You are on page 1of 28

Identification and study of feasible watermill sites for Micro Hydropower Generation in Jimma Area

Seminar Presentation Frezer Seid Awol 30.10.2012

X X X Constructed by diverting water from river to hit a wheel which is connected to a mill Water driven mills used to grind grains History in Ethiopia traced back to mid 19th century Distributed in rural areas where electricity and diesel not reached Privat or public Substitute hand-driven mills Small scale industry Multipurpose use of river Slow operation Flooded in rainy seasons Inefficient water use

Hence, upgrading to small hydropower scheme was advocated and requested.

Classification of Hydropower
By capacity Large Medium Small Mini Micro Pico >100 MW 15-100 MW 1-15 MW 100 KW 1 MW 5 100 KW <5 KW By design head Low-head Medium-head High-head <15 m 15-50 m >50 m

By grid type Off-grid In-grid By Power supply system

(Ethiopian context)

By design type Run-of-river Pumped-Storage Storage Tidal

Inter-Connected System (ICS) Self-Contained System (SCS)

The investigation sites are off-grid, low to medium head, micro, selfcontained system run-of-river hydropower plants.

MoU for Rural Electrification

Memorandum of Understanding signed between Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH and Jimma University :
To actively involve stakeholders in hydropower development secter To select and implement 2 joint pilot projects in Jimma area from proposed 6 sites for demonstration and know how transfer To establish a center of Excelence for research and capacity building 2nd largest University Started as a college in 1952 Institute of Technology Courses & Researchs Proposal on hydropower projects Feasibility study for pilot projects Jimma Hydropower Center of Excelence BMZ and BMF Since 1964 in Ethiopia Energy Coordination Office Policy & stategy advice Energy efficient technology promotion Rural electrification Pilot projects evaluation Funding

Jimma Hydropower Center of Excelence

Hydro Scout Consultancy and support Customized training and lectures Feasibility study and design Research and thesis 2 Pilot projects design and execution

Source: Abera Melese, JHPCE, J uly 2 010

Concept note and proposal Awareness and promotions Community setup Supervision Documentation

Team assigned to select 2 most technically & socio-economically attractive watermills sites from the proposed 6 sites and design the HP scheme Desk study Reconnaissance Visit Pre feasibility study Feasibility study Detailed design
Desk Study - To be familiar with hydrologic and topographic profile of the project sites - To be aware of rough location (distance) & accessibility Reconnaissance visit - Short Visit to the proposed sites - Identify if there is watermills at the sites & which are functional or not - Identifying ownership & social structures - Nominate contact persons Pre feasibility study - Available flow at dry season - Available head - Topographic maps - Access to project site - Availability of local construction material at project sites - To determine which sites are most attractive - Development options , conclusions and recommendations are made

Feasibility Study - The final decision for or against the recommended sites Best 2 pilot projects selection and reassessment - Design of civil and electromechanical structures - Socio economic analysis Detail Design Preparation of the detailed layout of the Civil & Electro Mechanical scheme Cost-Benefit analysis -

Proposed sites

Proposed sites

Site Name: Kersa-1 Distance (From Jimma): 23km GPS location: N 07o 4405.2 E 37o 051.62 Elevation: 1760masl

Watermills: 1 traditional Discharge: 120-160l/s Head: 11m Accessibility: Good Power Potential: 11 KW Remark: Attractive

Proposed sites

Site Name: Kersa 2 Distance (From Jimma): 26km GPS location: N 07o 44 53.9 E 36o 57 41.8 Elevation: 1750masl

Watermills: NO Discharge: 200l/s Head: 4-5m Power potential : 5.5-6.9KW Accessibility: Bad Remark: Not Attractive for MHP

Proposed sites

Site Name: Kelecha Distance (From Jimma): 25km GPS location: N 739'30.40" E 37 1'50.71 Elevation: 1702masl

Watermills: 1 Not functional Discharge: 100 l/s Head: 5m Power output: 3.4KW Accessibility: Medium Remark: Not Attractive for MHP

Proposed sites

Site Name: Melka Qiltu Distance (From Jimma): 24km GPS location: 746'30.71"N 3638'35.16"E Elevation: 1930masl

Watermills: 1 Not functional Discharge: 80 l/s Head: 15m Power output: 8.24KW Accessibility: Medium Remark: Not Attractive for MHP

Proposed sites

Site Name: Fechie Distance (From Jimma): 23km GPS location: 744'8.11"N 3640'49.06"E Elevation: 2017masl

Watermills: 1 Not functional Discharge: 90 l/s Head: 14m Power output: 8.65KW Accessibility: Bad Remark: Not Attractive for MHP

