%.(C)CostsThe installed cost for a fuel cell generating plant is estimated tobe approximately 30% higher than a gas turbine plant of equivalentcapacity when they become available (early 1980 1 5). The efficiencyof these "first generation ll plants is not expected to be no higherthan approximately 38% (at full load) and operating and maintenancecould be as much as 5 times as high as for a gas turbine installation.The "second generation" plants (anticipated in the early 1990 1 5)will be approximately 48% efficient.i 'l1lir '~apa19/aa2 3.10.4-2

JIHEATHYDROGENFUEL (H 2 )ANODE (-)0.65 toI. 0 VELECTROLYTE.... '-'ADOXYGENCATHODE (+)OXIDANT(02)ELECTRONFLOWWATER. ELEMENTARY FUEL CELL CONCEPTFIGURE. "CONTROLS:..JII J'JIFUELSTEAMAIRHEATFUEL GAS FUEL D-CPROCESSORCELLINVERTERA-C;~iWATERI~:JrJBASIC FUEL CELL POWER SYSTEMFIGURE 3.10.4-1

'-1· I!~I3.10.5PHOTOVOLTAICiWi;iI, rJ· \JI· ,,WI,~IIIJJ· 1.JI J,JIJ

.., \JIJ I,JIJII~flI ~bI JIU3.10.5 PHOTOVOLTAIC CELLS(A)General Description3.10.5PHOTOVOLTAICSolar cells are electric energy generators that consume no fuel,make no noise, pose no health or environmental hazards and produceno waste products. These cells convert light directly into electricityvia semiconductors. Since no moving parts, nor high pressures ortemperatures are involved, this would be an ideal way of generatingelectricity.(8) Performance Characteristics~fficiency of thermal conversion. to electricity is about 12%.I~(C)CostsUJToday, solar-cell power is too expensive to compete with fossilfuelpower. The single crystal silicon solar cell - the only cellcommercially available today - has an efficiency of about 12 percentand costs $10.00 per peak watt or $10,000 per peak kilowatt. Thisequates to an electrical energy cost of more than $1.17/kWh if anoutput of 1000 kWh per year per installed kW is assumed togetherwith 10% interest and a 20 year amortization period.In addition to the cell array, however, storage equipment (batteries)and inverters will be required if a "stand alone system" is desiredto supply the equipment and devices presently ;n use with electricenergy. Energy storage helps satisfy demand during periods oflittle or no sunshine, as well as supplying peak power. The presentlyavailable storage devices are lead-acid batteries, but they areexpensive, costing at least $30/kW of capacity. Enough storageapa19/n1

jW3.10.5PHOTOVOLTAICcapacity to meet the average demand for 24 hours would cost $600for a single-family house. Moreover, with daily cycling, the lifeof a 1 ead-aci d battery is limited to a few years, even wi th acharge controller.It is obvious 'that the costs of both photovoltic cells and lowmaintenance storage medi urns must be reduced before they caneconomically compete with conventional generation of electricenergy.\WI ..WI •I~.( \r •~fI'-apa19/n2 3.10.5-2[ I~

IJI!JJIIJJIIIW~IJIJ3.10.6SOLAR;, Ii ~IJII~J!IJ\J(;J\iJ .IJI

JIJIJIJIIJWII~oIJr IU\UI 'wI~JJIW3.10.6 PASSIVE SOLAR HEATING(A)(B)General Description3.10.6SOLARPassive solar heating makes use of solar energy (sunlight) throughenergy efficient design (i.e. south facing windows, shutters, addedinsulation) but without the aid of any mechanical or electricalinputs.solar heating.Space heating is the .most common application of passiveBecause such solar heating is available only whenthe sun shines, its availability is intermittent (day-night cycles)and variable (winter-summer - cloudy-clear).Performance CharacteristicsThe central Alaska area in question is located roughly between 61°and 66° North latitudes.Table 3.8.6-1 for Bethel ~ndconditions within this area.The possible insolations shown onFairbanks are considered to approximateThe Bethel and Fairbanks data hasbeen developed with the F-chart computer program and takes climateand typical weather conditions into account.The annual amount ofsolar energy available can satisfy all heating needs of an averagehome if enough collecting surface area and adequate storage couldbe installed.Heat storage or supplement heating by other meanswould be necessary for about 6 months of the year when the availableinsolation cannot satisfy the heating needs.If passive solarheating is considered, where the solar energy is sufficient andwith energy efficient design (increased insulation, south facing. windows with shutters, etc.) itis conceivable that,even in themonths of November, December and January approximately 20-40% ofthe required heat can be supplied by the sun if 200 square feet ofsouth facing windows can collect energy for an average size (600 sq.ft.) residence found in the Alaskan bush.apa19/u . 3.10.6-1

---------- ---------------apa19/p76TABLE 3.10.6-1WEST CENTRAL ALASKA ~SOLAR ENERGYAvailable passive heatBTU/day1Average insolation/day/Ft 2 BTU/day through Requi red, for averagea Vertical South Facing Surface 200 Ft. 2 South Facing Windows Heating Degree 2 Da~s 600 s9.ft. ResidenceFairbanks(64°49 I N) Bethel(600471) Fairbanks Bethel Fairbanks Bethel Fairbanks Bethe 1JAN 864 832 172.8 x 10 3 166.4 X 10 3 2384 1857 412.6 x 10 3 321. 4 x 10 3FEB 1149 1224 229.8 x 10 3 244.8 X 20 3 1890 1590 370.0 x 10 3 311.6 X 10 3MAR 1808 1892 361. 6 x 10 3 378.4 X 10 3 1721 1662 283.0 x 10 3 251. 7 x 10 3APR 1679 1689 335.8 x 10 3 337.8 X 10 3 1083 1215 185 ..8 x 10 3 108.5 X 10 3MAY 1323 1176 264.6 x 10 3 235.2 X 10 3 549 772 90.3 x 10 3 127.0 X 10 3JUN 1271 1021 254.2 x 10 3 204.2 X 10 3 211 402 40.1 x 10 3 76.5 X 10 3JUL 1158 886 231. 6 x 10 3 177.2 X 10 3 , 148 319 23.8 x 10 3 51.4 X 10 3AUG 1094 715 218.8 x 10 3 143.0 X 10 3 304 394 44.1 x 10 3 57.2 X 10 3SEPT 912 ' 874 182.4 X 10 3 174.8 x 10 3 618 600 115.1 x 10 3 111. 8 x 10 3OCT 723 823 144.6 x 10 3 164.6 X 10 3 1234 1079 197.8 x 10 3 173.0 X 10 3'NOV 513 518 102.6 x 10 3 103.6 X 10 3 1866 1434 327.0 x 10 3 251. 3 x 10 3DEC 263 502 52.6 x 10 3 100.4 X 10 3 2337 1879 395. 7 x 10 3 318.1 X 10 3ANNUAL 388.9 x 10 3 368.9 X 10 3 77.8 X 10 6 73.8 X 10 6 14345 13203 75.2 x 10 6 69.2 X 10 61 "Sol ar Energy Resource Potential in Alaska" by J.P. Zarling, R. D. Seifort for U of A Institute of Water Resources, 1978.2 "Monthly Normals of Temperature, Precipitation and Heating and Cooling Degree Days 1940-70 for Alaska", U.S. Department ofCommerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis,tration Environmental Data Service.

JIJI, 13.10.6SOLARI~I:JJ I~IUIIII\J: I~I1I.J1J( II~IiJIJ(C) CostsThe integration of passive solar heating into the design and constructionof a new residence adds little to the overall structurecost. Typi ca 1 increases in structure costs range for 0 to 5percent.In general, it is not economical to extensively remodelexisting residences to take adva-ntage of passive solar heating.apa19/u 3.10.6-3

: 1'wJIJIJI'][~3.10.7BIOGAS:~I~I: IUu

IJJI:JI•3.10.7 BIOGAS GENERATION3.10.7BIOGAS(A)General DescriptionBiogas (two-thirds methane and about 600-700 Btu/scf) can be producedfrom sewage system waste. In a bi ogas generation system " heat isused to promote elevated temperature anaerobic bacterial digestiveaction.of or.ganic material. The decomposition of organic .matter inthe absence of oxygen is called anaerobic fermentation. Figure3.10.7-1 depicts the biogas generation process.wAnaerobi c fermentation of organi c products results in methane,carbon dioxide, hydrogen, traces of other gases, and the productionof some heat.and high in nitrogen.The residue remaining is hygienic, rich in nutrients,Potentially damaging germs are killed by theabsence of oxygen during the fermentation process.There are over 50,000 small scale biogas producers in rural Indiaand over half a million reported in mainland China.unit in Alaska works on crab processing wastes.quite well established.A demonstrationThe technology isUnits range from "one cow" size (20,000-30,000 Btu/day) to over 3billion Btu/day.(B)Performance CharacteristicsUnless organic wastes other than human are available, productionfor a village will be quite limited. For example, based on apopulation of 100, an average human waste of 3 pounds/day, 11%solids in that waste, 84% of solids being volatile (gas producing),production of 5 cubic feet of biogas at 600 Btu/cubic food perapa19/jl 3.10.7-1

II..J3.10.7BIOGASpound of volatile solids, the theoretical biogas energy productionis about 80,000 Btu/day, equivalent to a heat content of six-tenthsof a gallon of diesel per day:Biogas generators can be designed for continuous or batch (4 days -2 weeks) operation, depending on the mode of digester loadingutilized.LThe biogas producing digestive activities are optimal in two temperatureranges: 85°-105° and 120°-140°F, although digestion will occur fromfreezing to 156°F. Fermentation, however, is less stable in thehigher of these two ranges and, consequently, the biogas unitsshould usually be designed to be maintained in the lower optimalrange.(C)Typically, biogas generation in lower 48 climates requires on-thirdto one-half of the energy cantent of the gas generated to heat theprocess .. This efficiency of 50-67% could drop to zero in severeAlaska climates.CostsI~N/Ar 1I IIIj!"i.Japa19/j2 3.10.7-2

JIJII~, 1I~IJIJIWIIi:].JI, ,.U, 1uORGANICWASTE INWATER INMIXING'HEATINSLURRYGASSLURRYGAS OUTFERTILIZEROUTBIOGAS DIGESTER~PADDLE OROTHER AGITATIONBIOGAS GENERATIONFIGURE 3.10.7-1

'1I:~Ii ..IJI3.10.8WASTE, ,I J,·WI'.JI

JIJIJIJIJIJ3.10.8 WASTE CONVERSION(A) General DescriptionIW(B)IJ3.10.8WASTEWhile refuse (waste) can be used as an alternate fuel, largequantities are required on a continuous basis to justify the largecapital investment for an economically sized facility.As only theAnchorage area approaches the production quantities required, thisoption is dismissed for the 13 villages. (Reference: Jobs andPower.)Performance CharacteristicsNot appropriate(C)CostsNot appropriateapa28/c1 3.10.8-1

I""II JJI:JIJI'JI:~3.10.9PEATIwIIJ~IUIIJ. II WIJ .JI,JIIJJIIJ

3.10.9PEATIJJ'J! , 1I~IW, 1UIWIJI,JIi JJIIWJ3.10.9 PEAT(A)General DescriptionPeat is an early stage in the transformation of vegetation to coaland results from the partial decomposition and disintegration ofplant remains in the absence of air. Peat is generally formed inwater bogs, swamps, and marsh lands. Generally, peat is low innitrogen, sulfur, and ash.A study to estimate the Alaska resource potential was recentlyperformed for the State of Alaska, Division of Energy and PowerDeve 1 opment. Numerous areas of peat depos i ts were 1 oca ted andoutlined in the study.Undrained bog peat usually contains between 92 and 95 percentmoisture, but moisture "is reduced to about 25 to 50 percent whenpeat is harvested (by large earthmoving equipment) and air dried.At these reduced moisture levels, the bulk density of the resultingpeat ;s about 15 to 25 pounds/cubic foot and its heat value isapproximately 6,200 Btu/pound.The use of higher heat content, easily obtainable wood ~uel has,however, pretty much kept peat out of the energy market in Alaska.(8) Performance characteristics(C)Performance is similar to burning low-grade coal ..CostsNot availableapa28/dl 3.10.9-1

....---APPENDIX E..-..---..- ....-..

Q)DEMANt' -- feWENERCiY -- MWHENER(;Y PLAN COST'S FOR EfI.le'

BUCKLAND - DIESEL GENERATION WITH WASTE HEAT{ ;wf ,II--,50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)LAccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatWaste HeatRelated Benefit Related BenefitAccumulated Present· Accumulated PresentWorth Benefits up Worth Benefits fromto year 2000 2001 to 203638176692.3450.0 1229.7r~56 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 3817 + 6692.3 = 10509.356 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 450.0 + 1229.7 = 1679.7Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel generation equipment, etc., are includedin accumulated present worth costs.r .~r ~W1 Assumes hydroelectric alternate is operable beginning 1986.APA 20/S3('~

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR E"-,CKI.ANDOIE$EI. AND BINARY CYCLE OENERATIONI JI JoIJIDEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT 112EXISTING SCHOOl. GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT .2ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT 112DIESEL INVESTMENT XIIOOO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST XCIOOO)OAI.!..ONS DIESEL FUEl.COST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST XCIOOO)DIESEL O&M COST Xllooo)BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT Xllooo)BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST Xll000)BINARY CYC!..E FUEL COST XIIOOO)BINARY CYCLE O&M COST XCIOOO)1981963351407513555:'39,3961.7/:.·16221';>821013~3140751355'541,5131.8283221407513555100SO'54'5.3941.8894231984119 129419 4'52140 14075 75135 13555 55100 1005 '549.274 '53.1'5'51.95 2.02lOb 11823 2319861344841407'5135551005'56,9182.0913123198713951514075135100'560.564Z.lb1442414!.534714075564.3272.2415924198;>ISO57814075135'55100ZSO400272051201'5'5610140751002'5027216120ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAl. COST XCIOOO)ACCUM PRES WORTH XCIOOO)98989810510220012211531'5134 14b123 130438 5bS15913770'51731458501881531.0033572SZ1,28536S2921.567EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(I000)3. MAINTENANCE COST XII(00)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000)63.04.21.65.8NON· ELECTRICAL BENEF'lTSWASTE HEAT4.2 4.2 4.21.6 1.6 1.65.B 5.8 5.84.21.65.84.21.65.8112.5I1.S4.416.211.84.416.2BENEFIT CHEATINO)1. GALLONS DIESEl. SAVED2. DOLl.AR VAl.UE SAVINO XC 1(00)'5.72011.96.504 7.335 8.19614.0 16.3 18.910.03524.1311,.(11228.0NET BENEFIT XlIOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT )(1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)6.05.75.78.2 10.5 13.17.5 9.3 11.313.2 22.5 33.815.813.247.019.015.462.411.89.371.71~.612.093.71991199219931994199519961997199819902000-)i Irl-JWII~t 1I~JUIJDEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411UNIT .2EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411UNIT .2ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411UNIT 412DIESEL INVESTMENT )(1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST XIIOOO)GALLONS DIESEL FUEl.COST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST XIIOOOIDIESEL O&M COST XII0001BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT Xllooo)BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST XII0(0)BINARY CYCLE FUEl. COST XIIOOO)BINARY CYCLE O&M COST XI 1(00)ANNUAl. COSTS )(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAl. COST X(1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH X(1000)EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT XII0(0)2. EQUIV AN COST XCI000)3. MAINTENANCE COST X(looo)TOTAl. EXTRA COST X(1000)BENEFIT IHEATINO)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING XII000)NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT XII000)140751355510025052.482723612011.84.416.220.415.298.91787231407'51355'5100250'52.57272561204082952,15111.84.416.215.04942.526.319.0117.918978014075135551002502.66272761204283002,4'5111.94.416.216.78b49.032.923.0140.9201837140751355510025052.75272961204483052,73611.S4.416.221289414075133551002302.83273171204693103.0662239511407513555100250'5273371204893143.380NON· ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT11.134.416.211.134.416.218t603 20.501 22.47956.3 64.4 73.040.1 49.2 56.827.3 31.9 36.5168.2 200.1 236.62351.0071407513555100250'53.05273571205093173.69711.94.416.22461.06414075135'5510023053.16273771205293204.01711.94.4H ... 22!.581,121140751355510025053 .. 27273971205493234.34011.94.416.224~514 26,652 28,S7192.2 92.7 103.966.0 76.5 97.641.1 46.3 51.5277.7 324.0 ~75.52691,171314075135551002~O'53.38:;:741712056"3244.66411.94.416.2.31.170115.999.7:;I3I

BUCKLAND - DIESEL AND BINARY CYCLEGENERATION WITH WASTE HEAT[ 1:W50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to·2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2036r :, .~46646873.5432.31204.456 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 4664 + 6873.5 = 11537.556 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 432.3 + 1204.4 = 1636.7Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and binary cycle generation equipment,etc., are included in accumulated present worth costs.1 Assumes hydroelectric alternate is operable beginning 1986.I•APA 20/S4

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR BUCKLANDDIESEL AND WIND GENERATION1981198219831984198519861987198819891990DE"AND -- KWENERGY -- ~H9633!51013!53110386119419129452134484139!5151455471505781!5!5610EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT 1121407!51407!51407!51407!51407514075140;75140751407!514075EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT 112ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT 112100'100100100100100100100WIND GENERATION SOURCESALL WIND UNITSKW36.036.036.036.036.036.036.081.0DIESEL INVEST"ENT X(IOOO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X/lOOO)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X!l000)DIESEL 0&" COST X(IOOO)39.3961.76762241. !5131.82832280!540.6901.888422!548.4!512.0210823552.2142.0912023!5!5!5.8602.1613323!563.2692.3216124!5610 1522.40161 '24WIND EQUIP INVEST"ENT X(1000)WIND EQUIP EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)WIND EQUIP 0&" COST X(IOOO)!52434343434343435176ANNUAL COSTS X(IOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(I000)ACCU" PRES WORTH X(1000)98989810!51022001181113111311204311431275!581!5!51346921681418331831499821971551.137203'1!561;293, ,·uIiWJIUIJI1I-JUII JI JEXTRA COST1. INVEST"ENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)3. ~INTENANCE COST X (1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(I000)BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOO)ACCU" PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)DEMND -- KWENERGY - ~EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT 112EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT 112ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -UNIT IIIUNIT 112WIND GENERATION SOURCESALL WIND UNITSDIESEL INVEST~NT X(I000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)GALLGNS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL 0&" COST X(IOOO)KWWIND EQUIP INVEST~NT X(IOOO)WIND EQUIP EQUIV AN COST X(1000)WIND EQUIP 0&" COST X(IOOO)ANNUAL COSTS X(IOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(IOOO)AC~ PRES WORTH X(IOOO)EXTRA COST1. INVEST"ENT X(IOOO)2. EQUIV AN COST X(I000)3. "AINTENANCE COST X(IOOO)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOOO)BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(IOOO)NET BENEFIT X( 1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOO)ACCU" PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(IOOO)KW19911407!510081.0!567.7382.4818!524762271691.4624.21.65.811.58331.625.819.2106.019921787231407!510081.0!574.4412.!5721024762!521821.6444.21.65.813.17637.231.422.7128.763.04.21.65.8!5.12710.64.84.54.!519931897801407!510081.0581.1442.662372!5762801961.8404.21.65.814.84943.437.626.41!55.14.21.65.86.96.310.819942018371407!510010081.0801187.8472.7!52662545.07.32.710.040.327.5182.6NON;tLECTRICAL BENEFITSIlASTE HEAT4.2 4.2 4.21.6 1.6 1.65.8 !5.8 5.86.686 7.!519 8.379,14.9 17.3 ,20.09.18.118.91~2128941407!510010081.01194.5502.8!52962611.59.929.82239!511407!510010081.01110t.2!542."32926763792432.527NON· ELECTRICAL BENEFITSIlASTE HEAT4!5.07.32.710.018.43757.747.731.5214.145.07.32.710.020.3!5266.1!56.136.0250.114.211.940.7199723!51.0071407!5100100126.011101.9!593.0!534226!511093982482.77!545.07.32.710.021.10670.860.837.9288.04.21.65.89.30122.917.1, 13.954.619982461.0641407!5100100126.011108.6623.16378261094342633.0384!5.07.32.710.023.14580.570.542.6330.64.21.65.810.2!5026.14.21.6!5.810.27427.020.3 21.216.0 16.270.6 '86.8199'92!581.12114075100100126.01111!5.3663.2741!5271094722773.31!545.07.32.710.080.947.5378.120002691.1781407!5100100126.011122.0693.384!542710945.07.32.710.027.465102.192.152.5430.6

{ 1UBUCKLAND - DIESEL AND WIND GENERATION WITH WASTE HEATU50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)r \UAccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2036I 'I.J36066172.9430.61112.656 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 3606 + 6172.9 = 9778.956 years present worth ~enefits at 3% discount = 430.6 + 1112.6 = 1543.2r '~Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WEC5 generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.1 Assumes hydroelectric alternate is operable beginning 1986.APA 20/51r '

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR BUCKLANDDIESEL AND HYDROELECTRIC GENERATIONJIJDEPIAND -- KWENERGY -- PlWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .21981963351407519821013331407319831103861407519841194191407519$5129452140751986134484140~198713951314075198814554714073198913057814073I~O13561014075EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2135551333313355133351335513553135551333313355ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2100100100100100100100100HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1238238238238DIESEL INVESTMENT X(IOOO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST XC 1000)DIESEL o.PI COST X(IOOO)39.3961.7676224105131.82832200343.3941.889423549.2741.9310623553. ISS2.0211823202.16202.242052.3872.3272036.3502.401720HYDROELECTRIC INVEST~NT X(IOOO)HYDROELECTRIC EQUIV AN COST XI 1000)HYOROELECTRIC a.rt COST X I 1000)·12.471485 48530 3048530485304S530ANNUAL COSTS XlIOOO)PRES WDRTH ANNUAL COST X I 1000 )ACCt.m PRES WORTH X I 1000)989898103102200122113313134123438146 340 540130 466 432368 1.034 1.4863404391.9253474322.3373574272.784NQN...ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVESTrtENT XIIOOO).2. EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)3. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X( 1000)63.04.21.63.84.21.65.84.21.65.a4.21.65.84.21.65.84.21.63.84.21.65.84.21.63.8BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALI.ONS DIESEl. SAVED2. 00I..1.AR VALUE SAVING X( 1000)3.720 6.304 7.33311.8 14.0 16.34191.1c ,NET BENEFIT XIIOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)AC~ PRES WORTH BENEFIT XllOOO)6.05.75.7a.27.513.210.59.322.3(5.8115.0)17.5(3.8)(4.9)12.6(5.8)(4.717.9(4.71(3.714.2(2.91(2.212.0199119921993199419961997199819992000DEl'lAND -- KW·ENERGY - I'IWH1666661787231897002018372128942239512331.0072461.064·2581.1212691.178EXISTING VII.LAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .214075140751407514075140751407514075140731407514075EXISTING SCHOOl. GENERATION SOURCES -UNIT .1 . .UNIT .2KW133551355513355133551355513553135551353513555ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .21001001001001001001001001001001001001001001001001001.~1(~HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1DIESEl. INVEST~NT XllOOO)DIESEl. EQUIV AN COST XllOOO)GALI.ONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALI.ONDIESEl. FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL o.rt COST Xll000)HYDROELECTRIC INVESTrtENT XI 1000)HYDROEI.ECTRIC EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)HYDROEI.ECTRIC a.rt COST XIIOOO)23848530238519.6392.57562148530238326.3422.66772248530238801133.0462.~1002248530238II39.7492.83125222381146.4522.9515123485301153.0383.0517823485302381159.7413.1620a24485·302381166.4443.2723924485302381173.1473.382722448530I:~IUI1° IJANNUAl. COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAl. COST X I 1000)ACCUrt PRES WORTH X ( 1000)EXTRA COST1. INVEST~NT Xll000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)3. PIAl NTENANCE COST X ( 1000)TOTAl. EXTRA COST X(1000)BENEFIT IHEATING)1. GALI.ONS DIESEl. SAVED2. DOLLAR VAI.UE SAVING X(10001NET BENEFIT XIIOOO)PRES WDRTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(I0001ACCUrt PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(IOOO)5764293.2134.21.65.82.2126.0.2.12.15974313.6444.21.65.83.4769.94.13.05.16194344.0784.21.65.84.82114.18.35.810.96474414.5194.21.65.S6.246la.913.18.919.86724444.9636994493.412NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT4.21.65.87.75124.418.612.332.14.21.65.89.33730.424.615.847.97264523.8644.21.65.810.97936.831.019.367.27574586.3224.21.65.812,72344.338.523.390.57884636.7834.21.65.846.521.3117.139214687,2534.21.65.816.45861.235.431.6149.4

BUCKLAND - DIESEL AND HYDROELECTRIC GENERATIONWITH NON-ELECTRIC BENEFIT50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)f •~f .~AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2036I '111/72539917.7149.4669.256 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 7253 + 9917.7 = 17170.7 ~56 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 149.4 + 669.2 = 818.6Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.1 Assumes hydroelectric project is operable beginning 1986.APA 20/S2

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR HUGHESDIESEL GENERATION181192193199419951861871981891 0DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWH381514116343173461834135220455216382296124064251EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT lI2UNIT *35035355035 '35303535SO3535503S35503S35303S3SADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT *1UNIT *2IJNIT *37350-n55075507550755075507S507S507SSODIESEL INVESTMENT X(looO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST XII000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST XII000)DIESEL O&M COST XII000)17.-n582.31452110071.162.35021720.3452.475521721.5212.566121722.672.656621723.02.747221725.4022.94722726.8132.48722729.2243.04422729.S183.1310222ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH AN COST X(10OO)ACCUI1 PRES WORTH X ( 1000)6666M7976142937922099913014933941009647010805601164654123977511311008!51NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE IlEATr UII! I~, IU1)~)JEXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X(IOoo)2. EQVIV AN COST X(1000)3. MAINTENANCE COST XII0001TOTAL EXTRA COST X(looOIBENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(10001NET BENEFIT XII000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFtT XII000)ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT XI 1000)DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IUUNIT .2UNIT .3ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3DIESEL INVESTMENT X(IOOO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST XIIOOO)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST XII000)DIESEL 0&11 COST X(1000)ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH AN COST X(IOOO)ACCUI1 PRES WORTH X(1000J1

