Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Sustainable and economical small-scale and low-head hydropower

generation: A promising alternative potential solution for energy
generation at local and regional scale
Khaled S. Balkhair a,b,⇑, Khalil Ur Rahman a
a
Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80208, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
b
Center of Excellence in Desalination Technology, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80200, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia

h i g h l i g h t s

 Studied hydro-sites provided considerable production of renewable and stable energy.

 Small-scale hydropower is a potential solution to increasing electricity demand.
 Combination of site-area-power can be viewed as an optimization/management issue.
 Proposed hydropower system minimizes energy shortfall significantly.
 Spatial power distribution scenarios lead to a cost-effective energy generation.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Accounting for more than 16% of the world’s net electricity production, hydropower is one of the most
Received 20 April 2016 commonly used renewable sources of energy. Small-scale hydropower (SSH) systems are becoming
Received in revised form 28 November 2016 increasingly successful options for hydropower generation, particularly in small localities and remote
Accepted 4 December 2016
areas. Regardless of its low capacity, small-scale hydropower produces cheap, clean, and reliable electric-
ity. The objective of this study is to provide a sustainable and economical solution for the increasing
demand of electricity through small-scale hydropower generation in Pakistan. River flow and low head
Keywords:
potential were investigated at twenty sites along the Upper Swat Canal and Swat River for hydropower
Small-scale hydropower
Energy shortfall
generation. The sites were selected based on large differential head, velocity, ease of access, close prox-
Cost-effective imity to dense population, and structural support. Hydropower capacity was calculated for each site
Canal hydrograph based on the collected flow and hydraulic data. The cost per kW h of energy generated has been estimated
Spatial distribution by dividing the average annual recurring cost with annual generation over the lifetime of the project. Cost
analysis indicated that purchasing one unit at 0.04 US$ is suitable for both the consumer and the govern-
ment. Results revealed that each site is qualified to provide stable energy to more than 1500 houses based
on the maximum consumption per home. The cost of the proposed power system was identified as the
incentive factor in this study. In addition to the minimal variation in the seasonal production, the studied
sites produced as much as 21% of the total Swat River production. The proposed spatial power distribu-
tion scenarios have contributed a potentially flexible alternative and cost-effective solution to the pro-
posed SSH system.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Hydropower is one of the most commonly used renewable
sources of electricity, accounting for more than 16% of the world’s
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Hydrology and Water Resources
Management, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80208, Jeddah 21589, Saudi
Arabia.
E-mail address: kbalkhair@kau.edu.sa (K.S. Balkhair).
net electricity production and more than 65% of the global power
generation capacity [1]. As compared to other renewable energy
sources, hydropower is reliable, economical, high efficient, low
maintenance cost and large storage capacity [2,3]. In addition to
large hydropower projects, two terms are used simultaneously:
Small Scale Hydropower (SSH) and Low Head Hydropower (LHH).
SSH in most cases represents ‘‘Run-of-River” projects which gener-
ally store little or no water and purely serve the function of regu-
lating water to the hydro-plant. Yet SSH is a promising source for

