oEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Remote Areas of
Affordable and Reliable Options for
Meeting Energy Needs and Reducing Emissions
/A Report to Congress as Directed by the
Alaska Remote Generator Reliability and Protection Act
Prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
in Consultation with the U.S. Department of Energy
September 2020
-------
-------
EPA-453/R-20-001
September 2020
Remote Areas of Alaska: Affordable and
Reliable Options for Meeting Energy
Needs and Reducing Emissions
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division
Research Triangle Park, NC
-------
A Report to Congress as Directed by the
Alaska Remote Generator Reliability
and Protection Act of 2019
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ii
Introduction 1
Energy Needs and Generation in Remote Areas........................................ 1
Emission Control Technologies and Pollution Prevention Alternatives 3
Replacement of Older Diesel Generators with New Tier 3 Diesel Generators 3
Fuel Switching 4
Add-On Emission Controls for Diesel Generators 5
Additional Renewablesto Replace Diesel Generation 7
Energy Efficiency 9
Electric Transmission Interties 10
Community Collaboration 11
Assistance Options for the Federal Government 12
EPA DERA Programs 12
DOE 13
Denali Commission 15
USDA 16
U.S. Department of the Interior, BIA 16
References 17
-------
Cover and Acknowledgements page photos courtesy of John PavittU.S. EPA Region 10,
Alaska Operations Office
Acknowledgements
This report was made possible thanks to the input and review provided by the following: John
Ashley and Melanie King, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation;
Lucita Valiere, Geoffrey Glass, Dave Bray, and Kelly McFadden, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 10; Sherry Stout, U.S. Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory;
Lizana Pierce, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Indian Energy; Jennifer DeCesaro and Aaron
Ng, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; David Lockard
and Taylor Asher, Alaska Energy Authority; Steve Stassel, Gray Stassel Engineering; Nathan Wiltse,
Bruno Grunau, and Jack Hebert, Cold Climate Housing Research Center; David Messier, Tanana Chiefs
Conference; Thomas Wolf, Denali Commission; Jim Plosay, Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation; and Brian Hirsch, Deerstone Consulting.
fi
-------
Introduction
The Alaska Remote Generator Reliability
and Protection Act, Public Law
116-62 (October 4, 2019), requires the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
submit a report assessing options for the federal
government to assist remote areas of Alaska
with meeting the energy needs of those areas
in an affordable and reliable manner using
existing emissions control technology or other
technology that achieves similar emissions
reductions. This report fulfills that mandate. In
this report, an overview of energy generation
in remote areas of Alaska and potential energy-
saving and emission control measures is
provided. Those measures include replacement
of older diesel generators with lower-emitting
generators, fuel switching, add-on emission
controls for diesel generators, installation
of renewable energy generation, energy
efficiency, new electric transmission interties,
and community collaboration. This report
also provides a discussion of ways that the
federal government can assist in implementing
those measures. Several federal government
programs already provide assistance, including
programs overseen by EPA, U.S. Department
of Energy (DOE), Denali Commission, U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USD A), and
the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau
of Indian Affairs (BIA). Continued support
of those programs likely provides the best
pathway for assisting the remote areas of
Alaska. This report is submitted in consultation
with the DOE, as required by the Alaska
Remote Generator Reliability and Protection
Act.
In Summary
These resources facilitate the production
of affordable and reliable electricity in
remote areas of Alaska while also
promoting the reduction of emissions:
Measures
• Diesel generator replacement
• Fuel switching
•Add-on emission controls
• Renewables
• Energy efficiency
• New electric transmission interties
• Community collaboration
Agencies and Programs
• EPA: Diesel Emissions Reduction Act
Grants
• DOE: Office of Indian Energy,
Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program,
Weatherization and Intergovernmental
Programs Office, Grid Modernization
Laboratory Consortium - Alaska Microgrid
Partnership
• USDA: Rural Energy for America
Program, High Energy Cost Grant
• BIA: Energy and Mineral Development
Program Grant, Tribal Energy
Development Capacity Grant
• Denali Commission
Energy Needs and Generation in Remote Areas
More than 190 communities in remote
areas of Alaska are scattered over
long distances and are not connected to
population centers by road and/or power grid
For purposes of this report, remote areas are
generally those areas that are not accessible by
the Federal Aid Highway System (FAHS), or
whose only connection to the FAHS is through
the Alaska Marine Highway System. Remote
areas also include those that are connected to
-------
Legend
MMOUi Hft0trw*y SytU*. RftM* CS^~'"
Figure 1: Alaska's Federal Aid Highway System (FAHS) and Railbelt Grid (2012).
the FAHS but have an isolated grid that is not
connected to the statewide Alaska Railbelt
Grid, which runs from Fairbanks through
Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula. A map of
Alaska showing the FAHS and Railbelt Grid
as of 2012 is shown in Figure 1. According
to data from the Alaska Department of Labor
and Workforce Development Research and
Analysis Section, the population size of remote
communities varies between seven and 8,100,
with 75 percent of communities having a
population of less than 500.1
Many of the communities in these areas are
in severe sub-arctic and arctic environments.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration
(EIA) reports that while Alaska's total energy
consumption is among the 10th lowest by
state, its per capita consumpti on of energy
is the fourth highest, due in part to its harsh
winters.2 The communities in remote areas
typically face higher energy costs as compared
to the rest of the United States. According to
the EIA, prices for retail electricity in remote
areas of Alaska can be 3 to 5 times higher than
rates in urban areas.3 Remote areas of Alaska
correspond roughly to the communities that
are eligible for the Power Cost Equalization
(PCE) Program, a state-run program which
reduces the cost of electricity for eligible
customers in rural Alaska. PCE serves 83,000
residents in 194 communities.4 The power
generation ownership in remote communities
is usually either tribal, municipal, electric
cooperative, or investor-owned utility. Most
utilities are nonprofits. Many power plants are
not continuously staffed, and operators have
minimal technical training.
The communiti es in remote areas primarily
rely on generators powered by diesel engines.
According to the Alaska Energy Authority's
(AEA) fiscal year (FY) 2019 Power Cost
Equalization report, 79 percent of kilowatt-
hours (kWh) in rural Alaska are generated with
diesel.5 Only two communities use generators
powered by natural gas. In 2010, a statewide
energy policy was enacted setting a goal for
50 percent of Alaska's electricity to come
from renewable sources by 2025.6 Renewable
2
-------
energy resources that have been deployed in
remote areas include hydroelectric, wind, solar,
and geothermal. Many of the best opportunities
for renewable energy projects in remote areas
of Alaska were developed after 2008 with
grants from the Renewable Energy Fund, which
was created and administered by the AEA.