( 1uHUGHES - DIESEL GENERATION WITH WASTE HEAT50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)r I~U( \Ui \AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000.2238AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to20383610.8Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000250.1Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2038642.6~r'I I~[1•58 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 2238 + 3610.8 =5848.8 LJu58 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 250.1 + 642.6 = 892.7Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent an'nual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.1 Assumes first hydroelectric alternative is operable beginning 1986,and second is operable beginning 1988.1-11r .~:APA 20/S15

IQIIIIrENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR HUGHESDIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATION1981 1982 1993 1984 198:5 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990:~l DEMAND -- KW 38 41 43 46 49 :52 :55 :58 61 64ENERGY -- I'IWH 1:51 163 173 183 193 204 216 228 240 251~~JU~W0EXISTING YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _1EXISTlNO SCHOOL OENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _1 50 :50 50 50 50 50 :50 50 50 50UNIT _2 '3!5 3:5 3!5 3:5 35 3!5 35 3!5 35 35UNIT _3 35 35 35 3!5 35 3:5 3!5 3!5 35 3:5ADDITIONAL YILLAOE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT _1 75 75 7!!1 75 75 75 7:5 75 7:5UNIT _2 50 50 50 :50 50 :50 50 50 50UNIT _3 ISO 150 'DIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000) 100DIESEL EQUIY AN COST XII000) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 17.758 19.169 20.34S 21.521 22.697 23.990 2!!1.402 26.813COST PER GALLON 2.31 2.39 2.47 2.56 2.65 2.74 2.84 2.94 3.04 3.15DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 4S 50 S!!I 61 66 72 79 87DIESEL O&M COST XII0001 21 21 21 21 21 21 22 22BINARY CYCLE INYESTMENT XII000) 240BINARY CYCLE EQUIY AN COST X 11000 I 16 16BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(1000) 36 38BINARY CYCLE O&M COST X(1000) 112 112ANNUAL COSTS X(l000) M 78 93 EI9 94 100 108 116 171 173PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST XI1000) M 76 78 81 83 86 90 94 135 133ACClJI'I PRES WORTH X I 1000) M 142 220 301 384 470 !!160 654 789 922HON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. I NYESTI'IENT X I 1000) 33.9 67. !!I2. EQUJY AN COST XI 1000) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 6.8 6.93. MAINTENANCE COST XllOOO) .9 .8 .9 .9 .9 .9 2. !!I 2.:5TOTAL EXTRA COST XIlOOO) 3.1. 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 9.3 9.3BENEFIT (HEATING)r 1 1. GALLONS DIESEl. SAYED 2.563 2.841 3,132 3.45:5 3.810 40193 4.572 4.959j II 2. DOLLAR YALUE SAYING X(10001 6.9 9.1 9.1 10.4 11.9 13.6 15.2 17.1IIII~NET BENEFIT X(lOOO) 3.8 5.0 6.0 7.3 9.8 10.5 5.9 7.8PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEF IT X (1000) 3.6 4.6 5.3 6.3 7.4 9.5 4.7 6.0r 1'ACClJI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X( 10001 3.6 8.2 13.5 19.9 27.2 3S.7 40.4 46.4W 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000DEMAND - KW 6EI 72 76 90 84 88 92 96 100 104ENERGY - I1WH 272 292 312 333 353 374 394 414 435 455f iEXISTING YILLAGE DENERATION SOURCES - leWUNIT _IL.Jr 1UUEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT, _I 50 50 50 !!IO 50 50 !!IO 50 50 50tlNIT '.2 35 3!5 35 3!5 35 35 3:5 3:5 3:5 3!5,UNIT _3 3!5 35 3!5 3!5 3!5 35 35 3:5 3!5 3!5',ADoITlONAa. YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leW'UNIT _I 7:5 7!!1 7!!1 7S 75 75 75 75 7S 7:5UNIT- .2 50 !!IO 50 SO 50 50 50 50 50 50UNIT .3 150 150 1!!10 1:50 150 150 1!!10 150 150 150,DIESEL INllESTMENT X ( 1000 IDIESEL EQUIY AN COST X(1000)GALLONS DIESEl. FUEL7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7COST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X (1000)3.26 3.37 3.49 3.61 3.74 3.97 4.01 4.15 4.29 4.44DIESEL 0.1'1 COST X(10001IU~BINARY CYCLE INllESTl'lENT XII0001BINARY CYCLE EQUIY AN COST X( 1000) 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST XI 1000) 41 44 47 !!IO 53 56 59 62 65 68BINARY CYCLE but COST X (1000) 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112I ANNUAL COSTS X(10001 176 179 192 185 lEIS 191 194 197 200 203I PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X ( 1000 I 131 129 129 126 124 123 121 119 U9 116ACCU1'I PRES WORTH X (1000) 1.053 1.192 1.310 1.436 1.560 1.693 1.904 1.923 2.041 2.157JNON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. I NYESMNT X ( 100012. EQUIY AN COST X(JOooI 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.8 6.8'1 3. MAINTENANCt:: COST X( 1000) 2.5 2. !!I 2.5 2.5 2.:5 2.5 2.:5 2.5 2.5 2.:5Id ..IJNETrlI ~TOTAL EXTRA COST X I 1000) 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAYED2. DOLLAR YALUE SAYING Xll000)5.47019.76.07922.S6.71425.87.40129.59.09S33.39.84037.69,59142.210,37047.311,20352.912,03958.7BENEFIT X(1000) 10.4 13.2 16.5 20.2 24.0 29.3 32.9 38.0 43.5 49.4PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X I 1000) 7.7 9.5 11.6 13.8 15.9 19.2 20.5 23.0 25.6 28.2ACCU1'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X (1000) 54.1 63.6 7!!1.2 El9.0 104.9 123.1 143.6 166.6 192.2 220.4

I 1I '-.jHUGHES - DIESEL AND BINARY CYCLEGENERATION WITH WASTE HEATf II '~50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2038Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2038(1W21572484.7220.4604.7W58 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 2157 + 2484.7 = 4641.758 years present worth benefits at" 3% discount = 220.4 + 604.7 = 825.1Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.WU..I ".. (( 1~1 Assumes first hydroelectric alternative is operable beginning 1986,and second is operable beginning 1988.r 'APA 20/S14(1~

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR HUGHESDIESEL AND HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION1991198219831994199519861997198919991990DEI'1AND -- KWENERGY -- I'1WH39151411634317346193491935220455216592296124064251EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT .2UNIT 113503535503535503535503535503535SO35 .35503535ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT .27550755075SO7550755075507S5075507550HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .14.545909090DIESEL INVESTI'1ENT X/lOOOIDIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(IOoolGALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(IOoo)DIESEL 0&1'1 COST X(1000117,7592.314S21100719.1692.395021720.3452.475521721.5212.566121722.6972.656621713.9942.744221715.4062.84482175.0572.94162076.4693.04222077.7623.152720HYDROELECTRIC INVESTI'1ENT X(IOOO)HYDROELECTRIC EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)HYDROELECTRIC 0&1'1 COST X(looO)3.40313230132303.426266302663026630I~1l-.jIANNUAL COSTS X(IOOOIPRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(IOoo)ACCUI'1 PRES WORTH X/IOoo)EXTRA COSTI. INVESTI'1ENT X(IOOO)2. EQUIV AN COST X(100013. MAINTENANCE COST X(looOITOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOOOI6666667976142937922033.82.3.83.199913012.3.83.194 23293 200394 584NOH.ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT2.3.83.12.3.83.12391997932.3.93.133827S1.0582.3.83.13442721.3302.3.93.13492671.5972.3.93.1BENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(looOI2.8418.13.1329.12.0156.02.3117.27892.S1.0493.61.3044.SIJIU, Il.JNET BENEFIT X(IOoolPRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOOIACCUI'1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT XtlOOOIDEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411UNIT 112UNIT 113ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT 412199168272SO353S75SO19927229250353575SO3.83.63.619937631250353S75SOS.O4.69.219948033350353S75SO6.0S.313.5943S3503S3S2.92.S16.019968837475SO4.13.419.4'199792394503S3S75SO(.6)(.S)18.91999964147SSO.5.419.3199910043S7'SSO1.41.120.4200010445550353575'SOIJI, 1I~1I~r-!.. ~I.JIHYDROELECTRIC GENERATION SOURCES -- KW'UNIT IIIDIESEL INVESTMENT X(looOIDIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(10001GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(IOOOIDIESEL 0&1'1 COST X(IOOOIHYDROELECTRIC INVESTMENT X(IOoo)HYDROELECTRIC EQUIV AN COST X(IOOOIHYDROELECTRIC 0&1'1 COST X(IOOO)ANNUAL COSTS X(IOOOIPRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(IOOO)ACCUI'1 PRES WORTH X(IOOO)EXTRA COSTI. INVESTI'1ENT X(looOI2. EQulV AN COST X(IOOO)3. MAINTENANCE COST X(IOoo)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(looO)BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(IOOO)NET BENEFIT X(IOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOO)ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(IOOO)90710.2313.263721266303602691.96S2.3.83.11.7S06.33.22.422.990712.5933.374721266303702672.1322.3.93.12.2278.35.23.826.690714.9353.490;;721266303902662.3992.3.83.12,73310.47.35.131. 790717.40S3.616921266303922672.6654042672.9324182683.2004312693.469NOH· ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT2.3.83.13.29013.09.96.738.490719.7S73.748121266302.3.83.13.85315.812.78.446.990722.2263.879521266302.3.93.14.46819.116.010.357.190724.$784.0110821266302.3.83.15.08922.419.312.069.190726.9304.1S12322266304472703.7392.3.93.15.73626.223.114.083.190729.4004.2913922266304632724.0112.3.93.16.43930.427.316.099.1731.7S24.4415522266304792734.21ii42.3.93.17.14434.931.918.1117.2

HUGHES - DIESEL AND HYDROELECTRICGENERATION WITH NON-ELECTRIC BENEFIT50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2038Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2038(~L42845863.0117.2389.2f .,5$1 years present worth cost at 31 discount = 4284 + 5863.0 = 10147.058 years present worth benefits at 31 discount = 117.2 + 389.2 = 506.4Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.i i )~( ,\ i--1 Assumes first hydroelectric project is operable beginning 1986,and second is operable beginning 1988.r Ii II.JAPA 20/S16

I,~,ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR KOYUKUKDIESEL GENERATIONJII~DEI'IAND -- I(WENEROY -- I"IWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES'-- KWUNIT (ttEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .31981431881007S307SSO19825421310075307SSO1983S722:51007S307SSO1984602371007S3075SO1985632481007S307S50198666262100753075SO751987702761007S3075SO7519887328910075307550751989773031007S3075SO751990eo3161007530755075DIESEL INVESTP1ENT X( 1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL 08d1 COST X( 1000)7922.1091.~38212:5.0491.61442126.4601.67492227.8711.73S32229.16S1.79572260430.9111.856322432.4S91.926922433.9961.987422435.6332.OS8022437.1622.138722ANNUAL. COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH AN COST X(looo)ACCUI1 PRES WORTH X 11 000):59S9S96S63122716718975692S879703288977405959048510081566106846S011387737NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1 • I NVEBTPlENT X (1000 )2. EQUIV AN COST X(looo)3. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X( 1000)33.82.3•. 83.12.3 2.3.8 .83.1 3.133.84.51.76.24.S 4.S1.7 1.76.2 6.24.51.76.24.51.76.2, ,I ',WBENEFIT (HEATING)1. OALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVINO )( 1000)NET BENEFIT )(( 1 000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X (1000)ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEF IT X ( 1000)3.3346.23.12.92.93.679 4.02:57.0 7.94.84.310.84.4379.12.92.S13.34.869 5.30210.4 11.S4.23.516.8S.34.321.15.77313.06.85.426.S6.24314.68.46.432.91991199219931994199519961997199819992000DE!WIIIl -- I(WENEI'!OY -- I'1WHas34089364943879841110343S1094581124,8211750;!,.121530126SS3EXISTING VILLAGE OENERATION SOURCES -- I(WUNIT .1,wIUEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- I(WUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- I

( .Wi 'I~KOYUKUK - DIESEL GENERATION WITH WASTE HEAT50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)f '~AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2036u18862935.4187.1509.856 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 1886 + 2935.4 = 4821.456 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 187.1 +509.8 = 696.9Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel' and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.r ;~f 'W..i ., II .1 Assumes hydroelectric project is operable beginning 1986.r \I ,~Lr ;~APA 20/513

Q:lI 1.1:IIJJENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR ~OYU~~DIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATION1981 1992 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990DEMAND -- KW 45 54 57 60 63 66 70 73 77 80ENERGY -- MWH 188 213 22~ 237 248 262 276 289 303 316EXISTING YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT In -EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100UNIT 412 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75UNIT 413 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30ADDITIONAL YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- ~WUNIT 411 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75UNIT 412 50 50 SO 50 50 50 50 50 50 SoUNIT 413 75 75 75 75 75UNIT 414 150 150DIESEL I NYESTMENT X (1000) 100 60W DIESEL EQUIY AN COST X(IOOO) 4 4 4 4 4GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 22.109 25.049 26.460 27.871 29.165 30.811 32.458 33.986COST PER GALLON 1.56 1.61 1.67 1.73 1.79 1.85 1.92 1.98 2.05 2.13..DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 38 44 49 53 57 63 69 74DIESEL O&M COST X(1000) 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 22BINARY CYCLE INYESTMENT X(1000) 240rl BINARY CYCLE EQUIY AN COST X(1000) 16 16BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(I0001 65 68BINARY CYCLE O'M COST X(1000) 112 112IANNUAL COSTS X(I000) 59 65 71 75 79 89 95 100 197 200PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(IOOOI 59 63 67 69 70 77 90 81 155 153ACCUM PRES WORTH X(1000) 59 122 189 25S 329 405 485 566 721 874U\NON· ELECTRICAL BEIIEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT Xll000) 33.8 33.8 67.5I ~ 2. EOOIY AN COST X (1000 I 2.3 2.3 2.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 9.1 9.13. MAINTENANCE COST XII0001 .8 .8 .9 1.7 1.7 1.7 3.4 3.4TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000) 3.1 3.1 3.1 6.2 6.2 6.2 12.5 12.5I1II! I~BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 3.334 3.679 4.0~ 4.437 4.969 5.302 5.773 6.2432. DOLLAR YALUE SAVING Xll000) 6.2 7.0 7.9 9.1 10.4 11.5 13.0 14.6NET BENEFIT X(1000) 3.1 3.9 4.8 2.9 4.2 5.3 .5 2.1PRES WORTH ANNUAL SENEFIT X(1000) 2.9 3.6 4.3 2.5 3.5 4.3 .4 1.6r 1 ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000) 2.9 6.5 10.8 13.3 16.8 21.1 21.5 23.1U 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000DEMAND -- KW 85 89 94 98 103 lOS 112 117 121 126I ; ENERGY -- MWH 340 364 387 411 435 458 482 506 530 553LJi!WUEXISTING YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100UNIT 412 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75UNIT 413 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 307530ADDITIONAL YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- ~WUNIT *1 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75UNIT 412 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50UNIT 413 75 75 75 75 75-- 75 75 75 75 75UNIT 414 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150DIESEL INYESTMENT XII000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COsT X(1000) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4'1 GALLONS DIESEL FUEL\ COST PER GALLON 2.20 2.28 2.36 2.44 2.53 2.61 2.71 2.80 2.90 3.00DIESEL FUEL COST X(I000)DIESEL O'M COST X(1000)I ~I.JBINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X( 1000)BINARY CYCLE EOUIY AN COST X(1000) 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16BINARY CYCLE FUEL COsT X(1000) 73 78 83 88 93 98 103 109 114 119BINARY CYCLE O'M COST Xll0001 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112ANNUAL COSTS Xll000) 205 210 215 220 225 230 235 241 246 251-rPRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(10001 153 152 151 150 149 148 146 146 145 143ACCUM PRES WORTH Xll0001 1.027 1.179 1.330 1.480 1.629 1.777 1.923 2.069 2.214 2.357NON- ELECTRICAL BENEFITSEXTRA COSTWASTE HEATI. INVESTMENT X(1000)2. EQUIY AN COST Xll000) 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1: 3. KAINTENANCE COST XIIOOOI 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4TOTAL EXTRA COST X(10001 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5I ~UIWSENEFIT (HEATING),e 1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 6.837 7.577 8.329 9.135 9.975 10.826 11.733 12.675 13.650 14.6322. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING Xll000) 16.6 18.9 21.6 24.6 27.7 31.2 35.0 39.0 43.6 49.4fii ~INET BENEFIT Xll000) 4.1 6.4 9.1 12.1 15.2 18.7 22.5 26.5 31.1 35.9PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT XI 1000) 3.1 4.6 6.4 8.2 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.3 20.5ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000) 26.2 30.8 37.2 45.4 55.4 67.4 81.4 97.4 115.7 136.2

i 'WKOYUKUK - DIESEL AND BINARY CYCLEGENERAGION WITH WASTE HEATI 1W50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2036i!..J23573032.1136.2433.756 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 2357 + 3032.1 = 5389.156 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 136.2 + 433.7 = 569.9Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.r \W1 Assumes hydroelectric project is operable beginning 1986.APA 20/512

W\I U.~IUI\I: 1UWr 1U, '. \Uo'1I\~r 1~.1i~IQIDIjDEMAND -- KWENERGV -- I'IWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3HVDROELECTRIC GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1DIESEL INVEST"ENT X(10001DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(10OO1DIESEL 0&" COST X(10oo1HYDROELECTRIC INVESTKENT X ( 1000)HVDROELECTRIC EQUIV AN COST X(lOOO)HVDROELECTRIC 0'" COST X(1000)ANNUAL COSTS X( 1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X( 1000)ACCUK PRES WORTH X(1000)EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X (1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(10OO)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000)BENEF IT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. D01.L.AR VALUE SAVING X (1000)NET BENEFIT I( (1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X( 1000)ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)DEMAND -ENERGV -I(WKWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- ICWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- I(WUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -UNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT ~HVDROELECTRIC GENERATION SOURCES -- ICW.UNIT .1DIESEL INVESTMENT X( 10001DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(looo)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X (1000)DIESEL O&K COST Xl1ooo)HYDROELECTRIC INVESTKENT X ( 1000)HYDROELECTRIC EClUIV AN COST X110OO)HYDROELECTRIC 010" COST X( 1000)ANNUAL COSTS X 11 000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST 1((1000)ACCUI1 PRES WORTH X ( 1000)EI(TRA COST1. INVESTMENT I( (1 000)2. mUlv AN COST X(10OO)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000)BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X110OO)NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT 1((1000)ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(10OO)KWENERGV PLAN COSTS FOR KOVUKUKDIESEL AND HVDROELECTRIC GENERATION19814518810075307SSO100722.1091.563S21666671199183340100753075SO75112.20303303642712.118.6.63.2988.07.45.547.0198254213100753075SO725.0491.6144217270141199289364100753075SO75112.2820303303642632.381.6.62.5066.35.74.151.119835722510075307S50726.4601.6749227874,215199394387100753075507515711303303642552.636.6.61.7484.53.92.753.8198460237100753075SO727.8711.73532282752901994984111007530755075157112.4420303303642482.884.6.69562.62.01.455.2198563248100753075SO729.1651.7957228676366198666262100753075SO75157bO111.8520198770276100753075SO75157111.92207.793303 30330 30364314680364305985NOH· ELECTRICAL BENEFITSIIASTE HEAT5.0.6 .6.6 .65.87011.911.39.79.71995 1996103 108435 458100 10075 7530 3075 7S50 5075 75157112.5320303303642413.125112.1172.61620303303702373.3625.40811.410.89.018.719971124821007530755075157114.9392.711520303303792363.598HON·ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT.6.6165.5(.1)( .1155.1.6.6( .61(.4)54.7.6.6( .6)

i'KOYUKUK - DIESEL AND HYDROELECTRICGENERATION WITH NON-ELECTRIC BENEFITI ;~50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)r 1I~AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year20004300AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to20364940.7Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 200053.2Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth .Benefits from2001 to 2036-7.2ou56 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 4300 + 4940.7 = 9240.756 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 53.2 + -7.2 = 46.0Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.1 Assumes hydroelectric project is operable beginning 1986.; i..r-:I :APA 20/S11

IJJJJENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR RUSSIAN MISSIONDIESEL GENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990DEMAND -- KW 69 72 77 83 88 95 102 109 116 123ENERGY -- _ 273 284 305 326 347 375 402 430 458 486EXISTING YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125UNIT .2 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75UNIT .3 ,75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75i UNIT .4 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15I:IJ~IUIUADDITIONAL YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90UNIT .2 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90UNIT .3 100 100..;DIESEL INVESTMENT )(1000) 57 72 90DIESEL EQUIY AN COST )(11000) 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 10 10GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 32,105 33,398 35.868 38.338 40.907 44.100 47.275 50.568 53.861 57.154COST PER GALLON 1.71 1.77 1.83 1.90 1.96 2.03 2.10 2.18 2.25 2.33DIESEL FUEL COST )(1000) 60 65 72 80 88 98 109 121 133 146DIESEL a.M COST )(1000) 22 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 23ANNUAl. COSTS X C1 000) 82 92 99 107 115 126 137 149 166 179PRES WORTH AN COST )(11000) 82 89 93 98 102 109 115 121 131 137ACCUM PRES WORTH X(1000) 82 171 264 362 464 573 688 809 940 1.077MOM-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATE)(TRA COST1. tNVESTI1ENT Xl1OO0) 40.545.02. EQUIY AN COST X(looo) 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 5.7 5.73. MAINTENANCE COST )( (1000) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.1 2.1TOTAl. EXTRA COST X(10OO) 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 7.8 7.8BENEFIT lHEATING)r', 1. OAU.ONS DIESEL SAVED 4.519 5.061 5.631 6.350 7.091 7.889 8.725 9.602! ~ z. DOLLAR VALUE SAYING X (1000) 9.1 10.6 12.1 14.1 16.4 18.9 21.5 24.5W NET BENEFIT X(10OO) 5.4 6.9 8.4 10.4 12.7 15.2 13.7 16.7PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(looo) 5.1 6.3 7.5 9.0 10.6 12.4 10.8 12.8I ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT )(11000) 5.1 11.4 18.9 27.9 38.5 50.9 61.7 74.51991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000JDEMAND KW 133 142 152 161 171 181 190 200 209 219IENERGY - _ 533 590 627 615 722 769 816 863 911 958IIIW~WJJEXISTING YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -UNIT .1KWEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES - KWUNIT .1 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125UNIT .2 15 15 75 75 75 75 75 7!5 75 75UNIT .3 75 75 15 15 75 15 15 75 75 7!5UNIT .. 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15ADDITIONAL YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .29090909090909090909090909090909090909090UNIT .3 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100DIESEL INVESTI1ENT X(1OOO)DIESEL EQUIY AN COST Xl1OO0) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 62.681 68.208 73.735 79.380 84.907 90.434 95.962 101.489 107.134 112.661COST PER GALLON 2.41 2.50 2.58 2.67 2.77 2.86 2.97 3.07 3.18 3.29DIESEL FUEL COST Xl1OOO) 166 188 209 233 259 285 314 343 375 408DIESEL 0IcfI COST X!1 000) 24 24 24 25 25 25 26 26 26 27ANNUAl. COSTS X ( 1000) 200 222 243 268 294 320 350 379 411 445PRES WORTH AN COST Xl1ooo) 149 160 170 183 194 205 218 229 241 254ACCUI1 PRES WORTH X 11000) 1.226 1.386 1.556 1.739 1.933 2.138 2.3'56 2.585 2.826 3.090NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT,I~EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X (1000)2. EQUIV AN COST XI 1000) 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.73. MAl NTENANCE COST X ( 1000) 2.1 2.\ 2.1 2.1 2.1 Z .. l 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1TOTAl. EXTRA COST X (1000) 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8JBENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 10.718 12.073 13.494 15.003 16.557 18.177 19.864 21.617 23.462 25.3492. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING XI 1000) 28.4 33.3 38.2 44.0 50.5 57.3 65.0 73.1 82.1 91.8'lNET BENEFIT X ( 1000) 20.6 25.5 30.4 36.2 42.7 49.5 57.2 65.3 74.3 84.0PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOO0) 15.3 18.4 21.3 24.7 28.2 31.8 35.6 39.5 43.7 47.9ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X110oo) 89.8 108.2 129.5 1'54.2 182.4 214.2 249.8 289.3 333.0 380.9~J

