DOCSLIB.ORG

Analysis of Electric Loads and Wind- Diesel Energy Options for Remote Power Stations in Alaska

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Analysis of Electric Loads and Wind- Diesel Energy Options for Remote Power Stations in Alaska ANALYSIS OF ELECTRIC LOADS AND WIND- DIESEL ENERGY OPTIONS FOR REMOTE POWER STATIONS IN ALASKA A Masters Project Presented by MIA M. DEVINE Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING February 2005 Mechanical and Industrial Engineering © Copyright by Mia M. Devine 2005 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT ANALYSIS OF ELECTRIC LOADS AND WIND-DIESEL ENERGY OPTIONS FOR REMOTE POWER STATIONS IN ALASKA FEBRUARY 2005 MIA M. DEVINE, B.A., GRINNELL COLLEGE M.S., UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST Directed by: Dr. James Manwell This report addresses the potential of utilizing wind energy in remote communities of Alaska. About 175 villages in Alaska are located beyond the reach of the central power grids serving the major urban areas. Instead, they are powered by diesel mini-grids. Along with the high cost of fuel delivery and bulk fuel storage tanks, these communities are exposed to environmental hazards associated with diesel generators, including the potential for fuel spills and the emission of greenhouse gases and particulates. To address these issues, Alaska energy representatives are looking to renewable energy technologies, particularly wind-diesel hybrid power systems. In order to determine the economic and technical feasibility of a wind-diesel system, computer modeling of the different power system options must be done. Two primary pieces of information are essential in accurately modeling the expected performance of a wind-diesel hybrid system: the village electric use patterns and the local wind resource. For many Alaskan villages, this information is not readily available. The purpose of this report is to present methods used to obtain both wind resource and electric load data in villages. The Alaska Village Electric Load Calculator, a simple spreadsheet, was created to assist in estimating hourly load data and is available for public use. Case studies are presented to illustrate how this information is used in modeling hybrid wind-diesel options for remote Alaskan villages. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................................................... V LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................................... VII LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................ IX INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................1 Background on Energy Use in Alaskan Villages.................................................................1 Historic Use of Wind Energy in Alaska ...............................................................................4 REPORT PURPOSE AND METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................8 CHAPTER 1: ANALYSIS OF VILLAGE ELECTRIC LOADS ...........................................................................9 1.1 Historical Growth in Energy Use ..................................................................................9 1.2 Effects of the Climate .................................................................................................11 1.3 Alaska Village Electric Load Calculator......................................................................12 1.3.1 Residential Sector Loads............................................................................13 1.3.2 Schools .......................................................................................................15 1.3.3 Public Water System...................................................................................17 1.3.4 Health Clinics ..............................................................................................21 1.3.5 City and Government Sector Loads............................................................22 1.3.6 Commercial Sector Loads...........................................................................24 1.3.7 Communications Facilities ..........................................................................26 1.3.8 Other Loads ................................................................................................27 1.4 Daily Village Load Profiles ..........................................................................................27 1.5 How to Use the Village Electric Load Calculator Method ...........................................30 1.6 Verification of Village Electric Load Calculator Method ..............................................32 CHAPTER 2: DESIGN OF WIND-DIESEL HYBRID POWER STATIONS.....................................................35 2.1 Background on the Technical Aspects of Wind-Diesel Systems ................................35 2.2 Method of Analysis......................................................................................................38 2.3 Modeling Inputs and Assumptions..............................................................................39 2.3.1 Wind Resource ...........................................................................................39 2.3.2 Solar Resource ...........................................................................................40 2.3.3 Load Data....................................................................................................40 2.3.4 Energy Storage ...........................................................................................41 2.3.5 Wind Turbines.............................................................................................42 2.3.6 Balance of System Components ................................................................43 2.3.7 Diesel Generators .......................................................................................44 2.3.8 Dispatch Strategies.....................................................................................45 2.3.9 Economics ..................................................................................................46 CHAPTER 3: FEASIBILITY STUDIES...........................................................................................................47 Feasibility Study 1: Hooper Bay, Alaska...........................................................................48 Feasibility Study 2: Chevak, Alaska..................................................................................61 Feasibility Study 3: Gambell, Alaska.................................................................................75 Feasibility Study 4: Mekoryuk ...........................................................................................89 Feasibility Study 5: Savoonga.........................................................................................101 Feasibility Study 6: Toksook Bay/ Tununak....................................................................112 Feasibility Study 7: Kiana................................................................................................121 AREAS FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION .................................................................................................132 APPENDIX 1. VALIDATION OF VILLAGE ELECTRIC LOAD CALCULATOR ............................................133 APPENDIX 2. WIND TURBINE SPECIFICATIONS.....................................................................................135 APPENDIX 3. BATTERY SPECIFICATIONS ..............................................................................................137 APPENDIX 4. DIESEL FUEL EFFICIENCY DATA......................................................................................138 APPENDIX 5. VILLAGE ELECTRIC LOAD DATA.......................................................................................141 APPENDIX 6. VILLAGE WIND SPEED DATA.............................................................................................145 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………………………...…...154 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Characteristics of AVEC Power Stations ...........................................................................3 Table 2. Electric Consumption of Residential Sector.....................................................................15 Table 3. Electric Consumption of K-12 Schools ............................................................................16 Table 4. Electric Consumption of Level I Public Water Systems...................................................18 Table 5. Electric Consumption of Level II Public Water Systems..................................................20 Table 6. Electric Consumption of Village Health Clinics................................................................22 Table 7. Electric Consumption of City and Government Buildings ................................................23 Table 8. Electric Consumption of Commercial Facilities................................................................25 Table 9. Electric Consumption of Communications Sector............................................................27 Table 10. Electric Load Calculator Inputs for Brevig Mission ........................................................31 Table 11. Electric Load Calculator Inputs for Selawik ...................................................................33
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Notice of Adjustments to Service Obligations
