Hydrotechnical Const ruct i on, Vol. 3/q, No. 1.

2000
HYDRAUL I C P OWE R E NGI NE E RI NG I N RUS S I A: P ROBL E NI S AND S OL UT I ONS
V. A. Ku z n e t s o v , V. M. Zo t o v , V. D. No v o z h e n i n a n d I. I . Fa i n
Current Russi an Hydraulic Power Engineering
The i ndi sput abl e advant ages of hydraul i c power engineering, which are associ at ed with the r enewabl e charac-
t er of the resources, low net pr oduct i on cost for electric power, rel at i ve ecological cleanliness of pr oduct i on, mobility
of capacities, st abi l i t y of gener at i on, and i nf l at i onar y stability; have served as t he basi sf or heavv ut i l i zat i on of water-
power resources in all count r i es of t he world. At the present time, approzimately 30%o of the economically effective
hydraulic potential is utilized in the world (Fig. 1). Such countries as the uni t ed States, Norway, France, Italy, and
J apan are essent i al l y fully ut i l i zi ng t hei r resources; Aust ri a, Canada, and ma ny ot her countries utilize significantly
more than hal f of t hei r pot ent i al . Devel opi ng count ri es - China, Indi a, Brazil, and Argent i na - will be embar ki ng on
rigorous hydraul i c const r uct i on (Fig. 2). More than 10 hydroelectric power plants with a total capacity of 50 million
W are currently under const ruct i on in China; the total capacity of hydroelectric plants under construction in Brazil
and India amount s to more t han 10 million k W, etc.
The specific wei ght of wat er - power engi neeri ng is also r at her high in the overall product i on of electric power
in many count ri es (Fig. 3). Thi s i ndi cat or is above 90% in Norway and Brazil; half to 80% of t he electric power
consumed in Ca na da and Venezuel a is gener at ed by hydroelectric pl ant s; in Indi a, Egypt , Italy, and Chi na, 20% of
t he electric power is gener at ed by hydr oel ect r i c pl ant s; t he United St at es and J apan generate appr oxi mat el y 10% of
t he electric-power cons umed at hydr oel ect r i c pl ant s.
Russia assumes second place in the world (after China) with respect to hydraulic potential. Today. it is
estimated at 850 billion k wh (Fig. 4). It s cur r ent utilization is 19%, i ncl udi ng 50~0 in the Eur opean port i on, 19% in
Siberia, and onl y 4% in t he Far East . Based on fuel equivalent, t he economi c pot ent i al is est i mat ed at 300 million
tons of specific fuel per year, and t he moder n gener at i on of electric power at hydroelectric plants is equi val ent to 60
million tons of specific fuel per year .
Large-scal e hydr aul i c const r uct i on in t he USSR and Russi a was i ni t i at ed in the 1930s , and has not been
interrupted, even dur i ng t he Second "World Vv'ar. Heavy utilization of wat er resources was begun in 1950 and continued
to appr oxi mat el y 1985. From 5 to 7.5 million k W of capacity was introduced at hydroelectric plants in Russia d'aT~'ng
each five-year period f rom 1960 through 1995 (Fig. 5). At the present time, t he t ot al capaci t y of hydr oel ect r i c plants
in Russia is 43.6 million kW, and annual gener at i on at these pl ant s has reached 170 billion kWh in t he current
decade. The s t r uct ur e of el ect r i c- power gener at i on in Russia in t he cur r ent decade is i l l ust rat ed by a pl ot (Fig.
6) from which it follows t ha t a r educt i on in pr oduct i on of electric power occurred at t hermal el ect ri c power plants
from 797 billion kWh in 1990 t o 550 billion kWh (by a factor of 1.45). Here, generation at hydroelectric plants has
remained stable. [ts specific weight in the overall production of electric power increased from 15.~/ in 1990 to 19.5
in 1998. Thi s suggest s t he hi gh s t abi l i t y of this source of electric power and t he count ry' s economi c i nt erest on the
whole in its vi gor ous and compl et e ut i l i zat i on. Fi gure T shows the s t r uct ur e of electric-power pr oduct i on by region
in Russia.
