Legislature(2013 - 2014)BARNES 124
02/26/2014 08:00 AM House ENERGY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Alaska Energy Authority | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ENERGY
February 26, 2014
8:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Doug Isaacson, Co-Chair
Representative Charisse Millett, Co-Chair
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Pete Higgins
Representative Shelley Hughes
Representative Benjamin Nageak
Representative Andy Josephson
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
SARA FISHER-GOAD, Executive Director
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCCED)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced Alaska Energy Authority staff
and answered questions during updates on the Renewable Energy
Fund grants and recommendations, and on the Emerging Energy
Technology Fund.
SEAN SKALING, Deputy Director
Alternative Energy and Energy Efficiency
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCCED)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an update on the Renewable Energy
Fund grants and recommendations.
ALAN BALDIVIESO, Program Manager
Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF)
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCCED)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an update on the Emerging Energy
Technology Fund.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:02:17 AM
CO-CHAIR CHARISSE MILLETT called the House Special Committee on
Energy meeting to order at 8:02 a.m. Representatives Nageak,
Josephson, Hughes, Isaacson, and Millett were present at the
call to order. Representatives Foster and Higgins arrived as
the meeting was in progress.
^PRESENTATION: ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
PRESENTATION: ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
8:02:28 AM
CO-CHAIR MILLETT announced that the only order of business would
be a presentation by the Alaska Energy Authority on the
Renewable Energy Fund grants and recommendations, and on the
Emerging Energy Technology Fund.
8:02:43 AM
SARA FISHER-GOAD, Executive Director, Alaska Energy Authority
(AEA), Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
(DCCED), informed the committee that in addition to the update
of programs, provided in the committee packet are copies of the
executive summary for the Renewable Energy Fund grant report and
details on projects that have been funded by Round 1 of the
Emerging Energy Technology Fund.
8:03:40 AM
SEAN SKALING, Deputy Director, Alternative Energy and Energy
Efficiency, AEA, DCCED, participated in the PowerPoint
presentation entitled, "Renewable Energy Grant Fund and Emerging
Energy Technology Fund" dated 2/26/14. Mr. Skaling informed the
committee the beginning of his presentation would be an annual
status report of existing projects, followed by recommendations
for 2014. He said the Renewable Energy [Fund grants] program
has gained momentum, although the program has taken some time to
get established and to see projects through to construction and
to producing energy [slide 2]. In response to Representative
Hughes, he said the Renewable Energy Fund was established in
2008 for a five-year period with $50 million per year and
renewed in 2012. The Renewable Energy Fund diversifies and
strengthens the state's energy portfolio, displaces volatile
fuel prices, and thoroughly examines energy projects before
making recommendations to the legislature for the funding of
grants.
8:06:26 AM
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON observed that Garn boilers, such as the one
installed at Coffman Cove School, seem to be the equipment
preferred, but they are very expensive and there is a lower-cost
alternative.
MR. SKALING said the program is not focused on a brand, but on a
standard for high efficiency and low emissions to protect air
quality. The Garn boiler meets this standard, as do others.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON questioned how another system that can be
proved as efficient and less expensive, could be vetted by AEA.
MR. SKALING said AEA seeks to include a cadre of biomass boilers
that meet the standards as verified by an independent third-
party.
MS. FISHER-GOAD added the AEA expects the equipment procured by
the applicant to meet the standard, regardless of the brand.
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK surmised diversification of the energy
portfolio means using different types of sources of energy, and
he asked for a realistic outlook for providing energy to the
villages in Alaska.
MR. SKALING explained that the Renewable Energy Fund program
provides grants for those that apply, and there is outreach
going on to inform communities of what energy resources are
available. He expressed his belief that Alaska has vast
renewable energy resources, and AEA seeks applications that can
provide cost-effective renewable energy at a lower cost than is
currently available. In further response to Representative
Nageak, he said AEA will reveal later in the meeting its action
plans for projects that are in place.
8:12:05 AM
CO-CHAIR MILLETT provided a brief history of the original [House
Bill 152, passed in the 25th Alaska State Legislature] and
modified by [House Bill 250, passed in the 27th Alaska State
Legislature]. As a member of the Renewable Energy Fund
[advisory committee] board, she said a lot has been learned
through the evolution of the process that is now in Round VII of
grant funding, and she encouraged the committee to attend the
board's public meetings. Co-Chair Millett listed some of the
requirements for a successful application to the grant program,
and asked Ms. Fisher-Goad to provide further background
information on the bill.