    Served: May 12, 2020 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. CONTINUATION OF CERTAIN AIR SERVICE PURSUANT TO PUBLIC LAW NO. 116-136 §§ 4005 AND 4114(b) Docket DOT-OST-2020-0037 NOTICE OF ADJUSTMENTS TO SERVICE OBLIGATIONS Summary By this notice, the U.S. Department of Transportation (the Department) announces an opportunity for incremental adjustments to service obligations under Order 2020-4-2, issued April 7, 2020, in light of ongoing challenges faced by U.S. airlines due to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) public health emergency. With this notice as the initial step, the Department will use a systematic process to allow covered carriers1 to reduce the number of points they must serve as a proportion of their total service obligation, subject to certain restrictions explained below.2 Covered carriers must submit prioritized lists of points to which they wish to suspend service no later than 5:00 PM (EDT), May 18, 2020. DOT will adjudicate these requests simultaneously and publish its tentative decisions for public comment before finalizing the point exemptions. As explained further below, every community that was served by a covered carrier prior to March 1, 2020, will continue to receive service from at least one covered carrier. The exemption process in Order 2020-4-2 will continue to be available to air carriers to address other facts and circumstances. Background On March 27, 2020, the President signed the Coronavirus Aid, Recovery, and Economic Security Act (the CARES Act) into law. Sections 4005 and 4114(b) of the CARES Act authorize the Secretary to require, “to the extent reasonable and practicable,” an air carrier receiving financial assistance under the Act to maintain scheduled air transportation service as the Secretary deems necessary to ensure services to any point served by that air carrier before March 1, 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • FY22 Capital CC Meeting 9.Xlsx
    CED Conference Committee Motion Sheet Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development Capital Budget Indicates language H or S Indicates structure change Number Program Project Title House Fund Fund Position Senate Fund Fund Position Notes Version Change Code Source Change Change Code Source Change Adopted TOTAL 0.0 0 95,135.0 0 1 (Unassigned) Community Block Grants 6,000.0 1002 Fed Rcpts S 60.0 1003 GF/Match S 2 (Unassigned) National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska Impact Grant 9,100.0 1063 NPR Fund S Program 3 (Unassigned) AMCO Enforcement Case Management and 100.0 1004 Gen Fund S Investigations Report Writing System 100.0 1005 GF/Prgm S 4 (Unassigned) Alaska Energy Authority - Alaska Cargo and Cold 21,000.0 1002 Fed Rcpts S Storage 5 (Unassigned) Alaska Energy Authority - Alternative Energy and Energy 5,000.0 1002 Fed Rcpts S Efficiency Programs 6 (Unassigned) Alaska Energy Authority - Bulk Fuel Upgrades 7,500.0 1002 Fed Rcpts S 5,500.0 1140 AIDEA Div S 7 (Unassigned) Alaska Energy Authority - Rural Power Systems 12,500.0 1002 Fed Rcpts S Upgrades 5,000.0 1140 AIDEA Div S 8 (Unassigned) West Susitna Road Access 8,500.0 1002 Fed Rcpts S 9 Grants to Named Recipients (AS Inter-Island Ferry Authority 250.0 1004 Gen Fund S 37.05.316) CC Meeting 9 - 6/12/21 Page 1 CED Conference Committee Motion Sheet Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development Capital Budget Indicates language H or S Indicates structure change Number Program Project Title House Fund Fund Position Senate Fund Fund Position Notes Version Change Code Source Change Change Code Source Change Adopted 10 Grants to Named Recipients (AS Matanuska-Susitna Borough- Arctic Winter Games 1,000.0 1004 Gen Fund CC: Modify to move from Grants to Named S 37.05.316) Recipeints to Grants to Municipalities.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer 2012 FAA TOURS ALASKA’S RURAL AIRPORTS
    Summer 2012 FAA TOURS ALASKA’s RURAL AIRPORTS May 9, 2012 at the Hooper Bay Airport—(L to R) FAA Rick Neff, DOT&PF Commissioner Luiken, FAA Mike McNerney, FAA Frank Smigelski, FAA Associate Administrator Christa Fornarotto, FAA Assistant Administrator Victoria Wassmer, FAA Airports Division Mgr. Byron Huffman, FAA Regional Administrator Bob Lewis, DOT&PF Deputy Commissioner-Aviation Steve Hatter and DOT&PF Roger Maggard. DOT&PF was very pleased to welcome back FAA Associate Administrator Christa Fornarotto and join her in a field inspection of Alaska’s rural airports. The inspection included many flyovers and landings at airports in the Y-K Delta. Conditions were challenging as many airports were still managing record snowfall conditions. There are 257 airports in Alaska funded by the FAA airport improvement program (AIP) with 166 classified as general aviation airports having less than 2,500 passenger enplanements annually. These airports may be small in size but are huge in the services they provide to villages where aviation is the only mode of transpor- tation. The FAA works with aviation stakeholders and local communities to ensure that our airports remain safe and efficient and meet the needs of the public. DOT&PF receives approximately $150M annually in AIP funding to help meet the needs of rural airports. The role of aviation in Alaska is huge, contributing $3.5 billion to the state economy and 47,000 jobs—that represents 10% of all jobs in our state. The “Alaska’s Aviation Lifeline” video recently released by the De- partment truly captures what aviation is all about in our state and can be viewed at these links: www.vimeo.com/39894638 or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDGw09IuApE Message From Deputy Commissioner We were able to sponsor another American Associa- tion of Airport Executives (AAAE) Certified Member (CM) training class and exam—the 2012 CM Acad- emy—and we’re very proud and honored to an- nounce 14 new Certified Members including our own DOT Commissioner, Marc Luiken.