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.12.012
0306-2619/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391
producing sustainable, inexpensive energy in rural or developing
areas. SSH is related to the magnitude of the generated power
which varies from country to country. There is no internationally
agreed upon definition for SSH capacity; however, production
mostly varies from 2.5 MW to 25 MW. According to European
Commission, SSH production is less than 10 MW. Mini-
Hydropower refers to production below 2 MW; Micro-Hydro refers
to production below 500 kW, and Pico-Hydro refers to production
below 10 kW [4]. Williams and Simpson [5] studied the Pico-Hydro
scheme, and determined that Pico-Hydro was a cost-effective
option for off-grid areas. The authors presented that Pico-Hydro
scheme’s generation cost is lower than small petrol or diesel gen-
erators, wind turbines, or photovoltaic (PV) system. On the other
hand, LHH refers to heads of water which are less than 5 m. It gen-
erates energy less than 100 kW, but there are more classes produc-
ing power below 500 kW [4,6]. The many advantages of low head
canal include no hydrological risk, close proximity to load center,
easily accessible, and assured water availability [7].
Small scale hydropower has been used for a long time; however,
due to economic feasibility, the use of large scale hydropower has
increased steadily over the last few decades [8]. According to Inter-
national Hydropower Association (IHA), hydropower is utilized in
more than 160 countries. At the end of 2008, the globally installed
hydropower capacity was 874 GW: derived from 11,000 stations
equipped with 27,000 generating units [9]. Refs. [10,11] estimated
the global potential of exploited hydropower to be approximately
16 petawatt hours per year or about 35% of the theoretical power
generated from total annual surface runoff . In Europe, there are
more than 70% fully developed theoretically available hydropower
capabilities [12]. China plans to produce 270 GW by 2020. In 2002
Asia’s hydropower capacity was approximately 225,000 MW
which produced approximately 754,000 GW h/yr. Currently, nearly
84,400 MW of hydropower is under construction, with a major
portion being in China. Turkey’s hydropower potential is
433 TW h, which is 1.1% of the world’s total hydropower potential.
In 2014, an additional 37.4 GW of newly installed capacity has
been added, thus bringing the global total to 1036 GW. It has been
projected that the world annual renewable energy generation may
reach 5.8 trillion kW h by 2020, out of which 4.4 trillion kW h
(76%) generated by hydropower [13]. Another projection by (US-
EIA, 2013) indicated that the world electricity demand is growing
with a rapid pace of 93% in next 30 years, increasing from 20.2 tril-
lion kW-h in 2010 to 39 trillion kW-h in 2040. The end-use energy
for all-purpose in U.S. are met by variety of sources, however, it has
been projected that hydroelectric power use would exceed the
combined use of geothermal, wave, and tidal power by the year
2050 [14]. Several studies have analyzed the feasibility of hydro-
power as an energy system. Of these studies, all agree that hydro-
power is clean, stable, and cost-effective; hence, it is an efficient
back-up technology to other renewable energy resources [15–17].
Advantages of SSH, especially in Run-of-River (RoR), include the
requirement for small construction facilities, hence avoiding the
migration of people out of the area; flooding small areas relative
to their output; less ecological migration; less risk of sedimenta-
tion; and cost-effective technology [18,19]. SSH also causes reduc-
tion in greenhouse gasses, no significant environmental impacts,
and no land acquisition or significant operating costs, hence pro-
viding quicker benefits and energy security to developing econo-
mies[20,21]. Most of SSH are economically viable and their
viability depends on many factors like site, conditions and size of
the project [22].
The most important parameter in SSH is the site selection,
which determines the amount of electricity production as well as
the cost. The hilly areas require more civil work but in turn can
yield maximum power due to high slope and high velocity. Suita-
ble sites can be selected either by field visits or by the analysis of
379
topographic maps and the use of Digital Terrain Model (DTM) in
Geographical Information System (GIS) applications. The GIS is a
powerful tool for selecting appropriate SSH plant sites by consider-
ing engineering, economic, environmental, and social issues
[23–25].
There are numerous studies in literature focused on mathemat-
ical modeling of hydropower generation, these studies were devel-
oped based on large scale power generation case studies including
but not limited to dynamic and control of hydro turbines [26–30],
self-optimization simulation model of cascaded hydropower sys-
tem [31], optimization of maintenance of hydro power compo-
nents [32], linear and nonlinear optimization model for power
and energy of river cascade falls [33], algorithms for optimization
of multiple turbines under specific hydraulic conditions [34], and
empirical techniques that maximize economic benefit of invest-
ment for computing physical characteristics of commercial turbine
[35]. Recently, Yang [36], applied a mathematical model for hydro-
power units on a case study of Swedish hydro power plant (HPP)
and three Chinese plants under different operating conditions.
Their model consists of eight turbine equations, one generator
equation, and one governor equation, which are solved for ten
unknown variables.
On the other hand, small-scale hydropower generation mathe-
matical models are few in literature. The reason could be due to
their simple and few number of set up components, known param-
eters, and low production rate. Relevant studies in this regard
include Boustani [37], who described the basic requirements for
a low head hydropower projects. He envisaged that a minimum
of two units are necessary to cater discharge during low and high
flow periods. It was concluded that the efficiency of the turbine is
not constant at all flow period. Montanari [38] has developed a
procedure to achieve the best operation of hydraulic energy in
low head sites. Shakir and Maqbool [39] emphasized on the instal-
lation of low head hydropower generation on canal falls due to
increased discharges after re-modeling. Singal and Saini [40] com-
puted economic viability of low head hydro plants on canals. They
concluded that the major part of the total cost is due to electrome-
chanical equipment’s that vary with the head. Bockman et al. [41]
developed a technique for the assessment of low head hydropower
schemes. They introduced an electricity price threshold beyond
which investment is unadvisable.
The project’s cost is a vital factor which should be considered
before and after the installation of SSH. The aim at this perspective
is to minimize the production cost and maximize community ben-
efits. Singhal and Kumar [42] explained the estimation of cost for
various civil structures. They established the cost curve which
can be used to estimate the cost of civil work on the bases of site
parameters. Singal et al. [7] also determined the cost of different
components of low head hydropower scheme based on the avail-
able head and capacity. Their estimation of cost led to an error of
only ±12%. Andaroodi et al. [43] discussed the standardization of
civil works to obtain the standard design chart which includes geo-
metric and volumetric functions. The chart helps the designer to
evaluate the different alternatives (production, transmission, cost,
etc.) of the project according to the location, discharge, and head.
The cost of SSH station is divided into four categories: civil work
comprises 40% of the total cost, turbine and generator comprise
30% of the total cost, control equipment comprises 22% of the total
cost, and management comprises 8% of the total cost [44].
Pakistan is currently facing an acute power shortage which
causes people to suffer from privation and the desperate economic
conditions as they buy their own systems for electricity generation.
The Upper Swat Canal (USC), which is the largest canal in Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa (KP), covers most of the areas in the KP province. If
utilized for its full potential, USC could minimize the energy short-
fall in the village and town bases.
380 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391
The current estimated population of Pakistan is 175 million; this
number is projected to reach 236 million by 2030. Increasing
urbanization and industrialization is elevating the demand for
energy to its maximum. The energy demand of Pakistan is mostly
fulfilled by the hydropower sector of renewable energy. The total
installed capacity of Pakistan in 2010 was 6720 MW with
3849 MW produced in (KP), 1699 MW produced in Punjab,
1039 MW produced in AJ&K, 193 MW produced in Sindh, and
133 MW produced in Gilgit-Baltistan. Balochistan has no hydro-
power resources. In KP, 142 hydropower sites with a total capacity
of 24,736 MW have been investigated with high, medium, and low
heads - 15% of which is utilized to produce 3849 MW [45]. The cur-
rent hydropower resources of Pakistan are insufficient to cope with
the energy crisis. Quick and economic steps must be taken to min-
imize the energy crisis of Pakistan. Although there are many ways
to minimize the crisis, the most reliable solution is to focus on
low head hydropower. Therefore, this study was designed to high-
light alternative solutions that minimize the energy crisis in Pak-
istan. Unlike many studies available in the literature, the novelty
of this work stem from: (1) the simple set-up systems of
small-scale and low-waste head hydropower generation to solve
large-scale energy demand increase, (2) the link of the proposed
hydropower system to the spatial distribution of power by intro-
ducing an aerial overlap and non-overlap coverage schemes (an
issue that has not yet been addressed in the literature), (3) the inte-
gration of the proposed system with the existing local and regional
power supply systems through an optimized management scheme.
In addition to the low cost of the proposed system which is the most
motivating factor of the study, it provides valuable information to
decision makers.
Pakistan’s energy consumption is met by a mix of gas, oil, elec-
tricity, and coal sources. The maximum share of 43.7% comes from
gas sources, followed by 29% oil, 15.3% electricity, and 11.9% coal.
Pakistan has the capability of generating 1500 MW from renewable
sources. The country needs approximately 15,000–20,000 MW of
electricity per day; however, it is currently able to produce only
11,500 MW per day. This shortfall is expected to increase with
the increasing rate of population if sustainable initiatives are not
implemented quickly. The main objective of this research is to pro-
vide a sustainable, economical and integrate solution for the rising
demand of electricity through small-scale and low-waste head gen-
eration at the villages and towns on the main canal of Khyber Pakh-
tunkhwa province of Pakistan. The aim is not only to propose a
solution to the shortfall in electricity in the local scale but also to
generalize it to the regional scale and wherever applicable.
2. Methodology
2.1. Study area
Pakistan lies in a semi-arid region and depends solely on hydro-
power for energy generation. Northern Pakistan is a mountainous
area covered by snow falls and glaciers and it is exposed to heavy
rainfall. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province has abundant water
resources from the mountains’ waterfalls and rivers. Water from
the rivers and streams is mostly used for irrigation purposes, as
the irrigation system of Pakistan is based on its large integrated
irrigation canal system. The extensive network of canals can be
used for the generation of a significant amount of hydropower.
The Upper Swat Canal (USC) is the main canal of KP province. Its
center lies at latitude 34.51° and longitude 71.89° with an eleva-
tion of 456 m above sea level. The USC receives water from the
Swat River which is constructed at Amandara headwork Batkhela,
KP. The capacity of USC is 1019 m3/s, with a bed width of 30.48 m
and a full supply level (FSL) of 2.44 m. The length of the USC is
846.52 km, and USC irrigates approximately 1137 km2. There are
three power stations constructed on the USC: (1) Malakand-III with
a capacity of 81 MW; (2) Jabban Power Station with a capacity of
20 MW; and (3) Dargai Power Station with a capacity of 20 MW
[46]. The USC is divided into two branches: Machai branch and
Abazzai branch. The Machai branch supplies water to Dargai, Sher-
garh, Skhakot, most of the Mardan division, and the Charsada and
Swabi areas. The Abazzai branch irrigates some parts of Charsada,
Swabi, and Peshawar. The USC canal system is shown in Fig. 1.
2.2. Hydropower resources
According to Private Power and Infrastructure Board (PPIB) Pak-
istan 2011, hydropower development in Pakistan started in 1925
with the construction of 1 MW Renala Khurd hydropower project
in District Okara, Punjab. After a decade, 1.7 MW Jabban (Malakand
I) was built, and was subsequently upgraded to 20 MW. At the time
of independence, Pakistan had hydropower resources of 60 MW for
31.5 million people. In 1953 Dargai (Malakand II) project, which
yields 20 MW, had started. In 1958 when Water and Power Devel-
opment Authority (WAPDA) was created, available hydropower
resources of Pakistan was 119 MW. When the Indus Water Treaty
was signed in 1960, Pakistan’s share was 142 MAF (Million Acre
Feet) of surface water. The total installed hydropower resources
of Pakistan until 2010 was 6720 MW (MOF-GOP, 2013), which rep-
resents 11% of the total proved (60,000 MW) hydropower potential
of the country (WAPDA, 2013). Fig. 2 depicts the hydropower
potential of Pakistan in terms of available basins, rivers and small
hydel potential sites. Table 1 shows the capacities of the existing
hydropower stations of Pakistan.
Most of the water resources of the KP province are utilized in
the production of hydropower. This contributes a total of
3,849 MW of electric power to the national grid, which supplies
80% of Pakistan’s electric power demand. A summary of hydro-
power resources of Pakistan and KP under different organizations
are listed in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
According to Pakistan Council of Renewable Energy Technolo-
gies (PCRET), 290 micro hydropower schemes have been imple-
mented in the Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA, KP) and
northern area (parts of Kashmir). These sites have the capacity of
3.5 MW ranging from 3 to 50 kW per plant. All of these hydro-
power plants are runoffs the river which require heads in the range
of 4–30 m. PCRET also plans to install 20 MW micro-hydro plants
in Gilgit-Baltistan, Azad Jummo Kashmir (AJK), and KP to serve
100,000 houses by 2020. Aga Khan Rural Support Program (AKRSP)
has constructed 171 micro-hydro plants serving 17,000 houses in
remote and isolated regions of northern Pakistan [47]. Alternative
Energy Development Board (AEDB, 2005) has determined that
1000 MW of Micro/Mini hydropower potential is available in the
northern mountainous regions of Pakistan. AEDB has 103 micro
power plants under installation at Chitral and other places of
Gilgit-Baltistan. The installed and under construction hydropower
projects on a provincial bases up to 50 MW are listed in Table 4.
Table 5 shows the installed micro hydropower plants (by WAPDA)
with production capacities of up to 150 kW.
With the assistance of Asian Development Bank (ADB) and
Malakand Rural Development Project (MRDP), 100 micro hydro-
power plants ranging from 5 to 50 kW were implemented within
and around Malakand division of KP (AEDB, 2005). Studies con-
ducted on River Swat revealed that the potential of River Swat,
which is not yet completely explored, is up to 1000 MW [48]. KP
province of Pakistan experiences a shortfall of 400 MW. So if the
potential of explored sites on the River Swat is utilized, then the
provincial power deficiency can be mitigated.
The hydropower capacity of Pakistan has increased by 40% from
42,000 MW in 2004 to 60,000 MW in 2011 from the exploration of
 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391 381