Fi gure 8 shows t he r el at i onshi p bet ween prices for delivery of electric power to the FORI ~M by various
electric-power pr oducer s. I n 1998, hydroelectric plants operated by j oi nt -st ock companies delivered electric power to
the FOREM at an average rate of 3. 6 kopeks/ kWh; this was 5.~ t i mes lower than the rates charged by state regional
power plants operated by j oi nt - st ock companies, ~. l times lower than the rates charged by nuclear power plants, and
3.8 times lower t han those set by the j oi nt -st ock company Energo. Thi s lowers t he overall t ot al of r at e payment s for
electric power cons umed in t he FORI ~M by 16-17 billion rubies per year on average (as compar ed wi t h t he average
r at e for electric power).
Modern Problems of Hydraulic Power Engineering
Ret ent i on of Equi pment Serviceabzlity at Active Hydroelectric Power Plants. Charact eri zi ng t he moder n st at e
of hydraulic power engi neeri ng, it shoul d be s t at ed t hat in the last 15-20 years, probl ems t hat have be c ome aggravat ed
Tr ansl at ed f r om Gi dr ot ekhni cheskoe St roi t el ' st vo, No. 1, pp. 2- t l , Januar y, 2000.
0018-8220/ 00/ 3401-0001525. 00 @2000 Kluwer Academi c/ Pl enum Publishers 1
o
c-
o
14o6~
1200-- 1
1000-1
8 0 0 - - ~
600--
400--
200--
O--
R u s s i a
D Economic potenti al
[] Economic potenti al utilized
1 [ ,
China Brazil canacla India Uni ted
States
- - ~ I6%
[ I
Argentina
2004 ~,o 78%
07.~ ~J/ o ~ ~ 54% 70% 88% 81% 64%
0
Norway Japan Venezuela Sweden France Italy Austria
Fig. 1. Utilization of economic pot ent i al of wat er-power resources in Russi a a nd foreign countries.
Thousands of MW
5 ° 1 !
40
30
2O
' llla
k . . -
Fig. 2. Countries with largest vol ume of hydroel ect ri c plants under cons t r uct i on.
dur i ng t he reformat i on and st r uct ur al rebui l di ng of t he economy have been clearly def i ned in t he subbranch. Above
all, we are speaking of the progressive aging of equipment, which is associated wi t h i nadequat e resources allocated
f or its reconditioning. It is sufficient t o st at e t hat for some t i me now the depr eci at i on of hydroel ect ri c pl ant s was
cent r al i zed and directed toward t he capi t al const ruct i on and over haul of thermal el ect r i c pl ant s within t he f r amewor k
of t he Mi ni s t r y of Energy of the USSR. As a result, t he hydroel ect ri c power plants of Russi a are t oday f i t t ed wi t h
equi pment t hat has either exhaust ed, or is approachi ng its s t andar d service life. Fi gur e 9 pr esent s dat a on t he ser vi ce
life of equi pment at Russian hydroel ect ri c power plants from which it follows t hat i f no ext ensi ve measures ar e t aken
t oday t o r epl ace and maintain t he servi ceabi l i t y of this equi pment , by the year 2010, t he port i on of the t urbi nes and
generators that will have exhausted their standard service lives will amount to 78Yo i n t er ms of rated capacity, and
8~o in t er ms of number of hydraulic generating sets.
Thi s st at e of the equi pment at t he hydroel ect ri c plants superposes a certain i mpr es s i on concerning t he over al l
pat t er n of t he overhaul campaign of recent years. The actual downt i me of hydraulic generat i ng sets f or repair in 1994-
I 998 exceeds the standard repair t i me by a f act or of 2-5 (Fig. 10). Analysis of demand for equi pment to r epl ace and
r econs t r uct t urbi nes and generat ors indicates t hat more t han 150 Kaplan, and near l y 20 Franci s hydraul i c t ur bi nes,
and mor e t han 100 hydraulic generat ors should be replaced t oday.
