Federal money could help build Healy wind farm
by Christopher Eshleman/ceshleman@newsminer.com
May 09, 2010 | 2404 views | 17 17 comments | 10 10 recommendations | email to a friend | print
FAIRBANKS - Electric utility managers say it’s a federal clean energy program that has them poised to build a big wind farm near Healy.

The program would repay more than two-thirds of construction costs for a $93 million Eva Creek farm, Golden Valley Electric Association president Brian Newton said Friday.

The utility has weighed the proposed farm for years and recently tested markets for renewable energy aid. Newton said they learned last month the project falls under the federal Clean Renewable Energy Bonds program and would be reimbursed from the federal treasury. They are talking of building the 24 megawatt wind farm immediately.

“It’s a shovel-ready project,” Newton said. “So we could have it up next summer if we really hustle.” He said GVEA directors are waiting for financing details and would then solicit potential builders.

GVEA pitched the financing plan last week, saying the potential aid represents a chance to build the farm without simultaneously putting upward pressure on retail electric prices. Newton said Friday the federal department would, if GVEA’s plan falls into place, reimburse the utility for 70 percent of its construction loan or bond payments. He said that would carry what would have been a roughly 6 percent interest rate to or below the 2 percent mark.

GVEA had already compiled paperwork for the project last year as it sought help from outlets including the state-based Renewable Energy Fund. Managers then learned they’d qualify for federal aid and have since worked with the Internal Revenue Service to double-check their eligibility, Newton said.

State energy managers assigned the 24 megawatt Eva Creek project a higher score last year than a number of other proposed renewable energy projects, ranking it in the top 20 percent of various pitches from the Interior and Southcentral regions for grants from the Renewable Energy Fund.

Newton said the utility ultimately didn’t get money from that fund but state energy managers’ analysis painted the picture of a viable project sited to enjoy a “better wind resource” than alternatives.

The utility isn’t the only one talking about wind in the Interior. Developer Mike Craft, who built a single megawatt turbine near Delta Junction, is talking about expanding to 17 megawatts to feed Fort Greely Army post. Craft had previously sought to sell the power to GVEA but said Friday he’s looking for direct power sales to the military.

Craft’s firm, Alaska Environmental Power, previously applied for aid from the state Renewable Energy Fund but the fund’s managers said a grant would arrive only if GVEA formally agreed to buy the power. They also cautioned, in an Alaska Energy Authority analysis of the project, that Craft’s wind farm might not produce enough power to cover its construction price tag.

But Craft said by phone that his analysis shows the estimated $34 million project, to be funded without government grants, has proven profitable and he thinks construction could start in 2011. Craft said work crews might start pouring concrete foundations this summer.

“It would make Fort Greely completely carbon free,” he said.

Either project would be a major addition to energy production along Alaska’s road system. A 24 megawatt farm near Eva Creek would represent about one-tenth of GVEA’s power portfolio. Cook Inlet Regional Corp. said its proposed Fire Island farm near Anchorage could be twice that size but plans for Eva Creek hold room for a six-fold expansion, or up to 150 megawatts.

Wind power in the United States grew from 2,000 megawatts to 35,000 megawatts — the carbon equivalent of 10.5 million cars off the road — during the past decade according to the federal office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. It has caught on in Alaska, drawing increased focus among utilities, developers and energy research centers here.

The Energy Authority gave Eva Creek’s prospects high marks last year, saying the estimated value of energy production, measured in terms of displaced fuel that the largely oil-dependent GVEA could do without, comes close to $156 million, almost double the construction cost. That analysis was produced before the realization GVEA qualified for the federal renewable subsidies, which one director last week said mesh with general market conditions for a “once in a generation opportunity” to build the wind farm at low costs.
Comments
(17)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
noramarie
|
May 09, 2010
Yes, yes, and yes. This is where we need GVEA moving right now. The clean energy industry has a higher job growth rate per dollar invested than any traditional fuel industry, and fossil fuels are becoming more expensive and harder to extract at the same time that clean energy technology is improving and pushing prices down. By investing in wind now, GVEA will be a model small utility company leading the way in the national movement toward clean energy development. There's major legislation in Congress right now that would increase the kind of federal funding for clean energy that GVEA currently has access to, and I hope that Begich and Murkowski will support it so that Alaskans can have greater access to clean, safe energy sources.
mileder
|
May 09, 2010
The Nome wind farm install was '08, not '09, as I see online.
mileder
|
May 09, 2010
Besides the fact that the installation was only last year? Dunno. Find us a source describing the problem and maybe it can become a topic of conversation. Kotz has been in for long enough that the bugs seem to be worked out fine.
Invictus
|
May 09, 2010
mileder -- you seem to know these things. Why were all of the Nome wind turbines shut down all winter long and are they up and running now?
Pearl=W
|
May 09, 2010
I'm not very knowledgeable about BIG wind farms. HOWEVER I can offer some first hand experience with small wind power generation.