Fig. 1. Study area showing Swat river canal system.

Table 1
Capacities of the existing hydropower stations of Pakistan.

S. No Name of the project Production (MW)

1 Tarbela Dam 3478
2 Ghazi Barotha 1450
3 Mangla Dam 1000
4 Warsak 240
5 Chashma 184
6 Malakand III 81
7 Dargai Power Station 20
8 Jabban Power Station 20
9 Rasul 22
10 Jagran-I 30.4
Fig. 2. River wise hydropower potential of Pakistan. 11 Shadiwal 13.5

new sites and increasing the capacity of already installed hydro-

power projects. But still, only 70% of Pakistan’s population has
access to electricity [46,49]. In 2011–2012, the estimated energy
shortfall in Pakistan was 6,000 MW as the demand was
18,876 MW while the supply remained 12,775 MW (MOF-GOP,
2013). The relationship between the peak demand and the
installed capacity of electricity in Pakistan is shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 4 presents the energy consumption trends in different sectors
of Pakistan. The domestic consumption has rapidly increased
between 1992 and 2015, followed by industrial, agricultural and
commercial sectors. On the other hand, the Indus basin has the lar-
gest integrated network of canals worldwide. These irrigation
canals also have attractive sites for small hydropower generation.
Six out of 303 sites on these canals are located in KP, 14 in Sindh
and the remaining 283 in Punjab. The hydropower potential for
these canals is 684 MW. The USC, which serves as the largest canal
of the KP, has not yet been explored for small hydropower poten-
tial. Therefore, SSH is one of the good power production candidates
to cope with the energy crises.
382 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391

Table 2
Summary of hydropower resources of Pakistan.

Project under implementation

Province Project in Public sector (MW) Private sector (MW) Project with raw sites (MW) Total hydropower
operation (MW) resources (MW)
Provincial level Federal level
KP 3849 9482 28 2370 8930 24,736
Gilgit-Baltistan 133 11,876 40 – 8542 21,125
Punjab 1699 720 308 710 238 7291
AJK 1039 1231 92 3172 915 6450
Sindh – – – – 126 126
Balochistan – – – – – –
Total 6720 23,309 468 6262 18,751 59,728

