Two similar projects have been tested in Ruby and Eagle. This one, lined up for use near Nenana, would be bigger — between 50 and 300 kilowatts, via small turbines and an underwater transmission cable in the Tanana River. It would operate a little less than half the year.
Monty Worthington, a project development director for the Anchorage-based ORPC Alaska, said he hopes to have the system up and running in 2012.
Nenana links to the Interior’s electric grid and ORPC would sell power to the market, he said.
The firm already holds a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission permit but wants to install the system at a different spot on the river than originally expected, said Jerome Johnson, a University of Alaska Fairbanks professor working with the firm and the city.
Advocates of small-scale hydrokinetic technology — turbines designed to harness kinetic energy from oceans, bays and rivers — say their use could trim rural Alaska’s dependence on diesel fuel. The firm says Nenana, “eager to adopt a clean, renewable, and cost-efficient power system,” has backed the plan. The Nenana project would be the first that needed FERC approval, Worthington said.
Researchers at the Fairbanks-based Alaska Center for Energy and Power estimated last month that Alaska’s vast geography holds about 40 percent of the country’s potential river energy. The center said research still needs to pin down the technical implications of in-river turbines and, more specifically, the system designed for Nenana. Worthington said it would be submerged, unlike other in-river pilot projects. He said the company thinks that setup could solve complications presented by floating debris and surface ice.
“We have a lot of technological evolution to go through,” he said of the system, originally designed in concept for capturing tidal energy.
The proposal coincides with increases in state aid for renewable and emerging energy research and development.
“Alaska is well positioned to facilitate RMHT” — river and marine hydrokinetic technology — “as it transitions from emerging to developed technology over the next five to 10 years by building on current and planned national and state structures,” the energy center wrote in November.
The federal commission is collecting comments through mid-January on the proposal. Worthington said the permit would let his company apply for a more detailed FERC license needed for the project.
Contact staff writer Christopher Eshleman at 459-7582.
http://www.newenergycorp.ca/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx
From the hydrokinetic conference:
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/OceanRiver/4-12-2010_HydrokineticTechConf/NewEnergyCorp.pdf
It's not like stuff hasn't been tested in Alaska's unique environment before, yes?
The old Alaska Science and Technology Foundation Grants was well-funded and required payback. Most of the grantees failed in their projects and therefore, failed to pay back the money into the grant fund, thus it dried up and is no more.
If these energy projects are to be sustainable, they must pay back the grants.
Why doesnt the project team not sale the indea to investors who can finance it?
Why not create an IPO?
I see so many comments of how great an idea it is, then by all means put your money where your mouth is and back the project with your own money.
If this is set up like the one up in Eagle was set up this summer, it's NOT completely submerged; it's set up on a barge platform:
http://www.adn.com/2009/02/04/679569/in-river-generator-may-give-bush.html
You also have to consider anchor ice forming.
Apparently you're unaware of the fact our rivers lock up with 40-50 inches of ice in the winter.
Oh, we'll need to build a smelter and refinery, too, so that we're not dependent on foreigners to do this for us. Dang it, we'll need a lot more power to do all this. Looks like it'll be coal for awhile, then maybe gas once the Pebble, Ambler, and Frying Pan deposits are in production. Meantime, we'll need to keep pumping as much oil as we can to keep the dozers and trucks running; and to make the insulation for the cables running from the little turbines to the end users.
Yep, there's alot of things that go into producing one of those little water turbines. Might even be some of those rare earth magnets that only China can produce. There's a uranium/rare earth element deposit near Ketchikan that's being drilled right now. Looks like we'll have to get that on line, too, to make these little hummers.
All those mines required to build little water turbines. It's amazing.
I say let's get started on this.
---
I am curious how you keep all your piping from freezing at 40-50 below zero.
-------
As for Nenana, I think the money would be better spent on buying some gas turbine gen sets and turning the local natural gas into electricity.
Also, there are successful devices that convert gas directly into electricity. They are built in to conex sized containers.
Both types require a pipe for the gas and one plug for the power output.
They come as "turn key" units and can be hauled by truck.
Seems to me some procedes from tax dollars and the precious PFD could have gone to get this up and running awhile ago.
I guess someone needs to turn a profit.
Where's the "federal commission" collecting comments at? Can't seem to find much info on that...
Surely there are many, many villages far more in need, and at least equally suitable? Villages NOT hooked to an existing large power grid already supplying [relatively] cheap energy, villages NOT on the main road and rail system and without easy access to [relatively] cheap fuel supplies.
Could selection for this poorly prioritized benefit [Fed freebie] have anything to do with the Coghill name and influence?? Where did this selection of Nenana as the beneficiary originate? What price have others paid for the influence, and it's benefits?