    [Show full text]
  • Remote Desktop Redirected Printer
    %621% %621% Page 1 of 39 Opened --Project Name Item Number Unit (f) Quantity Eng Project (VersionID/Aksas/Ref. Description (f) (f) Est Min Avg Max Low Bid Std. ID)------ Bid Bid Bid Amount (f) 335 Listed Low 2nd 3rd Bidder Low Low % of Bidder Bidder Bid % of % of Bid Bid 2013 HSIP: Northern Lights Blvd 621 (1A) EACH 5 248.00 296.77 432.60 2,488,685 10 At UAA Drive TREE, WHITE 550.00 275.00 300.00 432.60 Channelization SPRUCE, 4 FEET 0.13% 0.06% 0.05% 0.08% Improvements TALL (41670/52119/1604) 6 Bids Tendered 2013 HSIP: Northern Lights Blvd 621 (1B) EACH 13 441.00 505.68 653.10 2,488,685 10 At UAA Drive TREE, WHITE 650.00 490.00 500.00 653.10 Channelization SPRUCE, 6 FEET 0.39% 0.26% 0.24% 0.31% Improvements TALL (41670/52119/1604) 6 Bids Tendered 2013 HSIP: Northern Lights Blvd 621 (1C) EACH 3 530.00 608.73 827.35 2,488,685 10 At UAA Drive TREE, WHITE 800.00 590.00 605.00 827.35 Channelization SPRUCE, 8 FEET 0.11% 0.07% 0.07% 0.09% Improvements TALL (41670/52119/1604) 6 Bids Tendered 2013 HSIP: Northern Lights Blvd 621 (1D) EACH 16 310.00 332.78 355.00 2,488,685 10 At UAA Drive TREE, PAPER BIRCH, 450.00 344.00 355.00 327.70 Channelization 1 INCH CALIPER 0.33% 0.22% 0.21% 0.19% Improvements (41670/52119/1604) 6 Bids Tendered 2013 HSIP: Northern Lights Blvd 621 (1E) EACH 21 490.00 546.02 632.10 2,488,685 10 At UAA Drive TREE, PAPER BIRCH, 650.00 544.00 560.00 632.10 Channelization 2 INCH CALIPER 0.63% 0.46% 0.43% 0.48% Improvements (41670/52119/1604) 6 Bids Tendered 2013 HSIP: Northern Lights Blvd 621 (1F) EACH 7 615.00 719.33 1,051.00 2,488,685
    [Show full text]
  • ITB Amendment Form
    STATE OF ALASKA ITB NUMBER 2519H039 AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE (1) AMENDMENT ISSUING OFFICE: Department of Transportation & Public Facilities Statewide Contracting & Procurement P.O. Box 112500 (3132 Channel Drive, Room 350) Juneau, Alaska 99811-2500 THIS IS NOT AN ORDER DATE AMENDMENT ISSUED: March 4, 2019 ITB TITLE: Grader, Wing & Plow Blades ITB OPENING DATE AND TIME: March 27, 2019 @ 2:00 PM Alaska Time The following changes are required. 1. The Bid Schedule is amended to identify the cost of tariff for each blade. The Bid Schedule is amended and attached. Bidders must submit their bid on the amended Bid Schedule or their bid will be considered non-responsive and rejected. This is a mandatory return Amendment. Your bid may be considered non-responsive if this signed amendment is not received [in addition to your bid] by the date and time bids are due. Becky Gattung Procurement Officer PHONE: (907) 465-8949 FAX: (907) 465-3124 EMAIL: [email protected] Complete, Sign & Return: NAME OF COMPANY DATE PRINTED NAME SIGNATURE ITB 2519H039 - Grader Blades BID SCHEDULE Per Amendment 1 Lot No. 1 - Regular Curved Blades: F.O.B. Hole Hole Manufacturer Cost of Total Item Destination Mark For Qty Size Size Punch Part # Price Each Tariff Extended Price Northern Region: 1 Anvik Airport Anvik 4 7' x 8" x 3/4" 5/8" Top $ $ $ 2 Cantwell Cantwell 300 6' x 8" x 3/4" 5/8" Top $ $ $ 3 Cantwell Cantwell 200 7' x 8" x 3/4" 3/4" Top $ $ $ 4 Delta Delta 100 6' x 8" x 3/4" 5/8" Top $ $ $ 5 Delta Delta 30 7' x 8" x 3/4" 3/4" Top $ $ $ 6 Eagle Eagle 30 7' x 8"
    [Show full text]
  • GAMBELL FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITE (FUDS) (Aka ST LAWRENCE ISLAND)