Table 3
Hydropower resources of KP delivered by WAPDA and SHYDO.
canal flow hydrograph for the entire flow period is established.
S. No Project name Location Capacity (MW) Heads in the canal and drop structures are measured during de-
A. WAPDA (Water and Power Development Authority) siltation period. Mathematical calculation based on the design
1 Tarbel Dam Tarbela 3478 parameters of the canal is performed to compare and check values
2 Warsak Dam Warsak 240 field measurements. The most important steps in this design are
3 Jabban (Malakand-I) USC 20 the site and the turbine selections. Sites are selected based on
4 Dargai (Malakand-II) USC 20
5 Kurram Garhi K. Garhi Canal 4
the measurements acquired during canal field survey according
to the criteria listed in the flowchart (Fig. 5), while turbines are
Subtotal 3762
selected on the basis of minimum and maximum discharges and
B. SHYDO (Sarhad Hydropower Development Organization) head at a particular site. Selections of sites and turbines according
1 Malakand-III USC 81 to the above criteria shall maximize the generation of power.
2 Reshun Chitral 2.8 Finally, the control room distributes the generated electricity based
3 Ashuran Swat 0.4
on maximum consumption rate of residential building, where two
4 Thall Swat 0.4
5 Shishi Lower Chitral 0.3 schemes for distributions are adopted, overlap and non-overlap.
6 Karora Shangla 0.2
7 Kalam Swat 0.2
8 Keyal Kohistan 0.2 2.4. Hydropower generation
9 Kaghan Mansehra 0.2
10 Duber Kohistan 0.2 The River Swat has a number of sites that can generate a consid-
11 Jalkot Kohistan 0.2
erable amount of energy and hence contribute to minimizing the
12 Garam Chashma Chitral 0.2
13 Damori Shangla 0.2 power crisis of Pakistan. Small dams along River Swat is one poten-
tial alternative and the focus of this study. In this case, only run-off
Subtotal 86
river and low head hydropower potential of USC and River Swat
C. IPP (Independent Power Producers; Blue star energy (pvt) Ltd) will be utilized. Along with waterfalls and small dams, the canals
1 Machai Machai branch 1 can also be used for the development of power. The USC is the lar-
Subtotal 1 gest canal in KP on the basis of discharge and length. It has the
Grand total 3849 potential for small-scale hydropower (SSH) and numerous sites
that can be developed to generate electric energy.
USC is divided into Machai branch and Abazai branch by two
tunnels which are called A-tunnel (Auxiliary tunnel) and B-
2.3. SSH system design tunnel (Benton tunnel). The Machai branch has been selected for
this study because it’s maximum discharge ranges from 45 m3/s
The flowchart of Fig. 5 summarizes the proposed small-scale to 60 m3/s and its velocity ranges from 1.006 m/s to 4 m/s. The
hydropower system design. The system operates in steps starting Machai branch has a number of drops and check structures at cer-
with detailed hydrologic data collection from the irrigation depart- tain points which can generate electricity up to 1 MW. So the SSH
ment of Malakand division. Data are mainly normal flows, i.e. flood is used in this research to describe the capacity ranging from
events are discarded. From the daily flow fluctuation data, that is 200 kW to 1 MW. The SSH uses water that is already in the canal
important to the generation of clean and stable energy, continuous for the purpose of irrigation. Since no major construction is

Table 4
Province based hydropower resources.

Province Operational Under construction

No. of plants Installed capacity (MW) No. of plants Installed capacities (MW)
KP 8 125.800 7 115.68
Gilgit-Baltistan 78 44.275 15 49.83
AJK 8 38.800 11 25.47
Punjab 5 64 6 30.31
Total 99 272.875 39 221.29
 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391 383

Table 5 2.5. Data collection

Micro-hydropower plants installed by WAPDA.

Province Plants installed Installed capacity (kW) Households Data of canal parameters and discharges of main USC, Machai
KP 470 6790.5 59,437 branch and River Swat for the year 2014 at Amandara headwork
Gilgit-Baltistan 22 401.5 4010 were obtained from Malakand Irrigation Department. The follow-
Balochistan 3 80 800 ing equations were used to calculate the hydropower potential of
AJK 43 592 3915 USC:
Total 538 7864 68,162
Capacity ðkwÞ ¼ H  Q  g  GE ð1Þ

Annual Production ðkW hÞ ¼ kW  OH ð2Þ

involved on the canal section, the SSH is cost-effective and envi-
where:
ronmental friendly for energy generation.
H : Available head (m)
Three types of turbines are used in the hydropower genera-
Q: Discharge (m3/s)
tion: impulse, reaction, and kinetic turbines. The impulse turbine
g: gravitational acceleration (m2/s)
rotates as the jet of water strikes the blade of the turbine and
GE: Generating efficiency
converts that energy of the water into motion. Impulse turbines
kW: Capacity (kilo Watt)
are not used in heads less than 10 m but Energy System and
OH: Operating hours
Design Ltd., developed a turbo turbine which can be used for
head ranges from 3 m to 150 m. Williamson et al. [50] used Turgo
The data were analyzed and the hydropower potential of USC
turbine in micro and pico hydropower projects with head varying
and River Swat was calculated by Eqs. (1) and (2). During field vis-
from 3.5 m to 1 m to improve the turbine performance. Com-
its in July and August 2014, ten sites were selected on the USC
pared to impulse turbine, reaction turbines are very efficient in
main branch and the Machai branch. The sites were selected on
low heads [51]. Reaction turbines are used fully immersed in
the basis of large differential head, velocity, ease of access, close
water. The motion of water across the blade of the runner (shaft
proximity to the dense population, and structural support. The
and blade combined) creates a pressure differential (lift), hence
flow velocity at each site was measured by current meter and
creating a rotational motion to the runner. The efficiency of such
the discharge was calculated by using Manning’s Equation. Dis-
devices is reliant on the design. The reaction turbine may be
charge of USC varied from 26.8 to 91 m3/s while discharge of
mounted directly on the stream or river. Among various types
Machai branch varied from 20 to 50 m3/s. Beside the available data,
of reaction turbines, Kaplan, or Francis style devices, are suited
ten sites on each canal were initially selected because of limited
for the USC because of its efficiency; therefore, Kaplan is used
resources. However, numerous sites on this canal are suitable for
in this study.
SSH.
Kaplan type turbine is used efficiently for very low head. It is
Consistent parameters are used in evaluating the electrical
practical, efficient and cost effective [52]. It consists of a large
power developed from the mechanical power. One such parameter
diameter runner installed at 45° to the vertical within a concrete
is the generating efficiency, which is the potential power converted
shroud extending from the channel bed to the free water surface.
into electrical power. The generating efficiency includes both the
It can operate at 2.5 m of head at discharge of 22.5 m3/s and pro-
turbine and generator efficiencies. The turbine efficiency is mostly
duces up to 438 kW of electrical power. The efficiency of Kaplan
variable whereas generator efficiency appears consistently higher.
turbine is 85% at nominal flow (22.5 m3/s), and reduces to 50% at
Since the generating efficiency ranges from 60 to 80% [4], 75% was
20% of nominal flow. It is more suitable for head differences
chosen in our analysis. The efficiency plays an important role in
between 1.4 m and 2.8 m and flow rates between 10 m3/s and
determining the cost of the project. The hydro-turbine efficiency
30 m3/s.
can be computed accurately by an empirical model presented by
Kinetic energy turbines operate by placing the device directly
Voros et al. [35].
into the flowing water. These turbines derive energy from the flow-
Service factor (SF), or the percentage of a given time in which
ing water. The flow is created by causing a drop of the natural
normal generation would result, includes time for maintenance
stream and thus the energy produced still ultimately derives from
or repair. SF ranges from 90 to 95%; however, the most conserva-
the potential energy between two points. The efficiency of this
tive value of 80% was selected [53]. Annual Hours (AH) is the
type of turbine is low. Since the kinetic energy turbines are placed
expected number of hours in one year in which SSH could be
into the flow of the canal, constructing upstream control structures
expected to operate. The normal irrigation season is considered
would allow canal control for irrigation purposes and power
245 days, but in Pakistan the irrigation season ranges from 300
generation.
to 330 days each year. The de-siltation process of USC starts at

40,000

35,000 Peak demand Installed Capacity

MW

30,000

25,000

20,000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Years

Fig. 3. Comparison of peak demand vs installed capacity.