The AEA is the statewide energy office
and has a mission of reducing the cost of
energy in Alaska. It also has a long history
of constructing bulk fuel tank farms and
powerhouses in remote areas of Alaska.
Many of the AEA's powerhouse design
innovations, such as using marine manifolds
to increase output from heat recovery systems,
have provided benefits in terms of reduced
fuel use and emissions. In recent years, the
AEA has assisted numerous rural villages in
obtaining EPA Diesel Emissions Reduction Act
(DERA) funds to replace older, less-efficient,
and high-emission diesel engines in airal
powerhouses with cleaner new engines. The
AEA is involved in Alaska energy issues that
range from potential nuclear development to
biomass boilers for space heating and power
generation. It owns the largest hydropower
project in Alaska, Bradley Lake Hydro, as well
as the Alaska Intertie, a 170-mile transmission
line that transmits power from the southcentral
region to Fairbanks.
Emission Control Technologies and
Pollution Prevention Alternatives
This section discusses available emission
control and pollution prevention
technologies that could be deployed in remote
areas of Alaska. If available, information on
the availability and cost of the technologies is
provided, as well as the expected emissions
reductions that can be achieved. As discussed
in this section, many of these technologies
already have a history of being successfully
installed in Alaska, in some cases through the
funding mechanisms described in the next
section.
Replacement of Older Diesel
Generators with New Tier 3
Diesel Generators
One option to reduce emissions that is
already in use is the replacement of older
diesel generators with generators powered by
newer, lower emitting engines certified to meet
"Tier 3" emission standards required for new
stationary diesel engines.7 Improvements in
engine design, such as high-pressure common
rail fuel injection, electronic governors, exhaust
Photos courtesy of Dave Messier, Rural Energy Coordinator for
Tanana Chiefs Conference
Before (top) and after (bottom) of the Chalkyitsik Power
Plant Tribal DERA generator replacement project. The two
new generators are painted white.
-------
gas recirculation, and combustion optimization,
have led to significant reductions of particulate
matter (PM), hydrocarbons (HC), carbon
monoxide (CO), and nitrogen oxides (NOx) as
compared to engines built in the late 1980s to
the mid-1990s. Emissions of NOx, PM, HC,
and CO from Tier 3 engines generally range
from 50 to 80 percent lower than emissions
from older engines.8 Many of those older
engines are still in service in remote areas of
Alaska; a listing of the population of generators
at power plants in the remote communities of
Alaska provided by the AEA indicates that a
number of generators that are more than 20
years old are still in use today.9 Information
provided by the AEA indicates that the costs
for a new Tier 3 engine installed in a remote
area of Alaska range from $185,000 for a
65-kilowatt (kW) engine to $330,000 for a 350-
kW engine.
New Tier 3 engines also provide numerous
other advantages in addition to significant
emissions reductions. For example, new
engines generally are more reliable than older,
non-certified engines. New engines also have
advanced electronic controls that continuously
monitor engine operating parameters,
which enhance onsite engine operation and
maintenance and facilitates remote access
for monitoring and troubleshooting. Remote
community powerhouses frequently use new
engines designed for use on marine vessels
because they have water-jacketed exhaust
manifolds and turbo chargers, which improve
heat recovery output by as much as 50 to 100
percent and reduce fire risk. Engine parts are
more readily available and new engines include
engine manufacturer's warranties, which
provide financial security and technical support
to keep the engine operating.
Within the next decade, nuclear microreactors
could become an alternative to the installation
of new diesel generation. Nuclear microreactors
are being promoted as the combination of
small size and megawatt scale. With simplicity
of design, small footprints, passive safety
features, and factory fabrication and assembly,
nuclear microreactors are planned to be
highly integrated and transportable systems.
They would have the ability to provide both
electricity and process heat, would have
multi-year operational lifetimes with minimal
refueling requirements, and would not emit
greenhouse gases, criteria pollutants, or air
toxics while operating.10 While the technology
is not yet commercially available in the United
States, a number of private-sector nuclear
technology providers have microreactor
designs under development and hope to begin
initial deployment of the technology within the
next decade. Many are specifically targeting
applications and customers in locations such
as Alaska.11,12 The cost for this emerging
technology is unknown, so the economic
feasibility in remote areas of Alaska is still to
be determined.
Fuel Switching
Fuel switching reduces emissions from
stationary diesel generators. For example,
the transition to ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD)
fuel, which can reduce PM emissions by
approximately 20 percent13 and results in
lower emissions of sulfur dioxide, is already
widespread in remote villages according to
the AEA. Therefore, there are not likely to be
significant opportunities for additional emission
reductions from the use of ULSD.
Switching to biodiesel or renewable diesel
is another way to reduce emissions. Studies
have shown that switching to 100-percent
biodiesel can reduce emissions of PM and CO
by at least 45 percent and HC by greater than
65 percent. Slight increases in NOx emissions
can occur.14 A vendor of renewable diesel
indicates that its use can reduce emissions of
PM and HC by approximately 30 percent, CO
by approximately 20 percent, and NOx by 9
percent.15 Commercial availability of biodiesel
and renewable diesel is limited or nonexistent
4
-------
in remote areas of Alaska; therefore, switching
to these fuels is not likely to be an available
option for emissions reductions at this time.
Another potential option that can reduce
emissions of carbon dioxide (C02), NOx, and
PM is switching to natural gas fuel. However,
the infrastructure needed to deliver natural
gas to remote areas of Alaska by pipeline is
currently in place for only two communities,
Nuiqsut and Barrow, which are near existing oil
and gas fields on the North Slope that provide
natural gas. Delivery of liquefied natural gas
(LNG) by ship or truck is an option that has
been studied but has not been implemented in
remote areas. A study of the viability of small-
scale distribution of LNG in remote Alaskan
coastal villages conducted by the Alaska Center
for Energy and Power found that costs for ice-
bound communities may be too high for LNG
to be economically feasible. The viability for
ice-free communities is dependent on the rate
design of the electricity demand.16 Conversion
of existing diesel-fired power plants to run
on LNG would require the installation of
equipment for storage and regasification of the
fuel as well as conversion of existing diesel
engines to run on natural gas or replacement
with new natural gas-fired engines. Information
on the costs for these modifications was
not available for this report. There are also
technical considerations that would need to be
addressed, such as the effect on engine power
output and difficulty in training operators in
new engine maintenance procedures such as
replacing spark plugs.