    Health Consultation Evaluation of Environmental Exposures at the GAMBELL FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITE (FUDS) (aka ST LAWRENCE ISLAND) NATIVE VILLAGE OF GAMBELL GAMBELL, ALASKA EPA FACILITY ID: AKD981765894 SEPTEMBER 29, 2020 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Office of Community Health and Hazard Assessment Atlanta, Georgia 30333 Health Consultation: A Note of Explanation An ATSDR health consultation is a verbal or written response from ATSDR to a specific request for information about health risks related to a specific site, a chemical release, or the presence of hazardous material. In order to prevent or mitigate exposures, a consultation may lead to specific actions, such as restricting use of or replacing water supplies; intensifying environmental sampling; restricting site access; or removing the contaminated material. In addition, consultations may recommend additional public health actions, such as conducting health surveillance activities to evaluate exposure or trends in adverse health outcomes; conducting biological indicators of exposure studies to assess exposure; and providing health education for health care providers and community members. This concludes the health consultation process for this site, unless additional information is obtained by ATSDR which, in the Agency’s opinion, indicates a need to revise or append the conclusions previously issued. You may contact ATSDR toll free at 1-800-CDC-INFO or visit our home page at: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov Gambell FUDS (aka St Lawrence Island) Final Release HEALTH CONSULTATION Evaluation of Environmental Exposures at the GAMBELL FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITE (FUDS) (aka ST LAWRENCE ISLAND) NATIVE VILLAGE OF GAMBELL GAMBELL, ALASKA EPA FACILITY ID: AKD981765894 Prepared by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 of 7 5/20/2015
    Page 1 of 7 Average wind speeds are based on the hourly data from 1996-2006 from automated stations at reporting airports (ASOS) unless otherwise noted. Click on a State: Arizona , California , Colorado , Hawaii , Idaho , Montana , Nevada , New Mexico , Oregon , Utah , Washington , Wyoming ALASKA AVERAGE WIND SPEED - MPH STATION | ID | Years | Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec | Ann AMBLER AIRPORT AWOS |PAFM|1996-2006| 6.7 8.5 7.9 7.7 6.7 5.3 4.8 5.1 6.1 6.8 6.6 6.4 | 6.5 ANAKTUVUK PASS AWOS |PAKP|1996-2006| 8.9 9.0 9.1 8.6 8.6 8.5 8.1 8.5 7.6 8.2 9.3 9.1 | 8.6 ANCHORAGE INTL AP ASOS |PANC|1996-2006| 6.7 6.0 7.5 7.7 8.7 8.2 7.8 6.8 7.1 6.6 6.1 6.1 | 7.1 ANCHORAGE-ELMENDORF AFB |PAED|1996-2006| 7.3 6.9 8.1 7.6 7.8 7.2 6.8 6.4 6.5 6.7 6.5 7.2 | 7.1 ANCHORAGE-LAKE HOOD SEA |PALH|1996-2006| 4.9 4.2 5.8 5.7 6.6 6.3 5.8 4.8 5.3 5.2 4.7 4.4 | 5.3 ANCHORAGE-MERRILL FLD |PAMR|1996-2006| 3.2 3.1 4.4 4.7 5.5 5.2 4.8 4.0 3.9 3.8 3.1 2.9 | 4.0 ANIAK AIRPORT AWOS |PANI|1996-2006| 4.9 6.6 6.5 6.4 5.6 4.5 4.2 4.0 4.6 5.5 5.5 4.1 | 5.1 ANNETTE AIRPORT ASOS |PANT|1996-2006| 9.2 8.2 8.9 7.8 7.4 7.0 6.2 6.4 7.2 8.3 8.6 9.8 | 8.0 ANVIK AIRPORT AWOS |PANV|1996-2006| 7.6 7.3 6.9 5.9 5.0 3.9 4.0 4.4 4.7 5.2 5.9 6.3 | 5.5 ARCTIC VILLAGE AP AWOS |PARC|1996-2006| 2.8 2.8 4.2 4.9 5.8 7.0 6.9 6.7 5.2 4.0 2.7 3.3 | 4.6 ATKA AIRPORT AWOS |PAAK|2000-2006| 15.1 15.1 13.1 15.0 13.4 12.4 11.9 10.7 13.5 14.5 14.7 14.4 | 13.7 BARROW AIRPORT ASOS |PABR|1996-2006| 12.2 13.1 12.4 12.1 12.4 11.5 12.6 12.5 12.6 14.0 13.7 13.1 | 12.7 BARTER ISLAND AIRPORT |PABA|1996-2006|
    [Show full text]
  • Remote Desktop Redirected Printer
    %208% %208% Page 1 of 6 Opened --Project Name Item Number Unit (f) Quantity Eng Project (VersionID/Aksas/Ref. Description (f) (f) Est Min Avg Max Low Bid Std. ID)------ Bid Bid Bid Amount (f) 66 Listed Low 2nd 3rd Bidder Low Low % of Bidder Bidder Bid % of % of Bid Bid 2018 Nenana Little Goldstream 202(23) Lump 1 21,500.00 48,055.56 76,000.00 936,532 01 Bridge Replacement Removal of Existing Sum 65,000.00 21,500.00 52,000.00 30,000.00 (#2080) (45491//5517) Bridge No. 2080 3.98% 2.30% 5.51% 3.00% 9 Bids Tendered 2018 Nenana Little Goldstream 202(23) Square 942.0 22.82 51.01 80.68 936,532 01 Bridge Replacement Removal of Existing Foot 69.00 22.82 55.20 31.85 (#2080) (45491) Bridge No. 2080 (Alt) 3.98% 2.30% 5.51% 3.00% 9 Bids Tendered 2014 Haines Ferry Terminal 208(1) Each 21 1,000.00 6,612.50 9,950.00 