MS. FISHER-GOAD said the three directives in [AS 42.45.045] are
to assign the greatest weight to projects in high-cost areas,
and significant weight to projects that provide matching funds
and that contribute to regional spreading. The mechanism
developed by AEA has a strong vetting process to review all
three aspects. She pointed out the Renewable Energy Fund grant
program is unique in that AEA provides recommendations to the
legislature on which grants to fund. Over the life of the
program, the legislature has not made changes to the list of
recommendations, and she attributed that to interaction with the
advisory committee. Ms. Fisher-Goad stressed that the program
strives to first achieve affordable energy for the benefit of a
community.
8:16:24 AM
MR. SKALING returned attention to slide 2, noting that AEA and
the contractors have learned how to develop a project "right"
and maximize its benefits.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON asked for more information about AEA's
management, disbursal, and rewarding of funds.
MS. FISHER-GOAD said that information would follow.
MR. SKALING further explained that the Renewable Energy Fund
provides local employment and benefits businesses that are not
eligible for the Power Cost Equalization (PCE) program. Slide
[3] showed the number of applications received round by round,
and how many were funded. A total of 732 applications have been
reviewed at length, 251 have been funded, and over 87 have been
completed. In addition, $1.3 billion were requested, $340
million were recommended, and $237 million were funded. Slide
4 was a map which showed all of the projects funded throughout
the state: wind projects are concentrated along the coast in
Western Alaska, biomass projects are concentrated in the
Interior, and hydroelectric (hydro) projects are concentrated in
Southcentral and Southeast.
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK observed some projects have less cash
disbursed than appropriated.
MS. FISHER-GOAD clarified that multi-year funding puts some
reimbursement later in the fiscal year, or in the next year.
Match funding is recorded as the funding is disbursed.
MR. SKALING added that large projects receive match funding in
excess of what grantees are required to report to AEA.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON commended AEA on its progress.
8:21:38 AM
MR. SKALING directed attention to slide 5 which showed the
amount of diesel fuel displaced year-by-year in millions of
gallons of diesel fuel equivalent. He pointed out savings -
between 2011 and the projected savings in 2014 - increased from
two million gallons to roughly sixteen million gallons.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON expressed his interest in the displacement of
diesel and its effect on PCE calculations.
MR. SKALING said information on each project and its yearly net
production of electricity or heat, or electricity and heat, was
provided on slide 6. Slide 7 showed the net present value (NPV)
of benefits and costs of the program: the first 36 projects now
in operation represent $82 million of the Renewable Energy Fund,
the total NPV cost is $290 million, and the NPV benefits are
$840 million, therefore the ratio is almost 3:1 overall project
benefit versus costs.
CO-CHAIR MILLETT recalled the program was not funded at the $50
million level every year.
8:24:23 AM
MR. SKALING confirmed that the Renewable Energy Fund has
received around $25 million every year other than the first.
Slide 8 showed investment by region and by resource type during
Rounds I-VI, indicating that hydro and wind projects received
the majority of funding. Slide 9 showed the expected grant
completion schedule for 2014, and he pointed out that for the
first time, the number of completed projects will exceed the
stages of reconnaissance, feasibility, and final design. Mr.
Skaling continued to slides 10 and 11 which highlighted the
Pelican Hydro project: the Renewable Energy Fund invested $1.95
million towards the total cost of $5.8 million; the power plant
can now operate on 100 percent hydro.
8:26:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked how the little town of Pelican
got a match of funds.
MR. SKALING was unsure.
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK recalled hearing testimony on this project
last year.
MR. SKALING highlighted the Delta Junction School Biomass
project, noting that with its fuel savings the school has
retained two teachers, reinstated its music program, and
remodeled the school. The system is an automatic auger chip
system that is easy to manage [slide 12].
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS observed that Cantwell wants to save
money on fuel at its school by using coal, and asked whether
coal as an energy source would qualify for [a Renewable Energy
Fund grant].