Add-On Emission Controls
for Diesel Generators
Emission control devices that can be added
to the exhaust of an engine to reduce
emissions are also available for stationary
diesel generators. Among the most commonly
used emission controls for diesel engines are
selective catalytic reduction (SCR) for NOx
control; diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) for
CO, HC, and PM control; and diesel particulate
filter (DPF) for PM control. SCR systems can
reduce NOx emissions by 90 percent or more,
according to vendors of the systems.17 DOC
have been shown to reduce emissions of CO
and HC by more than 70 percent and PM by
up to 30 percent.18 DPF can reduce emissions
of PM by 85 to 90 percent.19 Capital costs
of DPF in remote areas of Alaska range from
approximately $40,000 for a 150-horsepower
(HP) engine to $200,000 for a 1,000-HP
engine. Annual costs range from approximately
$15,000 for a 150-HP engine to $70,000 for a
1,000-HP engine.20 EPA estimated the capital
and annual cost for SCR to be $98/HP and $40/
HP, respectively. For DOC, the capital cost is
estimated to be approximately $5,600 for a
240-HP engine, with an annual cost of $1,700.
The DOC capital cost for a 1,000-HP engine is
estimated to be $26,500, and the annual cost is
estimated to be $5,500.21 Note that these costs
are not specific to remote areas of Alaska, and
the operation and maintenance costs for the
remote areas, which are a component of the
annual cost, would likely be higher than these
estimates due to the remote location and severe
arctic climate.
Although these technologies are in
widespread use on both mobile and stationary
engines across the United States, EPA has
acknowledged that there are specific challenges
associated with deploying the technologies
on stationary engines in remote areas of
Alaska. As discussed in the June 28, 201122
and November 13, 2019,23 final amendments
to EPA's emission standards for new diesel
engines, several impediments have resulted
in a lack of experience with these control
technologies in remote areas of Alaska. Due
to the remote locations and severe climate,
the costs for acquisition, operation, and
maintenance of the controls are higher than
for other areas of the United States, and there
is also the difficulty of maintaining a supply
of diesel exhaust fluid needed for proper SCR
operation. Another barrier to implementation
-------
Add-On Emission Controls for Diesel Generators
r
Photo courtesy of John Pavitt, U.S. EPA Region 10
Emission Control
Technology
Pollutant Reductions
Capital Cost
Annual Cost
Selective Catalytic
Reduction (SCR)
At least 90-percent NOx1
$98 per HP
$40 per HP
Diesel Oxidation Catalyst
(DOC)
More than 70-percent
CO and HC;
Up to 30-percent PM 2
$5,600 for 240-HP engine
$26,500 for 1000-HP engine
$1,700 for 240-HP engine
$5,500 for 1000-HP engine3
Diesel Particulate
Filter (DPF)
85-90-percent PM4
$40,000 for 150-HP engine
$200,000 for 1000-HP engine
$15,000 for 150-HP engine
$70,000 for 1000-HP engine5
1 Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines, Updated Information on NOx Emissions and Control Techniques. Revised Final
Report. Prepared for: Mr. David Sanders, Ozone Policy and Strategies Group, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Prepared by: Stephen W. Edgerton, Judy Lee-Greco, Stephanie
Walsh, EC/R Incorporated. September 1, 2000.
2 Control Technologies for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines. See Docket Item Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2002-0059-0064. https://www. regulations. aov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0059-0064.
3 Alternative Control Techniques Document: Stationary Diesel Engines. Final Report. Prepared For: Energy Strategies Group, U.S. EPA
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Research Triangle Park, NC. Prepared By: Bradley
Nelson, EC/R Incorporated, March 5, 2010.
4 Technical Bulletin: Diesel Particulate Filter General Information. National Clean Diesel Campaign. EPA-420-F-10-029. May 2010.
httDs://www.eDa.aov/sites/oroduction/files/2Q16-03/documents/420f10029.pdf.
5 Impacts of the Amendments to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal Com-
bustion Engines. Memo from Melanie King and Larry Sorrels, EPA/OAR/OAQPS. May 10, 2019. Document Item Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2018-0851-0006.
-------
is a shortage of operators experienced with
the emission controls, which could result in
operational problems with the engines due to
lack of proper control device operation and
maintenance. Since the engines are used for
heating and electricity, operational problems
could present a risk to human life. For these
reasons, EPA has not required stationary diesel
engines in remote areas of Alaska to meet
emission standards that require the use of these
add-on emission controls. According to the
AEA, only one remote community has installed
DPFs on the engines in its power plant.24
Additional Renewables to
Replace Diesel Generation
Alaska presents significant renewable
energy opportunities to offset diesel
generation. For example, the island of Kodiak
has produced more than 95 percent of its
energy through a combination of hydro, wind,
and solar resources since 2014, and, during
times of peak wind and hydro production,
has surpassed its clean energy goals with
99-percent production from renewables.25
Additionally, communities such as Cordova
have ambitious goals to increase the share of
renewable energy contributing to electricity
generation and are taking steps to develop
renewable energy-based microgrids that
supply power at a reduced cost compared to
diesel generation.26 The 2016 report, Solar
Energy Prospecting in Remote Alaska, notes
that the move to incorporate more renewable
energy resources "has been driven from at
least three primary factors: (1) the economic
exposure of many Alaskan communities to oil
price fluctuations and other petroleum market
influences, (2) technological advancements
and reductions in the cost of renewable energy
Barrow.
\Arctic\Oceai
Nome
Jnalakleeti
foksook
Yakut at\
Bristol
Bay I
iKodial
Chignik
Unalaska
180° 175° 170° 165° 160° 155° 15CT 145^ 140^ 135^
200 0 200 400 600 800 Kilometers
100 0 100 200 300 400 500 Miles
?)£•:• AWSTruepower NREL
•. Where science delivers performance. national renewable energy laboratory
Source: Wind resource estimates developed by AWSTruepower,
LLC for wind Navigator®. Web: http://www.windnavigator.com |
http://www.awstruepower.com. Spatial resolution of wind resource
data: 2 km. Projection: Albers Equal Area WGS84.