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR RUSSIAN MISSIONDIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATIONI'DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 1111981692731982722S419837730:5198483326as34719869:53751913710240210943019891164581990123486fI I~EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 111UNIT 112UNIT 113UNIT 11412:5757!51!512575751512575751512!5757515125757515125757515ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIIUNIT 112UNIT 11390909090909090909090909090909090902:5090902:50DIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(I000!GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST'X(1000)DIESEL O&M COST X(IOOO)!5732,1051. 71602272!533,3981.77652253:5.8681.837222538.3381.908022!540.8071.96as22!544.1002.039823547.2752.1010923!550.5682.181212352.33'IUBINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(I000)BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE O&M COST X(1000)400279812027104120ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH X(1000)EXTRA COSTI. INVESTMENT X(I000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(I000)3. MAINTENANCE COST X(I000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOOO)8282132921391719993264107983621151024641261095731371156asNON-ELECTRl CAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT40.52.7 2.7 2.7 2.71.0 1.0 1.0 1.03.7 3.7 3.7 3.72.7 2.71.0 1.03.7 3.7149 2:50121 197809 1.006112.510.33.814.12561961.20210.33.814.1I Ii.iuBENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)4.519 5.061 5.631 6.3:509.1 10.6 12.1 14.17.091 7.88916.4 113.98.72:521.59.60224.SNET BENEFIT X (1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOO)ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(lOOO)5.45.15.16.96.311.48.47.S18.910.49.027.912.710.638.57.45.856.710.48.064.71991199219931994199:5199619971999DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWH133:533142sao15262716167517172218176919013162009632099112199:58EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SGURCES -- KW 'UNIT IIIEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 111UNIT 112UNIT 113UNIT 11412:5757:5IS12575751512:5757:51512:575751512:575751512:575751512:575751512:5757515ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 111UNIT 112UNIT 11390902:5090902:5090902:5090902:5090 9090,' 902:50 2:5090902:5090902:5090902:5090902:50DIESEL INVESTMENT X(IOOO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL O&M COST X(IOOO)2.412.502.675 52.77 2.9652.9753.0753.183.29BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE G&M COST X(1000)27114120271241202713:51202714512027 2715S 16S120 1202717S1202718:51202719612027, 206120ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(I000)ACCUM PRES WORTH X(1000)2661981.4002872011.8~2972022.0023072032.2053172032,4083272042.6123372042.8163482043.0203:582043.224EXTRA COSTI. INVESTMENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(IOoo)3. MAINTENANCE COST X(10OO)TOTAL EXTRA CGST X(IOOO)10.33.814.110.33.1314.110.33.814.110.33.814.1NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT10.33.1314.110.33.814.110.33.814.110.33.814.110.33.814.110.33.814.1BENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(I000)10.71828.412.07333.313.49438.215.00344.016.55750.518,17757.319.86465.021.61773.123.46282.125.34991.8NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)14.310.675.319.213.989.224.116.9106.129.920.4126.536.424.1150.643.227.7178.350.931.7210.059.035.7245.768.040.028:5.777.744.3330.0rliii

-ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR RUSSIAN MISSIONDIESEL AND WIND GENERATIONDEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .11981692731982722841983773051984833261985ee3471986953751987102402198810943019891164581990123486EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3UNIT .4ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3WIND GENERATION SOURCES -- KWALL WIND UNITSDIESEL INVESTMENT X(iOOO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X (1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(I000)DIESEL 0&1'1 COST X(I000)WIND EQUIP INVESTMENT XI1(00)WIND EQUIP EQUIV AN COST )(1000)WIND EQUIP 0&1'1 COST )(1000)ANNUAL COSTS )((1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST )((1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH X( 1000)125757515905732,1051.716022828282125757515909072533.3981.7765·229289171125757515909018.026239892263125757515909018.0535,9861.9075222310697360125757515909018.023114101461125757515909036.0539.3962.0388222645124107568125757515909036.0542,5712.10982345135113681125757515909036.0545.8642.181102345147120801125757515909010036.0eo1049,1572.251222345164129930125757515909010036.01052.4502.3313423451761351.065EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)3. MAINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(I000)BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL 'SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)NET BENEFIT X(I000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT )((1000)40.52.7 2.71.0 1.03.7 3.74.74.44.46.25.710.1NON-ELECTRICAl BENEFITSWASTE HEAT2.7 2.7 2.7 2.71.0 1.0 1.0 1.03.7 3.7 3.7 3.745.05.72.17.85.307 5.673 6.386 7.155 7.96311.5 12.7 14.7 17.2 19.87.86.917.09.07.824.811.09.234.013.511.045.012.09.554.55.72.17.88,81222.514.711.3-65.81991199219931994199519961997199819992000, i iI~DEMAND - KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1133533142580152627161675171722181769190816200863209911219958I'IWEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3UNIT .4ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3WIND GENERATION SOURCES -ALL WIND UNITSKW12:5757515909010036.012:5757515909010036.0125757515909010036.012:5757515909010081.012:5757515909010081.012:5757515909010081.012:5757515909010081.012:5757515909010081.012:5757515909010081.012:5757515909010081.0DIESEL INVESTMENT )(1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST )(1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL 0&1'1 COST X(I000)1057.9772.41154231063.5042.50175241069.0312.58196241068,7962.67202241074.3232.77226241079.8502.862:512:51085.3782.972792:51090.9053.073072:51096.5503.183382610102.0773.2936926WIND EQUIP INVESTMENT X(1000)WIND EQUIP EQUIV AN COST )(1000)WIND EQUIP 0&1'1 COST X(I000)4545455179797979797979ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X ( 1(00)ACCUM PRES WORTH X(I000)1961461.2112181581.3692391681.5372:521721.709276182108913021942.0853302062.2913582172.5083902292.7374212402.977;~IEXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT )(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST )(1000)3. MAINTENANCE COST )(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST )(1000)5.72.17.85.72.17.85.72.17.85.72.17.SNON-ELECTRICAl BENEFITSWASTE HEAT5.72.17.85.72.17.85.72.17.85.7 5.72.1 2.17.8 7.85.72.17.8BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)9.91426.311.24031.012.63335.913.00238.214.49344.116.05050.517.67357.819.363 21.14465.4 74.022.96783.0NET BENEFIT X (1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(I000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)18.513.879.623.216.896.428.119.7116.130.420.7136.836.324.0160.842.727.4188.250.031.2219.457.634.8254.266.238.9293.175.242.9336.0

ENERGY F'LAN COSTS FOR SHEL.DON POINT ~DIESEL. GENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984 198!5 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990DEI'IAND -- KW S4 66 69 72 7~ 81 86 92 97 103ENERGY -- I'IWH 224 261 273 2S5 298 319 341 363 38~ 407EXISTING VIL.L.AGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT elEXISTING SCHOOL. GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT el 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 .JUNIT e2 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120ADDITIONAL. VIL.L.AGE GENERATIGN SGURCES -- KWUNIT .1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100UNIT .2 7~ 7~ 7~ ~ ~ 7~ 7~ 7~ 7~UNIT e3100 100DIESEL. INVESTl'lENT X( 1000) 140 80DIESEL. EQUIV AN COST X(1000) 9 9 9 9 9 9 15 15·GAL.L.ONS DIESEL. FUEL. 26.342 30.694 " 32.1~ 33.~16 ~.04~ 37.~14 40.102 42.689 4~.276 47.863COST PER GALLON 1.70 1.76 1.82 1.89 1.~ 2.02 2.09 2.16 2.24 2.32DIESEL. FUEL. COST 1 (1000 I 49 ~9 64 70 7~ 83 92 101 112 122DIESEL. 0&" COST 1110001 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 23 23 23ANNUAL. COSTS X( 1000) 71 90 ~ 101 106 114 123 133 1~0 160 r 1PRES WGRTH AN COST X(loool 71 87 90 92 94 98 103 108 118 123ACCUI'I PRES WORTH X( 1000) 71 158 248 340 434 ~32 635 743 861 984~f IWWWItOlt- ELECTRICAL BEItEFITSWASTE HEATWEXTRA COST1. INVESTI'IENT X (1000 I 45.02. EQUIV AN COST X(lOOO) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.0 6.03. MAINTENANCE COST X(lOOO) 1.1 1. 1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 2.2 2.2TOTAL EXTRA COST XII000) 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 8.2 8.2~BENEFIT IHEATING I4.424 4,836 ~.402 6.015 6.6~ 7.~1. OAL.L.ONS DIESEL. SAVED 4.0458.0412. DOLL.AR VAL.UE SAVING X(1ooo) 8.1 9.2 10.4 12.0 13.8 1~.8 18.1 20.~UNET 9ENEF IT X!1 000) 4.0 ~.1 6.3 7.9 9.7 11.7 9.9 12.3PRES WORTH ANNUAL. BENEFIT X( 10001 3.8 4.7 5.6 6.9 8.1 9.5 7.9 9.4ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR SHELDON POINTDIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATION1981198219831984199519861987198819891990DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- I'IWH5422466261692737228'57529891319863419236397385103407EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT UUNIT 4IZ120120,.120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3100751007510075100751007510075100751007520010075200DIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000)DIESEL EClUIV AN COST,X(IOoo)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(looO)DIESEL O~M COST X(IOoo)26.3421.704922140930.6941.765922932.1051.826422933.5161.897022935.0451.957522937.5142.028322940.1022.09922292.161012392.2492.32BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE EClUIV AN COST X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE O~M COST X(IOoo)32022781162293116ANNUAL COSTS XClooO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(looO)ACCUM PRES WORTH XI 1000)717171908715895902481019234010694434114985321231036351331087432251789212301761.097EXTRA COSTI. INVESTMENT X(10OO)Z. EClUIV AN COST XIIOOO)3. MAINTENANCE COST X(loo0)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOOO)45.03.01. I4.13.01.14.1NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSHASTE HEAT3.0I. I4.13.01.14.13.01.14.13.01.14.190.09.03.412.49.03.412.4BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVEDZ. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING XllooO)4.04S 4.424 4.830 S.402 0.015 0.OS9 7.335 8.0418.1 9.2 10.4 12.0 13.8 15.8 18.1 20.5NET BENEFIT XIIOoo)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOoo)ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(IOoo)4.03.83.85.14.78.56.35.614.17.96.820.99.78.129.011.79.538.55.74.'543.08.16.249.219911993199419951996199719992000DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWH112449120492129534138577146619164704173747181789190832II\-i •~EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .312012010075200120120100752001201201007520012012010075200120120120120100 10075 75200 20012012010075200120120100752001201201007'520012012010075200, 1W, 1IUIDIESEL INVESTMENT Xll000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(looOIDIESEL ~M COST X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE EClUIV AN COST X(IOOO)BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(looO)BINARY CYCLE O~M COST XllooO)ANNUAL COSTS X(IOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST XIIOOO)ACCUM PRES WORTH XIIOOO)92.4022911162381771.27492.48221001162471781.45292.57221081162551791.63192.6022117116264ISO1.811":"9 92.75 2.8522 22126 134116 116273 281ISO ISO1.991 2.171HONfELECTRICAL BEHEFITSWAST[ HEAT92.95221431162901812.35293.0522151116298ISO2.53293.16221601163071802.71293.2722169116316ISO2.892EXTRA COSTI. INVESTMENT X(looO)2. EClUIV AN COST X(IOoo)3. MAINTENANCE COST Xll000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOoo)9.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.0 '3.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.4BENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING XI10OO19,02923.910.24128.011.49232.612.82537.014.19542.915.64849.017.13855.718.71162.820.32070.722.01S79.2NET BENEFIT XIIOoo)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOOIACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(IOOO)11.48.557.715.611.369.020.214.293.225.217.2100.430.520.2120.636.623.5144.143.327.0171.150.430.5201.658.334.323'S. 966.838.1274.0

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR SHELDON POINTDIESEL AND WIND GENERATION1981198219831984198519861987198819891990DEI'IAND -ENERGY -KWI'IWH542246626169273722857529881319863419236397385103407EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT elEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT elUNIT e2120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120120ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT elUNIT e2UNIT e3100751007510075100751007510075100751007510075WIND GENERATION SOURCES -- KWALL WIND UNITS15.030.030.057.057.057.057.057.064.5.DIESEl.. INVESTMENT X( 1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000)GALLONS DIESEl.. FUEl..COST PER GALLONDIESEl.. FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL 011

IUIIWQDuDEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT UUNIT .2ADDITIONAL YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3DIESEL INVESTMENT X(10001DIESEL EQUIY AN COST X(l000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GAU..ONDIESEL FUEL COST XIIOOO)DIESEL 0&1'1 COST X(IOOOIANNUAL COSTS X I 1000 IPRES WORTH AN COST X ( 1000 IACCUM PRES WORTH X(10001EXTRA COSTI. INVESTMENT XCl00012. EQUIY AN COST X(100013. MAINTENANCE COST X(looOITOTAL EXTRA COST X(looO)BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAYED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAYING XI10oo1NET BENEF IT X (1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(10001ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X 110001DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHr 1I I EXISTING YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KW~ UNIT .1I 1u( 1W( )I~I WwEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2ADDITIONAL YILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .3DIESEL INVESTMENT X 110001DIESEL EQUIY AN COST X(IOOO)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X/l0001DIESEL 0&1'1 COST X/I0oo)ANNUAL COSTS X(loo01PRES WORTH AN COST X(10001ACCUM PRES WORTH X ( 1000 IEXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X/I0oo)2. EQUIY AN COST X(1000)3. MAINTENANCE COST X/l000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(10001BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAYED2. DOLLAR YALUE SAYING X(10001NET BENEFIT X(10001PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X/l0001ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X/lOCO)ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR CHUATHBALUKDIESEL GENERATION198143193so, SO6010010122.6971.443621S7S7371991lOS419SOSO60100100eo549.2742.03110231381038424S.06.02.28.28.42618.810.67.949.91982S722SSO306010026.4601.4943226S631201992113461303060100100SS4.2142.1012S231331119336.02.28.29.S9622.113.910.039.91983612416010028.3421.344822706618643.0·3.01.14.13.S716.01.91.81.8199312230360100100339.1332.17141241701191.0726.02.28.210.8232S.817.612.372.2198430306010030.2231.60332219856927230306010031,9871.63382280713263.0 3.01.1 1.14.1 4.13.989 4.4147.0 8.02.9 3.92.7 3.34.3 8.01994130S43303060100100364.0922.2S139241881281.2001986742936010034.4371.716322877340119878031430SO6010036.9261. 777222NOlI· ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT199313938760100100569.0312.33177242061361.3363.01.14.1S.34.612.61996148629SOSO60100100373.9702.41196242231441.48094794803.01.14.1S.S3910.86.7S.618.219973667230SO60100100S79.0272.S02172SNON- ELECTRICAL BENEFITSHASTE HEAT247IS41.63419888S33':56010039.3961.83792210182':5623.01.14.18.26.724.9199816S71460100100383.9662.se2382S2681621.7966.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.02.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.28.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.212.113 13.461 14.868 16.3S9 17.88':530.1 34.3 39.4 44.9 30.721.914.987.126.317.4104.331.220.0124.336.722.9147.442.S2S.7173.11989913':56SO306010041.8661.908722109866483.01.14.16.78214.110.07.932.819991737'!56SOSO60100100S88.9062.672612S2911711.967199096377soSO60100119917393.01.14.17.44816.112.09.242.02000182798SO3060100100S93.8432.77286263171812.1486.0 6.02.2 2.28.2 8.219.470 21.11S57.2 64.349.028.8201.9':56. 132.0233.9

'I :~CHAUTHBALUK - DIESEL GENERATION WITH WASTE HEATr 1,~50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS .(in thousands of dollars)( 1JAccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 203621483829.4233.9677.756 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 2148 + 3829.4 = 5977.456 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 233.9 + 677.7 = 911.6Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.WDU! ,t.Jc 1i I-.l1 Assumes hydroelectric project is operable beginning 1986.r 1~APA 20/S10

~ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR CHUATHBALUKDIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATION( 1981 1982 1983 1984 198:5 1980 1987 1988 1989 1990l74 80 8:5 91 90IIIJDElmND -- KW 43 :57 01 05 09ENERGY -- I'!WH 193 22:5 241 2:57 272 293 314 335 350 377EXISTINO VILLAOE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I" EXISTINO SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I :50 50 50 50 :50 50 50 :50 50 50UNIT _2 ,:50 SO 50 SO :50 50 SO SO SO SOJ"W0JI UIIIIADDITIONAL VILLADE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00UNIT _2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100UNIT _3 200 200DIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000) 101DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(I000)GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 22,097 20,400 28,342 30.223 31.987 34,457 30,920 39,390COST PER GALLON 1.44 1.49 1.54 1.00 1.015 1.71 1.77 1.83 1.90 1.90DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 30 43 48 53 158 oS 72 79DIESEL 0.11 COST X(1000) 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 22BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X( 1000) 320BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST )(10001 22 22BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(looo) 53 50BINARY CYCLE 0.11 COST X(I0001 110 110ANNUAL. COSTS X I 1000 1 157 05 70 75 80 87 94 101 191 194PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X I 10001 57 03 00 09 71 75 79 82 151 149ACCIm PRES WORTH XI 1000) 57 120 180 2155 320 401 480 :562 713 802NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSHASTE HEATEXTRA COST90.01. INVESTMENT X(looo) 45.02. EQUIV AN COST XI 1000) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 9.0 9.0( 13. I1AINTENANCE COST Xlloool 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 3.3 3.3TOTAL EXTRA COST Xllooo) 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 12.3 12.3WBENEFIT (HEATINOII. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 3.571 3.989 4.414 4.902 5.539 0,140 0.782 7.4481 2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVINO XC 1000) 0.0 7.0 8.0 9.4 10.8 12.3 14.1 10.1NET BENEFIT X( 1000) 1.9 2.9 3.9 5.3 0.7 8.2 I.S 3.SW PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEF IT X ( 1000) 1.8 2.7 3.5 4.0 :5.0 0.7 1.4 2.9ACC\m PRES WORTH BENEFIT XI 1000) I.S 4.5 8.0 12.0 18.2 24.9 20.3 29.2U ~AND1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1990 1997 1998 1999 2000- leW 10:5 113 122 130 139 148 50 105 173 182ENERDY - I'!WH 419 401 503 5415 1587 029 072 714 750 798EXISTINO VILJ..AOE OENERATION SOURCES - KW1UNIT _IWU~J'JEX ISTINO SCHOOL. OENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I SO :50 SO :50 SO 50 :50 :50 50 :50UNIT _2 :50 50 50 :50 :50 SO :50 :50 50 :50ADDITIONAL VILJ..AOE GENERATION SOURCES - leWUNIT _I 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00UNIT _2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100UNIT _3 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200DIESEL INVESTMENT X(1ooo)DIESEL £WIV AN COST X(IOOO)GALJ..ONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALJ..ON 2.03 2.10 2.17 2.2:5 2.33 2.41 2.150 2.158 2.07 2.77DIESEL FUEL COST X(1ooo)DIESEL 0.11 COST )(1000)BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT XII000)BINARY CYCLE EQUrV AN COST 1(11000) 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X( 1000) 03 09 75 82 Be 94 101 107 113 119B I NARY CYCLE a.11 COST X (1000) 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110ANNUAL COSTS X ( 1000) 201 207 213 220 220 232 239 24:5 251 257PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X

CHAUTHBALUK - DIESEL AND BINARY CYCLEGENERATION WITH WASTE HEAT50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)r 'wWf 'WAccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2036I 'Wr 1W23503104.6194.3628.256 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 2350 + 3104.6 = 5454.656 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 194.3 + 628.2 = 822.5Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs., ,II II.j1 Assumes hydroelectric alternate is operable beginning 1986.APA 20/S9

IoI UUI;wI, ,U·. IIDEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IUNIT _2ADDITIONAL VILLAGE DENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IUNIT _2HYDROELECTRIC DENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IDIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(l000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL 0~1'1 COST X(1000)HYDROELECTRIC INVESTMENT X(1000)HYDROELECTRIC EQUIV AN COST X(1000)HYDROELECTRIC 0'1'1 COST X(l000)ANNUAL COSTS )(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000)ACCUI'1 PRES WORTH X{I000)ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR CHUATHBALUKDIESEL AND HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984 1983431936010010022.6971.443621575757572236010026.4601.49432265631206124130306010028.3421.5448227066186632376010030.2231.60332269272SO306010031.9871.65382280713261986742936010012S2.2341.71 1.77420 207.3602B6 2B630 303362906161987803146010012334028390.1.-198883335601001254.7041.83920286303452801.1811989913!!566010012157.1741.901!!S202B6303312771.4'!!!819909637730306010012159.6431.9621212B6303382741.732NQH.ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X(l000)2. EQUIV AN COST X (1000)3. I'1AINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X (1000)43.03.01.14.13.01.14.13.01.14.13.01.14.13.01.14.13.01.14.13.01.14.13.01.14.1UI , 1UI ',UIUBENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)NET BENEFIT )((1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT )((1000)DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- MWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IUNIT _2ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IUNIT _21991lOS419so306010019921134613030601003.371 3.989 4.414 333.66.0 7.0 8.01.91.81.81993122303!!SO30601002.92.74.51994130!!54!!S3030601003.93.38.01993139387SO30(4.1)(3.3)4.31996148629so306010019975667230!!SO601007341.4(2.71(2.2)(.6)199816!!S714601001.1622.4

W, \fiI I~CHUATHBALUK - DIESEL AND HYDROELECTRICGENERATION WITH NON-ELECTRIC BENEFITf\U50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)( 1I I~( iAccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual Costs, From 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 203645726281. 699.7439.756 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 4572 + 6281.6 = 10853.656 years present worth. benefits at 3% discount = 99.7 + 439.7 = 539.4Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.[1~U'·1i i~1 Assumes hydroelectric project is operable beginning 1986.r 1~APA 20/S8

III~ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR CROOKED CREEKDIESEL GENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990; 1DEI'IAND -- KW 44 :57 63 70 76 83 90 97 104 ttlENERGY - MWH 184 227 2:51 276 301 328 3:5'15 382 409 436I, ~ EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KW~UNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 11 SO SO 'SO :50 SO SO SO 'SO SO SOUNIT .2 50 SO 'SO SO SO SO 50 50 SO 50ADDITIONAL VILLAOE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60r~l UNIT .2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100UNIT .3 100 100I ~IIJDIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000) 101 80DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000) '15 '15GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 21.638 26.69'15 29.518 32.458 35.398 38.'1573 41.748 44.923 48.098 '151.274COST PER GALLON 1.4'15 1.'150 1. '15'15 1.61 1.66 1.72 1.78 1.84 1.91 1.98DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 3!S 44 SO '157 60S 73 82 91 101 112DIESEL O'M COST X(1000) 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 23 23 23ANNUAL COSTS X (1000) '156 66 72 79 87 9'15 104 114 129 140, l PAES WORTH AN COST X(1000) '156 64 68 72 77 82 87 93 102 107ACCUM PAES WORTH X ( 1000) '156 120 188 260 337 419 'S06 '1599 701 808~WIIOH-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE, HEATEXTRA COSTn1. INVESTI'IENT )( 11000) 4!s.0 4'15.02. EQUIV AN COST )(1000) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 6.0 6.03. MAINTENANCE COST X(1000) 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 2.2 2.2TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000) 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 8.2 8.2BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)3.7196.34.2847.:54.8859.0'15.'15'15'1510.'156.26212.37.00814.27.79216.48.61418.8, I~II UiNET BENEFIT X(l000) 2.2 3.4 4.9 6.4 8.2 10.1 8.2 10.6PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000) 2.1 3.1 4.4 '15.'15 6.9 8.2 6.5 8.1ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X (1000) 2.1 '15.2 9.6 1'15.1 22.0 30.2 36.7 44.81991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000UDEl'lAND - KW 119 128 136 144 1'152 160 169 177 185 194ENERGY - I'IWH 477 '1519 'i56O 601 643 684 72'15 766 808 849EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IU EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES - KWUNIT _I SO SO SO SO SO SO SO SO 50 50UNIT _2 SO SO SO 50 SO SO SO '50 SO '50ADDITIONAL VILLAOE GENERATION SOURCES - KW~ UNIT _I 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60~ UNIT _2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100UNIT _3 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100II1..WACCUPII 1.1DIESEl. INVESTI'IENT X (1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST )(1000) '15 :5 '15 5 '15 '15 '15 '15 '5 5GALLONS DIESEL FUEL '156.09'15 610034 6'5.856 70.678 7'5.617 80.438 as. 260 90.082 9'15.021 99.842COST PER GALLON 2.0'15 2.12 2.19 2.27 2.3'15 2.43 2.'151 2.60 2.69 2.79DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 126 142 U59 176 19'15 21'15 235 258 281 306DIESEL 0'" COST X(1000) 23 24 24 24 2'.'5 2'.'5 2'.'5 2'.'5 26 26ANNUAL COSTS X 11000) 1'154 171 188 20'5 22'.'5 24'15 26'15 288 312 337PAES WORTH AN COST )(1000) 11'15 124 132 140 149 1'157 16'15 174 183 192PRES WORTH XII000) 923 1.047 10179 1.319 1.468 1.62'.'5 1.790 1.964 2.147 2.3391liON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATJ: EXTRA COST1. INVESTl'lENT )( (1000)2. EQUIV AN COST )(1000) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.03. MAINTENANCE COST X(looo) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2I~JJBENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)9.'159221.510.8032'.'5.112.0'5229.113.35833.314.74538.016.16843.217.64948.619.187 20.81055.0 61.522.46468.8NET BENEFIT X (1000) 13.3 16.9 20.9 2'15.1 29.8 3'15.0 40.4 46.8 53.3 60.6PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000) 9.9 12.2 14.7 17.1 19.7 22.5 2'15.2 28.3 31.3 34.5ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X( 1000) 54.7 66.9 81.6 98.7 118.4 140.9 166.1 194.4 225.7 260.2

