Abstract:

Two Renewable Energy Projects of different technologies are proposed to be implemented. The
technical and economic feasibility of both projects are to be determined to choose the best option to be
invested over the following 10 years, among the two proposed projects. The first option is a run of river
hydroelectric project and the second option is a small tidal lagoon based project at the site of an ex tidal
mill. The first option will utilize the mechanical energy of river and convert into electrical energy by use
of hydro-turbine. These are also called smalls scale hydropower projects. These technologies are
efficient and among the cheapest source of electricity. The second option will utilize tidal currents of
lagoon, generated from the movement of water, and convert their energy into electrical energy by use
of turbine. These kinds of plants are in development phase and their feasibility will be discussed here.
The suitability of the resource for each project, possible environmental impacts of each scheme and
their mitigation methods, and the economic aspects of each scheme will be discussed. The turbine
specification, estimated annual energy output and the capacity factor of both systems will be presented
along with the net present value after 10 years and simple payback period of both projects. The results
and a suggestion for investor will also be described.

Introduction:
In run of river hydropower plants, electricity is produced by driving the turbine from natural flow of river
and elevation drop occurring in a river. The electricity production timing from these plants will depend
on flow of river. A share of the water flowing in the river may be redirected to a network or pipeline,
which is normally called penstock, to transport the water towards the turbine for effective operation
and timely production of electricity. The turbine generates electricity by converting mechanical energy
i.e. kinetic and potential energy, of river water into electrical energy. The run of river or Small scale
hydro plants from the practically stable flow might need only single retentive wall of low-down height
i.e. sufficient to keep the water gate or penstock fully underwater, but it does not offer storage (Tony
Weir, 2015). Hydropower installations and hydro power plants are long-term if provided with repetitive
maintenance and their operational expenses are low too. Hydropower plants have the most significant
conversion efficiencies among all recognized energy resources, which is up to 90% efficiency. The fairly
costly capital initial investment is counterbalanced by relatively long lifecycle, along with the low price
operation and maintenance.

Hydropower technology remains the highly recognized, broadly utilized and extensive renewable source
for electricity production. Hydropower systems are regularly incorporated with other applications, such
as flood control, water supply, and through pumped storage of water for consequent hydropower.
Hydropower output depends on yearly rainfall and water catchment. Hydro power plants are long-
lasting with routine maintenance. Long life span of turbine is because of the constant and stable
operation without high degrees of temperature or other stresses. The hydro turbines have a swift
response for electricity production and so the produced electricity may well be used to provide the
needs of baseload and peak demand. As a consequence of this suppleness, hydropower is a best
supplement to varying renewables, whether the sun shines, the wind blows or not.
(“RE_Technologies_Cost_Analysis-HYDROPOWER.pdf,” n.d.).

Hydropower is currently the only cost efficient and large scale storage technology available. Despite
some encouraging advancements in other renewable energy storage techniques, hydropower is even
now the only efficient technology presenting economically feasible large scale storage. It is also a
comparatively effective energy storage option. Hydropower can ease the low cost incorporation of
variable renewables i.e. solar and wind into the grid, as it is capable to respond very near
instantaneously to changes in the amount of electricity moving through the grid and to efficiently store
electricity produced by wind and solar by holding influxes in the reservoir instead of generating
electricity.

Small scale hydropower systems are usually designed as run of river systems. This is an ecologically
friendly choice as equated to large dams because it does not considerably interfere with the natural flow
of the river. Small scale hydropower systems are often employed for scattered electricity generation
functions to provide electricity to rural populations (“Hydropower Technology Brief.pdf,” n.d.).
Hydropower is usually CO2-free in operation, but there exist some Green House Gases (GHG) emissions
from the building of hydropower schemes. Hydropower converts the potential energy i.e. by virtue of a
water having mass, flowing in a stream or river with a certain upright fall termed as the “head”. The
expected yearly power generation of a hydropower project is related to both i.e. the head and the flow
of river water.

In hydropower plants, the water of flow rate Q (volume per second) and density ρ come down a slope.
The mass fall down per unit time is ρQ, then the potential energy lost rate by the fall of fluid is

PQ = ρgH

where g is the acceleration owing to gravity and H is the head or vertical component of the path of
water.