Alaska - Annual Average Wind Speed at 80 m
160° 165° 170° 175° 180° 175° 170° 165° 160° 155° 150° 145° 140° 135° 130° 125° 120°
Figure 2: Wind Resources of Alaska.42
-------
equipment, and (3) efforts to improve self-
sufficiency for remote Alaskan communities."27
Renewable energy resources vary greatly
across Alaska. Wind resources are greatest
in the Aleutian Islands and along the western
and northern coasts (Figure 2). Additionally,
limited wind resources are found around the
state based on local topography. Large wind
development is unlikely in many of the rural
communities due to limited size of the load
as well as transportation challenges related
to large turbines. However, distributed scale
wind development has seen success in rural
communities across the state. For example,
the village of Wales, Alaska, became one
of the first communities to reach high-
penetration levels of wind energy - that is,
energy contribution of 50 to 150 percent
on an annual basis - when the community
commissioned two 65-kW wind turbines and
a 130-amperage hour battery in 2002.28 The
Chaninik Wind Group is also a good example
of rural communities collaborating to develop
resources and reduce diesel dependence.2®
The consortia of communities has used the
development of distributed wind assets to
reduce the cost of electricity as well as home
heating by installing thermal electric stoves
throughout the community. These electric
heating devices provide home heating at a
reduced cost when compared to traditional
heating fuel. With partial DOE funding,
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC),
a generation and distribution utility serving 58
villages in Alaska, has partnered with a number
of villages and DOE to install wind turbines
that are providing power to Bethel, Oscarville,
Napakiak, Stebbins, St. Michael, Pitka's
Point, Saint Mary's, and (via a future intertie)
Mountain Village, Alaska.30-31,32
Solar resources in Alaska are comparable to
those of Germany on an annual basis. Flowever,
solar resources in Alaska are seasonal, and as
such, solar resources for electricity and heat
Figure 3: Solar Resources of Alaska
and Germany.43
generation are primarily used for summer
loads such as fish processing or freezing of
subsistence foods in late summer and fall.
Additionally, solar photovoltaic can offset
summer diesel use, providing valuable savings
for local communities and reducing dependence
on imported fuel products. One example
project is the Fort Yukon solar array, installed
by the Tanana Chiefs Conference and funded
in part by DOE. This 18-kW solar array saves
more than 780 gallons of diesel per year.31
Another example can be found in Hughes,
where a recently completed 120-kW solar array
co-funded by DOE is slated to save the village
25 percent in diesel use and more than $1
million during the project's 20-year lifespan.34
Additionally, with partial funding from DOE,
NANA Regional Corporation is installing
400 kW of solar in Kotzebue, Buckland, and
Deering, which is expected to produce about
420,000 kWh of electricity annually, displacing
over 30,000 gallons of diesel fuel.35
Finally, Alaska also shows potential for the
use of Marine Hydrokinetic (MHK) energy
systems. Figure 4 shows the MHK wave and
8
Germany
kWh/m'/Day
I >4.0
3.75 to 4.0
3.5 to 3.75
3.25 to 3.5
3.0 to 3.25
m 2.75 to 3.0
_ 2.50 to 275
_ 225 to 2.50
<2.25
,200 km
0 100 200 300 400 km
-------
65*N
60*N
55*N
170°W 160°W 150°W 140°W
Figure 4: Rural Alaskan Energy Prices (red, orange, yellow dots) and Marine
Energy Resources (green, blue).*4
tidal resources for Alaska. This technology is
not as commercially mature as wind or solar
generation. However, MHK systems are being
deployed in the state. A recently commissioned
project in Igiugig is licensed for testing through
2029 and is being used to demonstrate the
viability of MHK technologies partially funded
by DOE36 in rural locations in Alaska.17
Energy Efficiency
Another option for reducing emissions
from energy generation is the adoption
of energy efficiency measures, which result
in reduced consumption of energy (both
electricity and heating fuel). Implementation
of energy efficiency programs has already
been ongoing in remote areas of Alaska for
several years. From 2008 to 2018, the state of
Alaska invested $629 million in state funds into
residential energy efficiency in the form of two
programs.38 One was the Home Energy Rebate
Program, which had no income restrictions but
required people to pay for the energy efficiency
retrofits to their homes and apply for a rebate.
The other, the Weatherization Program, had
income limitations for the state funding
contribution set at or below 100-percent Area
Median Income but paid for the entirety of
the work done. In practice, the Home Energy
Rebate Program predominantly served the
road-connected (and Marine Highway) areas of
the state. The Weatherization Program served
some low-income areas on the road-connected
areas of the state and all rural remote areas.
During the 10-year period, the Weatherization
Program received $386.4 million from the
state. It served 20,917 households, reduced
energy use for participating households by
29 percent, saved an estimated $319 million
in health and safety costs and reduced C(X
MHK Resource
ids
I
Wave „ Tidal
n s -2
$/kWh population
<0.20 « <100
• 0.20-0.50 * 100-1000
• >0.50 *>1000
Railbelt Grid
-------
emissions by an estimated 700,000 tons.39
Current demand-side energy
efficiency programs
• Rural Alaska Communities Energy
Efficiency (RACEE): Objective of this
competition is to significantly accelerate
efforts by rural Alaska communities to
adopt sustainable energy strategies and
technologies through outreach, technical
assistance, project development, and the
power of competition.
Fund Source: Federal - DOE.
• Strategic Technical Assistance
Response Team (START): Objective
of this program is to provide technical
assistance to Alaska Native villages in
the development of community energy
plans and renewable energy and energy
efficiency projects.
Fund Source: Past - Federal - DOE.45
Current - Federal - Denali Commission.
• Village Energy Efficiency
Partnership (VEEP): Goal of these grant
projects is to reduce the cost of energy in
a community through upgrades that result
in lower operation costs. Energy efficient
lighting upgrades are typically the first
measures undertaken. Due to a specific
award, VEEP currently has an active
outdoor lighting replacement project.
Fund Source: Past - Federal - DOE.
Current - Private, State Capital, Federal
- Denali Commission.
The energy efficiency measures implemented
as part of the state of Alaska's Weatherization
Program focused primarily on reducing space-
heating and water-heating energy consumption
and not on electrical consumption. Outside of :
the two main urban centers (Anchorage and ¦
Fairbanks), primary space heating is done with
#1 or #2 heating oil. As a result, emissions
reductions from the program are primarily
from reduced heating oil consumption. While
regional differences exist within the programs
for which energy efficiency measures were
implemented, certain measures were still
fairly common regardless of the region of
Alaska. These included: tightening the home
against air leakage; increasing insulation in the
ceiling; installing a programmable thermostat;
replacing the heating system; replacing doors
and windows; increasing the insulation of the
floors and walls; and installing some form of
ventilation.40
The estimated average lifespan of the energy
efficiency measures implemented through the
state's Weatherization Program is 21 years with :
an estimated C02 emissions reduction impact
of 1.47 million tons. While the primary foci of
the program were energy efficiency and health
and safety instead of greenhouse gas emissions
reductions, the cost per reduced ton of C02 for
the program is estimated to be approximately
$263 per ton.