My 2 little wind chargers operate just fine at sub-zero temperatures. In higher humidities, they *might* have problems icing up. They keep my battery banks charged up just grand, all during the 'low-solar' months of winter, and of course I do not have the winds of the Alaska Range to run them, just foothill winds.

They do make some noise, it's true; I always know how the wind is blowing. I don't find the noise excessive, unlike running a fuel driven generator.

They've never caught a bird; I think the sound warns the birds off, maybe? I do have a lot of birds, especially in the summer. Ravens often visit my roof, where my wind chargers are mounted.

I've had zero maintainence expense in the last decade of operation.
mileder
|
May 09, 2010
blue5 must live Outside as it is common knowledge that they have been operating wind turbines in Kotzebue for at least 10 years. S/he seems to think people up here don't know how to keep machinery running.
Arctic_Lynx
|
May 09, 2010
*chuckle*

I wonder if GVEA is hiring any engineering interns for this project. It would be great to work on a green wind project like this.

Plus, I wouldn't mind being one of the "overpaid" employees 'hrdharry' is referring to.
blue5011
|
May 09, 2010
Nobody in their right mind would fund these follies. Google "California turbines frozen in Minnesota" and read the story. I am sure there are turbines that CAN operate in the cold -- but is the additional protection worth the additional cost?
Charliebussell
|
May 09, 2010
We should not be losing focus again on these dreams of green energy that simply do not cost less....remain focused on building, at least, phase one of Susitna. It is the only KNOWN and PROVEN long term clean, affordable and reliable energy source for the entire railbelt area.
oldowl
|
May 09, 2010
This is good news and hopefully the wind farm will be up by next year. The state could contribute the 25 million they are spending to drill in Cook Inlet.
Invictus
|
May 09, 2010
I'm very much in favor of augmenting permanent power sources with intermittent wind power, however, only if the wind turbines and components are mined, refined, manufactured, and marketed right here in the United States. Otherwise, most of that money goes into the pockets of the Chinese.

BTW, Nomes multi-million dollar wind farm didn't work all winter. Does anyone know if it's back up and producing?
blazerlgs
|
May 09, 2010
Fire up the coal plant.

Do it today
hrdharry
|
May 09, 2010
Funny how GVEA claims to be kicking the oil habit but waits for federal money to do it. I think the only bad habit they have, is paying for thoses overpriced employees.
dirttramp
|
May 09, 2010
Why did GVEA back out of Craft's deal? Larmax, sure dams work, but at what cost? I guess you don't like eating fish. Salmon numbers are way down. Let's wipe them out so we can have cheap power. I saw a local comic last night that wants to have free liposuction clinics to provide fat to GVEA to burn as an alternative fuel. There's enough fattys in this town to make it work.
lippyjr
|
May 09, 2010
There is a idle power project in Healy and now we are going to move on to the next one.

Let me get this right wind power generation renewable resource. What happens when the wind doesn't Blow or the temps drop well below zero and they quit working.

Building these eyesores on permafrost in a earthquake prone area is this a wise idea?

In the process of paying for this are there provisions to have them removed when this project fails.

Not being a tree hugger but how about the noise that wind generators produce? What happens when the first Bald eagle is killed buy the rotating blades?

This sound like another start of another Alaskan

Junk yard starting. This idea is to new there need to be more research on this before this goes any futher.
mileder
|
May 09, 2010
"Why is it that these projects are only worth while..."

Just like all those nuke plants they built 30-40 years ago.
Larmex
|
May 09, 2010
Why is it that these projects are only worth while when someone else pays for them. Why cant they stand on their own? There is only one answer, they are not profitable. Borrowing money for someone who is broke is not very sound business practice.

Who will pay for the maintance on these blow hard projects? How long will it be before they are shut down because they are no longer worth maintaining, or more costly than other sources of power? Why cant we take this so called "free money" and start building dams, something we know works and has proven to be profitable? Or is making power with the wind sound better to the tree huggers?

When I pay my electric bill I do not feel one bit better knowing I am getting raped by Green Power.
Newsminer.com encourages a lively exchange of ideas regarding topics in the news. Users are solely responsible for the content. Comments are not pre-approved by News-Miner staff. Please keep it clean, respect others and use the 'report abuse' link when necessary. Read our full user's agreement.