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR CROOKED CREEKDIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATIONI..J19tH19821983198419861987198819891990DEMAND -- KWENERGY -- I1WHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIUNIT 124418450505722763251702765050763018332890355973825050104409111436{ iW( ,I i..ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIUNIT 12UNIT 1360100601006010060100601006010060100601006010020060100200DIESEL INVESTMENT X(looo)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(lOOO)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(looo)DIESEL O&M COST X(I0001BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(I0001BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(IOOOIBINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE O~M COST X(I000)ANNUAL COSTS X(looo)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH X(looo)EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)3. MAINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000)10121.6381.4S3S2126.695I.S04422666412029,518I.S55022726818845.03.01.14.179722603.01.14.135.3981.66652238.5731.72732287 9577 82337 419NOH-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSIIASTE HEAT3.0 3.01.1 1.14.1 4.14107481.788222104875063.01.14.144.9231.849123114935993.01.14.11.91320226111619915775690.09.03.412.41.9822651162031~9129.03.412.4I' , I~u( ~I.oBENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)3.7196.34.885 S.5!549.0 10.56.26212.37.00814.27.79216.48.61418.8NET BENEFIT X ( 1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT.X(IOOO)2.22.12.13.43.15.24.9 6.44.49.65.S15.18.26.922.010.18.230.24.03.233.46.44.938.3199119921993199419951996199719981999DEMAND - KWENERGY -- I1WH119477128519136560144601H52643160684169725177766185eoe194849EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT IIUNIT 12SO505050ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -UNIT IIUNIT 12UNIT 13KW601002006010020060100200601002006010020060100200601002006010020060100200DIESEL INVESTMENT XUooo)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(I000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(I000)DIESEL ~M COST X(100012.052.122.192.272.352.432.692.79BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(1ooolBINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST )(1000)BINARY CYCLE O~M COST X(1000)227111622781162284116229011622961162210211622lOB116221151162212111622127116ANNUAL COSTS X( 1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X ( 1000)ACCUM PRES WORTH X ( 1000)2091~1.0682161~1.2242221561.3802341551.690240lS41.8442461531.997253IS32.1502591522.3022651512.453EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X(I000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(I000)3. MAINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X( 1000)9.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.4NOH-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT9.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.49.03.412.4BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X (1000)9.e9221.S10.80325.112.05229.113.35833.314,74538.016.16843.217,64948.619.18755.020,81061.522.46568.8NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X (1000 1ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X( 1000)9.16.845.112.79.234.316.711.766.020.914.280.225.616.997.130.819.8116.936.222.6139.542.625.8165.349.128.8194.1~.432.2226.3

IIIII'-l;i r ~'\'?,i ':".! "ENEROV PLAN COSTS FOR NIKOLAI~DIESEL GENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990'I DEl"lAND -- KW 151 52 154 57 60 63 67 70 73 76ENERGY -- ... WH 200 203 214 226 237 249 261 273 286 298\.JEXlSTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT el 715 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75UNIT e2 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 150 50 50UNIT e3 115 15 15 15 15 115 115 15 115 15JEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCESUNIT elKW( 1 ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES - KWi UNIT el 715 75 75 75 715I.- DIESEl. INVESTMENT X (1000) 60DIESEl. EQUIV AN COST X(1000) 4 4 4 4 4GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 23.520 23.873 215.166 26.578 27.871 29.282 30.694 32.1015 33.634 35.045'l COST PEA GALLON 1.67 1.73 1.79 1.85 1.92 1.98 2.05 2.12 2.20 2.28DIESEl. FUEL COST X(1000) 43 45 50 54 59 M 69 715 81 88DIESEL oa.... COST X (1000) 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 22jJJANNUAL COSTS XII 000) 64 66 71 76 81 90 915 101 107 114PRES WORTH AN COST X (1000) 64 64 67 70 72 78 80 82 84 87ACCUf1 PRES WORTH X ( 1000) M 128 195 265 337 415 495 1577 661 748NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSIlASTE HEATI U EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X (1000) 33.82. EQUIV AN COST XI 1000) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3I~c 1W3. I'IAINTENANCE COST XII 000) .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000) 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALl..ONS DIESEL SAVED 3.171 3.508 3.846 4.217 4.604 5.008 15.449 5.8882. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000) 6.3 7.1 8.1 9.2 10.4 11.7 13.1 14.8I , NET BENEFIT X(I0001 3.2 4.0 5.0 6.1 7.3 8.6 10.0 11.7PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000) 3.0 3.7 4.4 5.3 6.1 7.0 7.9 9.0ACC\m PRES WORTH BENEFIT XII 000) 3.0 6.7 11.1 16.4 22.5 29.15 37.4 46.4rIWJU; 1;~1991 1992 1993 1994 19915 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000DEl'IAND - KW 79 83 86 89 92 96 99 102 106 109ENEAGV - I'IWH 316 333 3151 369 386 404 422 440 458 4715EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT e1 75 715 75 75 75 75 715 715 75 75UNIT e2 50 150 150 50 150 150 50 50 50 50UNIT e3 115 15 115 115 115 15 15 15 15 15EXISTING SCHOOl. GENERATION SOURCES -UNIT elKWADDITIONAL. VILLAGE GENERATION' SOURCES - KWUNIT el 75 75 715 75 75 75 715 75 75 715DIESEL INVESTMENT X (l000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X (1000) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 37.162 39.161 410278 43.394 45.394 47.'1510 49.627 51.744 53.861 1515.860COST PEA GALLON 2.36 2.44 2.152 2.61 2.70 2.80 2.90 3.00 3.10 3.21DIESEL FUEL COST X (1000) 96 1015 114 125 1315 146 1158 171 184 197DIESEL OWl COST X(lOOO) 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23IANNUAL COSTS X ( 1000) 122 131 140 1152 162 173 185 198 211 224UPRES WORTH AN COST X (1000) 91 95 98 104 107 111 115 120 124 128ACCUI'I PRES WORTH Xll000) 839 934 1.032 1.136 10243 1.354 1.469 1.1589 1.713 1.841I IIOH-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSIlASTE HEATI ~i 1I ~EXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X (1000)2. EQUIV AN COST XI 1000) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.33. ItAINTENANCE COST X(1000) .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8TOTAL EXTRA COST XC 1000) 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1BENEFIT lHEATING)I1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 6.355 6.931 7.5154 8.201 8.852 9.1550 10.273 11.021 11.796 12.5692. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000) 16.4 18.6 20.9 23.6 26.3 29.3 32.7 36.4 40.3 44.3NET BENEF IT X (l000) 13.3 115.5 17.8 20.5 23.2 26.2 29.6 33.3 37.2 41.2JPRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000) 9.9 11.2 12.5 14.0 15.3 16.8 18.4 20.1 21.9 23.5ACCU ... PRES WORTH BENEFIT 'XI 1000) 56.3 67.5 80.0 94.0 109.3 126.1 144.5 164.6 186;5 210.0II J- 1~

..ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR NIKOLAI \DIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984 198'S 1986 ·1987 19ee 1989 1990-I':57 60 63 67 70 73 76DEI1AND -- KW :51 :52 :54iENERGY -- MWH 200 203 214 226 237 249 261 273 286 298 IEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 7:5 7:5 7S 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5UNIT .2 !SO 50 50 :50 !SO :50 50 :50 :50 50( ,UNIT .3 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .17S 7:5 7S 7:5 7S12S 12SUNIT *2r\DIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000) 60DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(I000) 4 4 4 4 4GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 23.:520 23.873 2S.166 26.578 27.871 29.282 30.694 32.1015COST PER GALLON 1.67 1.73 1.79 1.815 1.92 1.98 2. os 2.12 .2.20 2.28DIESEL FUEL COST X(IOOO) 43 4S 80 84 89 64 69 7SDIESEL O&M COST X(I000) 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 22I\.JiBINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(IOOO)200BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO) 13 13!BI NARY CYCLE FUEL COST X (1000)61 64BINARY CYCLE 0&11 COST X(I000)110 110~ANNUAL COSTS XII 000) 64 66 71 76 81 90iOI lee 191PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X 11 000) 64 64 67 70 72 78 " 80 82 148 146ACCUM PRES WORTH X(1000) 64 128 1" 26S 337 41S 49:5 sn 72S 871iNON-ELECTRICAL BEIIEF"lTS ...WASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVESTMENT X 11 000 ) 33.8l56.2!2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 6.1 6.1 ':3. I1AINTENANCE COST X(1000) .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 2.2 2.2TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000) 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 8.3 8.3BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 3.171 3.eoe 3.846 4.217 4.604 S.OOS :5.449 !5.eee2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(looo) 6.3 7.1 8.1 9.2 10.4 11.7 13. I 14.8NET BENEFIT X (1000) 3.2 4.0 S.O 6.1 7.3 8.6 4.8 6.:5 ~PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT Xllooo) 3.0 3.7 4.4 :5.3 6.1 7.0 3.8 S.OACCUl1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X( 1000) 3.0 6.7 ll.1 16.4 22.8 29.S 33.3 38.31991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 r:DEI1AND -- KW 79 83 86 S9 92 96 99 102 106 109.JENERGY -- I1WH 316' 333 3:51 369 386 404 422 440 4!5S 47SEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT *1 7S 7s 7:5 7S 7S 7:5 7S 7S 7S 7sUNIT .2 eo eo eo !SO eo 50 50 :50 50 :50UNIT .3 IS IS IS 1:5 IS IS 1:5 1:5 IS ISEX ISTlNG SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KW ~UNIT .1 7S 7:5 7S 7S 7:5 7S 7S 7S 7:5 7SUNIT !12 12S 12S 12S 12S I~ 12S 12S 12S 12S 12SDIESEL INVESTI1ENT X(looo)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(looo) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4GALLONS DIESEL FUEL~COST PER GALLON 2.36 2.44 2.s2 2.61 2.70 2.80 2.90 3.00 3.10 3.21..DIESEL FUEL COST X(IOOO)DIESEL 0&11 COST X(IOOO)r ;BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT XIIOOO) I !BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO) 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(1000) 68 71 7S 79 83 S7 91 94 98 102BINARY CYCLE 0&11 COST X(looo) llO llO llO llO llO llO llO llO 110 110ANNUAL COSTS X« 1000) I" 198 202 206 210 214 218 221 22S 229PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST XIlOOO) 14s 143 142 140 139 137 136 134 132 131ACCUI1 PRES WORTH X(1000) 1.016 1.189 1.301 1.441 1.880 1.717 1.8s3 10987 2.119 2.2S0EXTRA COSTNON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATr ;1. INVESTMENT X(I000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(looo) 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 ~3. I1AINTENANCE COST X(looo) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOOO) 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3rBENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 6.3:5:5 6.931 7.8s4 8.202 8.8:52 9.:550 10.273 110021 11.796 12.l5692. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X (1000) 16.4 18.6 20.9 23.6 26.3 29.3 32.7 36.4 40.3 44.3 WNET BENEFIT X(1000) 8.1 10.3 12.6 IS.3 18.0 21.0 24.4 28.1 32.0 36.0PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOO) 6.0 7.4 8.8 10.4 11.9 13.s 1:5.2 17.0 18.8 20.SACCUl1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(I000) 44.3 51.7 60.5 70.9 82.8 96.3 111.:5 128.s 147.3 167.8WW~rU( ;~Wr~i~

IWJ0t-:" " 'tiENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR RED DEVILDIESEL GENERATION1991 1~82 1~83 1~84 1~85 1~86 1~87 1998 1~8~ 1~~0DEI'IAND -- leW 32 40 41 42 43 44 46 47 4~ 50ENERGY -- MWH 132 156 160 164 lb8 174 180 186 1~2 1~8EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT _IEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES, -- KWUNIT _I 50 !!IO 50 50 50 50 !!IO 50 50 50UNIT _2 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78IC--, UNIT _2 !!IO 50 50 50 50 50 !!IO 50 50IUNIT _3~I..COST PER GALLON 1.46 1. !!II 1.56 1.62 1.67 1.73 1. 7~ 1.86 1.~2 1.~~in DIESEL FUEL COST X(looo) 2'5 30 32 34 36 ~ 42 45 48 51DIESEL OLM COST X(1000) 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21IADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I 75 75 7!!1 75 75 75 75 75 75OIESEL INVESTMENT X(looO) 100DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(10OO) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 15.!!I23 18.346 18.81b 1~.286 1~.7!!17 20.462 21.168 21,874 22.!!I7~ 23.285ANNUAL COSTS XC 1000) 46 58 60 62 64 67 70 73 76 79PRES WORTH AN COST X (1000) 46 56 57 57 57 !!I8 5~ 5~ 60 61ACCUM PRES WORTH X(1000) 46 102 15~ 216 273 331 3~ 44~ !!I09 570'l,~I'l~W-NON-ElECTRICAL BENEfITSHASTE HEATEXTRA COSTI. INVESTMENT X(10OO) 33.82. EQUIV AN COST X(1000) 2.3 2.3 2.3 ·2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 :i. 33. MAINTENANCE COST X(IOOO) .8 .8 .8 .8- .8 .8 .8 .8TOTAL EXTRA COST X(10oo) 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1BENEFIT (HEATING)r 1 1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 2.371 2.546 2.726 2.947 3.17!!1 3.412 3.6:58 3,9122. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X (1000) 4.0 4.:5 5.0 :5.6 6.3 7.0 7.8 8.6i U NET BENEFIT X(IOOO) .9 1.4 1.9 2.5 3.2 3.9 4.7 5.5PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(10OO) .8 1.3 1.7 2.2 2.7 3.2 3.7. 4.2ACCUI'1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X( 10001 .8 2.1 3.8 6.0 8.7 11.9 15.6 19.8I( 1 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 1999 2000iWIr 1Wr rUUDEMAND - KW 53 55 58 60 63 66 68 71 73 76ENERGY - I'IWH 211 22S 238 252 265 279 292 306 319 333EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT _IEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES - KWUNIT _I 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 !!IO 50UNIT .2 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT .1 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75UNIT .2 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50UNIT .3 75DIESEL INVESTMENT X (1000) 60DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(looo) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 11I GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 24.814 26.460 27.989 29,635 31.164 32.810 34.339 35.996 37,514 39.161COST PER OAL1.ON 2.06 2.13 2.20 2.28 2.36 2.45 2.53 2.62 2.71 2.81IDI ESEL FUEL COST X ( 1000 ) 56 62 6S 74 81 8S 96 104 112 121DIESEL OLM COST X(loo0) 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22:l ANNUAL COSTS X(IOO01 84 91 97 103 110 117 125 133 141 154PRES WORTH AN COST X(10OO)~63 66 68 70 73 75 78 80 83 eeACCUI'1 PRES WORTH X( 10001 633 699 767 837 910 98!!1 1.063 1.143 1.226 1,314, 1I ~IIJEXTRA:UrII0In~NON· ELECTRICAL BENEFITSHASTE HEATCOST1. INVESTMENT X(10001 33.S2. EQUIV AN COST X(1OO0) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 4.53. I'IA I NTENANCE COST X (1000) .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .S .8 .8 1.7TOTAL EXTRA COST X(loool 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 6.2BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 4.243 4.683 5.122 5.601 6.077 6.595 7.108 7.66!!1 8.216 8.8112. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(IOoo) 9.6 11.0 12.4 14.0 15.8 17.7 19.9 22.2 24.5 27.2NET BENEFIT X (1000) 6.5 7.9 9.3 10.9 12.7 14.6 16.8 19.1 21.4 21.0PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEF IT X (1000) 4.8 5.7 6.5 7.4 S.4 9.4 10.5 11.6 12.6 12.0ACCUM PRES WORTH BENEFIT X( 10001 24.6 30.3 36.S 44.2 52.6 62.0 72.5 84.1 96.7 108.7

GEI'IAND -- KWENERGY -- I'IWHENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR REO DEVILDIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATION19813213219824015619S34116019S44216419854316S19S64417419S7461801988471S619S949192199050198; lrI.JEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING'SCHooL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .250785078507S507S5078507S507S507850785078ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .375507550755075SO7550755075501007550100DIESEL INVESTI'IENT X(I000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(I000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(IOoo)DIESEL 0'1'1 COST X(loo0)BINARY CYCLE 'I NVESTI'IENT XII000JBINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST Xll000JBINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(IOO0)BINARY CYCLE 0'1'1 COST X(IOOO)ANNUAL COSTS XIIOoo)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(I0001ACCUI'I PRES WORTH X(looO)15.5231.462521464646100718.3461.5130215856102718.8161.5632216057159719.2S61.6234216257216719.7571.6736216457273720.4621.7339216758331721.16S1.794221705'9390721.S74I.S64521735'944971.92160112910815512257171.991130lOS156120691NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVESTI'IENT X(looOI2. EQUIV AN COST X(10oo13. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(10oo1TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOOOI33.82.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3.B .B ,S .8 .83.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3,145.02.3 5.5 5.5.8 1.'9 1.93.1 7.4 7.4BENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(10001NET BENEFIT X(IOOOIPRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(looO)199119922.371 2.546 2.726 2.947 3.1754.0 4.5 5.0 5.6 6.3.'9.8.819931.41.32.119941.91.73.B19952.52.26.019963.22.7S.719973.412 3.658 3.9127.0 7.8 8.63.93.211.91998.4.312.219991.2.913.12000DEI'IAND -- KWENERGY -- I'IWH53211552~SS23S60~2632656627968292713067331976333EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWIJNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .25078507S507B507B507850785078507BSO78507SADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2UNIT .375501007S5010075SO1007550100755010075501007550100755010075SO100DIESEL INVESTI'IENT X(loo01DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(looO)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X ( 1000)DIESEL 0'1'1 COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE INVESTI'IENT X(I000)BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)'BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(IOO0)BINARY CYCLE 0'" COST X(IOoo)7113210872.13113410872.20113610872.2811,381082.367,.114010872.45114210872.53114410872.62114610872.71114810860112.811150lOS{Il.JANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X ( 1000)ACCU" PRES WORTH X(1000)1581188091601169251621141.0391641121.1511661101.2611681081.36'91701061.4751721041.5791741021.6811801031.784liON-ELECTRICAL BEIIEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVESTI'IENT X(IOOO)2. EQUIV AN COST ~(1000)3. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(10oo)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(10OO)5;51.97.45.51.'97.45.51.97.45.51.97.45.51.97.45.51.97.45.51. '97.45.51.97.45.51.97.45.51.97.4BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(looO)4.2439.64.68311.05.12212.45.60114.06.07715.86.59517.77.10819.'97.66522.28.21624.58.81127.2NET BENEFIT X(IOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOO)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)2.21.614.73.62.617.35.03.520.S6.64.525.3S.45.630.910.36.637.512.57.S45.314.89.054.317.110.064.319.811.375.6

I'I~'(lENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR SLEETMUTEDIESEL GENERATIONI 1981 1982 1983 1984 198~ 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990Ir~l~DEPIAND - KW 42 ~1 :53 :5~ ~7 60 63 67 70 73ENERGY - I'IWH 17:5 200 208 216 224 236 248 261 274 286EXISTING VILLAGE OENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1r 1EXlSTINO SCHOOL OENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 :50 :50 :50 :50 50 :50 :50 30 :50 :50W UNIT .2 :50 :50 :50 :50 :50 :50 :50 30 :50 :50rADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES - KWr~1 UNIT .1 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60UNIT .2 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5 7:5IUNIT .3I..JJJDIESEL INVESTI1ENT X (1000) B:5DIESEL EQUIV AN COST )((1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 20.:580 23. :520 24.461 2:5.402 26.342 27.7:54 29.16:5 30.694 32.222 33.634COST PER GALLON 1.46 1. :51 1. :56 1.62 1.67 1.73 1.79 1.86 1.92 1.99DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 33 39 42 4:5 48 :53 :57 63 68 74DIESEL 0&1'1 COST )(1000) 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 22ANNUAl.. COSTS )( (1000) :54 60 63 67 70 7:5 79 B:5 90 96PRES WORTH AN COST X(loool :54 158 :59 61 62 65 66 69 71 74ACCUI'I PRES WORTH )(10001 :54 112 171 232 294 359 42:5 494 :56:5 639IW:--1\J; )~(1NON-ElECTRICAL BENEFITSIfASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVESTI1ENT X(1oool 33.82. EQUIV AN COST X (1000) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.33. PlAINTENANCE COST X ( 1000) .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8TOTAL EXTRA COST X(10001 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEl.. SAVED 3.0l!I2 3.3:53 3.63:5 3.997 4.37:5 4.788 5.220 5.6512. DOLLAR VALUE SAVINO X(1oool :5.3 5.9 6.6 7.6 8.6 9.8 11.0 12.4NET BENEFIT XI 10001 2.2- 2.8 3.5 4.5 :5.5 6.7 7.9 9.3PRES WORTH ANNUAl.. BENEFIT X(1oool 2.1 2.6 3.1 3.9 4.6 :5.4 6.2 7.1ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X( 1000) 2.1 4.7 7.8 11.7 16.3 21.7 27.9 35.01991 1992~1993 1994 199:5 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000DEl'lAND - KW 78 83 89 94 99 104 109 11:5 120 12:5ENERGY - I1WH 312 338 365 391 417 443 470 496 :522 548IEXISTINO VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES - KWlei UNIT '1I EXISTINO SCHOOL. GENERATION SOURCES - KWUNIT .1 :50 :50 :50 50 :50 :50 :50 :50 :50 30UNIT 12 :50 :50 :50 :50 :50 50 :50 :50 :50 :50i Ii..l ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT '1 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60UNIT 12 7:5 75 7!!l 7:5 7:5 7\5 7:5 7:5 7!!l 7:5UNIT .3, 1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100DIESEL INVE$TI1ENT X(IOOOIeoU DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1OOO) !!l :5 !!l :5 :5 :5 :5 \5 :5 :5GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 36.691 39,749 42.924 4:5,982 49.039 :52.097 :5:5.272 38.330 61.387 64.445COST PER GALLON 2.06 2.13 2.20 2.28 2.36 2.4\5 2.53 2.62 2.71 2.81DIESEL FUEL COST X(IOOO). 1as 93 104 11:5 127 140 1:54 168 183 199DIESEL 0&1'1 COST X(1oool 22 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 24 24I'~I JIIrIJ EXTRAQ0NET1~ANNUAL COSTS X(1000) 110 120 132 143 1!!l:5 168 182 196 212 228PRES WORTH AN COST X (1000) 82 87 93 97 102 108 113 119 12:5 130,ACCUI'I PRES WORTH X ( 1000) 721 eo8 901 998 1.100 1.208 1.321 10440 I. !56!!l 1.69:5NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATCOST1. INVESTMENT X(1000) 4:5.02. EQUIV AN COST X(looo) 5.3 !!l.3 !!l.3 !!l.3 !!l.3 3.3 !!l.3 3.3 :5.3 3.33. PlAINTENANCE COST X (1000) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0TOTAL EXTRA COST X

ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR SLEE~UTEDIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATIONDE"'AND -- KWENERGY -- "'WHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .119814217S1982SI20019835320819841985S722460236198763248198867261198970274199073286(WEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2soSOSOSOSOSOsoSOSOSOSOSO50SOSOSO50SOSOSOADDITIONAL VILLAOE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IUNIT _2UNIT .3607S6075607S607S6075,ISO6075ISODIESEL INVES~ENT X(1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(I000)DIESEL OL'" COST X(I000)BINARY CYCLE INVEST"'ENT X(IOOO)BINARY CYCL.E EQUIV AN COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE FUEL. COST Xllooo)BINARY CYCL.E aL'" COST X(1000)ANNUAL. COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000)AeCU'" PRES WORTH X (1000)EXTRA COST1. INVES~ENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)3. "'AINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL. EXTRA COST X(lOOO)2O.~01.463321S4545423.5201.513921605811224.4611.56422163S917133.82.3.83.125.4021.624S22676123226.3421.67482227.7S41.73532229.16S1.79S72270 75 79622946S35966425NQll..ELECTRICAL BENEFITSlIASTE HEAT2.3 2.3 2.3.8 .8 .83.1 3.1 3.12.3.83.130.6941.8663228!5694942.3.83.1240164111216913362767.S6.82.59.316431121711317586.82.59.3f 1~..IBENEFIT (HEATING)1. GAL.LONS DIESEL. SAVED2. DOLL.AR VALUE SAVING X( 1000)NET BENEFIT XllOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT XIlOOO)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)3.0825.32.22.12.13.353 3.635 3.9977.6!5.9 6.62.8 3.!5 4.52.6 3.1 3.94.7 7.8 11.74.3758.65.54.616.34.7889.86.75.421.7!5.22011.01.71.323.03.12.425.4r '~199119921994199!519961997199819992000OEI'IAND -- KWENERGY -- "'WH78312833389439199417104443109470liS496120S22125M8EXISTING VIL.L.AOE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL. GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UNIT .2SO50SOSOso!50SOSOSO SOSO !50SOSOSOSOSOSO50SOADDITIONAL VIL.L.AG"E GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IUNIT .2UNIT .3DIESEL. INVEST~NT Xllooo)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST Xll000)GALL.ONS DIESEL. FUEL.COST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL. COST Xll000)DIESEL aL'" COST XI 1000)BINARY CYCLE INVEST~NT Xll000)BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST Xll000)BINARY CYCLE FUEL. COST X( 1000)BINARY CYCL.E aL'" COST X(lOOO)ANNUAL. COSTS XI 1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000)ACCU'" PRES WORTH X ( 1000 )EXTRA COST1. INVES~ENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(I000)3. "'AINTENANCE COST X( 1000)TOTAL. EXTRA COST Xllooo)BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL. SAVED2. DOL.L.AR VAL.UE SAVING X(I000)6075ISO2.06164711217513088S6.82.59.36.27414.2607!5ISO2.1316511121791291.0176.82.!59.37.03616.5607SISO2.2016551121831281.1456.82.S9.37.8!5!519.060751502.2816581121861271.2726.82.59.38.69121.760 6075 75ISO " ISO2.36 2.4516621666112 1121901261941251.398 1.5236075ISO2.531670112IIOII-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT6.82.59.39.56324.86.82.59.310.47128.16.82.59.311.44131.9607!5ISO2.6216741122021221.7696.82.59.312.42435.86075ISO2.711678112206121108896.82.59.313.44440.16075ISO2.8116821122101202.0096.82.59.314.50044.8..{ \! I{Il.J,I 'II.Jr 1~r \NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEF IT X (1000)ACCU", PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(I000)4.93.629.07.25.234.29.76.841.012.48.449.415.510.259.618.812.171.722.614.185.826.!516.0101.830.818.1119.935.520.2140.1