Electric Transmission Interties
One of the most straightforward and
sustainable methods for reducing
diesel consumption in rural areas of Alaska
is to construct electrical interties between
communities. Interties allow smaller !•
powerplants to be shuttered and larger
powerplants to be used more efficiently. Across
the state, utilities have shown that the cost
of operating efficient, larger, appropriately
10
-------
staffed powerplants is less than the cost of
maintenance on the transmission lines. The
challenges with implementing additional
transmission lines include the remote nature
of much of the state, the lack of roads, and
the high financing costs associated with
building out expensive infrastructure for small
populations, which is a significant barrier.
Community Collaboration
Numerous studies have identified the
benefits of a regional approach to
providing electricity services in remote areas
of Alaska, rather than smaller independent
systems in individual communities.41 Regional
collaboration has been demonstrated to provide
benefits that result in improved operating
efficiency at a community's diesel power plant,
which would result in reduced diesel emissions.
For example, a regional approach facilitates
infrastructure improvements such as the
following:
• Installation of automated switchgear,
which allows correctly sized diesel engines
to run for changing loads and also allows for
implementation of renewable energy;
• Addition of waste heat recovery systems
which utilize waste heat that could offset
diesel fuel burned for heating in community
buildings;
• Distribution line upgrades which allow for
use of large-scale renewable projects; and
• Bulk tank farms which allow for additional
tanks to hold ULSD rather than #1 diesel.
Additional strategies at a regional level that
could result in reduced diesel emissions could
include multi-community collaboration and
technical support, since individual utilities
may be under-performing because of limited
training of staff and constrained financial
and technical resources. Pooling utility
operation and maintenance services for several
communities can create economies of scale,
lower costs, and improved efficiencies, thus,
reducing emissions.
Past demand-side energy
efficiency programs
• Commercial Energy Building
Energy Audits: Provided high-quality
energy audits or energy assessments
to private commercial building owners
to help identify and quantify the value of
energy efficiency measures that could be
implemented specific to their building.
Fund Source: Federal - DOE and
USDA Rural Energy for America Program
(REAP).
• Energy Efficiency and Conservation
Block Grant: Funded energy efficiency
and conservation improvements. Eligible
projects included: energy efficiency audits
of public buildings, energy efficiency
measures in public buildings, energy
efficiency measures to other public
facilities, and energy conservation
measures including replacing insulation,
doors, windows, streetlights, etc.
Fund Source: Federal - DOE.
• Whole Village Retrofit: Collaborative
pilot project undertaken in 2008-09 with
the intention to test what would happen if
all available energy cost-saving resources
were deployed in the same place at one
time. Originally tested in Nightmute and
tried in about four other communities. It
was a branch of VEEP.
Fund Source: Federal - DOE, Denali
Commission; State - Capital Funds and
Multiple Agencies.
-------
Assistance Options for the Federal Government
Our review found that several federal
government programs are already in
place that assist the remote areas of Alaska in
meeting their energy needs in an affordable
and reliable manner using existing emissions
control technology or other technology that
achieves similar emissions reductions. These
EPA, DOE, Denali Commission, USD A, and
BIA programs have a proven track history of
working collaboratively with stakeholders in
Alaska to implement the strategies for reducing
emissions and pollution prevention outlined in
this report. The continuation of, and possible
expansion of, funding for these programs is
likely the most effective option for the federal
government to promote energy savings and
emission reductions for energy generation in
remote areas of Alaska. A short overview of the
existing programs is provided in this section.
EPA DERA Programs
The DERA Program was created under the
Energy Policy Act of 2005. This Act gave EPA
new grant and loan authority for promoting
diesel emission reductions. Through the DERA
statute, EPA funds projects that reduce diesel
emissions from the 10 million existing older,
higher polluting on-highway, nonroad, and
stationary engines across the country through
replacement, idling reduction, and retrofit
technologies. The Act stipulates that 70 percent
of the DERA appropriation is to be used for
national competitive grants and rebates to
fund projects that use verified diesel emission
reduction technologies, with the remaining 30
percent of the DERA appropriation allocated to
the states and territories to fund programs for
diesel emissions reduction projects.
A brief overview of the state and tribal
programs and their implementation in Alaska
is provided below. More detailed information
about the DERA program is available at this
link: https://www.epa.gov/dera.
DERA State Program: The DERA
legislation requires EPA to offer 30 percent
of the annual appropriation to government
agencies in states and territories to implement
their own clean diesel programs. Agencies
run their own funding programs to implement
projects and offer funding to fleets within their
states. State agencies must select projects
according to EPA's eligibility and cost-share
requirements, but the selections are made
entirely by the states and territories to best fit
state and local needs. Per the DERA statute,
EPA offers states and territories a base funding
amount, and if they match this amount dollar-
for-dollar, EPA offers additional DERA funds
equal to 50 percent of the base amount.
The AEA is a State DERA Grant Recipient
currently working in partnership with tribes
and native villages to provide subawards and
contracts for generator replacement projects
throughout remote areas of Alaska. Such
projects are needed as primary sources of heat
and electricity within these communities.
DERA Tribal Program: Since the beginning
of the DERA Tribal Program in 2009, EPA
funded eight Alaska tribal grants totaling
approximately $2.1 million between 2011 and
2019, including three grants totaling over $1
million in the 2018-19 fiscal year.46 Since
the program's inception, EPA has listened to
and incorporated feedback from tribes about
the program and made changes based on that
feedback. For example, EPA began issuing
a tribes-only Request for Proposals in 2014
in response to tribes making that request.