384 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391

40,000
DomesƟc
35,000
Commercial
30,000
Industrial
25,000 Agricultural
Gwh 20,000 Other
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016
Year

Fig. 4. Energy consumption trend among different sectors of Pakistan.

The equation used for the estimation of annual cost of the pro-
ject is given as follows:

total financial cost of the project

Unit cost ¼ ð3Þ
total available KW h

3. Results

3.1. Capacity of the USC

The data obtained from the irrigation department showed vari-

Fig. 5. Schematic representation of SSH system approach.
the end of January and extends until the end of February. AH is
multiplied by SF to determine annual operating hours (OH).
ations of discharge in the canal as a result of River Swat water level
fluctuations. The daily variations of discharge in River Swat, main,
and Machai branch are shown in Fig. 6. The figure depicts a de-
siltation process in Machai branch from the end of January (day
15) until the end of February (day 25). When the de-siltation pro-
cess of Machai branch is carried out, the whole flow is diverted into
the Abazai branch. For the main canal, the flow is diverted to River
Swat. The figure shows high discharge rates during the summer
season (April 23 to September 29) due to the melting of snow
and glaciers as well as heavy monsoon rains.
The calculated average monthly production of electricity of
River Swat, main canal, and Machai branch of USC is shown in
Fig. 7. In the summer season, hydropower production reached up
to 10.64 MW, 1.39 MW, and 0.81 MW in River Swat, USC main,
and Machai branch, respectively. The potential of USC main sites
ranged from 291 kW to 561 kW with annual production of

2.6. Cost analysis

The cost per kW h of energy generated has been estimated by

dividing the average annual recurring cost with annual generation
over the life of the project. The average annual recurring cost is cal-
culated by amortizing the total financial cost including equip-
ment’s cost, transmission system, custom duties, and interest
rate for the specified year and leveled over the useful life of the
project.
The following components are considered while calculating the
annual recurring cost of the project:

1. Preliminary and civil works

2. Hydraulic steel structure
3. Hydro-mechanical equipment
4. Electrical equipment
5. Transmission system and expansion
6. Labor cost Fig. 6. Daily discharge fluctuation during 2014 in Swat River, USC, and Machai
7. Transportation cost branch.
 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391 385

River Swat
Main Canal

Electricity (MW)
Machai Branch

Months

Fig. 7. Average monthly electricity production of Swat River, main canal, and Machai branch.

18,931,777 kW h, while a potential in the range of 179–379 kW
with a total annual production of 15,526,873 kW h was produced
along Machai branch sites.
Besides the collected data, ten sites on the main canal and ten
sites on Machai branch were investigated to quantify the actual
power that could be produced from each site; these sites are
shown in Figs. 8 and 9, respectively. Figs. 10 and 11 show the cal-
culated annual production of USC main canal and Machai branch,
respectively. The production in both figures follows the same pat-
tern because the sites receive almost the same potential head and
flow rate at all times due to control structures located on the canal.
However, due to high flow in the summer season, the production is
high; this production ceases to zero in January and February due to
de-siltation process. Production of site 9 on the main canal is high
because of the drop structure which divides the main canal into
Abazai and Machai branches. Moreover, the drop in hydropower
production in August in Machai branch is due to the minimum flow
in the canal and most of the flow is diverted to River Swat and Aba-
zai branch.
Power produced from all the studied sites on both canals is
summarized and compared with the data collected at the gauge
stations (irrigation department). Fig. 12 shows that the total power
produced from the studied sites is more than the respective gauge
sites. This means that more power can be produced if all the canals
are investigated for potential sites. In the peak season the produc-
tion of studied sites on the main canal and Machai branch is three
and five times that of gauge station, respectively. There is more
than 1 MW difference between the studied sites of both canals in
the summer season; this difference reduces to zero in the winter
season. The production at both gauge sites follows almost the same

Fig. 8. Monitoring sites on the USC main canal.

386 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391

Fig. 9. Monitoring sites on the Machai branch.

Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Site 6 Site 7 Site 8 Site 9 Site 10
Hydropower (MW)

Months

Fig. 10. Monthly electricity production of USC main canal sites.

 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391 387

Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5

Site 6 Site 7 Site 8 Site 9 Site 10

Hydropower (MW)

Months

Fig. 11. Monthly electricity production of the Machai branch sites.

Main canal gauge Main canal sites

Hydropower (MW)

Months

Fig. 12. Cumulative monthly hydropower production of studied sites versus gauge production.

trend because of controlled discharge in the canal. The production
of 3 out of 10 sites on the main canal and 2 out of 10 sites on
Machai branch are equivalent to the production of the gauge sites
on the main canal and Machai branch, respectively. In other words,
the studied sites produce two to three times more energy than the
gauge sites.
The hydraulic characteristics and power data of main canal and
Machai branch sites are shown in Table 6. Although the velocities
at Machai branch sites are higher (due to steep slope) than their
counterparts in the main canal, the power production of the USC
main canal is 22% higher than that produced by Machai branch
because the discharges in all sites along the main canal are higher
than those of Machai branch. In addition, the USC main canal is
fully lined while the Machi branch is partially lined. It is worth-
while mentioning that site 9 on the main canal contributed a sig-
nificant amount to the overall power capacity due to its
steepness (i.e. high velocity). The low velocity in the main canal
and the partially lined condition of the Machai branch causes the
accumulation of silts in both canals.
3.1.1. Power distribution
Power produced by each site is distributed to the local con-
sumers on the basis of maximum consumption rate per residential
building. Transmission of power depends on the number of build-
ings and transmission losses. The closer the residential area, the
less transmission losses. In this context, power is distributed by
overlap distribution and non-overlap distribution.
3.1.2. Overlap distribution
In this scenario, each site supplies the residential areas in its
neighboring districts based on the production capacity. Due to
uneven distances between sites and variations in the population
density, supplied areas by individual production sites overlap.
Fig. 13 shows the power distribution under this scenario. It is
apparent that the overlap occurs between areas served by sites 4
through 10. This overlap exists because of the low population den-
sity in the downstream sites. This indicates that these sites have
the potential to produce more power than the demand. This situa-
tion is quite different in the upstream sites where the population
density is high. In these cases, no overlap occurred between sites
1 through 3 due to the high density of residential area.
Due to increasing transmission loss beyond a distance of one
kilometer, each site may be designed to cover an area represented
by a one-kilometer radius circle. Based on the overlap distribution
scenario, the upstream sites may face a shortage of power supply
due to the high residential density. Hence, the served areas may
become less than the designed coverage. In contrast, a surplus
power may be produced in the downstream sites due to the low
residential density. In this case, the generated extra power can
be transferred to the national grid station.
3.1.3. Non-overlap distribution
Although each site supplies its neighboring residential area,
overlap under this scenario is not allowed. Therefore, sites with ini-
tially overlapping areas have the potential to transfer their extra
power to the national grid. Fig. 14 shows the distribution of areas
388 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391

Table 6
Hydraulic characteristics and hydropower production of the studied sites at the upper Swat canal and Machai branch with operating hours of 6336 for the month of July 2014.