ENERGY0I0000,." Wif,,"~' r,PLAN COSTS FOR STONY RIVERDIESEL GENERATION1991 1992 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990l'lEI1AND -- KW 3'!1 42 43 45 46 47 49 50 32 33; ENERGY -- PlWH 146 165 170 175 179 185 191 197 203 209IUIIIIIiIIIUEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _IEXISTING SCHOOl. GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I 50 50 50 50 50 30 50 50 50 50UNIT _2 .. 50 50 30 50 50 50 50 50 SO 30ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60UNIT _2 73 73 'i'5 73 73 75 73 'i'5 75 75DIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000) 85DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X 11000)GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 17.170 19.404 19.992 20.580 21.050 21.756 22.462 23.167 23.873 24.578COST PER GALLON 1.47 1.32 1.37 1.63 1.69 1.73 1.81 1.87 1.94 2.00DIESEl. FUEL COST. X(I000) 28 32 3'!1 37 39 42 45 48 31 34DIESEl. 0&" COST X(IOOO) 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21ANNUAL COSTS X (1000) 49 33 36 sa 60 63 66 69 72 'i'5PRES WORTH AN COST X(looo) 49 51 33 53 33 54 53 56 37 57ACCUI'f PRES WORTH X ( 1000) 49 100 153 206 259 313 368 424 481 538NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATr~lEXTl'IA COST1. INVESTI'IENT X ( 1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X( 1000)33.82.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.33. I'IAINTENANCE COST X ( 1000) .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8TOTAL EXTl'IA COST X( 1000) 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1~eENEFIT (HEATING)1. OALLONS DIESEL SAVED 2.519 2.717 2.905 3.133 3.369 3.614 3.867 4.1292. OOLI.AR VALUE SAVING Xllooo) 4.4 4.9 !S.4. 6.0 6.8 7.5 8.3 9.1~ lNET eENEFIT X 11000) 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.9 3.7 4.4 5.2 6.0W PRES WORTH ANNUAL eENEFIT X(1OOO) 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.5 3.1 3.6 4.1 4.6ACCUI'f PRES WORTH BENEFIT Xl1OOO) 1.2 2.8 4.8 7.3 10.4 14.0 18.1 22.71 1991 1992 1993 1994 1993 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000~ DEttAND -- KW 56 39 62 65 68 71 74 77 80 83ENERGY -- I1WH 224 240 253 270 285 300 316 331 346 362, EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1UrU1EXJSTtNG SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I 50 30 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 30UNIT _2 50 50 50 50 50 30 50 50 SO 50ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60UNIT _2 73 'i'5 'i'5 75 73 'i'5 73 73 'i'5 75DIESEL INVESTMENT X(looo)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST Xllooo)~IOALLONS DIESEl.. FUEL 26.342 28.224 29.998 31.732 33.516 3'!I.280 37.162 38.926 40.690 42.571COST PER GALLON 2.07 2.13 2.22 2.30 2.38 2.46 2.35 2.64U2.73 2.83DIESEL FUEL COST X(IOOO) 60 67 73 80 88 95 104 113 122 133DIESEL 0lcP1 COST XllOOO) 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 23UJ1 ANNUAL COSTS Xllooo) 82 89 95 102 110 117 126 13'!1 144 156PRES WORTH AN COST XII 000) 61 64 67 69 73 'i'5 79 82 85 89ACCUI'f PRES WORTH Xl1OOO) 599 663 730 799 8n 947 1.026 1.108 1.193 1.282r 1NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTl'IA COSTI. INVESTMENT X(IOOO)~2. EQUIV AN COST X( 1000) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.33. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(1OOO) .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 .8TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1OOO) 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1~BENEFIT (HEATING)I 1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 4.504 4.996 5.488 6.001 6.536 7.091 7.693 8.291 8.911 9.5782. DOU.AR VALUE SAVING X(IOOO) 10.3 11.9 13.4 13.1 17.2 19.1 21.5 24.1 26.7 29.9II0, ,IJ IINET BENEFIT X (1000) 7.2 8.8 10.3 12.0 14.1 16.0 18.4 21.0 23.6 26.8PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT Xl1OOO) 3.4 6.4 7.2 8.2 9.3 10.3 11.3 12.7 13.9 15.3ACtUt PRES WORTH BENEFIT XOOOO) 28.1 34.5 41.7 49.9 59.2 69.5 81.0 93.7 107.6 122.9

DEI'IAND -- KWENERGY -- I'IWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _1UNIT _2ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR STONY RIVERDIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984351465050421655050431705050451755050198546179505019864718550501987491915050198850197505019895220350501990532095050II1.1( iU( 1UADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _1UNIT _2UNIT _36075607560756075607560756075607560751006075100DIESEL INVESTI'IENT X(1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL OLI'I COST X(1000)17.170.1.47282119.4041.52322119.9921.57352120.5801.63372121.0501.69392121.7561.75422122.4621.81452123.1671.8748211.942.00BINARY CYCLE INVESTI'IENT X(1000)BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE OLI'I COST X(1000)ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH X(1000)49494953511005653153585320660532596354.3136655_368695642416011301081491185421131108150115657r iUEXTRA COST1. INVESTI'IENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)3. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000)NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT33.82.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3.8 .8 .8 .8 .83.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.12.3.83.145.05.32.07.35.32.07.3BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESE~ SAVED2. DOLLAR VAL~ SAVING X(1000)NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)2.519 2.717 2.905 3.133 3.3694.4 4.9 5.4 6.0 6.81.3 1.8 2.3 2.9 3.71.2 1.6 2.0 2.5 3.11.2 2.8 4.8 7.3 10.43.6-147.54.43.614.03.8678.31.0.814.84.1299.11.81.416.219911992199319941995 19961997199819992000DEI'IAND -- KWENERGY -- I'IWH5622459240622556527068 71285 30074316773318034683362EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _1EXISTlNG SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _1UNIT _2505050505050505050 5050 50505050505050ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _1UNIT _2UNIT _3607510060751006075100607510060 6075,. 75100 1006075100607510060751006075100DIESEL INVESTI'IENT X(1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL OLI'I COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE INVESTI'IENT X(1000)BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(1000)BINARY CYCLE OLI'I COST X(1000)2.0711341082.1511361082.221138i082.3011401082.38 2.4611 1143 45108 1082.5511471082.6411501082.7311521082.831154108, 'i I~ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH X(1000)1531147711551128831571109931591081.101162 164107 1051.208 1.3131661031.4161691021.5181711001.618173991.717EXTRA COST1. INVESTI'IENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)3. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000)5.32.07.35.32.07.35.32.07.35.32.07.3NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEAT5.32.07.35.32.07.35.32.07.35.32.07.35.32.07.35.32.07.3BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(1000)4.50510.34.99611.95.48813.46.00115.16.53617.27.09119.17.69221~58.29124.18.91126.79.57929.9NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)3.02.218.44.63.321.76.14.326.07.85.331.39.96.537.811.87.645.414.28.854.216.810.264.419.411.475.822.612.988.7I 1~u

'1,.!:I":~ ,. L~''1 ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR TAKOTNADIESEL GENERATIONl-\ 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 19901 DEI1AND -- KW 43 S3 S8 64 69 72 7S 78 81 84ENERGY -- I1WH 178 208 228 249 270 282 294 307 319 331i~EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 40 40 40 40 40 40I40 40 40 40UNIT .2 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20I: EXISTINO SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1II\00'-l~ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT _I 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 75UNIT _2 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 75DIESEL INVESTMENT XC 1000) 60 60DIESEl. EQUIV AN COST X(1000) 4 4 8 8 8 8 8 8 8GALLONS DIESEL FUEl. 20.933 24.461 26.813 29.282 31.752 33.163 34.574 36.103 37.S14 38.926COST PER GALLON 1.65 1.71 1.77 1.83 1.89 1.96 2.03 2.10 2.17 2.2SI DIESEL FUEl. COST )(1000) 38 46 S2 59 66 71 77 83 90 96DIESEL 0Ie11 COST X (1000) 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22UU'1ANNUAl.. COSTS X(1OOO) 59 71 78 89 96 101 107 113 120 126PRES WORTH AN COST X( 1000) S9 69 74 81 as 87 90 92 95 97ACCUI1 PRES WORTH XCI 000) $9 128 202 283 368 4\5\5 S45 637 732 829NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INllESTI1ENT X ( 10(0) 33.8 33.82. EQUIV AN COST XC 1000) 2.3 2.3 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.63. I1AINTENANCE COST XC 1000) .8 .8 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7I.jTOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000) 3.1 3.1 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3BENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAYED 3.86S 4.382 4.775 5.186 5.632 6.077 6.S40r 1 2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING XC 1000) 7.8 9.1 10.2 11.6 12.9 14.6 16.1I )NET BENEFIT X(IOOO) 4.7 6.0 3.9 S.3 6.6\.l8.3 9.8PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT XC 1000) 4.3 S.3 3.4 4.4 5.4 6.6 7.SACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT X( 1000) 4.3 9.6 13.0 17.4 22.8 29.4 36.9iI~iW1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000DaWlD - KW 88 92 96 100 104 109 113 117 121 12SENERGY -- I'IWH 3S3 374 396 418 429 461 483 S04 \526 548EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT _I 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40UNIT .2 20' 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20EXISTING SCHOOl.. GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT .1IADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES - KWU UNIT .1 7S 75 7S 7S 7S 7S 75 7S 7S 7\5UNIT _2 7S 7S 7S 7S 75 7S 75 75 75 75DIESEL INllESTI1ENT X(1ooo)f I DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1OOO) 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8GALLONS DIESEL FUEl. 41.513 43.982 46.570 49.157 SO. 450 S4.214 56.801 S9.270 61.SS8 64.445~ COST PER GALLON 2.33 2.41 2.49 2.SS 2.67, 2.76 2.86 2.96 3.06 3.17DIESEl. FUEl. COST X(looo) 106 117 128 140 148 165 179 193 208 22SII IESEL 0Id'1 COST X ( 1000) 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 24 24 24'1 ANNUAL COSTS XC 1000) 136 148 IS9 171 179 196 210 22S 240 2S7PRES' WORTH AN COST X (1000) 101 107 112 116 118 126 131 136 141 147~ ACCUI1 PRES WORTH X ( 1000) 930 1.037 1.149 1.265 1.383 1.509 1.640 1.776 1.917 2.064I[1II1IIJW0JNON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INllESTI1ENT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.63. MAINTENANCE COST X(1OOO) 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7TOTAL EXTRA COST X(1OOO) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEl. SAYED 7.099 7.785 8.S22 9.291 9.838 10.897 11.758 12.625 13.S47 14.\5002. DOLLAR VALUE SAYING X( 1000) 18.1 20.7 23.4 26.5 28.9 33.2 37.1 41.1 4S.6 50.6NET BENEF IT X (1000 ) 11.8 14.4 17.1 20.2 22.6 26.9 30.8 34.8 39.3 44.3PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEF IT X (1000) 8.8 10.4 12.0 13.8 14.9 17.3 19.2 21.1 23.1 25.3ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT XllOOO) 4S.7 56.1 68.1 81.9 96.8 114.1 133.3 154.4 177.5 202.8

(

IIII,~00EXISTINGUJENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR TAKOTNADIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE OENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984 198~ 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990DEI'IAND -- KW 43 ~3 ~8 64 69 72 7S 78 81 84ENERGY -- I'IWH 178 208 228 249 270 282 294 307 319 331EXISTING IIILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40UNIT .2 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1ADDITIONAL IIILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 7!5 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7SUNIT .2 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7S 7~UNIT .3 ISO ISODIESEL INIIESTI'IENT X(1000) 60 60DIESEL EQUIII AN COST X(1000) 4 4 8 8 8 8 8 8 8GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 20.933 24.461 26.813 29.282 31.7!52 33.163 34.~74 36.103COST PER GALLON1.6S 1.71 1.77 1.83 i.89 1.96 2.03 2.10 2.17 2.2!5DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 38 46 S2 S9 66 71 77 83DIESEL 0'1'1 COST X(1000) 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 22IBINARY CYCLE INIIESTI'IENT X(1000) 240BINARY CYCLE EQUIII AN COST X(1000) 16 16i BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(1000) 48 SOBINARY CYCLE 0'1'1 COST X(1000) 112 112I,IIWl.J0UANNUAL COSTS X(looo) S9 71 78 89 96 101 107 113 184 186PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000) S9 69 74 81 8S 87 90 92 14S 143ACCUI'I PRES WORTH X(1000) S9 128 202 283 368 4SS !54S 637 782 92!5NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INIIESTI'IENT X(lOO0) 33.8 67.S2. EQUIII AN COST X(10OO) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 6.8 6.83. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(1000) .8 .8 .8 .8 .8 2.S 2.STOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000) 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 9.3 9.3BENEFIT (HEATING)1. OALLONS DIESEL SAilED 3.86S 4.382 4.776 S.l86 S.632 6.077 6.!5402. DOLLAR IIALUE SAIiINO xnoool 7.8 9.1 10.2 11.6 12.9 14.6 16.1NET BENEFIT X ClOoo) 4.7 6.0 7.1 8.S 9.8 S.3 6.8PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000) 4.3 S.3 6.1 7.1 8.0 4.2 S.2ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000) 4.3 9.6 lS.7 22.8 30.8 3!5.0 40.2r 11991 1992i1993 1994 199!5 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000U DEI'IAND -- KW ee 92 96 100 104 109 113 117 121 12!5ENERGY -- I'IWH 3!53 374 396 418 429 461I483 S04 S26 S48r" 1 EXISTINO IIILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40IJ UNIT .2 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20IIIIIIIIIUADDITIONAL0W0JWJUEXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES ~- KWUNIT .1IIILLAGE OENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 7S 7!5 7!5 7S 7S 7S 7!5 7S 7S 7!5UNIT .2 7!5 7S 7S 7S 7S 7!5 7S 7!5 7S 7SUNIT .3 ISO ISO ISO ISO ISO,. ISO ISO ISO ISO ISODIESEL INIIESTI'IENT X(1000)DIESEL EQUIII AN COST X(1000) 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8GALLONS DIESEL FUEL-'COST PER GALLON 2.33 2.41 2.49 2.S8 2.67 2.76 2.86 2.96 3.06 3.17DIESEL FUEL COST X(10oo)DIESEL 0'1'1 COST X(10OO)BINARY CYCLE INliESTI'IENT X(1000)BINARY CYCLE EQUIII AN COST X(1000) 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X(1000) S3 S6 S9 63 64 69 72 7S 79 82BINARY ~YCLE 0'1'1 COST X(10oo) 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112ANNUAL COSTS X(1000) 189 192 19!5 199 200 20S 208 211 21S 218PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(lOO0) 141 139 137 136 132 132 130 128 126 124ACCUI'I PRES WORTH X(1000) 1.066 1.20S 1.342 1.478 1.610 1.742 1.872 2.000 2.126 2.2!50NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INIIESTI'IENT X(1000)2. EQUIII AN COST X(1000) 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8. 6.8 6.8 6.83. I'IAINTENANCE COST X(1000) 2.S 2.S 2.S 2.S 2.S 2.S 2.S 2.S 2.S 2.STOTAL EXTRA COST X(1000) 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAilED 7.099 7.78!5 8.S22 9.291 9.838 10.897 11.7S8 12.62S 13.S47 14.S002. DOLLAR IIALUE SAIiINO X(1000) 18.1 20.7 23.4 26.S 28.9 33.2 37.1 41.1 4S.6 SO.6NET BENEFIT X(1000) 8.8 11.4 14.1 17.2 19.6 23.9 27.8 31.8 36.3 41.3PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(1000) 6.5 8.2 9.9 11.7 13.0 lS.3 17.3 19.2 21.3 23.SACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000) 46.7 S4.9 64.8 76.S 89.S 104.8 122.1 141.3 162.6 186.1

(IIt..JI \I ;~TAKOTNA - DIESEL AND BINARY CYCLEGENERATION WITH WASTE HEAT50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS' AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)r 1WAccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated presentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2036WrlIal, 1I ',W22502633.4186.1498.9r \~56 1 ~ears present worth cost at 3% discount = 2250 +2633.4 = 4883.456 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 186.1 + 498.9 = 685.0Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs., 1I I~i .'~1 Assumes hydroelectric alternate is operable beginning 1986.APA 20/56UL

flI~10II JuDEI'IAND -- KWENERGY -- I'IWHEXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411UNIT .2EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411DIESEL INVESTI'IENT X( 1000)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(I000)DIESEL 0&1'1 COST X(IOOO)ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR TAKOTNADIESEL AND HYDROELECTRIC OENERATION1991 1992 1993 1994 198543179402020.9331.65382153209402071560424.4611.71462159229402075426.9131.77522264249402075429.2921.93592269270402075431.7521.89662219967228240207524041.962019871529440201524042.032019881830140201524042.102019898131940201524042.112019908433140201524042.2520HYDROELECTRIC INVESTMENT X(IOOO)HYDROELECTRIC EQUIV AN COST X (1000)HYDROELECTRIC 0'" COST X(IOOO)- 21.513836 83630 30836308363083630ANNUAL COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH X( 1000)71691337874207857828592 89082 168367 1.1358901451.8808901242.6048901023.3068906823.988NOH-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSELECTRIC HEATEXTRA COSTI. I NVESTI'IENT X (1000 )2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOOO)5.0.6.6.6.6.6.6.6.6.6.6oBENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAIlED2. DOU..AR VALUE SAVING XI 1000)NET BENEFIT X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL SENEFlT XI 1000)ACCUI'\ PRES WORTH BENEFIT Xll000)9.39820.319.117.017.09.00220.119.516.333.38.51419.819.215.648.98.17819.518.914.963.81.18219.318.714.318.11991199219931994199519961997199819992000OEI'IAND - KWENERGY -- "WH9237496396100418104429109461113483111504121526125548EXiSTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411UNIT 4124020402040204020402040204020402040204020ui1I~,0Io\'J \IWEXISTING SCHOOL. OENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411ADDITIONAL VILLAOE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411HYDROELECTRIC OENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT 411DIESEL INVEST"ENT X(IOOO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST Xll000)GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEL FUEL COST X(1000)DIESEL 0&1'1 COST X(1000)HYDROELECTRIC INVEST~T XII000)HYDROELECTRIC EQUIV AN COST X(1000)HYDROELECTRIC 0&" COST X( 1000)ANNUAl. COSTS X(1000)PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST Xll000)ACCU" PRES WORTH Xll000)EXTRA COSTI. INVEST~NT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(looo)TOTAL EXTRA COST Xl1OOO)BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED2. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING Xll000)NET BENEFIT XllOOO)PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X( 1000)ACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000)24042.332083630S9()6624.650.6.67.05718.117.513.091.171524042.41209363089064315.293.6.66.36416.916.311.9102.971524042.4920836308906245.917.6.65.63915.414.910.4113.37152404836308906066.523.6.64.91313.913.39.1122.475240152404 42.67 2.1620 20836 83630 30890 890588 5717.111 7.682IIOII-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSELECTRIC HEAT752404836308905558.237.6 .6 .6.6 .6 .64.551 3.495 2.71013.4 10.6 8.712.88.5130.910.06.4131.38.15.0142.375240420836308905388.775.6.62.0716.86.23.9146.175240420836308905239.298.6.61.3524.64.02.4148.51524043.1720836308905079.805.6.66272.~1.6.9149.4

( \Uj ,II.JTAKOTNA - DIESEL AND HYDROELECTRICGENERATION WITH NON-ELECTRIC BENEFITI ;w50-YEAR ACCUMULATED PRESENT WORTH OFPLAN COSTS AND BENEFITS(in thousands of dollars)AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsUp to year2000AccumulatedPresent WorthAnnual CostsFrom 2001 to2036Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits upto year 2000Waste HeatRelated BenefitAccumulated PresentWorth Benefits from2001 to 2036iI~980510751.2149.419 .. 356 1 years present worth cost at 3% discount = 9805 + 10751.2 = 20556.256 years present worth benefits at 3% discount = 149.4 + 19.3 = 168.7Operation and maintenance, fuel cost, equivalent annual costs relatedto capital investment in diesel and WECS generation equipment, etc.,are included in accumulated present worth costs.u.1 Assumes hydroelectric project is operable beginning 1986. ,APA 20/S5, IuU

\I ~ ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR TELIDADIESEL GENERATIONIIIIIII \JJI 1W1981 1992 1983 1994 1985 1996 1987 1999 1999 1990DEMAND -- KW 13 15 16 16 17 19 19 21 22 23ENERGY -- MWH 53 59 60 63 65 70 76 91 96 91EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12UNIT .2 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT Itl ,. 50 50 SO SO 50 50 50 SO 50UNIT .2 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30DIESEL INVESTMENT X(IOOO) 64DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(1000) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4(l GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 6.233 6.921 7.056 7.409 7.644 9.232 9.938 9.526 10.114 10.702COST PER GALLON 2.31 2.39 2.47 2.56 2.65 2.74 2.94 2.94 3.04 3.15DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 16 19 19 21 22 25 29 31 34 37~ DIESEL O&M COST X(10OO) 20 20 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21ANNUAL COSTS X(IOOO} 36 42 43 45 46 49 53 56 59 62" PRES WORTH AN COST X ( 1000 ) 36 41 41 41 41 42 44 46 47 49ACCUM PRES WORTH X(looO} 36 77 119 159 200 242 296 332 379 427WWNOlI-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST:-11. INVESTMENT X(IOOO) 22.52. EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5.~ 3. MAINTENANCE COST X (1000) .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOoo) 2.1 2. I 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1BENEFIT CHEATING)'1 1. CoALLONS DIESEL SAVED 989 979 1.055 1.1~ 1.341 1.496 1.638 1.7982. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(looO) 2.4 2.9 3.0 3.6 4.2 4.9 5.5 6.2J.NET BENEFIT X(looo) .3 .7 .9 1.5 2.1 2.7 3.4 - 4.1PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X (1000) .3 .6 .9 1.3 1.9 2.2 2.7 3. IACCUI'I PRES WORTH BENEFIT X

~ENERGY PLAN COSTS FOR TEL IDA~DIESEL AND BINARY CYCLE GENERATION..1981 1982 1983 1984 19815 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990f II iDEMAND -- KW 13 115 16 16 17 18 19 21 22 23ENERGY -- MWH 153 15EI 60 63 615 70 76 81 eo 91EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KW , 1UNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12UNIT .2 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 150 150 :50 :50 150 :50 :50 150 150UNIT .2 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30UNIT .3 :50 150DIESEL INVESTtE:NT X(1000) 64DIESEL EQUIV AN COST XI 1000) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4GAU.ONS DIESEL FUEL 6.233 6.821 7.0156 7,409 7.644 8,232 8.938 9.1526COST PER OALLON 2.31 2.39 2.47 2.156 2.615 2.74 2.84 2.94 3.04 3.115DIESEL FUEL COST X(1000) 16 18 19 21 22 215 28 31DIESEL O .. M COST X (10001 20 20 20 20 20 20 21 21BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(1000) 80BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST X(1oool 15 5BINARY CYCLE FUEL COST X( 1000) 18 20BINARY CYCLE 08rM COST X(1000) 104 104ANNUAL. COSTS X I 1000 I 36 42 43 415 46 49 153 156 132 134 f \PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(1000) 36 41 41 41 41 42 44 46 104 103 ,ACCtm PRES WORTH Xltooo) 36 77 118 159 200 242 286 332 436 1539NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVEST..e:NT X(1000) 22.15 22.15 fl2. EQUIV AN COST Xl1OOO) 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.5 1.15 1.5 3.0 3.0W3. MAINTENANCE COST XI 1000) .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 1.2 1.2TOTAL EXTRA COST XI 1000) 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 4.2 4.2BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED ee9 978 1.01515 1.185 1,341 1.486 ' 1,638 1.7982. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING XI 1000) 2.4 2.8 3.0 3.6 4.2 4.8 15.15 6.2NET ~BENEFIT X(1000) .3 .7 .9 1.15 2.1 2.7 1.3 2.0,PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEF IT X I 1000) .3 .6 .8 1.3 1.8 2.2 1.0 1.15":ACCtm PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1OOO) .3 .9 1.7 3.0 4.8 7.0 8.0 9.5 r i1991 1992 1993 1994 19915 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000..oa.AND - KW 24 215 27 28 29 30 31 33 34 35ENEROY -- MWH 96 100 105 109 114 119 123 128 132 137EXISTING VILl..AGE GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1EXISTING SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12UNIT .2 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12ADDITIONAL VILLAGEOENERATION SOURCES -- KWUNIT .1 150 :50 50 150 150 50 50 :50 :50 50UNIT .2 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30UNIT .3 50 :50 50 50 50 :50 :50 50 50 :50DIESEL INVESTMENT X(1000)DIESEl. EQUIV AN COST Xltooo) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4GALLONS DIESEL FUELCOST PER GALLONDIESEl. FUEL COST Xllooo)3.26 3.37 3.49 3.61 3.74 3.87 4.01 4.115 4.29 4.44DIESEL ~ COST X(looo)I !BINARY CYCLE INVESTMENT X(1000) ~BINARY CYCLE EQUIV AN COST XI 1000) 5 5 5 5 15 15 15 15 15 15BINARy'CYCLE FUEL COST Xll000) 21 21 23 23 24 26 26 27 28 29BINARY CYCLE ~ COST X(1000) 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104ANNUAL COSTS X I 1000) 135 135 137 137 138 140 140 141 142 143PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X (1000 I 100 98 96 93 91 90 87 815 83 82ACCtm PRES WORTH X(1000) 639 737 833 926 1.017 1.107 10194 1.279 1.362 1.444NON-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COST1. INVEST..e:NT X(1000)2. EQUIV AN COST X(1000)3; MAINTENANCE COST XI 1000)3.01.23.01.23.01.23.01.23.01.23.01.23.01.23.01.23.01.23.01.2WTOTAL EXTRA COST X!1OOO) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2, 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2r :BENEFIT (HEATING)1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 1.931 2.082 2.260 2.423 2.614 2.813 2.994 3.200 3.400, 3,62152. D01..LAR VALUE SAVINO X(1000) 6.8 7.8 8.6 9.6 10.7 12.1 13.2 14.7 16.0 17.8NET BENEF IT X (1000) 2.6 3.6 4.4 15.4 6.15 7.9 9.0 10.15 11.8 13.6 r'\PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT XII000) 1.9 2.6 3.1 3.7 4.3 15.1 5.6 6.4 6.9 7.8ACCU,", PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(1000) 11.4 14.0 17.1 20.8 215.1 30.2 33.8 42.2 49.1 36.9; \WUDU~I~\W,I I ,11'~UI.J[ '.'\,Wr"',J..j~