14,979,745 05 Improvements GROUND ANCHORS 5,000.00 8,500.00 9,950.00 7,000.00 (39251/68433/0) 1.08% 1.19% 1.30% 0.91% 4 Bids Tendered 2016 Skagway - Replace 208(1) Linear 2,100 158.22 249.64 390.00 18,907,426 12 Captain William Henry Stabilization - Rock Foot 355.00 158.22 200.00 200.00 Moore Bridge Bolt 5.44% 1.76% 2.08% 1.94% (46281//1432) 5 Bids Tendered 2017 Haines Highway 208(1) Linear 3,885 55.00 66.50 80.00 36,149,513 11 Reconstruction Milepost Stabilization - Rock Foot 160.00 80.00 76.00 55.00 3.9 to 12.2, Phase 1 Bolt 1.68% 0.86% 0.80% 0.53% (47539//0) 4 Bids Tendered 2016 Skagway - Replace 208(2) Linear 875 158.22 248.44 359.00 18,907,426 12 Captain William Henry Stabilization - Foot 415.00 158.22 225.00 200.00 Moore Bridge (46281//0)
    [Show full text]
  • KOD FLYGPLATS AAC Al Arish, Egypt
    KOD FLYGPLATS AAC Al Arish, Egypt – Al Arish Airport AAM Mala Mala Airport AAN Al Ain, United Arab Emirates – Al Ain Airport AAQ Anapa Airport – Russia AAT Altay, China – Altay Airport AAX Araxa, Brazil – Araxa Airport ABC Albacete, Spain – Albacete Airport ABE Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton International, PA, USA ABK Kabri Dar, Ethiopia – Kabri Dar Airport ABL Ambler, AK, USA ABM Bamaga, Queensland, Australia ABQ Albuquerque, NM, USA – Albuquerque International A ABR Aberdeen, SD, USA – Aberdeen Regional Airport ABS Abu Simbel, Egypt – Abu Simbel ABT Al-Baha, Saudi Arabia – Al Baha-Al Aqiq Airport ABV Abuja, Nigeria – Abuja International Airport ABX Albury, New South Wales, Australia – Albury ABY Albany, GA, USA – Dougherty County ABZ Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom – Dyce ACA Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico – Alvarez International ACC Accra, Ghana – Kotoka ACE Lanzarote, Canary Islands, Spain – Lanzarote ACH Altenrhein, Switzerland – Altenrhein Airport ACI Alderney, Channel Islands, United Kingdom – The Bl ACK Nantucket, MA, USA ACT Waco, TX, USA – Madison Cooper ACV Arcata, CA, USA – Arcata/Eureka Airport ACY Atlantic City /Atlantic Cty, NJ, USA – Atlantic Ci ADA Adana, Turkey – Adana ADB Izmir, Turkey – Adnan Menderes ADD Addis Ababa, Ethiopia – Bole ADE Aden, Yemen – Aden International Airport ADJ Amman, Jordan – Civil ADK Adak Island, Alaska, USA, Adak Island Airport ADL Adelaide, South Australia, Australia – Adelaide ADQ Kodiak, AK, USA ADZ San Andres Island, Colombia AED Aleneva, Alaska, USA – Aleneva Airport AEP Buenos Aires, Buenos
    [Show full text]
  • 12 Case Studies Prepared for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities October 2011
    Economic and Community Contributions of Selected Alaska Airports: 12 Case Studies Prepared for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities October 2011 Wisdom • Trust • Relevance • Innovation Economic and Community Contributions of Selected Alaska Airports: 12 Case Studies Prepared for Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities October 2011 Prepared by Preparers Team Member Project Role Jonathan King Project Manager Alexus Bond Assistant Project Manager Alejandra Palma Riedel Economist Joel Ainsworth Project Analyst Terri McCoy Technical Editor Please cite as: Northern Economics, Inc. Economic and Community Contributions of Selected Alaska Airports: 12 Case Studies. Prepared for Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. June 2011. Contents Section Page Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................................... ix Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. ES-1 The Airports and their Communities ............................................................................................. ES-1 Estimates of Total In-State Jobs, Labor, and Economic Output ....................................................... ES-6 Out-of-State Economic Effect ...................................................................................................... ES-10 Return on Annual Maintenance and Operating Costs
