Propane, WAPA and pricing

After the conversion is done, it should be able to run on 3 fuels...whichever is cheaper..when nothing is done people complain...when something is done they complain...I guess that's just human nature eh

http://www.viwapa.vi/Libraries/PDFs/2013-04-25_Letter_to_Senators-Malone_v2.sflb.ashx

Not saying they should not be doing it, probably (without question) should have been done years ago, along with a lot of other updates. Just think that it is possible the cost-savings people are hoping for may not come to be, if these prices do increase long-term. We're just late to the party, and unfortunately some of the anticipated benefits might not come to be at the level we're hearing now.

Well that seems to be the trend with us...always the last

I am hoping to see some relief...the conversion is on track +/- a few months...then again wasnt VINGN supposed to be done by last July...
Tibbar (those 3 big tanks by the highway at Diageo) seems to be on track to provide biofuelto produce I think 7MW
Across the street in the Machuchal (Mathew Charles, Profit, Clifton Hill) that solar project is going up fast pretty sure thats 3MW

maybe it's wishful thinking on my part

we're all wishing! And the VINGN end-date was April last...and it's still ongoing. We had tenants a few years ago, whose major contract with Hovensa ran months (years) late, and way over budget...they used to refer to it as "the St Croix factor" in their accounting reports...

Hey at least the boardwalk went flawless...so lets hope the trend continues...the list of capital projects look really good so yea I remain a tad bit hopeful

I'm impressed with how nice the Boardwalk looks now! 🙂

I will be truly surprised if there turns out to be a decrease in LEAC of any sort after the conversion.

IMO, the price of Propane will soon skyrocket as supplies are at an all time low thus pushing the price up and up! The recent weather up north hasn't helped!

CZM Hearings on Permits for WAPA Propane Conversion
By Source Staff — February 12, 2014
Moving another step toward converting to lower cost propane fuel, the V.I. Water and Power Authority and propane contractor Vitol discussed the project at a public St. Croix Coastal Zone Management hearing Wednesday at the Port Authority offices at the St. Croix airport.

WAPA presented the details of the project to the commissioners and respectfully requested swift consideration of the permit application, according to a statement from WAPA.

“This project will lower our electricity bills, make us more competitive, create economic growth and help us along the path to economic recovery,” WAPA Executive Director Hugo Hodge Jr. testified to the CZM committee. “It is also vitally important that we complete this project on time so that we all realize the many benefits at the earliest possible time. For that reason, I’m respectfully requesting that the committee render its decision as soon as practical after the mandated seven days following this hearing,” Hodge said.

A CZM permit is needed for any development activity that may impact a U.S. coastline. The Coastal Zone Management Act, passed by Congress in 1972 and administered by the Nation Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, is designed to balance economic development with environmental conservation. Public hearings on permit applications are a regular part of the CZM process.

The hearing was well attended, according to a statement from WAPA, which also said the conversion should be finished and running in the fourth quarter of 2014. Customers should experience lower bills beginning in the fourth quarter of 2014, the statement said.

There is a hearing on St. Thomas on Thursday at 6 p.m. in the Department of Natural Resources conference room on the second floor of the Cyril E. King Airport.

For updates on the project, visit www.poweringvi.vi and follow the Facebook page at www.Facebook.com/poweringVI.

Related Links
WAPA Board Gets Update on Propane Conversion Project
WAPA Shift From Oil to Propane Moving Ahead
http://stthomassource.com/content/news/local-news/2014/02/12/czm-hearings-permits-wapa-propane-conversion

This CZM meeting, I believe, is only for the Land side of the permit application, as they have a second one, CZT-2-14W also pending, but don't know what the schedule is for a hearing. They do have to expand their dock in Krum Bay. Still can't understand why they've chosen to divide the permit application when it's all for the same project.

I have not had a chance to look at the two EAR's or the Supplement for CZT-1-14(L).

What do you think Yearasta??

Alana if you go see if you can get an answer as to the area covered by the blast zone and how many people live within the blast zone

I won't be going but have asked a friend who will attend to ask your question.

I'm trying to get an answer on the blast zone

Thanks. I'm told someone asked about it at the STX meeting and the answer was they didn't know...I think that's kinda scary if true.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/06/27/verdict_expected_in_sunrise_propane_trial_over_deadly_2008_toronto_explosion.html

There's lots online about the Propane explosion in Toronto in 2008. I can't find the size of the zone of destruction, but it does say they evacuated people up to a 1 mile radius around the plant. I imagine the initial blast was around 1/2 mile around.

Well, guess that would effect our airport and Crown Bay Marina, cruise ship dock down there not to mention the government offices and various and sundry businesses in that specific location.

Anything WAPA/Vi Gov. does makes me queasy.
Propane costs on the rise as well so very conflicted that this conversion would actually provide the type of savings and be cost effective in the long run. Why aren't they looking at geothermal/ocean/solar and other diversified non fossil fuel alternatives (without a submarine cable to PR!!!). What is a total cost and who gets what? Whose pockets, I should say!

An engineer friend just e-mailed:

Re: the Harley site.

Suffice it to say that for a project of that size / scale, and at that site perched right on the shoreline, silt fencing and a retention pond are NOT adequate stormwater pollution control management measures.

Even TX Dept. of Transportation, in central Texas (far away from coral reefs ....), using rock berms along with silt fencing.... etc. etc.

I just put some random numbers into ALOHA, (Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres) is a modeling program that estimates threat zones associated with hazardous chemical releases, including toxic gas clouds, fires, and explosions.) If anyone has actual sizes of the storage tanks...I could get something approaching real info. As it is now I'm guessing.

Well, guess that would effect our airport and Crown Bay Marina, cruise ship dock down there not to mention the government offices and various and sundry businesses in that specific location.

Anything WAPA/Vi Gov. does makes me queasy.
Propane costs on the rise as well so very conflicted that this conversion would actually provide the type of savings and be cost effective in the long run. Why aren't they looking at geothermal/ocean/solar and other diversified non fossil fuel alternatives (without a submarine cable to PR!!!). What is a total cost and who gets what? Whose pockets, I should say!

An engineer friend just e-mailed:

Re: the Harley site.

Suffice it to say that for a project of that size / scale, and at that site perched right on the shoreline, silt fencing and a retention pond are NOT adequate stormwater pollution control management measures.

Even TX Dept. of Transportation, in central Texas (far away from coral reefs ....), using rock berms along with silt fencing.... etc. etc.

They're proposing just silt fencing and a retention pond? Are you kidding me? The silt fencing alone would not survive one rainy season.

From my engineer friend"

who designed the onsite wastewater treatment system that serves that site. Construction was completed in August 2013 (a month prior to Amy Dempsey / Bioimpact submitting that EA doc to DPNR it would seem). Suffice it to say, my systems NEVER have a "soakaway", or a "leach pit", or a "soakaway pit". Those are outlawed in all of the 50 states, and are a big part of the reason EPA formed a whole program within their agency (the "Class V Injection Well Program", which deals with de-centralized / onsite wastewater systems, though systems larger than this one). This is a very small wastewater system. It is however perched right next to the shoreline, assuming that they are using the system I designed and which was permitted by DPNR, and which was completed in August 2013. The cover letter to Barnes by Mr. Garcia also contains reference to an onsite wastewater system that bears no resemblance to what was permitted by DPNR and installed this past summer.

if you could.. email me what he is talking about. please

sent you a PM.