I;I,,IIrIIIIIIIIIII!J ENERGYJ0PLAN COSTS FOR TELIDADIESE~ AND WIND GENERATION1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 198~ 1997 1988 1999 199013 15 1~ I~ 17 18 19 21 22 23DEI1AND -- leWENERGY -- I1WH 33 59 ~O ~3 ~3 70 7~ 91 ~ 91EXISTIND VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT *1EX ISTIND SCHOOL GENERATION SOURCES -- leW12 12UNIT *1 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12UNIT *2 ,", 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT *1Q WIND GENERATION SOU~ES ALL WIND UNITS -- leW 10.5 10.5 10.5 12.0 12.0 12 •. 0 12.0 12.0 12.0DIESEL INVESTI1ENT X(IOoo),--, DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(10oo)1 5.762 5.esO 6.350 ~.938GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 6.233 5.527 5.5277.409 7.879 8.232COST PER GALLON 2.31 2.39 2.47 2.3~ 2.65 2.74 2.94 2.94 3.04 3.15~ DIESEL FUEL COST X(10oo) 16 H5 IS 16 17 19 22 24 2~ 29DIESEL ~11 COST X(IOOO) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20JWJJWIND EQUIP INVESTI1ENT X(looO)95 14WIND EQUIP EQUIV AN COST X(IOOO) 6 ~ 6 7 7 7 7 7 7WIND EQUIP ~11 COST X(I000) IS 15 13 17 17 1'7 17 17 17ANNUAL COSTS XnOOO) 3~ S~ 5~ 57 ~1 ~3 ~~ ~9 70 73PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X(IOoo) ~ S4 S3 52 S4 54 SS 55 SS ~ACCUI1 PRES WORTH X(IOoo) 3~ 90 143 195 249 303 359 413 468 524NOlI-ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COSTI. INVESTI1ENT X(IOOO)22.52. EQUIV AN COST X(IOoo) 1.5 I.S 1.5 I.S I.S I. S 1.5 I.S3. I1AINTENANCE COST X(10oo) .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ .~TOTAL EXTRA COST X(IOoo) 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2. I 2.1BENEFIT (HEATING)911 914 10041 1.156 1.27~1. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED ~9~ 7611.3832. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(IOOO) 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.7 3.3 3.7 4.2 4.9NET BENEFIT X(IOOO) (.2) .2 .~ 1.2 1.6 2.1 2.8PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT X(IOOO) 1.2) .2 .S 1.0 1.3 1.7 2.1A~ PRES WORTH BENEFIT X(IOoo) (.2) (.2) .S I.S 2.9 4.S 6.6: 1U 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 199~ 199.,. 1998 1999 2000r 1WDEI1AND -- leW 24 2S 27 28 29 30 31 33 34 35ENERGY -- I1WH 96 100 lOS 109 114 119 123 129 132 137EXISTING VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT 411EXISTING SCHOOl. GENERATION SOURCES -- KW1 UNIT *1 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12r I UNIT *2 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12!.. ADDITIONAL VILLAGE GENERATION SOURCES -- leWUNIT *1JQJJUWIND GENERATION SOURCES -- leWALL WIND UNITS 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 lS.0DIESEL INVESTI1ENT XIIOOO)DIESEL EQUIV AN COST X(IOoo)GALLONS DIESEL FUEL 8.702 9.0SS 9.S26 9.978 10.349 10.919 11.172 11.642 11.995 12.466COST PER GALLON 3.26 3.37 3.49 3.61 3.74 3.97 4.01 4.IS 4.29 4.44DIESEL FUEL COST XnOoo) 31 34 37 39 43 46 49 S3 57 61DIESEL 0~11 COST X(IOoo) 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21WIND EQUIP INVESTI1ENT XIIOoo) 27WIND EQUIP EQUIV AN COST XIIOoo) '7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9WIND EQUIP ~11 COST XI 1000) 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 21ANNUAL COSTS XIIOoo) 76 79 92 84 99 91 94 99 102 112PRES WORTH ANNUAL COST X ( 1000) S7 S7 S9 S7 S8 S9 59 S9 60 64ACCUI1 PRES WORTH XIIOOO) S91 639 ~96 753 911 969 928 997 1.047 1.111NON. ELECTRICAL BENEFITSWASTE HEATEXTRA COSTI. INVESTI1ENT X(lOOO)2. EQUIV AN COST X(looO) 1.5 I.S I.S 1.3 1.5 1.5 I.S I.S I.S 1.53. I1AINTENANCE COST XllooO) .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .~ .6 .~TOTAL EXTRA COST XIIOOO) 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1BENEFIT (HEATING)I. GALLONS DIESEL SAVED 1.499 1.~3 1.743 1.~7 2.019 2.17S 2.313 2.490 2.627 2013052. DOLLAR VALUE SAVING X(IOOO) 5.3 6.0 6.9 7.4 9.4 9.2 10.1 11.3 12.3 13.7~NET BENEFIT XIIOoo) 3.2 3.9 4.7 S.3 ~.3 7.1 8.0 9.2 10.4 11.~PRES WORTH ANNUAL BENEFIT XIIOoo) 2.4 2.9 3.3 3.6 4.2 4.~ 5.0 5.6 ~.1 ~.OI ACCUI1 PRES WORTH BENEFIT XI 1000) 9.0 11.9 IS. I 18.7 22.9 27.5 32.5 39.1 44.2 SO.9Ii~

APPENDIX FDESCRI PTION OF RECOMMENDED PLAN(S)-

APA 22-A/ZAPPENDIX FThis section provides a brief description of the various plan componentsrequired for diesel generation and waste heat recovery, the most promisingplan for providing the lowest cost energy to the thirteen villages. Thisplan assumes continued use of diesel driven generators throughout the studyperiod with the implementation of waste heat recovery.I~l~11I~Ii j, \IW, III..iI)JIrJI, 1:J() )i~I:~I ,'1~,JIDiesel generation and waste heat recoveryDiesel generation with waste heat recovery has proven to be the mostreliable and economical method of supplying electrical energy in the13 villages studied in this report.This study has assumed that only the waste heat from the engine coolingwater is recovered for use. This in turn implies the diesel engine usedas the source of waste heat must be liquid cooled.Implementation of waste heat recovery is not free and requires the additionof certain equipment to the diesel engine, plus the installation of pumpsand insulated pipes for transporting the waste heat to the user and installationof radiators or baseboard water heating system by the user.The diesel engine, unless previously equipped, must be retrofitted witha heat exchanger and associated valving. This can in most cases, beaccomplished by tapping into the exisiting engine radiator hoses. Hotcoolant from the engine is circulated through the heat exchanger andradiator to maintain correct engine temperature. Heat from the enginecoolant is transfererd via the heat exchanger to the heat using loopand transported to the user. The heated liquid upon passing throughthe users radiators is returned to the heat exchanger for reheating.Wa~te heat capture equipment is commercially available in the unit sizesrequired and can be installed in those villages where it is determinedfeasible with only a few months lead time.F-1

APA 22-AIZFeasibility and Timing of Installationsi I~I '~Feasibil ityFinding that waste heat recovery systems appear feasible in a reconnaissancelevel study of the magnitude does not mean materials shouldbe purchased and construction started on waste heat installation inthe villages. Waste heat installation must still be engineered for theparticular location and situation. The simplified analysis accomplishedin this reconnaissance study has merely justified a more detailed studybe performed to accurate determine the cost and feasibility associatedwith the project. Such studies should include a definitive reviewof the following item for sach case.a) availability of waste heatb) ,transportation of waste heatc) end use of waste heatApproximate cost for determining the feasibility of the waste heatalternative is estimated at $2,500 per village.Approximate Timing of InstallationThe appropriate timing of diesel and waste heat installation as determinedfrom this study are shown below. A detailed feasibility studyconducted for each Village may alter the recommended installationdate of waste heat recovery equipment from the dates listed.A. Villages north of Yukon River1. BucklandDiesel - 1983 - 100 kWj 1994 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 140 kW, 1985 - 100 kW,1994 - 100 kWr 'Wr 'Ir 1~r'I1.1r '~I~r~LLF-2r '

I~1APA 22-A/Z. ,j"I2. HughesDiesel - 1982 - 75 + 50 kW; 1991 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW; 1991 - 75 kWiJrIWIJI,U! , \UI, !I~I!W, I3. KoyukukDiesel 1981 - 75 + 50 kW, 1986 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW, 1986 - 75 kW4. Russian MissionDiesel - 1981 - 90 kW; 1982 - 90 kW; 1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 90 kW; 1989 - 100 kW5. Sheldon PointDiesel - 1982 - 100 + 75 kW; 1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 100 kW, 1989 - 100 kWB. Villages - Middle and Upper Kuskokwim6. ChuathbalukDiesel - 1981 - 60 kW and 100 kW, 1991 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 100 kW, 1991 - 100 kW7. Crooked CreekDiesel - 1981 - 60 kW + 100 kW; 1989 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment 1983 - 100 kW; 1989 - 100 kW8. Ni ko 1 a;9. Red DevilDiesel - 1986 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kWDiesel - 1982 - 75 and 50 kW; 2000 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW2000 - 75 kWF-3

; 1APA 22-A/Z10. SleetmuteDiesel - 1981 - 60 kW and 75 kW; 1991 - 100 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kW; 1991 - 100 kW11. Stony RiverDiesel - 1981 - 60 and 75 kWWaste· heat equipment - 1983 - 75 kWr)W12. Takotna13. TelidaDiesel - 1982 - 75 kW; 1984 - 75 kWWaste heat equipment - 1984 - 75 kW; 1986 - 75 kWDiesel - 1982 - 50 and 30 kWWaste heat equipment - 1983 - 50 kWr '!I.JF-4r I~

APPENDIX G\~OODFUEL RESOURCES FOR TE.N ALASKAN VILLAGESbyReid, Collins, Inc.

WOOD FUEL RESOURCESFOR TEN ALASKAN VILLAGESJanuary 23, 1981r Ii~I .j 1II.J[ II~II JiJI'l;~IJI......,:oe* I .--.:~"'/;/. cc:./,1ittJPrepared By :_~_~=~'-=~'.,..;-..,..:e.~,:-I2v---=::....;:.....;;' ~_Calvin L. KerrRE I D, CO LLI NS, INC.1577 C Street, Suite 214Anchorage, Alaska 99501'U.S.A..----------------------------.----------------------~----------~

TABLE OF CONTENTS1.0 Introduction .••....•..............•...•....•••••••.••....•••• 12.0 Summary ............. ' ......................................... 2IJ,I~.JJ'w I~l:1jl.JI, 1JIJ3.0 Objective and Scope of Project .••••.•.•..•..•.•••...•.•....•. 33. 1 ~1ethodo logy ................................................... 34.0 Wood Fuel Resources, Kuskokwim Villages ..•.••.•.......•.•.. 44.1.1. Table 1 .....•..................•... : ••....•.•.....••.....• 44.1.2. Table 2 .................................................... 44.2 Wood Fuel Types ............................................. s5.1 Wood Fuel Resources, Doyon Villages .......•••••....•..•..... 65.1.1. Table 3 ...•.•.......•......•••.....•.•.•..•.....•.•••.•.•• 65.1.2. Table 4 .................•............................•.... 65.2 Forest Types ...•.•....••••...•.•....•..•.....••.•......•••.. 76.0 Harvest and Transportation Costs ............................ 86. 1 Summary ....•.....•.......••.......•...•..•.............•.••. 86.2 I nterior Alaska Loggi nq Costs ..••....•.•.....••••....•....•.. 86.3 I nterior British Columbia Wood Costs ......................... 86.4 Small Scale Cost Estimation, Alaska ..•.....••..............•• .96. 5 I Base Case l Cord .........•.•.....•.....•..•......•.....•..... 9~:i'nd. re//'fl:"--------------------------------------------------------~

LI :~I~i1. 0 INTRODUCTIONI'I n December, 1980, Reid, Collins submitted a proposal on wood fuelevaluation to R. W. Retherford and Associates, a division of InternationalEngineering Company, Inc., Anchorage, Alaska. An agreement wassigned on January 9, 1981 with the January 16 completion date extendedto January 23, 1981 at the request of Calvin Kerr, Reid, Collins AlaskaManager.The wood fuel evaluation will form part of R. W. Retherford's reconnaissancestudy of energy requirements and alternatives for thirteen western Alaskavillages. The study will be submitted to the Alaska Power Authority andthe State Division of Energy and Power Development, Department ofCommerce and Economic Development.Reid, Collins gathered field information in October, 1980 for five of the tenvillages in this report. These five are part of the Kuskokwim VillageCorporation who granted approval for use of this data.r \Wi \( :Wuw( 1~f'1./.,... r..,/jf,,,i/. "el/':;" I----------------------------------------------------------------~-1-r I~( :~

'1i~IJI2.0 SUMMARYReid. Collins developed wood fuel energy assessments for ten villagesin Western Alaska. Base data for five Kuskokwim villages came fromReid, Collins field data; data for five Doyon villages was developed fromexisting maps, aerial photographs, and inventories.IIQJJ!JSignificant quantities of wood energy are available. Totals for all tenviHages indicate standing wood energy on 1,520,091 acres is 47,453 billionBTU's. Potential annual energy production on this same area is 571.9billion BTU's.Cost estimates per delivered million BTU's ranges from $5.01 to $9.04,depending on access, harvest methodology and whether chips or roundwood are desired.I, 1IW; I[\JJJIJbI d[jf"r/ 't;;.{1;'J---------------------------2----------------------------------~----~

IW3.0 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF PROJECTI 'I I~Reid, Collins is providing information on the wood fuel resource for thefollowing villages:Kuskokwim VillagesDoyon VillagesChuathbalukTakotnaCrooked CreekNikolaiRed DevilTelidaSleetmuteKoyukukStony RiverHughesSpecifically, the scope of the project includes:ooooooo3. I Methodologydetermining wood fuel productivity classes for each villagecalculating areas for each wood fuel typedetermining standing type volumes by villageCalculating standing wood fuel volumes in bilJ'ions of BTU'sdetermining potential wood fuel growth per year by wood fueltype in millions of BTU'sevaluating costs of wood harvesting and transportationcalculating costs per million BTU's for potential wood harvestsystemsr \I \iiir ;I ,~r IWI •i.IriI \~The standing forest resource within an approximate ten mile radius of eachvillage was analyzed. Aerial photographs, type maps, and summary timbercruising data were available for Kuskokwim Corporation Villages. Aerialphotogl-aphs, Spetzman forest ecosystem maps and published forest inventoryfigures were used in analyzing the Doyon Villages.( 1~r I~.... .[jf,,(/. ?::'/,fAJ------------------~--~--"--------------------------------------~-3-

II J1IJIUIJIJII4.0 WOOD FUEL RESOURCES, KUSKOKWIM VILLAGES4.1.1. Total and annual potential wood energy is shown in Table 1.CurrentAnnualVillage Wood Energy PotentialAvailable*Wood EnergyChuathbaluk 7,610 147.2Crooked Creek 432 4.0Red Devil 1,400 14.0Sleetmute 8,042 84.4! Stony River 11, 100 102.3--Total 28,584 351. 9,*Units are billions of BTU's, 1I..UJ,JI ,1I\J!: \!~,4. 1.2. Wood fuel acreages for the Kuskokwim Villages are shown inTable 2..iiProductive Nonproductive Nonforest TotalVillage Forestland Forestland (acr~s) (acres)I (acres).(acres)iIiIChuathbaluk 36,050 57,515 107,497 201,062ICrooked Creek 1,366 nfa 199,696 201,062Red Devil 4,348 1,836 136,098 142,282 IIi, Sleetmute 24,499 17,857,I93,786 136,142 IStony River 35,156 nfa 165,906 201,062 I:Total 101,419 77,208 702,983 8S 1, 610 :,Il~I'jJIfif."oI. '(;:$:.; -.....-4-

I 1W4.2 Wood Fuel TypesWood fuel types near Chuathbaluk contain a standing utilizable volume(all species) of 1132 cubic feet per acre with 76% of that volume spruceand the rest hardwoods. Average breast high diameter (all species) is10.1 inches and average height 47.5 feet. There are 128 trees per acreon the average; 74 are white spruce and 54 are hardwoods.Wood fuel types near Crooked Creek, Red Devil, Sleetmute and StonyRiver have a standing utilizable volume (all species) of 1934 cubic feetper acre with 82% of that volume spruce and the rest hardwoods. Averagebreast hi9h diameter is 9.9 inches and average height 53.5 feet. Thereare 184 trees per acre; 110 are white spruce and 74 are hardwoods.I :UWWUThese figures ar.e based on Reid, CO.llins field data.Non-productive forest land had an estimated 100 cubic feet per acre(standing) based on analysis of field work for the NANA Corporation bythe U.S. Forest Service.Growth of productive forest types is 17.8 cubic feet per acre per year,based on U.S. Forest Service inventory data. Growth of non-productiveforest land was estimated at 4.5 cubic feet per acre per year based onanalysis of the NANA study.r 1~Site specific values will differ.-5-r '~

JJJ5.1 WOOD FUEL RESOURCES, DOYON VILLAGES5.1.1. Total and annual potential wood energy are shown in Table 3.VillageCurrentWood Energy'"Annual WoodEnergy Potential '"Nikolai7,01067.0·JTakotnaTelidaKoyukuk1,7604,9314,93916.253.380.1r ")WI, 1~IHugh>1:!sTotal"'Units in billions of BTU's22918,869220.05.1.2. Wood fuel types for the Doyon Villages are shown in Table 4.VillageProductiveforest(acres)Nonprod uctive. forest(acres)Nonforest(acres)TotalNikolai21,9484,25779,927106,132Takotna5,5580195,504201,062Telida14,90913,54395,995124,447Koyukuk24,70412,20375,344112,251Hughes1,194093,39594,589Total68,31330,003540,165638,481;.:JI!,u/.

.,r ,WW~i,W5.2 Forest TypesA standing volume of 1934 cubic feet per acre of all species was usedfor Nikolai, Takotna and Telida, based on Reid, Collins field data fromStony River. These stands are comparable in composition. A growthfigure of 17. 8 cubic feet per acre was used, based on U. S. ForestService inventory data.A standing volume of 1173 cubic feet per acre of all species was derivedfor Koyukuk and Hughes from "Forest Statistics for the Upper KoyukukRiver, 1971", by Karl Hegg, U.S. Forest Service. A growth figure of17.6 cubic feet per acre per year was also used from the same document.{:~,~UrW..\ ,f ~ '.~( \ II.iWIIIaIil-.iI \~I~-.'if,,~ce-Zn.-7-f,~Wr 1I-.I

II6.0 HARV AND TRANSPORTATION COSTS6.1 SummaryWood cost per million BTU's for the system discussed following, are:Location Cost per Cord Cost6per 10BTU'sInterior Alaska $ 73.21 $5.01Interior B.C. $ 73.09 $5.01MaunelukLevel $132.00 $9.0.4Level 2 $ 92.00 $6.30Level 3 $ 80.00 $5.486.2 I nterior Alaska Looging CostsInterior Alaska logging costs are $114.39 per thousand board feet,according to base figures from the University of Alaska, School ofAgriculture and Land Re.sources Management. These were adjusted toreflect 1980 cost incre;3ses, especially in fuel costs. Converting tocunits (100 cubic feet) from thousand board feet at a ratio of 2.0 to 1.0,this is a cost of $57.20 per cunit or $73.21 per cord (128 cubic feet).These figures are based on actual harvest operations near Fairbanks withroad access.6.3 Interior British Columbia Wood CostsAverage total wood cost (delivered) in Interior B.C. was $39.00 per cunitin 1976 or $57.10 in 1980 at 10% inflation. This equals $73.09 per cord(Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, Canada, 1977).Interior B.C. forests are very similar to Interior Alaska in harvest methods,yeild and topography. A significant difference would be increasedhandling due to river transportation and the Jack of roads in Alaska. An· .}i,,'/' 't:.Ih;. ..------------------~----------------------------------~--------~-8-

:,ofestimated cost for this form of transportation is $28.74 per cord or anadditional $1.97 per million BTU's (from Galliett, Marks and Renshaw,1980) .i! ,U; i1 ;6.4 Small Scale Cost Estimation, AlaskaThe Mauneluk Association, NANA's non-profit organization, developed a1979 cost estimate for approp riate level wood ha rvest techniques. Threelevels were analyzed; the first was a labor intensive method with handfelling and snow machine yarding. The second method involved morespecialized labor with a heavy duty Alpine Skidoo and the third was alarge scale meth()d with a' Thiokol snow machine for log skidding. Thecalculated costs were:( ,WLevel $132 per cord,Level 2 $ 92 per cordLevel 3 - $ 80 per cord6.5 'Base Case' Cordr:~Logging and transportation cost per million BTU's- depends on speciescomposition, moisture content, method of stacking, presence of bark, sizeof material and other factors. A 'base cord' was developed for thevillages under study based on Reid, Collins Kuskokwim field data.The three main species, spruce, birch and balsam popular, comprised76.8%, 14.3% and 8.9% of the base cord, respectively,. The averageweighted BTU value was 14.6 million BTU's per cord at 20% moisturecontent, a 90 cubic foot solid wood content, and derived values from aprevious Alaska Power Authority study by Gal/iett, Marks and Renshaw.The APA study calculated a cost of $6.25 per million BTU's at the burnpoint. The fuel form was chips, not roundwood.I 1i'/f/",/. Y:;//'A ..------------~--------------------------------------------------~-9-I ".~I il.J

APPENDIX HASSESSMENT OF COAL, PEAT, AND PETROLEUM RESOURCEOF WESTERN ALASK~byC. C. Hawley a nd Asssociates, Inc.