Site Depth H (m) Velocity (m/s) Discharge Q (m3/s) Capacity (KW) Production (kW h) Cost (US Dollar)
A:Upper Swat Canal (main branch)
1 1.34 0.76 31.70 291.40 1,846,310 56,128
2 1.41 0.42 31.51 304.99 1,932,416 58,745
3 1.22 0.82 31.43 264.27 1,674,414 50,902
4 1.67 0.60 31.24 359.35 2,276,841 69,216
5 1.04 0.97 31.20 221.88 1,405,831 42,737
6 1.19 0.84 31.11 253.78 1,607,950 48,882
7 1.31 0.67 31.07 279.45 1,770,595 53,826
8 1.13 0.88 30.91 239.18 1,515,444 46,069
9 2.68 3.89 30.62 560.92 3,553,989 108,041
10 1.01 0.98 30.51 211.33 1,338,987 40,705
Total 2986.55 18,922,781 575,525

B: Upper Swat Canal (Machai branch)

1 1.04 0.85 25.54 217 1,374,912 41,797
2 1.15 1.036 25.45 200.77 1,272,079 38,671
3 1.60 3.780 25.16 276.15 1,749,686 53,190
4 2.20 4.020 25.10 378.81 2,400,140 72,964
5 1.50 1.036 25.08 258.07 1,635,131 49,708
6 1.30 1.050 25.08 223.66 1,417,110 43,080
7 1.60 3.330 25.08 275.28 1,744,174 53,023
8 1.40 1.360 25.07 240.77 1,525,518 46,376
9 1.17 1.030 25.07 201.21 1,274,866 38,756
10 1.04 1.006 25.07 178.86 1,133,257 34,451
Total 2450.58 15,526,875 472,016

Fig. 13. Areal overlap hydropower distribution at the residential areas surrounding USC main canal.

served under non-overlap scenario. The figure shows no change in
the served areas by sites 1 through 3 which were initially non-
overlapping areas. On the other hand, areas covered by the down-
stream sites 4 through 10 were delineated to avoid overlap. In this
way, the extra power that was not consumed by the local residen-
tial areas (within one kilometer) could be transferred to the
national grid station or sold to non-residential units. Another
option is to export the full capacity of individual sites to the
national grid station. In this case, no two sites would serve the
same residential area. Our calculations show that the downstream
residential areas could be fully served by sites 4, 6, and 8. That is,
the full production by sites 5, 7, 9, and 10 could be transferred to
the national grid station.
3.2. Cost analysis
The per unit price of production at each site is determined by
Eq. (3). Hence, the suitability of SSH project to consumers and
the government could be evaluated. The cost of the project is cal-
culated from the estimated production of single sites, river, and
canal sections. The cost of low head hydropower is exceptionally
low. The only costly component of such projects is the turbine.
The cost of local turbine is very low compared to the cost of
imported turbine. As an example, cost analysis of site 7 on the
main canal is shown in Table 7. The total cost of the project at
one site was found to be $5000. The price is obtained by adding
the individual costs of preliminary works, civil works, hydraulic
 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391 389

Fig. 14. Areal non-overlap hydropower distribution at the residential areas surrounding USC main canal.