For the FY20 Tribal DERA Request for
Applications, $2 million will be awarded under
the competitive solicitation. A tribal agency
or intertribal consortium with jurisdiction
over transportation or air quality is eligible to
12
-------
: SS-35S
" v"*"
igmm
Photo courtesy of John Pavitt, U.S. EPA Region 10
The Yakutat Power Plant provides electricity to approximately 600 people in the area. As an added innovation, the
black tubes attached to the stacks utilize waste heat from the generators to heat the neighboring school.
apply. Tribal agencies are defined as federally
recognized Indian tribal governments, which
are any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other
organized group or community (including
native villages) certified by the Secretary of
the Interior as eligible for the special programs
and services provided through the BIA as well
as any organization or intertribal consortium
that represents federally recognized tribes.
"Intertribal consortium" is defined as a
partnership between two or more tribes that is
authorized by the governing bodies of those
tribes to apply for and receive assistance under
this program. Intertribal consortia are eligible
to receive assistance under this program
only if the consortium demonstrates that all
members of the consorti um meet the eligibility
requirements for the program and authorize the
consortium to apply for and receive assistance
by submitting to EPA documentation of (1) the
existence of the partnershi p between Indian
tribal governments, and (2) authorization of the
consortium by all its members to apply for and
receive the assistance.
DOE
The DOE has several offices and programs
that provide assistance to remote areas
of Alaska. One such office is DOE's Office
of Indian Energy, which provides Alaska
Native villages with resources, technical
assistance, skills, and analytical tools needed
to develop sustainable energy strategies and
13
-------
implement viable solutions to community
energy challenges. Alaska Native villages and
regional and village corporations can apply
to receive no-cost technical assistance to
address a specific challenge or fulfill a need
that is essential to a current project's successful
implementation by providing technical
analysis, financial analysis, and strategic energy
planning. Specifically, for Alaska, the Office
has entered into an interagency agreement with
the Denali Commission to provide technical
assistance using local expertise. Additionally,
through a recent collaboration between DOE's
National Renewable Energy Laboratory and
Alaska's Cold Climate Housing Research
Center, additional energy efficient design and
integration expertise can be tapped to support
Alaska Native communities. More information
about technical assistance is available here:
http s: //www, en ergy. gov/i n di anen ergy/technical -
assistance. The DOE Office of Indian Energy
also provides competitive financial assistance
to support tribal energy projects. Between
2010 and 2018, the Office invested $22 million
in nearly 50 energy development and energy
efficiency projects.47 For more on projects
funded, see the Tribal Energy Projects Database
at https://www. energy, gov/i n dianen ergy/
maps/tribal-energv-proiects-database. Current
funding opportunities through DOE and other
agencies and entities are available at this link:
https ://www. energy, gov/i n di anen ergy/ fundin g/
current-funding-opportunities. Webinars,
workshops, and trainings are also provided
to help educate tribal leaders and staff on
renewable energy project development and
financing. For more information, see https://
www, en ergy. gov/indi anen ergy/al aska-nati ve-
villages.
The Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program
(TELGP), authorized under title XXVI of the
Energy Policy Act of 1992, as amended, is
implemented through DOE's Loan Programs
Office. TELGP is a partial loan guarantee
program that can guarantee up to $2 billion
in loans to support economic opportunities to
tribes through energy development projects and
activities. For more, see https://www.energy.
gov/1 po/tribal -energy-4oan-guarantee-program.
The Weatherization and Intergovernmental
Programs Office (WIP), part of DOE's
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy, enables strategic investments in
energy efficiency and renewable energy
technologies by a wide range of stakeholders,
in partnership with state and local organizations
and community-based nonprofits. Additional
information about WIP in Alaska is
available here: https://www.energy.gov/
eere/wipo/downloads/weatherization-and-
intergovernmental-programs-office-proiect-
map-alaska. WIP's programs and teams include
the following:
• The State Energy Program (SEP) provides
funding and technical assistance to states,
territories, and the District of Columbia
to enhance energy security, advance state-
led energy initiatives, and maximize the •
benefits of decreasing energy waste. State-
led activities include energy emergency
planning and response, low-cost financing
programs for energy efficiency, performance
contracting, school and public building retrofit
programs, and innovative energy technology
demonstration projects among other programs
that spur economic development, increase
energy efficiency, and expand domestic
energy resources. DOE has provided over
$31 million in SEP formula grant funds to
the state of Alaska over the period of 2008
to 2018. The AEA has used this funding for
a variety of energy efficiency and renewable
energy investments, including rural community •
planning and efficiency (such as the VEEP
described earlier in this report), remote
building energy monitoring in cooperation
with the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation
(AHFC), and integrating electric vehicles
into their transportation infrastructure. AEA
also used a portion of its funding to set up a
revolving loan fund to support energy upgrades
in public facilities. AEA also received a
14
-------
$300,000 competitive award from DOE to set
up a statewide commercial Property Assessed
Clean Energy program to increase energy
efficiency and building-level renewable energy
technology deployments within the state.
• The Weatherization Assistance Program
(WAP) reduces energy costs for low-income
households by increasing the energy efficiency
of their homes while ensuring their health and
safety. The program provides funding to states
and territories for locally-run weatherization
services to approximately 35,000 homes every
year. States contract with community action
agencies, non-profits, and local governments
that use in-house employees and private
contractors to deliver services to low-income
families. In Alaska, DOE provided $34 million
through the AHFC for energy efficiency
measures to low-income Alaskans from 2008-
2018 (including funding under The America
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009).
The National Association of State Community
Service Providers 2018 Funding Survey
indicates substantial state funded activities,
as well as, other, non-DOE federal funding
services for weatherization activities.
• The Partnerships and Technical Assistance
(P&TA) team serves at the nexus of state and
local governments to catalyze lead-by-example
programs by developing solutions to barriers
facing state and local governments, convening
and creating peer exchanges to showcase
public-sector leadership and effective public-
private partnerships, and providing information
from leading technical experts. P&TA
cultivates diverse partnerships and provides
technical assistance through initiatives that
include the Better Buildings Challenge, Better
Communities Alliance, and Accelerators.
• The Strategic and Interagency Initiatives
team leads inter-organizational initiatives that
provide states and local governments technical
assistance to help underserved communities
have access to more energy choices. DOE's
Clean Energy for Low Income Communities
Accelerator and Remote Alaskan Communities
Energy Efficiency Competition initiatives
demonstrate replicable, scalable models
that address barriers to energy efficiency
and renewable energy access in low-income
communities.
The DOE Grid Modernization Laboratory
Consortium - Alaska Microgrid Partnership
is a collaboration between DOE, National
Laboratories, the Alaska Center for Energy
and Power, Cordova Electric Cooperative, and
other Alaska research entities to understand
how to better modernize microgrids in Alaska.