    [Show full text]
  • IAWG Recommendations to the Governor's
    IMMEDIATE ACTION WORKGROUP RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE GOVERNOR’S SUBCABINET ON CLIMATE CHANGE MARCH 2009 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK Commissioner Hartig and Members of the Governor’s Subcabinet on Climate Change: The Immediate Action Workgroup (IAWG) is pleased to provide its recommendations regarding the actions and policies that we believe should be implemented in 2009 and 2010. This is the second report provided to the Climate Change Subcabinet and follows up on recommendations and actions taken as a result of our April 17, 2008 report to the Subcabinet. The IAWG has continued at the request of Commissioner Hartig, chairman of the Climate Change Subcabinet, to collaboratively examine the needs of communities that are under imminent threat from conditions that may be attributed to climate change phenomena. The membership of the Immediate Action Workgroup has remained consistent from the previous year with one exception. Added to the IAWG is a representative from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Amy Holman, Lead for NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team. Her participation has contributed greatly to our understanding of the data and research that is needed in the near future. The IAWG would likely benefit from additional agency participation. The spirit of cooperation and serious collaboration has infused our meetings and we believe resulted in meritorious recommendations for near-term actions by the Subcabinet and the State of Alaska. Last year we described our recommendations in terms of a recipe for success. The members and others participating with the Immediate Action Workgroup have now worked together for over a year, both directly on the Immediate Action Workgroup’s tasks and on leveraging resources and ideas resulting from the Workgroup’s collaboration.
    [Show full text]
  • National Transportation Safety Board 1717 Bureau of Aviation Safety 11 .Contract Or Grant No
    TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. I 2.Government Accession No. I 3.RecipientI.s Catalog- No. NTSBLAAR-76-1 I I 4. Title and Subtitle I 5.Report Date Aircraft Accident Report - Wien Air Alaska, Inc. rv 7. 1976 Fairchild F-27B. N4904 rming Organization Gambell, St. Lawrence Island. Alaska I Code 7. Author(s1 I 8.Performing organization Report No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10.Work Unit No. National Transportation Safety Board 1717 Bureau of Aviation Safety 11 .Contract or Grant No. Washington, D.C. 20594 I3.Type of Report and Period Covered 12,Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Aircraft Accident Report August 30, 1975 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, D. C. 20594 14.Sponsoring Agency Code 16.Abstract At approximately 1357 Bering daylight time, on August 30, 1975, Wien Air Alaska, Inc., Flight 99, crashed into Sevuokuk Mountain, Gambell, Alaska, while attempting to land at Gambell Airport. There were 28 passengers and 4 crewmembers on board. Seven passengers and three crewmembers were killed; the aircraft was destroyed by impact and fire. The weather was characterized by low ceilings and low visibilities. Sea fog was reported to be moving in an easterly direction across the airport and toward the mountain. The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the flightcrew's failure to adhere to prescribed company instrument approach procedures while attempting to land in adverse weather conditions 17. Key Words 18.0istribution Statement Low ceilings and visibilities; prescribed company This document is available instrument approach procedures; fog; numerous through the National attempts to land.
    [Show full text]