MS. FISHER-GOAD said AEA has other programs to assist in
reducing energy costs besides the Renewable Energy Fund; in
fact, AEA is looking at coal projects for other entities through
its regional energy planning effort which allows for other fuel
sources.
8:30:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS surmised that every area has different
resources to use for the highest benefit.
MR. SKALING highlighted the Kodiak Renewables project: the
project has a blend of hydro, wind, and battery, and generates
95 percent of its electricity from renewables utilizing a
battery storage system [slide 13].
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES asked for the cost of electricity in
Kodiak.
MR. SKALING advised the cost of electricity in Kodiak is in the
range of 15-20 cents per kilowatt (kW).
MS. FISHER-GOAD said AEA would provide additional information on
the cost of energy in Kodiak under differing scenarios, pointing
out that renewables are an inflation-proof resource and the way
to assess savings is to compare the future cost of renewable
energy to the future cost of energy from existing power sources.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES requested information on the lowest and
highest costs of electricity in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS compared the higher cost of the Eva Creek
Wind Turbine Project to that of the Kodiak Renewables project.
8:35:22 AM
MR. SKALING expressed his belief that the projects have similar
wind turbines of 1.5 megawatts (MW) each, but Eva Creek
installed more of them; furthermore, the Kodiak project also had
funds from other sources, and he offered to compare the cost per
kilowatt hour.
CO-CHAIR MILLETT recalled Kodiak also received federal money.
MR. SKALING then turned attention to the Renewable Energy Fund
Round VII disbursement recommendations. The recommended
projects went through a four-stage review process, including
vetting by the advisory committee, more stringent technical and
economic criteria, and ranking using statutory criteria. The
status report shows within a $20 million budget, AEA recommends
funding 26 projects, of which 17 are heating projects and 9 are
electric or other [slide 15]. Slide 16 illustrated the
recommended Round VII heat projects; the larger projects are
within the $20 million budget and are spread around the state.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON asked for a description of the symbols on
slide 16.
MR. SKALING explained the biomass symbol indicates a project
that burns wood for heat; the heat pump symbol indicates taking
heat from the ground into a building; the heat recovery symbol
indicates the capture of wasted heat from diesel powerhouses
that is diverted to a nearby public building; the hydro to heat
symbol indicates electricity from excess hydro generation that
can be used to heat buildings; and the wind to heat symbol
indicates the use of excess electricity generated by wind to
heat buildings.
8:40:40 AM
CO-CHAIR MILLETT gave the gavel to Co-Chair Isaacson.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON asked whether storing excess electricity
generated by wind is successful.
MR. SKALING said the most economic deployment has the wind
project "sized" to fit demand, with a secondary load for periods
of excess generation; however, producing a large amount of heat
is uneconomic during the seasons when the heat is not needed.
In further response to Co-Chair Isaacson, he agreed the
aforementioned system works best in a small community or village
setting. Slide 17 illustrated the location of the recommended
Round VII electric projects around the state; again the larger
projects are within the $20 million budget.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON inquired as to the nature of the transmission
line project in the North Slope Borough.
MR. SKALING responded the project will bring electricity
generated by local natural gas to a community currently burning
diesel fuel. The applicable statutes were written to include
local energy, including natural gas, thus the project qualifies
for funding from the Renewable Energy Fund.
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK recalled attending a workshop about the
project which will transmit electricity 75 miles along the Meade
River from Barrow to Atqasuk.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked, "... is there overlap in these
electric amplification programs with ... the Railbelt major
utilities, and their desire for more intertie enhancement?"
MS. FISHER-GOAD advised that the programs are considered
separate projects; there are Railbelt utilities and other
entities in the Railbelt that have applied and are represented
on [slide 17] and are listed in the report as applicants.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES questioned whether there are tidal project
applicants.
8:44:54 AM
MR. SKALING noted there is a hydrokinetic project in the False
Pass area that is recommended, but is not in the $20 million
budget. In further response to Representative Hughes, he said
there is one other tidal project in the Cook Inlet area from an
earlier round of applications. Tidal energy remains very
expensive to develop and does not compete very well. Slide 18
illustrated the recommended Round VII heat applications
specified by type and by region: Tier 1 projects were shown in
red and fall within the $20 million budget, and Tier 2 projects
were shown in tan, but are not within the budget.
