12.07.2015 Views

Electrical Power for Valdez and the Copper River Basin-1981

Electrical Power for Valdez and the Copper River Basin-1981

Electrical Power for Valdez and the Copper River Basin-1981

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Valdez</strong>/Glennallen <strong>Power</strong> Market AnalysisCHAPTER IINTRODUCTIONPurpose aQd ScopeThis power market analysis evaluates alternatives <strong>for</strong> meeting <strong>the</strong> powerneeds of <strong>the</strong> <strong>Valdez</strong>/Glennallen areas after full utilization of <strong>the</strong>Solomon Gulch hydro project, now under construction. Included are powermarket <strong>for</strong>ecasts, analyses of various alternatives <strong>for</strong> supplying <strong>the</strong>projected needs, <strong>and</strong> estimates of future energy costs. The <strong>Valdez</strong> <strong>and</strong>Glennallen areas are considered as one, <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> purposes of this report,since <strong>the</strong> <strong>Copper</strong> Valley Electric Association (CVEA) line between <strong>the</strong> twoareas is presently under construction.The analysis primarily focuses on <strong>the</strong> Allison Creek Hydro Project as apotential to meet area power needs after full utilization of SolomonGulch. It also looks at <strong>the</strong> alternatives of (1) pressure reducingturbines in <strong>the</strong> Alyeska Pipeline, <strong>and</strong> (2) interconnection with Railbeltarea power supplies.Project Plans <strong>and</strong> CostsThe Corps of Engineers Southcentral Railbelt Stage II Checkpoint reportof April 1978 titled, Hydroelectric <strong>Power</strong> <strong>and</strong> Related Purposes <strong>for</strong><strong>Valdez</strong>, Alaska, identified <strong>the</strong> Allison Creek project lake tap scheme ashaving <strong>the</strong> best potential of several alternatives considered. Sincethat report, <strong>the</strong> Corps designed two alternatives <strong>for</strong> using a powertunnel <strong>and</strong> a penstock between lake tap <strong>and</strong> powerplant. Alternative 1uses a "lower" powerplant near <strong>the</strong> shoreline <strong>and</strong> alternative 2 an"upper" one on <strong>the</strong> mountainside. The following chart outlines <strong>the</strong>se:<strong>Power</strong>plant LocationInstalled CapacityAverage Annual EnergyFirm EnergyPlant Factor (firm)Project CostUnit <strong>Power</strong> CostAverage Annual CostUnit Energy CostTransmission LineAlternative 1Lower8 MW39,350 MWH34,300 MWH48.9%$37,250,000$5,029/kW$3,489,52110.2¢/kWh3 milesPrevious StudiesAlternative 2Upper8 MW37,250 MWH32,200 MWH45.9%$34,301,000$4,63l/kW$3,229,17610.0¢/kWh3.5 milesAn inventory of potential hydroelectric sites in Alaska was done by <strong>the</strong>Alaska District of <strong>the</strong> U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (now <strong>the</strong> Alaska <strong>Power</strong>Administration) in <strong>the</strong> 1960's. Several sites near <strong>Valdez</strong>, includingAllison Creek, were part of this inventory. However, when <strong>the</strong> inventory1

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!