IJIJ!'JIJIIIIUIIIIJ~JJJI 1~IASSESSI-lEtlT OF COAL, PEAT, !\I'm PETROLEUH REE;OURCESOF WESTERN ALASKhprepared under contract toRobert W. Retherford Associatesfor theAlaska Power Authorityby Gary FriedDannJanuary 29, 1981C. C. UMILEY and ASSOCIATES, INC.(907)349-4673 * 8740 Hartzell Road * Anchorage, Alaska 99507

Ti\BLE OF COI!T£:1TSP2geI. SU!H·IARY AI:lD COilCLUSIOtlS •• " ••• " .• ""."." ••••.•••• " .• ".lII. ItITTIODUCTIOI'! ••••.•••••• "" •••• "." •• """ ••••••••• ,, ••••• 5IJ, 1,J, 1I UIJJJIJJI I I. POTEnTIAL CO.z\'L RESOURCES OF ~':ESTERN ALl\SI~l\1\. Farewell Coal Field1. History ...•.•. ".•..••••............... 62. Current aevelopment ••••••••••••••••••• 63. Geology ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 7a. Little Tonzona •••••••••••••••• 8b. Upper tributaries to "Deepbank Creek •••••••••••••••• 9c. Windy Fork ••••••••••••••••••• lO4. Feasibility of Mining •••••••••••••••• lOa. 4,000 tons/yr ••••••••••••••.• 12b. 10,000 tons/yr ••••••••••••••• 13IV.B. Yukon River, Blackburn-TIulato Occurrences1. History •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 142. Geology •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 143. The Hilliams MineB. Collier's 1903 description ••• lSb. F~a~ibility of resumingID1n1ng ••••••••••••••••••••••• 16i. 500 tons/yr ••••••••• 18ii. 1,440 tons/yr ••••••• l9C. Kugruk River Coal Field •••••••••••••••••••••• 201. History •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 202. Geology •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 21.3. Economic Feasibility of a 900 tons/yrnine at Chicago Creek •••••••••••••••• 23a. Mining costs •••••••••••••• ~ •• 24b. Transportation costs ••••••••• 24D. Coal Potential of the Hughes Area ••..••••••• ~25E. Usibelli Coal for western Alaska ••••••••••••• 26POTENTIAL PEAT RESOURCES OF t'7ESTERN ALASKAA. Eistor"'I ...•.••.••.• " ..•.• " .•••.•••....••.•... 27B. Locati~n and Nature of Peat •••••••••••••••••• 28C. Feasibility of Peat as a Fuel •••••••••••••••• 29v. OIL AND GAS RESOURCES OF HESTERH ALASKA •••••••••••• 30A. Existing Nells ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 30B. Costs of Exploration ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3lC. Future Petroleum Developrnent ••••••••••••••••• 32D. Conclusions •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 33VI. REFERENCES •••••••••••••••••• ~ •••••••••••••••••••••• 35

:Wwuuu'i -~Appenc.lix A.l\ppenc1 i::-: B.Appendi:: C.l\ppenClix D.APPEl:JDIX E.APPENDICESTables of Estin~ted Costs of CoalPilreviell Area Coal nine: 4,000 tons/yr ••••• 40Fare'.'lell Area Coal rHne: 10,000 tons/yr •••• 42Williams Coal nine: 500 tons/yr •••••••••••• 44Williams Coal nine: 1,440 tons/yr •••••••••• 46A Brief look at Usibelli Coal forWestern Alaska ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 4Dr IjI~PLP.TE I.ILI.USTRATI0t1SCoal and Petroleum Resources of WesternAlaska, Scale 1:2,500,000 ••••••••••• in pocket1 •\I IT:W, -' ~·"'··?'--, .. ··LJ

. SUHilliP.Y AND CQi:!CLusrOtlS, 1i~Potential coal, peat, and oil and gas resources of\lestern Alaska were evaluated for local use as alternativesto imported petroleum fuels to meet space heating andelectric generation needs of thirteen villages. Buckland,Hughes, Koyukuk, Russian Mission, Sheldon Point, Telida,Nikolai, Tal:otna, Stony River, Sleetmute,' Red Devil, Crool~ed,JIJJCreel~,and Chuathbaluk were specifically addressed, but thetowns of " MCGrath, A~iak, and Dethel were considered aspotential co-consumers of locally-produced coal for thepurposes of economic feasibility.Over three dozen knmvn and reported coal occurrence,s.were evaluated for potential production. From existing dataavailable on these resources, only three are considered tohave sufficient quantities of mineable coal to supply villageneeds at competitive prices for at least twenty years.A steeply-dipping 50-foot seam of subbituminous Tertiary" 1I~icO.:ll has been mapped along strike for 15 miles on the northside of the Alaska Range bebleen the Little Tonzona and l'lincJyFork Rivers near Farewell. A surface mine here could produceenough coal for eight villages on the Kuskokwim, or about4,000 tons per year, for approAimately $125 per ton at the·mine. 15,000 tons of coal per year, or enough for the eight1

villages plus ~cGrath,Aniak, and Bethel, could be mined forabout $66 per ton. Transportation costs would range from $40to SOO per ton, depending on destination of the coal and typeof road built fron the mine to the Kuskokwim River~ The costaf building such a road is not included in this study.r 1i I1.1It appears feasible to reopen the Williams mine on theYukon River, about 100 miles south of Koyukuk. Bituminous.coal from the uniform 39-inch seam there could be minedunderground at the rate of 500 to ~1600tons per year forabout $350 to $200 per ton. Five hundred tons per year wouldsupply all the energy requirements of Koyukuk; 1600 tons• would meet the annual needs of Russian Mission and SheldonPoint as well. Transportation costs are not included, butwould range from $10 to $25 per ton by river barge.Chicago Creek lignite could be mined for about $160 perton to meet Buckland's energy requirements. Because of thesnaIl scale of mining, low BTU's per pound, andtransportation costs of $40 to' $100 per ton, the price wouldprobably be marginally to non-competitive with liguid fuels.Cbicago Creek coal is Cleerned to' be economic for use byBuckland should. a large-scale mining operation be undertakento fuel production of electricity for Kotzebue.~WWLHughes is the only village covered in this study forwhich coal is considered to be an unviable energy resource in21 ,I~

, j'the foreseeable future.On a scale of 5,000 to 50,000 tons per year or more,subbituminous coal from Usibelli's Healy mine could probablybe delivered to all of the villages included in this study,except Hughes, for $50 to $125 per ton.t'7hile peat is a resource \'J.idely available to the"villages in this study, no current information exists on thecosts of harvesting and burning peat in Alaska.Large-scalepeat-harvesting operations in the lower 48 states sell peatfor agricultural purposes for as little as $20 per ton., II •I~i:UII U,JIJi~I, 1lo,jJIJShort harvesting seasons, permafrost problems, and lack ofdefinition of the resource make it difficult to assess thepotential of peat harvesting in the near future.Villages with high potential for deep, fuel-grade peatresources \~ithin three miles include Buckland, Sheldon Point,Telida,Nikolai, Takotna, Sleetmute, and Stony River. Sincepeat appears to be harvestable at roughly the same or lesscost for which coal is mined, the reduced transportatione~penses,which account for as much as 50 to 75% of the totalcost of coal delivered to western Alaska, strongly suggestthat pilot projects, such as that proposed for Dillingham bythe Division of Energy and Power Development, be undertakento test the viability of this fuel resource for villages.I'JI3

IW[ 1WNo local sources of oil or gas exist as feasiblealternatives to presently imported p~troleumproducts for( ,I~Hestern l~lask~.r )~..iI'i :~\1~. I'.-........ -.---~

IJIJII. I~TRODUCTIOU, IUI ., 1W( ,~JIJI'1I~,JI. 1I~JIThe purpose of this study is to inventory and evaluatein general the coal, peat, ana petroleum resources locallyavailable to thirteen selected western villages. Thisobjective was achieved through review of literature availableon theae subjects and by discussion with persons who haveexperience in production and development of solid and liquidorganic fuels.The dollar-per-ton figures that follow are estimatesderived from well controlled and efficient local operations.Baseo on the experience of the author and his associates, andon the additional input from Alaskans noted in the Referencesof Unpublished Reports anCl Personal Contacts, pages 35-39,the estimates are believed to be within 30 percent of likelymine cost conducted on a local scale by-an experiencedcontractor. Such costs do not assume the profit leveldesired by a prudent business. In this sense, in order torealize anticipated costs, an effective subsidy by a localgovernment may be required.5l oJ

I~I I I. POTEnTIhL COl\L RESOURCES OF HESTERN P.Lt~SKA•I 1A. Farewell Coal Field1. HistoryCoal-bearing rocks in the Farewell area were identifiedas far back as 1902 (Brooks, 1911), but the first geologistto focus on the coal resources of the gently sloping piedmontnorth of the Alaska Range was Gary Player. In a 1970helicopter reconnaissance for Gulf Oil, Player recognized atrend of coal beds roughly parallel to the Farewell Faultexposed in stream-bank outcrops of Tertiary rocks.· In 1976Player returned to th~ Farewell area as a consultant to theBureau of Mines to study known outcrops and explore foradditional exposures of coal (Player, 1977). The mostdetailed published descriptions of the Farewell fieldresulted from a brief reconnaisance survey for coal conductedin the Minchumina Basin by the U. S. Geological Survey in1977 (Sloan and others, 1979).I~r \Wr \~2. Curreot DevelonmeotDoyon Native Corporation, which has selected theFarewell-area coal-bearing landi, has entered into a jointventure agreement \·,i th Cnnadi'an Supe r ior to develop the6

IJIJJIJI! :I J,, I~Farewell coal field. In 198fr Canadian Superior carried out adetaileo mapping and sampling progratl in the area bet'.leen theLittle Tonzona and Kuskokwim South Fork Rivers (Navin Sharma,University of Alaska School of Mining Engineering, oralcOi.1!.lunication, 1981), Drilling and seistlic e}:ploration areplanned for 1981, \lith bulk sampling and pilot miningpossible in 1982. The Doyon-Canadian Superior venture aimsto develop coal resources sufficient to supply an East orSoutheast Asian import market of the million-ton-per-year, magnitude.3. GeologyThe Farewell coal field occurs on the southeastern edgeJI WJIJJIJof the Minchumina Basin, a 100land covered with coarsegranular sediments deposited in glacial moraines, outwashslopes I floodplains, and alluvial fans. The basin e~:tendsfrom near McGrath to Lake Ninchutlina on the north, and slopesnorthward from the Alaska Range on the south (Plate I), Onthe southern edge of the Minchumina Basin, coal beds occur inTertiary nonmarine sandstone, siltstone, and volcanic rocksin widespread isolated exposures north and south of theFarewell Fault from Dig River northeast to ~antishna and,beyond. Outcrops are limited to residual hills, riverbluffs, and small stream valleys where erosion of surfacegravels has exposed the bedrock.The Farewell Fault, a right-lateral strike-slip7I

( \co~ponentof the Denali Fault System, separates theNinchcrnina Basin from the Alaska Range. It is the majorstructural feature in the area and is probably responsiblefor t~etilting, minor bedding plane faults, and folding ofthe coal-bearing stata that lie north of the fault (Sloan,1977) •8. Little Tonzona Coal. The coal at Little Tonzqna River, ,i~r \Wr 'Wcrops out in a bank extending about 25 feet above thesouthwest side of the floodplain. The Tertiary strata strikeIJ75E and dip 47-63 degrees NH. Three minor bedding planefaults are associated with drag folds in the 195 feet ofexposed section, but the beds ~re not significantly offset orrepeated by faulting (Player, 1977).riI \1.1Seven seams of coal each at least three feet thick areexposed in this outcrop, totalling 100 feet of cleansubbituminous coal with 21.5 feet of dirty coal. Outcrop isobscured for an additional 60 feet, and coal float andisolated thin outcrops of coal extend another 90 feetupstream from the massive Tertiary exposures.r 'Sharma (oral'comrn., 19B1) reports that 1900 field workdocumented 520 feet of Tertiary coal-bearing strata in 15square miles mapped in the Little Tonzona area. 478 feet ofthis section consists of subbituminous coal with intermittentzones of vitrain and clay; the remaining 42 feet consists ofr 'Wo

J!Jclastic sediments with ~inorbed of lignite. Three otherJIJIJIJ. 1I \.JII~, 1WJ, J~IJiI: J.., 1I~IW,JIoutcro?s in this area 'Vlere found on the sane stril.e as theriver outcrop.An estimated 50-foot-wide seam of mineable coal under 3to 10 feet of flat~lying terrace gravel overburden isprojected for up to 15 miles along strike (Sharma, oralconD., 1981). Large-scale mining would be expedited if thedip of the strata shallows out with distance to the northfrom the FareHell Fault, and 1981 seismic vlOrk is aimed attesting this hypothesis.Analyses show this coal to be somewhat higher in rankand quality than the Tertiary coals of the Nenana Field.Heating values range from 7,850 to 11,700 BTU's per pound,with the most reliable values for fresh, unweathered coal ~nthe 10,000+ BTU's range (Rao and Dolff, 1980). Ash contentis relatively low - 5 to 8% - while sulfur content is higherthan many Alaskan coals: 1.1 to 1.7%.Qt Upne r Tr iQutar ies of Deepbank Cree},. Outcrops he re arescarce; coal beds are the dominant outcrop-forming rock,usually occurring in three- to five-foot outcrops of highlyweathered coal. Sloan (1979) measured two sections with a4.5-foot coal seam striking N35E and dipping 38 degrees U,{'7,and a 2l-foot coal seam striking N50E and dipping 48-559

degrees I~7. Deepb~nk Creek coal is sinilar to Little Tonzonacoal, with lower sulfur: 0.3 to 1.0%.I '\~c. Winav Fork Coal. Thick beds of bony coal crop out alongthe west bank of the windy Fork of the Kuskokwim River.Sloan (1979) measured 880 feet of stratigraphic section hereon the west limb of a north-trending syncline. Analyses ofsamples from this section show Nindy Fork coal to be thelowest in quality of the Farewell coals. Ash content wasvery high - 30 to 60% - with correspondingly low heatingvalues: 4,100 to 8,400 STUls per pound. Sulfur levels weref'~Ii~0.1 to O.tl%.4. Feasibility of HiningThe Little Tonzona occurrence is about 150 air milesnorthwest of Anchorage and 27 miles northeast of Farewelllanding strip. No facilities for the transportation of bulkcomnodi ties exist near Fare\vell; some kind of road \-lould haveto be built from the Kuskokwim River near McGrath or FarewellLanding to the coal beds to facilitate development andDining.r I~r "~I'~If the Farewell coal field is developed for export, itwill be on such a scale as to justify year-round surfaceaccess to the mine site, with a transportation corridorprobably including the Kuskohllm River cO\'lnstream to the10

ocean port of Bethel.This scenario, not to be realizedbefore 1990, would easily provide coal for nIl the ~uskokwimvillages included in this study at 2SSO/ton (1981 dollars).cost of less thanThe feasibility studies for ninin; Farewell coaldiscussed in this report are based on tuo levels ofproduction:a} 4,000 tons per year, at 40 tons per day for 100 days -enough coal to supply the eight Kuskokwim villages~u1I II.iJb} 15,000 tons per year, at 150 tons pei day for 100 days -enough coal for the eight villages plus OcGrath, Aniak,and Bethel.Both models assume that surface mining will take placeduring summer months, stockpiling coal for "linter shipmentoverland to the Kuskokwim, and barging coal to villages thefol10\dng summer.Road-building costs are not included inthis feasibility study because it is e~pectedthat CanadianSuperior/Doyon would construct a road to the Farewell area inthe course of development, or that the State '1rlill take aninterest in some or all phases of road construction andmaintenance.The annual cost of constructing and maintaininga minimal winter ice road would be SS,OOO to S15,000/mile(Ray Farrar of Ray's Equipment, Anchorage, oral comm., 19B1) tor assuming 50 miles from "indy Fork and 75 miles from LittleTonzona, $25 to $2S0/ton, if the burden were born 6nly byJII~Iproduction for local use. Construction and maintenance of anall-weather road would cost 20 to 40 tines that amount11

..,(modified from Clark, 1973).The winter haulage of coal by truck would add anadditional $30 to $45/ton. Back-haul barging on the riverwould range from SID to $35/ton depending on destination (Jim..r .IHoffman, United Transportation Company, Bethel, oral corom.,1981).Royalties and taxes are not estimated in this study.Each model also assumes:I} 8 hours/day, 5 day wOrk week2} Coal density approx.= 80 lb/cubic foot3) 3 to 10 feet of easily-removed overburden4) 40-foot ".. ide seam mined 20 feet deep5) buildings for shop and nill6) movable camp facilities for miners and families7) 5 year capital write-off (life of all equipmentand buildings)'8) Hostly used (1977-78) eguipmentI~LUa. 4,000 tpyAssume:. 1)2)2 miners and 2 family membersHan-days/week of following activities:2 Removing overburdenI Drilling and blasting coal3 Removing and loading coal2 Hilling2 Nainten~nce, repairs, ,tending stockpiles, etc.12

II JJI:JIJIJI'1I~\~I. ,','J,IJIWIJIJII~JCostE~ploration and Deve16prnentCapital Expenses (Infr~structure,canp, buildings, equipment)Interes~ and insuranceIli ninl1Fooc.l ~nc1 commisaryReclanationSUDTOTi\L10% contingencyTransportationTOTl\Lb. 15,000 tpy$10 ~ OOlton40.0025.0025.504.00n.oo$112.5011.25$1;5-80,00$160-$203.75/tonl,ssume: 1) 5 miners/operators, 1 camp hand and5 family members2) r~an-days/week of following activities:5 Removing overburden305 Drilling and blasting coal, 5 Removing and loading coal5 Hillin']5 Maintenance, repairs,tenaing stockpiles, etc.Exploration and DevelopmentCapital Expenses (Infrastructure,car;.p, buildings, equipment)Interest and insuranceHininqFood and commisaryReclamationSUBTOTAL10% contingencyTransportationTOT].l..LCost SUr:1marV$6.00/ton14.008.5024.003.00~$60.506.05$/)0- $7 Q. OQ$106-$136.55/tonIJIJ13

( )II.JB. Yukon River, Blackburn-Nulato Occurrences( \I :~1. flistorvSeven coal occurrences on the Yukon River between Rubyand Dl.::cl

IIJJ. ~lJIIIJ~I.~I "I JIU,JI60 degrees (Chapnnn, 1963).The co~lthic~ness,beds are relatively thin and irregular ineven pinching out locally within short distances.The thic!:est bed reported is 39 inches, and another containspockets that are eight feet thick~than two feet thick (Collier, 1903).most of the beds are lessThe coal is highlyfractured, friable, and slacks rapidly on exposure to air and.drying (Chapman, 1963). Drainage is a major problem inmining these coals, since the beds tend to dip under theriver level, as at the Number 1 mine.precludes strip mining in most cases.The steep dip of bedsDespite these characteristics, the coal is a good gradeof bituminous -- average analyses indicating 2~ moisture, 25%volatile matter, 65% fixed carbon, 7%ash, and .6% sulfurIJ(Gallett and Marks, 1979).3. The Uilliams ninea. Collier's 1903 description. The Williams Mine was on thewest bank of the Yukon River about 50 miles downstream fronKaltag and about five miles upstream from a river"blufflandslide known as Eagle Slide.Up to the time that Colliervisited the mine in 1902, about 1,700 tons of coal had beenmined.A drift had been driven 400 feet into the bluff on a39-inch bed of bituminous coal wllich showed no change instrike or thickness and was divided by a thin clay parting.15

Since the mine has been abandoried the portal and coal bedhave been conpletely obscured by slumping of the bank.The coal bed strikes N70W and dips about 45 degrees NE.Only one \;orkable seam has been found, but Collier speculatedthat "other seams of commercial importance" could exist.Most of the coal was stoped from above the drift, withcoal cars carrying coal to the mine Douth. From the dump thef 'I '1.1I \~r~coal '-las \·,heelbarrO\·,ed onto stearne r s.Fifteen men, mostlyexperienced miners from Washington State, were employedduring the summer months that the mine operated.'b. Feanibilitv of resuming mining. Simple calculations ofprobable coal reserves remaining at the Williams Mine can benZlc'ie by calculating volumes of coal based on a' given, uniformseam thickness of 39 inches, an assumed nineable width of 60feet, and extension along strike of 2,000 et. Assuming anaverage weight of coal to be 00 lbs/cu ft, every foot alongr ;~strike would contain about eight tons of recoverable coal.This nodel yields, an estimated nine reserve of 16,000 tons,less the 1,700 tons mined, or about 14,000 tons remaining.Collier speculated, "Should demand warrant it, a slope willprobably be driven to lower levels and a hoisting and pumpingplant be provided. Nith such an equipment this mine could nodoubt supply all the demand for coal on this part of theYukon for many years to come." (1903, p.56). This indicates..rL16rII.J

IIIIJJJtr.V.t cL"lrlier ElrllllS die; not even ta.p the dO',m-dip reservesfron tr.c existing adit.•The 1979 energy c;c:-:-.a.n~; of I~o:rul~u!~ \las equiva.lent to

I 'i-.J1) l'!arm \'Teather ,Lining and shipping of coal;2) Purchase of D03tly used (1977-70) equipnent:3) Overlapping State and Native land selectionsover the Hilliams coal seam '-loula not haraperfeasibility of ~ining;Transportation costs are not included, but wouldprobably range from $10 to $25/ton for river barging,depending on destination, availability of back-haul andbulk-tonnage rates, cost of leasing a barge, and amount ofcoal shipped.1. 500 tpyCost Sumr.laryr \WEx?1oration and Development(3-yr write-off) . $17,500 $12.00/tonCapital Expenses (Infrastructure,camp, buildings, equipment - 10-'lear \-Trite-off)interest and insurance(12%)Operating Costsa) 2 miners $125/day or $2S/ton,whichever is more (max. $31,250)b) Food and commisary for 4 people$20/day * 150 days ($12,000)c) Fuel 75 gal/day * 125 daysd) ~ining suppliese) Parts & maintenancef) Freight and transportg) Reclamation & permitsSUBTOTil.LTOTAL10;:; contingencyTrc;;,sportationGP..f:.l7D TOTAL. ($18,500)($14,50-0)($5,000)($2,500)($5,000)230,50027,6.60$62.5024.0065.8455.3237.5029.0010 .. 005.00IO.OO$178.00 178.00$321.1632.11$1Q-$25.00S3G3-$37C.27/tonI .~r .I~18

IQIJIJ'l\J{li.JJI:n~IJIii. l,GOa tpyCost Summz:.ryE~ploration anQ Development(3-yr \'lrite-cff) $60,000 $12.50/tonCapital Expenses (Infrastructure,c , buildings, equipment - 8-year ~'lrite-off)Interest and insurance(12%)Operating Costsa) 1 foreman S160/day, 1 minerS150/day, 2 helpers S125/day *130 days = $75,600 max, orincentive$40-$45/crew tonb) Food and commisary for 8 people$20/day * 160 days ($25,600)c) Fuel 125 gal/day * 160 days =20,000 gal * $2 = $40,000 ord) Hining supplies ($32,000)e) Parts ~ mainteriance ($10,000)f) Freight and transport ($5,000)g) Reclamation & permits ($10,000)SUBTOTALTOTAL10~ contingencyTransportationGIt.i\ND TOTI~L300,50036,050$-17.2516.0023.5022.5025.0020.006.253.25~$124.00 124.00$182.5018.25$10-$25.00S210-$225.75/tonII~. 1I~IJJ19

i 1C. Kugruk River Coal FieldI'Wf 1WThe only potentially economic source of coal forBuckland is that of the Kugruk River coal field, 70 air mileswest of the village (Plate I). A small-scale mine here wouldha~eto be unclerground ana would cost as least as much tooperate as the Williams Mine. Because the coal is low~rgiade and transportation is more difficult than 'at theWilliams Hine, it is probable that Kugruk coal would only beused in Buckland as a spin-off benefit of large- scale miningfor power generation in the Kotzebue area.iW~.1. HistoryiNearly all Seward Peninsula coal deposits were~iscoverednear the turn of the century by gold prospectorsr '~and D.S. Geological Survey geologists. Nhile coal was ~inedfrom several locations on the Seward Peninsula, the vastmajority of the 110,000+ tons mined was from the ChicagoCreek area. No attempts have been made to explore, develop,or othervise evaluate the coal resources of this arearecently, because of the widespread and preferred use of fueloil for local energy requirements (Smith and others, 1900).Presently, the Alaska Division of Geological and GeophysicalSurveys has plans to map, trench, and sample the Chicagof .~I~Creek Field in 1981 (Gill Eakins, oral comm., 1~8l).20

·----------------------------------~-------------------------------IiJJJJI J"lJ!JI J" ,,JIJJPotential coal resources of the Kugruk area have beenaifficult to assess because of beavy vegetative cover andlini ted available data.Even the" Chicago Creel< field tlay beof smull areal extent because of steeply dipping beds andcomplicated structures (Smith and others, 1980).2. GeologyThe Kugruk River deposits are lignitic coals of lateCretaceous age. They are exposed in seams dipping from 45 to70 degrees and in widths to 80 feet near the tributaries ofChicago, Reindeer, Montana, Mina, and Independence Creeks(Gropp, Fisher, and Steeby, 1980).Horl~in9sThe coals were once mined in the early 1900's fromnear Chicago ana Reincieer Creeks. These coals rangein heat content from 6,200 to 6,BOO BTU's/lb, and average30-35~ in tloisture content. Although it required nearlytwice as much volutle as the higher-quality imported coals,the Kugruk coals were found adequate ,to fire boilers ofnumerous placer gold ~iningoperatons in the area. Ananalysis of the coal from the Chicago Creek area is asfollows (after Gropp, Fisher, and Steeby, 1980):21

F i:~ec1 CarbonVolatile Hydrocarbonsr-IoisturehshSulfur%19.239.033.87.1~100.0I i~( '.;r :iIJHeating vC'llue:6,825 BTU's/lbllt Chicago Creck, the main seam strilq~s about N9~'1 anddips 45 to 53 degrees westward. Between 1902 and 1908, 60,000to lOO,OOQ tons of coal were mined from a slope and crosscutswhich e~tended over 300 feet underground; A similar butsmaller-scale mining venture occurred at the George Hallinmine about 4 miles up the Kugruk River near Reindeer treek.Between these two nines, scattered exposures of coal havebeen noted, and exploration at the Chicago Creek claim blockindicated that the main sear;). ,-ras continuous for at least 1/2mile, at which point it was about 70 feet below the surface.The coal beds dip more steeply upstream from Chicago Creek,reaching 70 degrees at t~e George Wallin mine. With littleother information available, it seems likely that the coalbeds would be relatively continuous along the eastern banksof the gugruk. Since the coal beds (bed?) that were exposedare from 50 to eo feet in width, the potential amount of coalin the area is substantial (Gropp, Fisher, and Steeby, 1980).r '~LI1.1r .~L22L

JIr-JI I IIJiJIJ3. Econo:Jic Fe~sibility of ~Assuming Buckland's totalr uirements to be 15.5 billionChicago Creek lignite at 6,200operation very similar to thethe Williams Nine. Becausedouble that of the t'7illiarnsfor the same mining, milling,Hillia.ms I·line, \·,i th 1250 tons1250 tnv nine at Chicaco Creekelectric and heating energyBTU's annually, 1250 tpy ofSTU's/lb would be required.500 tpy progr~~ designed forof the much greater size of theHine.and capital expenses asof coal mined in 125 days.23This small quantity would have to be mined by an underground. Chicago Creek seam, the rate of coal recovery \'lOuld at leastThe follm'ling cost summaryassumes that two men will be mining ten tons of coal per day

f )a. npproximnte mining costsCost SUi1r:1arvi '~Exploration and Development(3-yr wr i te-off)$~O,OOOCapital Expenses (Infrastructure,car.lp, buildings, equipment - 8-year \lr i te-off) 230,500Interest and insurance(12%)27,660Operating Costsa) 2 miners $125/day or $15/ton,whichever is more (max. $37,500) $30.00b) Food and commisary for

D. Coal Potential of the Hughes AreaLack of economic21 surface transportation to Hughesma.l~es coal un untenable energy resource at present. Ho coaloccurrences of proven quantity are known to exist closer thanSOair TidIes from Hughes, although several deposits have beenlocatea within a 150-~ileradius.UI :IJIIJJI, JIJIJIJI25