Table 7
Cost analysis of site 7 on the main canal at USC.
25 years [54], and perhaps as much as 50 years [8]. The initial cost
of recovery is expected to be in the order of 4–12 years based on
(a) Capacity of station 279.45 kW
experience with other SSH installations [54].
(b) Units generated per annum 1,770,595 kW h
(c) Losses @ 24% include 424942.8 kW h
There is no silt excluder nor silt ejector installed in the canal
(1) Power station and auxiliaries and consumption in colonies headwork; therefore, the silt is removed manually during the win-
(2) Transmission and distribution ter season at which time the irrigation requirement is low. The de-
(f) Net units available for sale 1345652.1 kW h siltation process of the canals must be considered as it usually
(g) Cost per unit generated $0.01
takes 35–40 days. This process is mostly carried out from the end
(h) Sale price per unit (kW h) $0.04
(g) Revenue on sale of 2,701,032 kW h of energy $53,826 of January until the last week of February. During the de-siltation
process, the water is diverted to either River Swat when de-
siltation in the main canals is carried out or to Abazai branch when
structure, equipment (turbine, etc.), transmission system, mainte- Machai branch is under the process of de-siltation as in the case in
nance, staff, and insurance. All of these prices are confirmed from 2014. During the de-siltation process, the electricity will be cut off
the respective authorities. from the area and an alternative source should be considered.
Calculations showed that the cost of purchasing one unit at 0.04 The most important factor in the production of low head hydro-
US$ is suitable for both the consumer and the government. Upon power is the efficiency of the turbine. For high production, highly
operation, the government could earn a revenue of $575,525 from efficient turbine is required, but the price of such turbines is very
the main canal and $472,016 from a single site on Machai branch high. The local turbines are inexpensive but have low efficiency
with the prescribed per unit charges. in the range of 60–80% [4]. For the sake of calculation, an efficiency
of 75% was selected and used in the cost analysis.
4. Discussion
4.2. Investment and sustainability
4.1. Implementation of SSH at USC
The summer production of ten sites on USC main canal is
The design discharge of USC is 1019 (m3/s). This high flow rate 18,922,781 kW h (units) from which the government could make
can be accommodated and used beneficially for hydropower gen- an annual revenue of $575,525 at the price of $0.04/unit. Accord-
eration. However, the variability of flow depends mainly on the ingly, over 1500 homes could be served with clean and stable
flow of the Swat River. The Swat River in turn depends on the power, renewable energy, and a water supply for irrigation pur-
snowmelt which occurs during the summer season which causes pose. The production of Machai branch in summer is
high river flows. This leads to a maximum hydropower production 15,526,873 kW h with a revenue of $472,016.
in the months of May through September. While in the winter sea- The total annual production of USC (main canal) and Machai
son, flow is minimum in the river and USC which results in low branch is 3.75 MW and 23,778,422 kW h, an amount which poten-
power production. tially generates $ 951,137 revenue to the government at a per unit
The development of SSH at the USC main and Machai branch charge of $0.04. Gensler and Kinzli [53] carried out similar work on
has several important benefits. The hydropower production of Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District (MRGCD) in central New
the main canal and Machai branch in 2014 at the ten studied sites Mexico which has been built with an extensive canal network.
was 3 MW and 2.4 MW, respectively. This produced power repre- The researchers claimed the production of 2.2 MW and over 10
sents a sustainable income stream to the government as well as million kW h from 9 different locations that were further divided
a continuous supply to consumers. No lifecycle cost estimates of into 17 sub-sites. The total income is calculated to be $1.023 mil-
such hydropower systems have been made; however, the esti- lion with the purchase price of $0.075/unit. Additionally, the
mated lifespan of a small SSH installation should be at least 20– MRGCD discharge ranges from 0.57 to 4.53 m3/s whereas the dis-
390 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391
Fig. 15. Planned production capacity of different energy resources for 2030.
charge of USC is higher and ranges from 31.70 to 25 m3/s. However,
the head (0.9–7.6 m) in MRGCD is higher than that in USC (1.01–
2.68 m).
The implementation of SSH on USC canal generates a significant
annual revenue that can reduce the shortage of electricity in the
locality of the canal. It is expected that the amount invested in
SSH project on the USC main canal and Machai branch can be
recovered over a short time period of 5 to 6 months. In addition,
the consumer will receive clean and stable electricity at a price
lower than that provided by WAPDA’s electricity. In this case, the
government could save more than 50% of the cost invested each
month. The construction and operation of these proposed sites
would have no negative impact on irrigation water delivery as well
as water quality, and in some cases would be beneficial to irriga-
tion as long as the flow rates are stable.
4.3. SSH contribution to Pakistan hydropower
Despite the current installed hydropower resources of Pakistan,
the government is planning to utilize all the energy resources of
the country such as wind, solar, nuclear etc., to minimize the
energy crises in the future. In the plan for 2030, the government
is focusing on 24 mega hydropower projects which will add
41,270 MW into the existing capacity (WAPDA, 2013). Fig. 15
shows that the total planned production of all resources by the
year 2030 is 118,268 MW. Currently, the hydropower is the major
contributor with 40.5% of the total production. Small-scale hydro-
power in this projection is minor; however, it is definitely subject
to increase due to the high demand on electricity in the rural and
undeveloped areas all over Pakistan.
On the other hand, Pakistan is blessed with ample water
resources but presently only 13% of the river flow is stored, which
is subject to depletion due to sedimentation behind dams (WAPDA,
2013). Knowing that the northern part of the country has a very
dense river and stream networks, Run-off-river and small hydro-
power projects are the best choices for mega hydropower produc-
tion projects. Consequently, this study is very beneficial; eradicate
the local scale electricity problem. In addition, the low head hydro-
power scheme can be adopted to cope with the local and regional
energy crises almost in every city and village of the study area as
well as areas experiencing similar problems. Among its benefits,
it saves a comparatively significant amount of energy that can be
provided for areas having no rivers or abundant water supply.
5. Conclusion
In recent years, Pakistan has undergone an extreme electricity
shortfall. This shortfall can be minimized by utilizing the proposed
system of small scale hydropower generation. Environmentally-
friendly energy, spatial accessibility, and low installation and
maintenance costs encourage its use as a potential energy
alternative. The production rate of such a system depends on the
rate of flow in the river or canal. In this study the production rate
was found to be eight times higher in the summer season than the
winter season. During the summer season, the two studied
branches on the Upper Swat Canal produced 21% of the total River
Swat production. While in the winter season, the production is low
due to the river’s low flow. The low cost of the proposed small scale
hydropower is the incentive factor in this study. Its production cost
is three times less than the production cost of Water and Power
Development Authority. Based on the characteristics of the studied
sites, the main canal produces 20% more power and 30% more rev-
enue than the Machai branch. In addition, each site on both
branches qualified to provide stable energy to more than 1500
houses based on the maximum consumption per home. The pro-
posed low head hydropower system can be adopted to cope with
the local and regional energy crises almost in every city and village
of the study area as well as areas experiencing similar problems.
The introduction of spatial power distribution scenarios added a
potentially flexible alternative cost-effective elucidation to the
proposed SSH system. The combination of spatial distribution of
potential sites, generated power capacity, and residential area den-
sity becomes a management problem of power supply; it can also
be viewed as site-area-power optimization problem. In the pro-
posed power distribution scenarios, non-overlap proved to be
cost-effective as well as a power saver against overlap distribution.
However, to ensure maximum utilization of resources at low cost,