MS. FISHER-GOAD offered to provide the committee information on
the interaction between the Renewable Energy Fund projects and
the PCE program. Generally, 30 percent of the kilowatt hours
sold in a PCE-eligible community is eligible for PCE, therefore,
the community is already receiving state assistance. How the
Renewable Energy Fund benefits the community as a whole is by
reducing the cost of the non-eligible kilowatt hours. A
document further explaining the aforementioned relationship will
be provided by AEA. She concluded that the PCE-kilowatt hours
do not significantly benefit from renewables because the PCE
program is already providing state assistance.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON recalled testimony from the Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC), and the Alaska Power
Association that an unintended consequence of the displacement
of diesel fuel causes a strain on the fixed-costs of utilities
because it lowers demand. He urged for AEA to look at the PCE
formula and how to identify lower-cost fuels, yet preserve small
utilities. He observed that there is a related proposed bill
now held in committee that needs an in-depth review by the
committee, AEA, and the electric utilities.
MS. FISHER-GOAD was reminded that AVEC advised AEA that using
excess electricity from wind power for a secondary load affects
the PCE calculation by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska
(RCA), and she expressed her belief that an adjustment to
correct this problem may be possible by amending PCE
regulations.
8:51:31 AM
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON urged for changes to be made by regulatory
means, and for the committee to be kept informed.
MS. FISHER-GOAD related that when the Renewable Energy Fund
grant program was established, the legislature was clear that
AEA was not to fund projects that were not productive.
Unrealistic projects are eliminated during the feasibility and
reconnaissance grant analyses. She characterized the projects
as "tightly managed" and stressed that AEA requires that
reimbursements follow a stringent milestone basis. Project
managers work very closely with grantees and seek successful
results within the intent of the legislation, although more work
could be done towards community outreach.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON requested that Ms. Fisher-Goad describe AEA's
project management process. He acknowledged that the Renewable
Energy Fund is making progress and is considered a model of
decision-making; he referred to slide 9 and asked for further
information on what a basic model of project management entails.
MS. FISHER-GOAD suggested that her response be part of AEA's
follow-up to the committee so as to include examples of specific
projects.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON re-directed his question to apply to a
hypothetical project advancing through the four phases shown on
slide 9.
8:57:40 AM
MR. SKALING said the lowest phase is reconnaissance, during
which AEA measures the potential of the local energy resources
in the affected community, and determines if there is a resource
with which to work. If so, at the feasibility phase, AEA looks
more closely at the approach, chooses the best resource, and
determines the infrastructure that is needed to serve the
community. The economics of a project are also a factor in the
feasibility phase. Final design and construction are often
grouped as one grant, depending on the project. In response to
Co-Chair Isaacson, he said the time between reconnaissance and
final design requires a minimum of one year of data. The final
design phase also includes permitting and all of the pre-
construction tasks, and the construction phase includes
commissioning and starting operations. In further response to
Co-Chair Isaacson, he stated that the time period of the
construction phase can vary; for instance, installing a biomass
boiler may take a few months, a hydro project takes much longer,
and wind goes up relatively easily.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked whether AEA assists with
permitting.
MR. SKALING responded that AEA sets some guidelines and provides
some assistance; however, obtaining the proper permit is the
grantee's responsibility. In further response to Representative
Josephson, he affirmed that projects take place on land owned by
local governments, Native corporations, the state, and private
landowners, and that the grantee needs to have clear access.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON recalled there were detractors when
Fire Island Wind was constructed, but he assumed AEA supports
wind turbine electrical generation.
MR. SKALING said the aforementioned project was not a project
through the Renewable Energy Fund and therefore was not vetted
by AEA.
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK inquired as to the governance of Fire
Island Wind.
MS. FISHER-GOAD said she was unsure but would provide
information to the committee on the relationship of Fire Island
Wind to Cook Island Region Inc. (CIRI).
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS observed that AEA knows the permitting
process, and asked whether the agency would help an entity -
that has a good project - obtain its permits.