The turbines usually convert this power to shaft for electricity power generation. For a site having a
reservoir of water, H is fixed and Q is changeable, hence the power output is immediately managed at,
or less than, the design output, given that there is adequate water supply. Costs of power produced per unit of
high head systems are fewer than low head if not pipework expenses become extreme. For small systems at older
water mill sites, which corresponds to conversion to power production can be very cost efficient. The comparatively
large initial capital costs have been long since written off, with the (LCOE) levelized cost of energy produced,
which is the cost per KWh averaged over the life cycle of the system, much less than the other sources.

The water level in oceans decreases and increases unsurprisingly as tides due to the comparative
positions of the Moon, Earth and Sun. Since the cosmic cyclicities are well known exactly and the
impacts of certain coastlines remain steady, the estimate of tidal patterns and scales is statistically
accurate. The rise and fall of the tides create potential energy and the streams because of deluge and
receding tide flows creates kinetic form of energy. Both these forms of energy can be collected by tidal
energy technologies as renewable energy (“Tidal Energy Technology Brief.pdf,” n.d.). Tidal energy is
expected and can be forecasted, as the energy production is not affected by weather considerations, but
instead by the cyclic patterns.

Tidal currents may be utilized with some technologies in a manner similar to wind, but unlike wind, tidal
currents are expected in frequency and amplitude. Thus, for highest flow rate i.e. u max, with sea water
density i.e. r and assuming conversion efficiency of 40% to electricity, the mean power produced per
unit area of capture is:

q u = 0.1r^3 max
Power generation can only be desirable where tidal currents are fairly fast because of:

(a) Comparatively large tidal range.

(b) Improved speed of movement of water in passages near islands and at estuarial or lagoon inlets.

Thus tidal current power is exceptionally site specific. Tidal current electricity generating plant may be
built offsite as a typical module.

The greatest hurdle for tidal range technology developments are the relatively high up-front costs
related to the advancements of the waterways or walls, and the ecological consequences of corrals or
impoundments. Moreover, due to tidal sequences and turbine effectiveness, the load factor of a
traditional tidal barrage is around 25%, which go ahead to high cost of energy. Development in turbine
efficiency, in certain innovative reversible turbines for flood and ebb generation, should provide a
substantial increase in energy yield.

An advantage of tidal energy is that it remains quite likely with daily, weekly, monthly and even annual
cycles over a longer time period for a number of years. Energy can be produced in both daytime and
nighttime. Moreover, tidal range is almost not influenced by weather conditions. All types of tidal power
technologies demand a support arrangement to keep the technology in place and endure the strict
conditions at sea. The choice for the groundwork depends on the location of the tidal current
technology existing in the water, the water depth, the formation of the seabed, and the accessibility of
vessels and offshore drilling tools to support the assembly.

Methodology:
For calculations of hydropower small scale or run of river project, data file of this river`s yearly flow
profile was taken into account because most of the data remains same throughout the years. At first the
Q95 flow curve was calculated from the overall yearly data set available. Then the design flow rate was
calculated by taking into account the Q95 flow curve calculations. The abstracted flow rate and the
percentage of abstracted flow rate was calculated by using design flow rate of the system. By taking in
to account residual flow and abstracted flow, turbine efficiency was calculated, and the type of turbine
which required for this system. After turbine efficiency calculations and selection of appropriate turbine,
the power produced from this small scale hydro power plant was calculated and annual production in
KWh was determined, which will help in economic analysis later on. The rated power of the system and
capacity factor of the system was determined by flow curve, annually produced power calculations and
turbine efficiency. Then the head losses were calculated. Following are the equations which were
considered for calculations:

Energy Yield = (Rated Power) x (no. of hours in one year)

H eff  H m  h f 1  h f 2  ... ht1  ht 2  ...  htr

After the power production calculations economic analysis of the project was conducted. The costs were
taken by considering the previously available data of the projects executed in similar nature. The cost for
electromechanical equipment was determined, which were then used to calculate the overall cost of the
plant. The operation and maintenance cost were determined on the basis of the overall cost of power
plant. The annually obtained income was calculated from annual power production because this will be
the only source of income. The annual income was subtracted from the operation and maintenance cost
to get the generated income. Finally the Net Present value (NPV) and payback period of the project was
calculated to understand the economics of the project.