it is strongly recommended to investigate the optimal number and
location of proposed sites. The existence of regional national grid
stations supports and encourages the development of SSH projects
which could accommodate the extra power production.
Acknowledgment
This project was funded by the National Plan for Science, Tech-
nology and Innovation (MAARIFAH) – King Abdulaziz City for
Science and Technology – the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia – award
 K.S. Balkhair, K.U. Rahman / Applied Energy 188 (2017) 378–391
number (11-WAT1999-03). The authors also, acknowledge with
thanks Science and Technology Unit, King Abdulaziz University
for technical support.
References
[1] Burrett R, Clini C, Dixon R, Eckhart M, El-Ashry M, Gupta D, et al. Renewable
energy policy network for the 21st century; 2009.
[2] Yüksel I. Hydropower for sustainable water and energy development. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:462–9.
[3] Liu J, Zuo J, Sun Z, Zillante G, Chen X. Sustainability in hydropower
development—a case study. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;19:230–7.
[4] Paish O. Small hydro power: technology and current status. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2002;6:537–56.
[5] Williams A, Simpson R. Pico hydro–reducing technical risks for rural
electrification. Renew Energy 2009;34:1986–91.
[6] Burton J, Muluget A. Running centrifugal pumps as micro-hydro turbines
performance prediction using the area ratio method. Renew Energy, Technol
Environ 1992:2839–47.
[7] Singal S, Saini R, Raghuvanshi C. Cost optimisation based on electro-
mechanical equipment of canal based low head small hydropower scheme.
Open Renew Energy J 2008;1:26–35.
[8] Price T, Probert D. Harnessing hydropower: a practical guide. Appl Energy
1997;57:175–251.
[9] IHA. International Hydropower Association. Sustainability assessment
protocol. IHA activity report; 2010.
[10] Zhou Y, Hejazi M, Smith S, Edmonds J, Li H, Clarke L, et al. A comprehensive
view of global potential for hydro-generated electricity. Energy Environ Sci
2015;8:2622–33.
[11] Huang H, Yan Z. Present situation and future prospect of hydropower in China.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:1652–6.
[12] Giesecke J, Mosonyi E. Water power plants. In: German:
Wasserkraftanlagen. Berlin: Springer; 2005.
[13] Guney MS. Evaluation and measures to increase performance coefficient of
hydrokinetic turbines. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:3669–75.
[14] Jacobson MZ, Delucchi MA, Bazouin G, Bauer ZAF, Heavey CC, Fisher E, et al.
100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy
roadmaps for the 50 United States. Energy Environ Sci 2015;8:2093–117.
[15] Bakos GC. Feasibility study of a hybrid wind/hydro power-system for low-cost
electricity production. Appl Energy 2002;72:599–608.
[16] Sahin C, Shahidehpour M, Erkmen I. Generation risk assessment in volatile
conditions with wind, hydro, and natural gas units. Appl Energy
2012;96:4–11.
[17] Purvins A, Zubaryeva A, Llorente M, Tzimas E, Mercier A. Challenges and
options for a large wind power uptake by the European electricity system.
Appl Energy 2011;88:1461–9.
[18] Goodland R. Environmental sustainability and the power sector. Impact Assess
1994;12:409–70.
[19] Nautiyal H, Singal S, Sharma A. Small hydropower for sustainable energy
development in India. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:2021–7.
[20] Diesendorf M. Comparison of employment potential of the coal and wind
power industries. Int J Environ, Workplace Employ 2004;1:82–90.
[21] Walmsley MR, Walmsley TG, Atkins MJ, Kamp PJ, Neale JR. Minimising carbon
emissions and energy expended for electricity generation in New Zealand
through to 2050. Appl Energy 2014;135:656–65.
[22] Khan R. Small hydro power in India: is it a sustainable business? Appl Energy
2015;152:207–16.
[23] Rojanamon P, Chaisomphob T, Bureekul T. Application of geographical
information system to site selection of small run-of-river hydropower
project by considering engineering/economic/environmental criteria and
social impact. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:2336–48.
[24] Kusre BC, Baruah DC, Bordoloi PK, Patra SC. Assessment of hydropower
potential using GIS and hydrological modeling technique in Kopili River basin
in Assam (India). Appl Energy 2010;87:298–309.
[25] Yi C-S, Lee J-H, Shim M-P. Site location analysis for small hydropower using
geo-spatial information system. Renew Energy 2010;35:852–61.
[26] Demello F, Koessler R, Agee J, Anderson P, Doudna J, Fish J, et al. Hydraulic-
turbine and turbine control-models for system dynamic studies. IEEE Trans
Power Syst 1992;7:167–79.
391
[27] De Jaeger E, Janssens N, Malfliet B, Van De Meulebroeke F. Hydro turbine
model for system dynamic studies. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1994;9:1709–15.
[28] Strah B, Kuljaca O, Vukic Z. Speed and active power control of hydro turbine
unit. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2005;20:424–34.
[29] Pennacchi P, Chatterton S, Vania A. Modeling of the dynamic response of a
Francis turbine. Mech Syst Signal Process 2012;29:107–19.
[30] Chen D, Ding C, Do Y, Ma X, Zhao H, Wang Y. Nonlinear dynamic analysis for a
Francis hydro-turbine governing system and its control. J Franklin Inst
2014;351:4596–618.
[31] Zhang X-M, Wang L-P, Li J-W, Zhang Y-K. Self-optimization simulation model
of short-term cascaded hydroelectric system dispatching based on the daily
load curve. Water Resour Manage 2013;27:5045–67.
[32] Welte TM, Vatn J, Heggset J. Markov state model for optimization of
maintenance and renewal of hydro power components. In: International
conference on probabilistic methods applied to power systems, 2006
PMAPS. IEEE; 2006. p. 1–7.
[33] Catalão JPDS, Mariano S, Mendes VMF, Ferreira L. Nonlinear optimization
method for short-term hydro scheduling considering head-dependency. Eur
Trans Electr Power 2010;20:172–83.
[34] Anagnostopoulos JS, Papantonis DE. Optimal sizing of a run-of-river small
hydropower plant. Energy Convers Manage 2007;48:2663–70.
[35] Voros N, Kiranoudis C, Maroulis Z. Short-cut design of small hydroelectric
plants. Renew Energy 2000;19:545–63.
[36] Yang W, Yang J, Guo W, Zeng W, Wang C, Saarinen L, et al. A mathematical
model and its application for hydro power units under different operating
conditions. Energies 2015;8:10260–75.
[37] Boustani F. An assessment of the small hydropower potential of Sisakht Region
of Yasuj. Engineering and Technology, World Academy of Science; 2009. p. 57.
[38] Montanari R. Criteria for the economic planning of a low power hydroelectric
plant. Renew Energy 2003;28:2129–45.
[39] Shakir A, Maqbool N. Remodelling of the Upper Chenab Canal: a case study
from Pakistan. Irrig Drain 2011;60:285–95.
[40] Singal S, Saini R. Analytical approach for development of correlations for cost
of canal-based SHP schemes. Renew Energy 2008;33:2549–58.
[41] Bøckman T, Fleten S-E, Juliussen E, Langhammer HJ, Revdal I. Investment
timing and optimal capacity choice for small hydropower projects. Eur J Oper
Res 2008;190:255–67.
[42] Singhal M, Kumar A. Cost benching for civil structures of micro/mini hydro
electric projects located in Uttaranchal. In: Himalayan small hydro summit,
Dehradun. p. 381–90.
[43] Andaroodi M, Schleiss A, Boillat J-L, Bollaert E. Standardization of civil
engineering works of small hydropower plants and development of an
optimization tool; 2005.
[44] Laghari J, Mokhlis H, Bakar A, Mohammad H. A comprehensive overview of
new designs in the hydraulic, electrical equipments and controllers of mini
hydro power plants making it cost effective technology. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2013;20:279–93.
[45] PPIB. Hydropower resources of Pakistan. Islamabad (Pakistan): Private Power
& Infrastructure Board; 2010. February.
[46] PPIB. Hydropower resources of Pakistan. Islamabad (Pakistan): Private Power
& Infrastructure Board; 2011. February.
[47] Habib B. Micro hydro electric power in Pakistan. In: 19th World energy
congress Pakistan.
[48] Sabir MA, Rehman SS, Umar M, Waseem A, Farooq M, Irshad M. Assessment of
hydro power potential of Swat, Kohistan Himalayas: a solution for energy
shortfall in region. Water Resour 2014;41:612–8.
[49] PPIB. Hydropower resources of Pakistan. Islamabad (Pakistan): Private Power
& Infrastructure Board; 2004. February.
[50] Williamson SJ, Stark BH, Booker JD. Performance of a low-head pico-hydro
Turgo turbine. Appl Energy 2013;102:1114–26.
[51] Ghosh T, Prelas M. Energy resources and systems: volume 2: renewable
resources. Springer Science & Business; 2011.
[52] Miller G, Corren D, Armstrong P, Franceschi J. A study of an axial-flow turbine
for kinetic hydro power generation. Energy 1987;12:155–62.
[53] Gensler D, Kinzli K-D. Examining the feasibility of hydropower generation in
irrigation canals: middle Rio Grande conservancy district. J Irrig Drain Eng
2012;139:405–13.
[54] Blankenship J. Manufacturer’s feasibility analysis of prospective projects
Design rep. Alameda (CA): Natel Energy; 2010.