The over-arching goal of the Alaska Microgrid
Partnership is to reduce diesel fuel consumption
by 50 percent in Alaska's remote microgrids
without increasing system lifecycle costs, while
improving overall system reliability, security,
and resilience. Data sources and information
will be developed and shared with other
stakeholders across Alaska and the Arctic.
More information is available here: https://
www.eriergY.gov/eere/buildings/dowiiloads/
alaska-microgrid-partnership.
Denali Commission
The Denali Commission (Commission)
was established by the federal
government in 1998. The Commission's
purpose includes providing job training and
other economic development services in rural
communities, promoting rural development,
and providing power generation and
transmission facilities, modern communication
systems, water and sewer systems and other
infrastructure needs. The Commission funds
job training for bulk fuel storage as well as
power plant and utility operations through
grants to the AEA. The Commission has
funded rural power system upgrades, which
have included renewable energy projects and
electric interties. Sources of funding for the
Commission include federal appropriations and
other federal agencies. Information provided
by the Commission indicates that as of October
-------
2018, the Commission has provided over $245
million for power system and intertie projects
based on project priority lists developed in
partnership with AEA and the Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative. The Commission has
provided $50 million for wind/microgrids,
hydroelectric, biomass, geothermal, and
emerging technologies such as hydrokinetic
river turbines. In addition, the Commission has
invested approximately $26 million in projects
and initiatives specifically related to energy
planning, efficiency, and conservation, such as
the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium's
Sanitation Energy Efficiency Program, which
strives to reduce energy consumption in
rural water supply and wastewater treatment
systems. More information about the
Commission can be found at https://www.
denali.gov/.
USDA
The USDA's REAP offers grants and
loan financing for renewable energy
and energy efficiency projects to rural small
businesses and agricultural producers.
Businesses must not be within a city or town
with a population of greater than 50,000. The
grant funds can be used for the purchase and
installation of renewable energy systems such
as small and large solar or wind generation,
which could reduce emissions by decreasing
the reliance on diesel generation in remote
areas. More information about the program is
available at https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-
services/rural-energv-america-program-
renewable-energv-systems-energy-efficiency/
ak
construction, or improvement of energy-
related facilities serving residential customers,
including electric generation, transmission,
and distribution facilities and renewable
energy facilities. See the following link for
more information: https://www.rd.usda.gov/
programs-services/high-energy-cost-grants.
U.S. Department of the Interior; BIA
The BIA has several energy-related
programs for tribes that can support
reduced diesel emissions in rural Alaska.
Specifically, the BIA's Division of Energy and
Mineral Development program provides two
grant opportunities, the Energy and Mineral
Development Program (EMDP) Grant and
the Tribal Energy Development Capacity
(TEDC) Grant. The TEDC grant in particular
has been used by various Alaska communities
and organizations to develop institutional
infrastructure that can improve tribal and rural
utility operations, thus, reducing diesel fuel
consumption and resulting emissions. The
EMDP grant has not been applicable to Alaska
Tribes (except for Metlakatla) in the past,
though this year (FY20) will be the first year in
which Alaska Tribes will be eligible.
More information about the EMDP and
TEDC grants can be found at the following
links: https://www.bia.gov/as-ia/ieed/division-
energy-and-mineral-development/tribal-
toolbox/tribal-funding and https://www.bia.
gov/as-ia/ieed/division-energy-and-mineral-
development/tedcp.
The USDA's High Energy Cost Grant assists
power providers in rural areas with extremely
high per-household energy costs (275 percent
of the national average or higher), including
nonprofits such as cooperatives, for-profit
businesses, and state, local, or tribal entities.
The grants can be used for the acquisition,
16
-------
References
1 Alaska Population Estimates by Borough, Census Area, City, and Census Designated Place (CDP), 2010 to
2019. https://live.laborstats.alaska.gov/pop/.
2 U.S. Energy Information Administration Alaska State Energy Profile, https://www.eia.gov/state/print.
php?sid=AK.
3 Ibid.
4 Power Cost Equalization Quick Facts. Alaska Energy Authority. April 2019. http://www.akenergvauthority.
org/Portats/0/Programs/Pow6r%20€ost%20Equa!ization%20(P€E¥Power€ostEquairetShtApr2019.
odf?yer=2019-06-19-135 649-943.
5 Power Cost Equalization Program Statistical Report. FY 2019. Alaska Energy Authority. February 2020.
http://www.akenergvauthoritv.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=agKDRJvwe2M%3d&portalid=0.
6 House Bill 306, 26th Legislature, http://www.akleg.gov/basis/Bill/Detail/26?Root=HB%20306.
7 Emission standards are specified in the Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition
Internal Combustion Engines, 40 CFR part 60, subpart IIII.
8 Exhaust and Crankcase Emission Factors for Nonroad Compression-Ignition Engines in MOVES2014b.
Assessment and Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. EPA-420-R-18-009, July 2018. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZvPDF.cgi?Dockev=P 100UXEN.pdf. See
emission factors for Tier 0 and Tier 3 engines in Table A-4 and Table 5-2.
9 Alaska Powerhouse Genset Inventory Provided by David Lockard, AEA. EPA Document Item Number EPA-
HQ-OAR-2018-0851 -0024.
10 What is a Nuclear Microreactor? U.S. DOE, Office of Nuclear Energy, https://www.energv.gov/ne/articles/
what-iiiiclear-m i crore actor.
11 The BIG Potential for Nuclear Microreactors. U.S. DOE. OtTice of Nuclear Energy, https://www.energy.gov/
ne/articles/big-potential-nuclear-microreactors.
12 Experts Explore Options for Microreactors in Alaska. U.S. DOE. Idaho National Laboratory. littps://itil.gov/
article/experts-explore-options-for-microreactors-in-alaska/.
13 Benefits of ULSD. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Division of Air Quality. https://dec.
alaska.gov/air/anpms/ultra-low-sulfur-diesel/benefits/.
14 A Comprehensive Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on Exhaust Emissions. Assessment and Standards Division,
OtTice of Transportation and Air Quality. U.S. EPA. EPA420-P-02-001. October 2002. https: //ne p i s. epa. gov/Exe/
ZvPDF.cgi?Dockev=P 100.1Z AO. odf.
15 Neste NY Renewable Diesel Reduced Emissions, https://www.neste.com/coro.panies/produets/renewable-
fuels/neste-mv-renewable-diesel/reduced-emissions.