For calculations of Tidal power project, same methodology was adopted and again the provided data file
was taken into account. The data file, which was having the data of just eight days, was extrapolated to
a whole year dataset. Velocity of water (v) was calculated, for flow rate calculations and then flow rate
(Q) of water was determined. The efficiency of turbine was determined on the basis of flow rate and
then the power produced from the power plant annually was calculated. The annual energy output, the
rated power and capacity factor of the system was determined by taking into account the previously
executed flow rate and turbine efficiency calculations. The equations used for calculations are:

dD
v 
dt
dD
Q  A
dt

AgD 2
Ep   AgDH t
2
After the power calculations economic analysis of the project was conducted to determine the economic
feasibility of the project. The costs for the equipment were taken by considering the previously available
data. The cost for electromechanical equipment was determined, which was used to calculate the
overall cost of the plant. Again the operation and maintenance costs of plant was determined from the
overall cost of plant. The annual income was calculated from annual power production, again the only
source of income. The annual income was then subtracted from the operation and maintenance cost to
calculate the generated income. Final step was the NPV and payback period was calculation to
understand the economics of the project.

The calculations were performed through Microsoft Excel and results obtained are mentioned below.

Results:
In the hydropower project the turbine efficiency was found to be 90% and the type of turbine
therefore, selected is Kaplan turbine, which is suitable for low heads. The Total Energy produced from
the plant was found to be 980295 kWh/year. The rated power output of this system was calculated to
be 236 kWh and the capacity factor is 0.58. The flow duration curve of the system is given in Figure 1.

Figure 1
Following are the
head losses obtained from the calculations:

Gross Head = 15 m

Pipe loss = 5 % of total head

H f = 0.75m

Trash rack loss: H tr = 0.0062m

Turbulence loss: H t = 0

Effective head =14.2 m

The economic analysis, conducted for economic feasibility of the project is presented in the following
results:
Costs of electromechanical equipment:

C = 188925 £

Total Project costs:

Assuming electromechanical equipment costs is 34% of total project costs then total project costs:

C t = 555662 £

Operational and maintenance costs:

O&M = 2.5% of total costs

O&M = 13891 £

Revenue generation from the plant:

Total electricity production: 1212337 kWh

Electricity selling costs 5.50 p/kWh

Income = 60616 £

Total income of plant by incorporating and subtracting O&M costs = 46725 £

By above calculations the payback period of the project was found to be 12 Years, which is very good for
a power plant and the NPV at the end of 10 years at 8% discount rate was found to be 21642:

years Discount rate NPV

0 8% -555662
1 8% 43264
2 8% 40059
3 8% 37092
4 8% 34344
5 8% 31800
6 8% 29444
7 8% 27263
8 8% 25244
9 8% 23374
10 8% 21642

Similarly for the tidal power project the turbine efficiency was again found to be 90% and the type of
turbine selected is therefore, Kaplan turbine. The Total Energy produced from the tidal power plant was
980295 kWh/year. The rated power output of this system is calculated to be 854 kWh and the capacity
factor is 0.13. Following are the head losses calculations for this system:

Gross Head = 8.5m

Pipe loss = 5% of total head

H f = 0.42m

Trash rack loss: H tr = 0.0185m

Turbulence loss: H t = 0

Effective head = 8.05 m

The economic analysis conducted to determine the economic feasibility of the project is presented in
the following results:

Costs of electromechanical equipment:

C = 410996 £

Total Project costs:

Assuming electromechanical equipment costs is 34% of total project costs:

Ct = 1208813 £

Operational and maintenance costs:

O&M costs = 2.5% of total costs

O&M = 30220 £

Revenue from the plant:

Total electricity production: 980296 kWh

Electricity selling costs 5.50 p/kWh

Income = 49014 £

Total income by incorporating and subtracting the O&M costs = 18794 £

By above calculations the payback period of the project was found to be 64 Years, which is economically
undesired and the NPV at the end of 10 years at 8% discount rate was found to be 8705:

years Discount rate NPV

0 8% -1208813
1 8% 17402
2 8% 16113
3 8% 14919
4 8% 13814
5 8% 12791
6 8% 11843
7 8% 10966
8 8% 10154
9 8% 9401
10 8% 8705
Discussion:
The hydropower run of river plant is utilizing the flow of river and potential of river and usually on small
scale they are environment friendly power plant. The results obtained in this report suggests that it is
worth of investment and the ample amount of electricity will be produced from this power plant. The
efficiency of this hydropower plant which was calculated to be 90% gives a hint to use Kaplan turbine for
this project. Kaplan turbine can be called as dual controlled because the flow rate is regulated in two
ways i.e. by changing the pitch on the runner blades and by adjusting the wicket gates. Kaplan turbines
are most suitable for high volume flow rate, low head conditions (“Cengel Cimbala Fluid Mechanics
Fundamentals Applications 1st text sol.PDF,” n.d.). The annual power output capacity of this project
glooms the good picture of this project. The capacity factor of 0.58 suggest that most of the time
electricity will be generated from this plant and relatively stable supply of electricity is expected from
this power project. The head losses were accounted for 5%. Both the projects are renewable sources of
electricity generation and therefore, environmental impacts of both projects are negligible. The
economics of this power project is pretty attractive. It is an economically feasible project with good
returns and a simple payback period of 12 years.

Currently most low head sites are at best and only slightly desirable economically compared with typical
fossil fuel power generation and for this reason many such prospective sites remain to be exploited. For
example, the UK has a number of 20 000 disused watermill sites, all low head, which were somewhat
used in the past, but also have so far not been renewed; many other countries have a similar situation.
(Paish, 2002). Conventions for economic and financial appraisal, a new hydro installation appears to
produce rather costly electricity, since the high initial costs are usually written off over only 10 or 20
years. Given that such systems commonly last without major overhaul for 50 years or more, an older
hydro site where the capital investment, which has been paid off is extremely competitive because the
only costs related to the low operation and maintenance costs.

The tidal power lagoon project is utilizing the height difference of tides and they are also environment
friendly power plant. The results obtained in this report suggests that it is not worth of investment and
the amount of electricity produced from this power plant would not be that much, if it is invested in
hydropower plant. The efficiency which was calculated to be 90% gives hint to use Kaplan turbine. The
annual output capacity of this project does not give good picture when compared with hydro power
project. The capacity factor of 0.13 suggest that most of the time electricity will not be generated from
this plant and stable supply of electricity is also not expected from this power project. The economics of
this power project is not attractive and it is not an economically feasible project with low returns and a
simple payback period of 64 years.

The difference in both projects is the utilization of technology. The hydropower is the most developed
technology as it is an ancient technology. The tidal power is new to the business and much more
research and development is required on this technology to lower its cost of power generation and
therefor to make it economically feasible. Although, a lot of work on tidal power technologies has been
done with some power plants in operation, but this technology is yet to be in competition with hydro
power technologies, which is considered to be the cheapest source of electricity generation.
In recent times, assessments of tidal stream and tidal current energy sources around the United
Kingdom have estimated to be the exploitable resource, especially when averaged over a year, in the
range of 2 to 7 Giga Watt. This may be compared to an standard electrical power consumption in the UK
for 2005 of 46 Giga Watt. There is a substantial uncertainty attached to these resource estimates.
However, most of the assessments to date have either passed over the change in flow conditions due to
the effect of the producing devices or have been based on more or less subjective proportions of kinetic
energy flux through a particular site. A number of issues involving to tidal energy resource assessment
and demanding further research have been raised. Analytical and numerical models of energy
withdrawal by tidal stream generators require scale and field data for assessment, predominantly in the
area of turbulence quantities because of which the rate at which a wake mixes with the free stream
disturbs the extent of interaction between a number of generators in an array (Blunden and Bahaj,
2007).

The environmental impacts of both projects are almost similar, but the difference occurs because of
their sources. The tidal power is located onto a lagoon, so it would affect the marine life, whereas run-
of-river hydropower plant can only affect some fish species, if occurring in that river. Both the projects
would minimize CO2 emissions and other GHG emissions. Both projects are overall environmentally
friendly projects.