9:05:30 AM
MS. FISHER-GOAD informed the committee that most of the
Renewable Energy Fund projects are "pass through" grants with
the exception of the construction of a powerhouse or a bulk fuel
tank farm. Of the 200 renewable energy projects, there is a
wide range as to whether the grantee has the capability to
obtain permits. Her agency has been funded to provide technical
assistance to small rural communities and help develop projects;
however, because AEA does not own these projects, it does not
have the responsibility to acquire permits. For example, a
large electric utility would have the capability to manage and
acquire permits, but a rural single-site utility may not.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS sought more information on the guidance
that AEA provides to a [small rural] utility or to a community
before tying up grant funds.
MR. SKALING expressed his belief that the process is driven by
the technology required for the project; for instance, biomass
is "relatively light on permitting," hydro, depending on the
scale, is hard to permit, but the companies involved are
experts. For a wind project, AEA provides guidelines and
assistance, and ensures that grantees acquire permits and
provide proper notice.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS said his intent is to shorten the time
needed for permitting.
9:10:10 AM
MS. FISHER-GOAD directed attention to the Emerging Energy
Technology Fund (EETF) and provided a brief history. The
Emerging Energy Technology Fund was part of [Senate Bill 220
passed in the 26th Alaska State Legislature]. Unlike the
Renewable Energy Fund, EETF is not a recommendation process, so
when funds are available AEA issues grants immediately following
the completion of its due diligence vetting process.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON pointed out that EETF funding can "move
faster."
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK expressed his hope that this type of
program will reveal the new technology that is needed to produce
energy from the resources that are found in the northern regions
of the state.
9:13:31 AM
ALAN BALDIVIESO, Program Manager, EETF, AEA, DCCED, informed the
committee that EETF supports demonstration projects of
technologies that have a reasonable chance at commercial
viability within five years. Approved projects can test
emerging technologies, improve an existing technology, or
demonstrate readily-available commercial technologies unproven
in Alaska [slide 21]. This is also a competitive award program,
although projects are not expected to be commercially economic
within the demonstration period. The ideal is to gain a well-
defined data set and a well-documented independent analysis of
the performance of the technology, and its economic and
technical viability in Alaska. Eligible energy technology
includes renewables, diesel generation, the integration of
renewables and diesel, energy storage, the extraction and
refining of hydrocarbons, energy efficiency, and others,
although the program is not an angel fund for research and
development (R&D), as eligible technologies must exist at least
at the prototype level [slide 22].
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON asked Mr. Baldivieso to describe the examples
given.
MR. BALDIVIESO said there are 15 Round 1 projects underway,
including: the testing of Eocycle Wind Turbine, a small
capacity wind turbine in Kotzebue that is mounted on a tilt-up
monopole tower, and the testing of a large lithium ion battery
module integrated into a wind-diesel grid in Kwigillingok [slide
22]. The program attracts diverse projects and technologies and
EETF benefits from the advice of its seven-member advisory
committee consisting of members with technical backgrounds. All
projects are evaluated on technical criteria in addition to the
priorities that are given to: partnership with Alaska entities;
partnership with Alaska postsecondary institutions; commitments
to matching funds or other resources; and a demonstrated
potential for widespread use in the state. After review by AEA
staff and its advisory committee, top-ranking proposals are
funded [slide 23].
9:18:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES inquired as to the number of applicants
that are affiliated with Outside entities.
MR. BALDIVIESO answered that Alaska entities seek to bring to
Alaska new or existing technologies that are established
Outside. In further response to Representative Hughes, he
estimated that most of the technologies are manufactured outside
of the state.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON questioned the role of the AEA board.
MS. FISHER-GOAD responded that the AEA board has delegated
appeal and final approval authority to her as its executive
director, and therefore is not involved directly with the
program or the final approval process.
MR. BALDIVIESO directed attention to the EETF first round of
funding in 2012. The total amount available for awards was $8.9
million, largely from a matching grant from the Denali
Commission. From 70 responses to the request for approval (RFA)
15 projects were awarded funding, representing a range of
technologies and a geographic spread across the state, although
regional spreading is not required of the program [slide 24].
In response to Representative Hughes, he explained that
applications for river hydrokinetics, a tidal application, and
wave projects were received in Round 1.
9:22:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK asked whether diesel applications are for
diesel retrofitting in existing power plants.
MR. BALDIVIESO relayed that within the diesel category there are
several technologies such as modifications to generators, and
the incorporation of magnetic coupling.