-I 'IE. Usibclli Coal for ~cstern AlaskaPlans are now being generated for the construction ofbulk coal-handling facilities in Anchorage, l1hittier, andSeward (Jones and Gray, 1981).Even without thesefacilities, limited quantities of Usibelli coal can beshipped to weGtern Alaska at very competitive prices.Feasi~il~ty p~esented here is based on the fo110win~parameters:(W\.u1) Cost of high-quality, appro?. 8,500BTU1s/lb, coal at Healy2) Rail tariff, Healy to Seward. 3) Handling at docks at Seward and Bethel4) Barge, Seward to Bethel8,000 tons (1 load) = $24.2416,000 tons (2 loads) .= $17.7424,000 tons (3 loads) = $15.575) River Barge to villages upstream onKusl~ok\'Jim = $15 to $50 (7) I ton$23.00/ton10.155.0024.2430.QO$92.39/toni )~iI ,~Therefore, large quantities of coal can presently bedelivered to Bethel for $53.72 to $62.39/ton, and to villagesupstrea~for about $lS to $SO/ton above that. Ocean bargingrates are 1981 quoted lease costs fr6m Narine LeasingCorporation, Seattle.for lease at the ti~eSince river barges were not availableof this study, rates are extrapolatedfron regular tariffs supplied by Unit~dTransportationCompany, Bethel.26\1~

I J:1'~IJIV. POTEnTIAL PEAT RESOURces OF HESTERrJ hL~SKAIA. History.JII Jfuel resource for Alaska.WDavis of the U.S. Geological Survey in 1909.surn~arizeoproduction, they are outdated.uecology of peat deposits.Ireland, and Japan extensively use peat as a fuel, b~tspo~soredJIJLittle information exists on the subject of peat as aProbably the first publishedsuggestion of peat for fuel in Alaska came from Charles A.Dachnowski-Stokes of the U.s. Department of Agriculturethe general features of peat deposits in Alaska in1941. While these reports discuss. costs and methods of peatNost r~cent work on peat has focused on fhe bi~logy andOther states, such as Minnesota,have sponsored peat study and development programs (NorthernTechnical Services and ERONO, Inc., 1980), but information onthese projects was not available for this study. Finland,information from these countries is also difficult to obtain(Robert Huck, Northern Technical Services, oral comm., 1980).Since about 1979 the U.S. Department of Energy hasstudies on the use of peat as an energy resource.This has resulted in general studies so far, such as the27

I :I.jPreliminarY Evaluation o~Environmental Issues on the Use ofPeat i:lS an Eneray Source

(.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------...JC. Feasibility of Peat as a FuelDry-peat harvesting could be conducted only in latespring and summer - 20 to 50 days - in arctic and subarctic'IIJII~I JJ; Il.j,J!I~I. 1~JIIJJenvironments. If frozen when wet, peat bricks fall to pieceseasily and become hard to handle. Harvesting peat frompermafrost presents technical problems of as'yet unknownimpact. Correctly drained peatland could probably supplysufficient quantities of fuel for small energy facili~ies inwest~rn Alaska (King and others, 1980).Hinter harvesting - and freeze-drying - of peat is apossibility suited to Alaska that has not yet been tested.Present peat production in the lover 4B states is aboutone million tons per year, with the average value per tonbefore shipping around $20 01icJ~elsen, 1977). Almost allpeat in the United States is harvested with conventional' ormodified conventional earthmoving and excavating machinery.Since the surface of a peat bog is unstable, roads are builtacross the bog for trucks to trc,vel on. Nearly all peat inthe United States is harvested for agricultural use, althoughgasification of peat for electric power generation is beingtested (Uickelsen, 1977).29I

I'IofJ'., J. 1:11 steam boiler ';lould require appro:~imately 25 acresat at six-foot depth over 20 years (King and others,r'1980). Therefore, it is theoretically possible that heat 2ndelectricity could be gQnerate~ for the villages in this study\'li only 2 few acres of nearby peat of sufficient depth.r 'I...V. OIL AND GAS RESOUl1CES OF ~'iESTERn ALASKAThere are three approaches to supplying the villages\d th oil or gas aside from the current supply of petroleutlderivatives:A. Use existing wells which have a record of oilor gas shows to supply or augment village needs.B. Carry out an exploration program to locate,drill, and produce petroleum to meet villagerequirements;C. A\'Jait future oil and gas developments and hopethere will be some villages adjacent to productivesites which may share with villages.r 1Wu·30'1: I•

(~----------------------------------.. ----------------------------------------------------...JA. Existing ~ellsl iJIJIJUExploratory veIls and stratigr2phic test holes drilledin pest-central Alaska ,were unsuccessful, rarely showing anysign of oil or gas. Of eighteen wells drilled within thestudy area, data for eight of these are available and werereVie\'lea at the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission inAnchorage. Drill hole reports, electric logs and mud logsfrom these eight wells indicate no exploitable oil or gasshows. No knovn exploration activity is planned for the nearfuture.B. Costs of ExplorationwJJJIJIi JThe least expensive drilling program envisaged ,,,ouldinvolve at least four wells for a minimum cost per wellfigure, there being a dis60unt for a four well or moreprogrum Ula;'{ Bre\'ler, oral comm., 1981> 0 Seasonal operationwould be dictated by environmental and access conditions -winter only for .soft tundra and muskeg.For a small program, the drill rig would be leased withCre\l; occasional larger programs may find costs minimized bypurchasing the drill rig. A leased drill rig, capable ofdrilling to about 6,000 feet at optimum rates with fewbreakdm·ms Hould have a costing list as follo'.-7s:31

1. Drillins--dcpcnding on contrnct, paid as timewhile 6rilling only.2. Tools and rc parts--negotiable.3. Pipe, Rig Support, Coring--service companiesana all their equipment.4. Transportatian--personnel and rig.5. Testing--if any, necessary to prove the showand evaluate reserves.6. Professional costs to surv site and complywith federal and state regulations.Ii'The costs of a shallow gas or oil hole 2,000 feet deep,with a simple casing, testing, and minimum costs to make holeready for tapping or production is about $700,000 (ChatChatterton, oral corom., 1981). The drilling industry as anyr i~other equipment and labor intensive industry may be beset b~'conditions or breakdowns, weather, part~ or personnel, thefailure of which may cause the quoted absolute minimumcosting to triple. A more realistic baseline figure would bein excess of $1 million.r \~This costing would be for onihore w6rk only; offshoredrilling is more expensive by far than onshore work. Supportcosts for a semi-submersible drill rig would not fall below$1bO,000.OO per day (Max Brewer, oral comm., 1981).Of the interior lowlahd basins, the Holitna, Minchumina,lnnoko, and T~nana basins are most likely to have shallow gasdeposits for local consumption, but they are very low on the32

list for future development (Alaslta Division of Energy andPower Development, 1977).C. Future Petroleum Development•Plate I shows the possible petroleum basins neQr thevillages, their probable order of development. and an,~I ,, !I~I, I, I~wJIJIIJJJIJapproximate date of that development. If the "wait-and-see"approach is selected for the supply of natural oil or gas,the earliest date any of the villages may be able to tlaim orshare some local reserve would be later than 1990, accordingto petroleum exploration and dev~lopment experts of bothstate and industry (Alaska Division of Energy and PowerDevelopment, 1977).D. Conclusions1. To date, there are no existing wells suitable tosupply or augment village needs.2. Exploration programs to develop any reserves areextremely costly, wells costing in excess of $1 nillion each.Villages or village corporations are unlikely to be able toafford such high-risk capital.3. Very little exploration by the oil industry is33I

~.-WI )W(I~expected near any of the villages until 1990 or later. Only"lhen the cost of oil has doubled or tripled \-.'ill suchexploration programs appear viable.I )~tl. liost muskeg or'marshland basins Hill have sho\1G of .marsh gas. This methane rich gas is derived frorn rottingorganic debris on recent bus in bottons.. It burns cleanly andeasily, hOHever, reservoirs of this gas are, by their nature,r 1.JI 'WsnaIl, sporadic, and difficult ~o tap. It is unlikely th~tany significant contribution to energy supplies in thesevillages will be made by marsh gas.u, ,r 1~r \~34"~'"'--L

JIJIjJIJIJIIQoIJIIW, ,J, !WIIW.JIJVI. REPSREIlCESUnpublished Reports and Personal ContactsEakins, G., Infor~ation on the Kugruk coal fields and State ofAlaska plans for exploration there: State of AlaskaDivision of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, 479-7147,FClirbanks.Farrar, R., Information on costs of construction and maintenanceof '.-linter ice roads: Ray's Equipr.tent, 34'~-l088, Anchorage.Frost, S., Information on the terrain and feasibility of an iceroad in the Fare\'lell area: Proprietor, Fare\>lell Lal:c Lodge,344-5482, Anchorage.Gallager, J., Information on Doyon-Canadian Superior jointventure on development of the Fare\'lell coal field: ArcticResources, lob, Anchorage.Gellett and Narks, 1979, Nulato coal field reconnaisance report:study for the Alaska Power huthority, p. 1-5.Hoffman, J., Information on barging costs and logistics on theKuskokwim River: United Transportation Company, Bethel.Marine Leasing Corporation, Infornation on costs and logistics ofbarging coal from Seward or ~hittier to Bethel:206-53/.-1441,' Seattle.Player, G., 1977, The Little Tonzona coal bed near Farewell,Alasl~a - an important extension of the coal fields north ofthe Alaska Ran~e: report by Gary Player Ventures, 17 p.Saunders, R., Information on coal development in Alaska:Shamrock, Anchorage.Diar.tond35

i ;Sharma, N., Info[nation on recent work in the Farewell coalfi·:::lc1: University of Alaska, Fairbanks, School of IiininsEngineering Master's Degree Candidate.United States DepQrtment of the Interior, Bureau of Landliunagement, Inforr.:ation on the land status of the Uilliamsand Chicago Creek Nines: Anchorage Public InformationOffice, Federal Building.i 1I 'I.Jr )~Published Reportsr 'L.JBarnes, F.F., 1967, Coal resources of Alaska:~ull. 1242-D, 36 p. and 1 plate.U.S. Geol. SurveyBrooks, A.H., 1911, The Hount McKinley region, Alaska: U.S.Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 70.Cht'lpman, R. r,!., 1963, Coal aeposi ts along the Yukon River bebleenRuby and AnviJ~, Alaska, in Contributions to economicgeology of Alaska: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1155, p. 18-29.wu,Clark, P.R., 1973, Transportation economics of coal resources ofNorthern SloL?e coal fiegds, Alaska: Hineral Industrynesearch Laboratory, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, 134 p.Collier, A.J., 1903, The coal resources of the Yukon, Alaska:U.S. Geol. Survey Bull.2l8,p. 36-67.Coonrad, W.L., 1957, Geologic reconnaisance in theYukon-Kuskokwim Delta region, Alaska: U.S. Geol. Surveynisc. Geol. Investigations Hap 1-223, Scale 1: 500,000.Gropp, D.L., Fisher, L.A., and Steeby, C.H., 19CO, Assessment ofpower generation alternatives for Kotzebue: Alaska PowerJ'I.uthority.Jones, F.B. and Gray, J., 1981, Coal transport infrastructurerequirements: a paper presented to the Resource DevelopmentCouncil's Alaska Coal Marketing Conference, January 23,1981, Anchorage, 9 p.36

., ,Joyce, C.R., 1~80, Final federal surface nining regulations:~cGraw Uill, Dashington, D.C., 165 p.r ,rertie, J.B., Jr. andregion, Alask2.:119-120.Earrington, G.t,., 1924, The TIubv-IZuskoln'lin',U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 754, p.·84,r l,~IIJ,DIWIJRao, P.D., and Wolff, E.N., 1980, Characterization 2nd evaluationof washability of hlaskan coals: University of Alaska!lineral Industry Research Laboratory, Fairbanks, for U.S.Department of Energy, Office of Coal I!ining, 47 p.Robert tJ. Retherford Associates, 1979, Bristol Bay energy andelectric power potential: u.s. Department of Energy, AlaskaPower Administration.Sloan, E.G., Shearer, G.B., Eason, J.E., and Almquist, C.L.,1979, Reconnaisancc survey for coal near Farewell, Alaska:u.s. Geol. Survey Open File Report 79-410, 18 p. and 4plates.IW, ,,WIWIJIJIJIJJI'WISmith, P.S., 1915, Ilineral resources of the Lake Clark-Iditarodregion, Alaska: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 622, p. 247-271.Smith, P.S. and Mertie, J.B., Jr., 1930, Geology and nineralresources of northwest Alaska: U.S.'Geol. Survey Bull. 815,p. 316.Smith, W.H., Hoffman, B.L., Solie, D.N., Frankhauser, R.E., andChipp, E.R., 1980, Coal resources of northwest Alaska: Asubcontract to Dames and Hoore for the li.laska PO"lerAuthority, 217 p. and 4 plates.State of Alasl~a Department of Commerce and Economic Development,Division of Energy and PO".'ler Development, 1979, Communityenergy survey, 47 p.37

i'\r 1Unpublished Reports and Personal ContactsEuck, Robert, Norttern Technical Services, 750 Hest 2nd Avenue,Anchorage, aska 99501, 276-4302.Published ReportsI~Dachnowski-Stokes, A.P., 1941, Peat Resources in Alaska: U.S.Dept~ of Agriculture Tech. Bull. 769, 84 p.D.:::vi!3, C.A., 1909, The possible use of peat fuel in .r~laska, .inr.rool~s, A.H • .,· Hiner.:::.! resources of Alaska, report onprogress of investigations in 1908: U.S. Gebl. Survey Bull.379, p. 63-66,.King, R., and others, 1~80, Preliminary evaluation ofenvironmental issues on the use of peat as an energy source:U.S. Dept. of Energy, Division of Fossil Fuel Processing, p.2-6 to 2-30 ano 4-3 to 4-8.D.P., 1977, Peat, in Bureau of IUnes rlinera1sYearbook, Volume I, p. 1-9.~Hckeisen,Northern Technic~.lServices and EKOt!O, Inc., 1980, Peat resourceestimation in Alaska: under contract to State of AlaskaDepartment of Commerce and Econo~ic Development, Division ofEnergy and Power Development; prepared for U.S. Dept. ofEnergy, Division of Fossil Energy, 107 p. and 2 plates.Oi1 and GasUnpublished Reports and Personal Contacts38

[.1 us!:a Di vis i on of iIinc r 2.l s anel Energy ilanage;:12nt, Sta te ofAlaska Departnent of lic::tu[c.l Resources, 701 n. NorthernLights Dlvd., Anchorage, Alaska.Alaska Oil an~ Gas Association, Location of oil and gas wells inAl

....-....APPENDIX IReview Agency Comments....----........--

(PIJI'lI~iAPA 25/NlReview Comments of Draft ReportooooDepartment of the Army - Alaska District, Corps of EngineersUnited States Department of Commerce - National MarineFisheries ServiceDepartment of Energy - Alaska Power AdministrationResponse to Comments.1I~IW, 1IJ,WI.JIl II~IJJ1

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYALASKA DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERSP.O. BOX 7002ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99510; 1ATTENTION OF,NPAEN-PL-RMr. Eric P. YouldExecutive DirectorAlaska Power Authority333 West 4th Avenue, Suite 31Anchorage, Alaska 99501flE.CSl'JE.D:~PR 7 1981i •• l3 APR 198\C'WuDear Mr. Yould:We have completed our review of the draft report for the Reconnaissance Studyof Energy Resource Alternatives for Thirteen Western Alaska Villages by RobertW. Retherford Associates.The report appears to need additional work in the areas of organization andediting. The ability to easily find required data is limited.We have attached a representative list of conments on the report. However,the apparent lack of organization makes it difficult to review the report in amore complete manner. If you have any questions please contact Mr. DaleOlson at 752-3461.Sincerely,/~)1!onf!-1 Inc 1 HARLAN E. MOORE. As stated Chi~f, Engineering Divi~ion" ........ "'"f •. ,:. ,_."'''' ........... ''' ... --•• ~.-.'

present text design makes it difficult to quickly find out what 13 villagesare being studied.2. The table of contents should be expanded to include the thirteen villagesplus seperate sections relating to the various energy alternatives studied.1. The thirteen Alaska villages should be listed on the title page. The3. In section 1, references are made to table 1.2. Where is table 1.2?. 1I~I~i'lJ I J I J IIJ!IJIJIIJI JiJI ,4. The Summary and Recommendations Section should contain tabulated resultsof all thirteen villages .

l1arch 30, 1981Mr. Eric P. Yould, Executive DirectorAlaska Power, Authority333 West 4th Avenue, Suite 31Anchorage, Alaska 99501Dear Nr. Yould:UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNationaZ Marine Fisheries ServiceP.O. Box 1668Juneau, AZaska 99802, ' .'. -) KWe have reviewed the draft report for the reconnaissance study ofenergy requirements and alternatives for the villages of Chuathbaluk,Crooked Creek, Sleetmute, Stony River, Red Devil, TakotRa, Telida,Nikolai, Russian Mission, Sheldon POint, Hughes, Koyukuk, and Buckland.We have no comments to offer at this time.Si ncere ly,#D~McVeyAlaska Regionii.ii :I,..: ,iII.iI.JUI~'-'iI-i,rl , ,,~r :'~, \(il.JIIr \:~Ii Ii~iI ~,i.;I~I,II.J"r I~r ,~

JIJIIjJJ1I-JAPA 25/N2Response to comments:1) Department of the Army. Alaska District, Corps of EngineersThe final report has been edited several additional timesto hopefully eliminate the majority of typographical errorsand insure all materials are located in the proper section.The organization of the report has been modelled after theoutline supplied by the Alaska Power Authority. Tofacilitate locating information within the report, theTable of Contents has been significantly expanded and theTitle Page has been reprinted to include the names of thethirteen villages included in the study.2} United States Department of Commerce - National Marine FisheriesService.1iWINo response.3) Department of Energy - Alaska Power AdministrationWe agree wi th the Department of Energy in that wi ndgeneration may make a contribution for at least somevillages, when reliability of the machinery is improved.Whether the wind contribution will amoun~ to a significantcontribution to the energy supply is, however, yetto be determined.Power requirements forecast in the study for residentialconsumer is based on a modest growth rate of 4.5%/year inelectrical energy usage.2

WAPA 25/N3This growth rate assumes some form of power productionsubsidy will be provided by the State of Alaska torural residence and the continued use of diesel generation.This growth rate reflects as energy usage of 415 - 567kWH/mo/residential consumer by the year 2000.An examination of the energy usage in the rural UnitedStates twenty years past, reveals an energy usage 100 -125 kWH/mo consumer. The same rural consumer usage fortoday is 500 - 600 kWH/mo/consumer. When compared tothis increase in electrical energy requirements, the abovelisted energy use projection for rural Alaska for theyear 2000 does not represent an unreal i st i c forecast.: I1.1..i .r ,Wi ;WI '~r ·.~r )~r )1.1~~r .I~3; \!I.jI ;~L

REFERENCES

J I J I J IJI,JIIJ1I'~I; lifIIiIJ1JIJI1.2.3.4.5.6.REFERENCESCalifornia Energy Commission; Commercial Status: Electrical Generationand Nongeneration Technologies; Staff Draft; September 1979.California Energy Commission; Volume 1: Technical Assessment Manual,Electrical Generation, Version One; Staff Draft with Appendices;September 1979.Canter, Larry W. and Hill, Lore!) G.; Handbook of Varibles forEnvi ronmental Impact Assessment; Ann Arbor Sci ence Publ i shers,Inc.; Ann Arbor, Michigan; 1979.Comtois, Wilfred H.; "Economy of Scale in Power Plants"; PowerEngineering; August 1977.Zarling, J. P., and Seifort, R. D.; Solar Energy Resource Potentialin Alaska; University of Alaska Institute of Water Resources; 1978.Gas Turbine World; Gas Turbine World Handbook 1980-81; PequotPublishing, Inc.; Framingham, Massachusetts; 1980.7. Godfrey, Robert Sturgis, Editor-in-Chief; Building ConstructionCost Data 1980; Robert Snow Means Company, Inc.; 1979.8. Golden, Jack; Ouellette, Robert P.; Saari, Sharon; and Cheremisinoff,Paul H.; Environmental Impact Data Book; Ann Arbor Science Publishers,Inc.; Ann Arbor, Michigan; 1979.9. Grumman, Energy Systems, Inc.; Wind Stream 33 Wind Turbine Generator.Harkins, H. L.; "Applying Cogeneration to Solve Tough Energy Problems ll ;Specifying Engineer; December 1979.Misc16/P1 1

i i, :REFERENCES10 Budwani, Ramesh H.; "Power Plant Capital Cost Analysis"; PowerEngineering; May 1980.L11. Reeder, John W.; Coonrod, Patti L.; Bragg, Nola I.; Denig-Chakroff,Dave; and Markle, Donald R.; Alaska Geothermal Implementation Plan;Draft for U.S. Department of Energy; July 1980.12. Retherford, .Robert W., Associates; Alternate Energy Study: Angoon,Alaska; Preliminary Report for State of Alaska Division of Energyand Power Development; Anchorage; November 1980.13. Retherford, Robert W., Associates; Assessment of Power GenerationAlternatives for Kotzebue; for Alaska Power Authority; Anchorage;June 1980.14. Retherford, Robert W. t Associates; Bristol Bay Energy and ElectricPower Potential Phase 1; for U.S. Department of Energy; Anchorage;December 1979.15. Retherford, Robert W., Associates; Lower Kuskokwim Single WireGround Return Transmi ssi on System Pahse 1. Report; for State ofAlaska, Department of Commerce and Economic Development; June 1980.r'WUI '~!\.j16. Retherford, Robert W., Associates; Transmission Intertie Kake­Petersburg, Alaska: f:. Reconnaissance Report; for Alaska PowerAuthority; Anchorage; October 1980.17. Retherford, Robert W., Associates; Waste Heat Capture Study forState of Alaska; Anchorage; June 1978.18. Schweiger, Robert G.; "Burning Tommorrow's Fuels"; Power; February1979.I~Misc16/P2 2

REFERENCES19. Simons, H. A., (International) Ltd.; Engineering Feasibility Studyof the British Columbia Research Hog Fuel Gasification System; forBritish Columbia Research; May 1978.: II~JI "

iWi ;REFERENCESI :~28. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census; StatisticalAbstract of the United States; September 1979.29. Ehrlich, Paul R.; Ehrlich, Anne H.; Holdren, John P.; "Ecoscience-Population, Resources, Environment"; 1977.30. University of Alaska, Arctic Environmental Information and DataCenter; Northwest Alaska Community Profiles ~ Background For-Planning;for Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs; December1976.ii~i'~31. Darbyshire and Associates; Lower Yukon Regional Community Profiles~ Background For Planning; for Alaska Department of Community andRegional Affairs; December 1979.32. Darbyshire and Associates; Middle Kuskokwim Region Community Profiles~ Background For Planning; for Alaska Department of Community andRegional Affairs; December 1979.33. The Fairmount Press, Inc.; Alternative Energy Sources Factsheets;1978.34. Michels, Tim; "Sol ar Energy Utilizationll; 1979.35. Canter, Larry; IIEnvironmental Impact Assessment ll ; 1977.36. Alaska Village Electric Co-operative, Inc.; 1979 Year End Report;December 1979.r .~37. OTT Water Engineers, Inc.; Northwest Alaska Small HydroelectricReconnai ssance Study; for U. S. Army Corps of Engi neers; January1981.Misc16/P4 4

REFERENCES38. Beck, R.W.; Small Scale Hydropower Reconnaissance Study SouthwestAlaska; for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Draft February 1981.39. Retherford, Robert W., Associates; Reconnaissance Study of theKisaralik River Hydroelectric Power Potential and Alternate ElectricEnergy Resources in the Bethel Area; for Alaska Power Authority;February 1980.40. Retherford, Robert W., Associates; Reconnaissance Study of the LakeElva and Other Hydroelectric Power Potentials in the DillinghamArea; for the Alaska Power Authority; February 1980.41. Department of Commerce and Economic Development; Community EnergySurvey; 1978 and 1979.42. Department of Commerce and Economic.Development; The PerformanceReport of the Alaska Economy 1978.43. U.S. Department of Commerce; The Alaska Economy Year-EndPerformance Report 1979.44. Department of Commerce and Economic Development; The AlaskaStatistical Reviews 1980.45. Alaska Department of Labor; Alaska Population Overview; December1979.46. Rural Electrification, January 1981.47. Alaska Village Electric Co-operative, Inc.; itA Guide Book forMembers/!; 1980.Misc16/P5-. ,"'~ .'51l;~!,'11I"f .." .I'. .,..

-~".--REFERENCESr11./r 1W48. University of Alaska, Institute of Social, Economic and GovernmentResearch; Review of Business and Economic Conditions; September1973.49. Retherford, Robert W. ,i Associates; Electricity - Vital Ingredientto Quality in Survival; 1979.50. Retherford, Robert W., Associates; Management Audit ElectricalSystem Performance -Engineering Aspects Evaluation; for MatanuskaElectric Association, Inc.; September 1979.< 'U!!~51. University of Alaska, Institute of Social and Economic Research;Electric Power in Alaska, 1976-1995; August 1976.52. Mechanical Technology Inc.; Liquid ana Solid Fuel Stirling Enginesfor Alaskan Applications; December 1980.53. Mechanical Technology Inc.; Program Concept for DemonstratingStirling Engine Power Generators in Alaskan Villages; September1980.I '~..f 1i '54. Village Meetings, November-December 1980.55. Verbal Communication fuel dealers in Bethel, McGrath, Kotzebue andNenana; 1981.56. Orith, Donald J.; Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, United StatesGovernment Pri nti ng Offi ce ~ Wash; ngton, D. C., repri nted 1971.r \--r '~Misc16/P6ARLISAlaska Re~ourcesLibrary & Infofmation ServicesA nchorage Alaskai 1I~'