16 Project Snapshot: Micro-Liquid Natural Gas. Alaska Center for Energy and Power, http://acep.uaf.edu/
media/134649/Micro-LNG-Snapshot-final.pdf.
17 Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines, Updated Information on NOx Emissions and Control
Techniques. Revised Final Report. Prepared for: Mr. David Sanders, Ozone Policy and Strategies Group, Air
Quality Strategies and Standards Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Prepared by: Stephen W. Edgerton, Judy Lee-Greco, Stephanie Walsh, EC/R Incorporated.
September 1, 2000.
18 Control Technologies for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines. See Docket Item Number
EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0059-0064 at https://www.regiilatioiis.gov/.
19 Technical Bulletin: Diesel Particulate Filter General Information. National Clean Diesel Campaign. EPA-
420-F-10-029. May 2010. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/420fl0029.pdf.
20 Impacts of the Amendments to the NSPS for Stationary Compression Ignition Internal Combustion Engines.
Memo from Melanie King and Larry Sorrels, EPA/OAR/OAQPS. May 10, 2019. Docket Item Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2018-0851-0006.
21 Alternative Control Techniques Document: Stationary Diesel Engines. Final Report. Prepared For: Energy
Strategies Group, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division,
Research Triangle Park, NC. Prepared By: Bradley Nelson, EC/R Incorporated. March 5, 2010.
22 76 FR 37954.
23 84 FR 61563.
17
-------
References
24 84 FR 61565.
25 Desk, Rachel Waldholz, Alaska's Energy. (2017). Kodiak has almost 100 percent renewable power. It
took some sci-fi tech to get there. Retrieved from https://www.ktoo.org/2017/09/15/kodiak-almost-100-percent-
retiewable-power-took-sci-fi-tech-get/.
26 Emerging Energy. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.cordovaeIectric.com/categorv/emerging-energv/.
27 Schwabe, P. (2016). Solar Energy Prospecting in Remote Alaska. National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/02/f29/Solar-Prospecting-AK-final.pdf.
28 Baring-Gould, I., and Corbus, D. (2007). Status of Wind-Diesel Applications in Arctic Climates. Paper
presented at The Arctic Energy Summit Technology Conference, Anchorage. Alaska, https://www.nrei.aov/docs/
fV08osti/42401 .pdf.
29 Chaninik wind group - 2010 project. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/indianenergy/chaninik-wind-
group-2010-project.
30 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (Joint Venture with Bethel Native Corporation) - 2017 Project.
Retrieved from https://www.energv.gov/indianenergv/alaska-viHage-electric-cooperative-ioint-venture-bethel-
native -coiporation-2017.
31 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (Joint Venture with Stebbins Native Corporation) - 2018 Project.
Retrieved from https://www.energv.gov/indianenergv/alaska-viHage-electric-cooperative-ioint-venture-stebbins-
native-corporation-2018.
32 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc./Pitka's Point Native Corporation Renewable Energy Joint Venture
-2016 Project. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/indianenergv/alaska-viHage-electric-cooperative-incpitka-
s-point-native-corporation-renewable.
33 Fort Yukon Solar Electric Project - Tanana Chiefs Conference. January 8, 2020. Retrieved from https://www.
tanariacliiefs.org/fort-vukoii-solar-electric-proiect/.
34 Can solar work in Alaska'.' Hughes village says yes. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/indianenergv/
articles/can-solar-work-alaska-hughes-viHage-says-yes.
35 DOE Co-Funded PV Project Brings Fuel Cost Savings to Three Alaska Native Villages—Starting With
Buckland. Retrieved from https://www.energv.gov/indianenergv/articles/doe-co-funded-pv-proiect-brings-fuel-
cost-savings-three-alaska-native-villages.
36 Energy Department Funding Helps Transform Alaskan River into Renewable Energy Source. Retrieved from
https://www.energy.gov/eere/water/articles/energy-department-fiinding-helps-transform-alaskan-river-renewable-
energy-source.
37 Igiugig Hydrokinetic Project - NO A A Fisheries. Retrieved from https://www.fisheries.rioaa.gov/alaska/
habitat-conservation/igiugig-hvdrokinetic-proiect.
38 Weatherization Program Impact Report (2020) and Home Energy Rebate Impact Report (2020). Cold
Climate Housing Research Center, http://cchrc.org/energv-efficiencv-programs-impacts-report/. j
39 Funding does not include DOE federal funding in the form of WAP formula grants discussed later in this re-
port. Cold Climate Housing Research Center. http://cchrc.org/media/Weatherization-Program-Impacts-Report.pdf.
40 Energy Efficiency Measures Implemented in the Home Energy Rebate Program. 2019. Cold Climate Housing 1
Research Center, http://cchrc.org/home-energv-rebate-program-energv-efficiencv-measures-review/.
41 See, for example, the study titled "Sustainable Energy Solutions for Rural Alaska," Prepared for the U.S.
Department of Energy's OtTice of Indian Energy Policy and Programs, April 2016. https://www.eiiergv.gov/sites/
prod/files/2016/04/f30/sustai nable-energv-solutions-AK.PDF. >
42 NREL. (2011). Alaska 80-meter wind resource map. Retrieved from https: //w i iidexclian.ee .e tie rgv. gov/maps-
data/1.
43 Schwabe, P. (2016). Solar Energy Prospecting in Remote Alaska. National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Retrieved from https://www.energv.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/02/f29/Solar-Prospecting-AK-final.pdf.
44 Harnessing marine energy at all scales, from a village microgrid to a vast tidal inlet. (2020). Retrieved from
https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2020/harnessing-marine-energy-at-an-scales.htmL
45 START Program. Retrieved from https://www.eiiergy.gov/iridianeiiergv/resoiirces/start-program.
46 EPA DERA Program. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/dera/tribal-dera-awarded-grants.
47 DOE OtTice of Indian Energy Policy and Programs. Retrieved from https://www.energv.gov/indianenergv/
alaska-nativ e-v illaee s.
18
-------
> rr n
OQ
Ci
=3
O
ft)
Cu
m
g
CD
QO
w O
CD 2
go O
3
b °
y »
Q- ^ S-
O ^
-j = >
2- e. tr
S 01 /-i
3 v-
f S g
J? S3
R- o 2
§
p K
ng •
GO
fd
T3
P—f*
CD
2
s
H-t .
o
S
H-t .
O
3
*
O
w
£
-fc.
Ul
oj
cr
!-l
to
o
to
o
to
o
o
o
------- |