Economic and Environmental Analysis of the Small Hydropower Plants Development

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Ph.D., candidate of Oil and Gas Economics –Economic faculty- Allameh Tabatabaei University

2 Associated Professor, Dep. of Renewable Energies and Environmental Eng., Faculty of New Sciences and Technologies, University of Tehran

3 Associated Professor, Faculty of Economics, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The necessity to preserve the environment and the depletion of fossil fuels for energy production have concerned human attention to the use of alternative and renewable sources. Hence, hydropower plants development is one of the solutions that are using in countries. Since the hydropower plants division into small and large scale, economic and environmental factors plays an important role in choosing the optimal scale of hydropower plants.
In this study, an analytical and comparative method use in order to determine the economic and environmental effect of the construction of small hydropower plants and their comparison with large hydropower plants. The results indicate that small hydropower plants; in addition to being able to use the minimum potential of water; are economically and environmentally advantages of in comparison with large hydropower plants. Some of the main advantages of small hydropower plants that differentiate them from large hydropower plants are: low investment costs, shorter construction time, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, the proper dispersal of units, enabling capacity for technology transfer and private sector investment capability. These advantages have led small hydropower to be considered as a good alternative to large hydropower plants.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1].Renewable energy policy network for the 21st century (REN21). Renewables 2016: global status report. REN21 secretariat. France. 2017.
[2].Koutsoyiannis D. Water Crisis: From Conflict to Cooperation, Scale of water resources development and sustainability: small is beautiful, large is great. Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering. Faculty of Civil Engineering. National Technical University of Athens. Greece; 2011.
[3]. Bakken H, Guri Aase A, Hagen D, Sundt H, Barton ND, Lujala P. Demonstrating a new framework for the comparison of environmental impacts from small- and large-scale hydropower and wind power projects. Journal of Environmental Management; 2014. 140: 93-101.
[4]. Adhau P. Economic Analysis and Application of Small Micro/Hydro Power Plants. International Conference on Renewable Energies and Power Quality. Valencia. 2009; 15th to 17th April.
[5]. Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York. USA; 2011.
[6]. World Energy Resources. Charting the upsurge in hydropower development. London; 2015. ⟨https://www.worldenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/World-Energy-Resources_Charting-the-Upsurge-in-Hydropower-Development_2015_Report2.pdf⟩; [accessed 08.05.16]
[7]. Liu H, Masera D, Esser L. World Small Hydropower Development Report. Editors. United Nations Industrial Development Organization; International Center on Small Hydro Power. Available from www.smallhydroworld.org; 2016 [accessed 07.05.2016].
[8]. Minstry of Energy. Iran Energy Balance; 1393. [Persian].
[9]. Iran water & power Resources Development Company (1396), http://en.iwpco.ir/PMS/default.aspx. 5.8.2017.
[10]. Vermaak HJ, Kusakana K, Koko SP. Status of micro-hydrokinetic river technology in rural applications: a review of literature. Renew Sustain Energy Review; 2014. 29:625–33.
[11]. Choulot A. Energy recovery in existing infrastructures with small hydropower plants. FP6 Project Shapes (Work Package 5—WP5); 2010.
[12]. Brown A, Müller S, Dobrotková Z. Renewable energy markets and prospects by technology. ⟨https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/ Renew_Tech.pdf⟩; 2011 [accessed 20.04.16].
[13]. Shahmohammadi S. Yusuff RB. Shakouri H. Sadat M, Keyhanian S. Long term policy analysis of Malaysia’s renewable energy fund budget: a system dynamics approach. System Dynamics Conference; 2014.
[14]. Climate change. USA. ⟨http://www.americanrivers.org/initiatives/dams/ hydropower/climate/⟩; 2016 [accessed 09.05.16].
[15]. IEA (International Energy Agency). Annual report; 2012.
[16]. IRENA) International Renewable Energy Agency). Renewable energy technologies: cost analysis series. Hydropower: IRENA. ⟨http://www.irena.org/documentdownloads/ publications/re_technologies_cost_analysis-hydropower.pdf⟩; 2012 [accessed 03.05.16]
[17].European Sustainable Electricity; Comprehensive Analysis of Future European Demand and Generation of European Electricity and its Security of Supply. The European Union;
[18]. Håkon S, Ruud A, Harby A. Development of small versus large hydropower in Norway comparison of environmental impacts. Energy Procedia; 2012. 185 – 199.
[19]. Forseth T. Outcome of Trollheim power plant in July 2008: effects on fish stocks in Surna. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Trondheim; 2009.
[20]. Sundt H, Hallaraker J.H, Alfredsen K.T, Svelle K. 2006. Optimization of fishing conditions and power generation in Surna - Partial report on river basins, watertight area and hydraulic conditions relevant to salmonids. SINTEF Energy, Trondheim; 2006.
Iranian journal of Ecohydrology
Volume 4, Issue 4
January 2018
Pages 1255-1268

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 18 April 2017
  • Revise Date: 08 August 2017
  • Accept Date: 11 August 2017
  • First Publish Date: 22 December 2017
  • Publish Date: 22 December 2017

Share

How to cite

Statistics