Proposed sites

Site Name: Wanja Distance (From Jimma): 38km GPS location: N 07o 5202.5 E 36o 4203.8 Elevation: 1520masl

Watermills: 1 traditional Discharge: 250l/s Head: 35m Accessibility: Good Remark: Irrigation scheme is being constructed on the river without affecting the watermill, attractive

Proposed sites

Site Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 Kersa 1 Kersa 2 Wanja Kelecha Melka Qiltu Fechie

Distance (km) 23 26,03 38 25 24 23

Discharge Head (m/s) (m) 0,14 0,2 0,25 0,1 0,08 0,09 12 4 35 5 15 14

Power output Accessibility (KW) 11,5 5,5 60,1 3,4 8,24 8,65 Accessible Not accessible Accessible Mostly Accessible Accessible

Existing Watermills

Social status

1 Operational Active None Passive

1 Operational Active 1 Abandoned Passive 1 Abandoned Passive

Not accessible 1 Abandoned Passive

Selection Criteria
Technically attractive sites fulfills ideally most of the following criteria Available flow and head are substantial. Topography is favorable. Ratio of water head to canal length is 10% or better. Firm capacity is more than demand estimate. Low degree of difficulties / risks. Distance of powerhouse to load center is less than 1 km per 100 kW installed capacity. Consumer density is greater than 30 connections per 1Km of transmission and distribution lines.

Technically attractive projects are not necessarily promising projects and vise-versa!

Source : GIZ guide lines, MHP assessment standards

Selection Criteria
Non-technical aspects should be considered equally. Synergies with other projects or installations e.g. irrigation, water supply Large part of the equipment can be manufactured & maintained locally. Limited number of technically critical parts. Country's feed-in-tariff policy is encouraging. Substantial equity contribution to project cost is available. Broad political support at all relevant levels can be secured. No social conflicts due to project implementation expected. No major adverse environmental impacts to be expected.

Kersa-1 and Wanja sites are selected.

Source : GIZ guide lines, MHP assessment books, JU C ivil Engg student thesis

Selected sites
Kersa-1 124 households Power Consumption: 45.276 KWh/household/month Good access for transportation Local construction material Village out of gird line Traditional weir of 6m length at 40o CCW Main river 160 l/s, diverted canal 120l/s 1200m earth canal

Selected sites
Kersa-1 Development option Option 1. At the existing watermill- To modify the existing site to get 11m head and upgrade the trash-rack, forebay, penstock and powerhause Option 2. 50m upstream of the watermill- To construct new Civil and Electro-mechanical structures, Diverting water completely and using T-14 cross flow turbine( = 70%), has power potential of: Power = QH = 0.7*9810 N/m*0.14 m/s*12 m = 11.5 KW

Selected sites
Wanja 688 households Power Consumption: 99.176 KWh/household/month Site is easily accessible for transportation Community is in remote area Head - 35m Discharge - 250 l/s Ratio of water head to canal length about 16% Synergy with Irrigation scheme Local construction materials available Power potential = 60 KW the most attractive & promising feasible site

Rough layout

Kersa 1


Hydraulic design
Wanja Site Intake structure Weir

Hydraulic design
Wanja Site Diversion canal Forbay tank

P enstock

Length 220m

Hydraulic design
Wanja Site

Penstock Slide block Length = 67m Type - Welded steel Internal Diameter = 0.35m Wall thickness = 6 mm Anchor block size = 2.34 m3 Slide block spacing = 8m
Slide block

Hydraulic design
Kersa-1 Site

Intake structure Weir Type Diagonal Ogee-crested weir @ 40o Calculation according to USACE and Chow, 1959 HQ50 = 58 m/s Length 7.5m Upstream height 1m Downstream height 1.66m Bottom Width 2.66m

Hydraulic design
Kersa-1 Site

Diversion Canal
Modify the traditional canal Length = 1150 m Type - unlined earth Total depth = 0.5m Base width = 0.7m Channel bed slope = 0.002 m/m

Hydraulic design
Turbine Selection

T-15 Crossflow turbine is selected for both plants

Turbine sizing Wanja site Design head 36.47m Design discharge 230 l/sec Diameter of the runner 0.3m Calculated width of the runner = bo = 159mm Calculated turbine speed = 765 rpm Run away speed = 1377 rpm Specific speed = 24.7 Generator, belt and transmission efficiency = 85 % Electrical power output = 54.28 KW

Hydraulic design

L oc ally manufactured T-15 turbine @ Ererte site, a G IZ project

Thank you!