The suggestion for investment to the investor is evident from the economic analysis of both the
projects. The hydropower plant project is very good for investment, considering the economics of
hydropower project instead of tidal power project. Hydropower project will also require less human
resource requirements as compared to tidal power project because of normal operating conditions
existing for hydropower project. The environmental and ecological effects of hydropower plant are also
less if compared to tidal power plant because hydropower project will be catching the run of river only
and aquatic life seldom exists in rivers, whereas tidal power project can cause significant impacts on
aquatic life of lagoons. Therefore, hydropower run-of-river plant should be selected for investment to
get better returns and to avoid more harmful environmental effects. Hydropower plant will be a better
option considering the fact that only a single project for investment can be selected. Moreover,
hydropower is cheapest source of energy because of their long life spans.

Conclusion:
The run-of-river plants also called as small scale hydropower plants utilizes kinetic and potential energy
of the river. They convert the mechanical energy of river into electrical energy. Their efficiencies are high
and energy generated from these plants are of low cost. The main factor accounting for their long life
spans is steady operating conditions. Thermal stresses are also absent in hydro turbines, which also
increases the lifetime of the turbines. These are the most developed technologies for power generation
and are the most cost-effective plants because of their long life-span. The analysis conducted for a run
of river plant suggested to have good returns and reliable source of power generation. All the results
calculated for hydropower plant were determined by taking into account the data file.

Tidal power plants utilize the kinetic energy and potential energy of tides generated in sea or oceans and
convert it into electrical energy. These technologies are new and more research and development is
required to reduce their cost of generation. Although, their efficiencies are high, but their resource
assessment is a major challenge owing to less production and less capacity factor of these plants. The
two way utilization of tidal currents can play a role for increasing the electricity production from these
plants. The analysis conducted for a lagoon plant did not give good returns. Also it was found that
electricity would not be produced most of the time from the plant. All the results calculated for tidal
power plant were also determined by taking into account the data file.

Summarizing the whole document, if one needs to invest in one project in any of the two i.e.
hydropower project and tidal power project then one should select hydropower project. As per
literature and technological advancements in hydropower technologies, the investment in small scale
hydro power project is currently the best in power sector. The world is moving towards the net zero
carbon emissions and renewable sources are the only way to achieve the target of net zero emissions. If
hydropower is compared with other renewable sources like Solar, Wind, Biomass, still hydropower
provides the most stable source of electricity production with the fact that energy can be generated at
any time of the day and not depending on the sun or velocity of air. Tidal power technologies are new
and not much projects of this technology have been executed. Although tidal works on the same
principal as hydropower, but the turbines in tidal power are immersed into the sea water. Sea water has
high concentrations of salts, which can corrode the blades of turbine. A structure under the sea is also
required to put the tidal power turbine at a particular position, which also increases the cost of energy.
More research and development are required on tidal power to bring it into a competition with the
price of other renewable energy technologies. From investment point of view, one would like to invest
in a project which gives better returns upon initial investments. Similarly, payback period should be as
small as possible to recover the cost of the project. A developed technology is best suited for investment
rather than a new technology which has some implications. Therefore, hydropower run of river
technology is good for investment as evident from the technical and economic analysis of both the
technologies. Advising investor on investment requires the proper assessment of resource, cost
assumptions, technical details of project, economical analysis of project and these factors are well
achieved in this document. A recommendation to investor is to invest in small scale run of river hydro
power project provided that the proper storage of water for agricultural needs of farmer is obtained,
with less environmental effects should be caused during the commissioning of the project.

References:
Blunden, L.S., Bahaj, A.S., 2007. Tidal energy resource assessment for tidal stream generators. Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. Part J. Power Energy 221, 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1243/09576509JPE332
Cengel Cimbala Fluid Mechanics Fundamentals Applications 1st text sol.PDF, n.d.
Hydropower Technology Brief.pdf, n.d.
Paish, O., 2002. Micro-hydropower: Status and prospects. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part J. Power Energy
216, 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1243/095765002760024827
RE_Technologies_Cost_Analysis-HYDROPOWER.pdf, n.d.
Tidal Energy Technology Brief.pdf, n.d.
Tony Weir, J.T., 2015. Renewable Energy Resources.