MR. BALDIVIESO turned to Round 2, and noted that AEA is close to
announcing its selections. Approximately $2.3 million are
available for rewards, and AEA is pleased with the quality of
the top proposals and with the continued high level of interest
in the program [slide 24].
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked Mr. Baldivieso to compare EETC
with programs sponsored by the Alaska Center for Energy and
Power (ACEP), University of Alaska Fairbanks.
MR. BALDIVIESO said ACEP is involved in this program as a
contractor to gather data and complete analyses for Round 1
projects; in addition, ACEP has made its power systems
integration and hydrokinetic test beds available to EETF
applicants.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON clarified that testing done at ACEP is not
limited to students' projects.
MR. BALDIVIESO highlighted a project in Kodiak applied for by an
engineer who specializes in marine engines and generators. The
project team is demonstrating the use of a power electronics
package in combination with modified electric motors in order to
improve the efficiency of a diesel generator. This application
can be used in stationary generator set operations or in marine
propulsion [slide 25].
9:26:59 AM
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON asked how the aforementioned project could be
put into production after the demonstration period.
MR. BALDIVIESO said the projects are examined using the
Department of Energy's (USDOE) Technology Readiness Level (TRL)
system, which categorizes the development of a technology as it
proceeds to commercial availability.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS assumed these are technologies that will
come on the market.
MR. BALDIVIESO said yes.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS recalled that the University of Alaska
(UA) has a program to fund new technologies and it gets a
percentage of the patent.
MR. BALDIVIESO advised that the applications to AEA are
typically for technologies that are already patented, and
therefore are the intellectual property of the applicant.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON suggested a mechanism to claim a portion of an
applicant's revenue from future production could be put in
legislation.
MR. BALDIVIESO returned to Co-Chair Isaacson's earlier question
on the generation project's path to production: The diesel
generation technology came to AEA at the prototype level, was
first utilized in a modified automobile, progressed to a 15
kilowatt (kW) generator set, will advance to a 150 kW generator
set, and from there will advance to commercial applications by
the end of the project next year. In further response to Co-
Chair Isaacson, he added that the commercial applications will
be smaller powerhouse generator sets and marine propulsion.
9:31:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NAGEAK asked whether the same technology could be
applied to snow machines.
9:31:43 AM
MR. BALDIVIESO expressed his understanding that the technology
would translate to power-dense motors, he said, "I suspect ...
that [the project developers] would try."
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON urged for drafting of the language AEA needs
to enable "a profit-sharing of commercialized revenues [as
reimbursement] for [the] investment the state has put into these
[technologies]." The recent UA enabling legislation is a good
model to adapt for this purpose.
MR. BALDIVIESO highlighted the installation of a ground source
heat pump in Fairbanks by the Cold Climate Housing Research
Center to demonstrate that ground source heat pumps can be
economically operated in colder environments. A horizontal
ground loop is installed in a narrow band of thawed ground, is
instrumented, and then is covered with different surface
treatments above so as to compare heat retention and heat
absorption [slide 26].
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON has heard that a heat pump can substantially
lower residential home heating and electricity costs.
MR. BALDIVIESO confirmed that the project heat pump is in
operation and is very efficient. Data on this project will be
collected for two years to determine heat output and electricity
costs so as to compare with installation costs, and to measure
thermal degradation.
9:35:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS advised heat pump technology helps with
the cost of heating but not with electricity.
MR. SKALING added that heat pump technology is available and is
in use in Juneau; the most favorable application is in a region
that has low-cost electricity and high-cost heating.
CO-CHAIR ISAACSON expressed his interest in whether AEA is
examining modifications for self-contained systems, such as
electrical systems that create heat and heating systems that
create electricity.
MR. SKALING stated that during past phases of the Renewable
Energy Fund, AEA learned that it is generally challenging to
take heat and produce electricity due to the loss of efficiency.
9:40:55 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Energy meeting was adjourned at 9:40 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| ENE - PRESENTATION - AEA RE Fund and EETF 022614.pdf |
HENE 2/26/2014 8:00:00 AM |
(H) ENE AEA RE Fund and EETF 2/26/14 |
| ENE - AGENDA - AEA Renewables (02-26-14).pdf |
HENE 2/26/2014 8:00:00 AM |