Tur ni ng attention to t he t echnol ogy used to perform this work, and t he pot e nt i a l of equi pment pl ant s-
manuf act ur er s , and the financial st at us of t he hydroel ect ri c power plants and i ndus t r y as a whole, it is possi bl e t o
st at e t ha t i mpl ement at i on of such a pr ogr am in t he near fut ure is unreal. The De p a r t me n t of Electric Power Pl a nt s
%
80~
60-
40
20
0
¢
Fig. 3. Specific weight of hydroel ect ri c power pl ant s in gener at i on of
electric power in a number of countries.
Bi l l i ons of kWh
900 .
800 .
700,
600 .
500
400
300 19%
200
l O 0 I
0
Total for
Russia
[ ] Economic potential
[ ] Economic potential utilized
European Siberia Far East
portion
Fig. 4. Ut i l i zat i on of economic pot ent i al of wat er - power resources b y
act i ve hydr oel ect r i c power pl ant s in Russia.
with the par t i ci pat i on of design, scientific-research, and specialized or gani zat i ons has t her ef or e developed a method
for the cornplez ezecution of work to maintain the serviceability of equi pment at active hydroelectric power plants,
which is based on optimal combination of work involving total replacement of equipment and ezpanded reconditioning
of turbines and generators with replacement and reconstruction of individual subassemblies and components.
In recent years, t he compl ex met hod has been successfully empl oyed at the Vol zhsk, Sar at ov, ~v~igograd, and
other hydroel ect ri c plants; here, expendi t ur es for expanded repai rs is 15- 25~ of t he cost of t he t ot al repl acement
of equi pment , and t he service life of t he hydraulic gener at i ng sets has been ext ended by 15 years. For a number of
hydroel ect ri c pl ant s possessing worn equi pment , small depreci at i on charges, and low gener at i on, even this low-cost
met hod of ret ai ni ng equi pment servi ceabi l i t y cannot be used at t he pri ces commanded for el ect ri c power today. The
inclusion of costs for expanded r epai r s and the acquisition of new equi pment at such f eder al - l evel hydroelectric pl ant s
as the Rybi nsk, Uglich, and Ka ma wili lead to a t wo-t hreefol d i ncrease in t he price of t he el ect ri c power generat ed
by these pl ant s. To mai nt ai n the operational status of the equipment at these hydroelectric plants, it is therefore
necessary in the near future to develop proposals for financial sources f or work involving the technical refitting of this
kind of entities.
Provision for the Safety of Water-Development Works. The saf et y- i nspect i on s y s t e m for wat er-devel opment
works, which has been in effect wi t hi n t he i ndust ry for t he past al most 30 years, has as s umed ma j o r significance for t he
support of their reliable and failsafe oper at i on. Moni t ori ng of t he condi t i on of wa t e r - de ve l opme nt works on the basis
of active r egul at or y document s, and al so recommendat i ons of l eadi ng sci ent i fi c-research a n d desi gn organi zat i ons by
operat i ng personnel at t he electric power plants has been an i mpor t ant el ement of the s ys t e m. Observat i onal dat a on
the condi t i on of wat er - devel opment works has been used as initial i nf or mat i on tbr t he t i me l y det ect i on of danger ous
processes, served as the basis of anal ysi s of causes of appar ent devi at i ons from the desi gn oper at i ng regimes of t he
st ruct ures, and provided a base for t he development and i mpl ement at i on of measures t o pr event or eliminate t hei r
damage.
Inspect i on dat a i ndi cat e t ha t for the maj ori t y of entities, t he condi t i on of t he s t r u c t u r e s meet s requi rement s
for their reliable and safe oper at i on. In addition, anal ysi s of i nspect i on r epor t s i ndi cat es t h a t a dangerous t rend of
increasing exposed defects and damages requiring the adopt i on of i mper at i ve measures for t hei r el i mi nat i on has been
8000 - -
7000 - -
6000 - -
5000 - -
4000 - -
3000 - -
2000 - -
1 0 0 0 - -
0 - -
7400 7400
6 9 0 0
1 6 0 0
500
?7
I ! I I I 1
Year s
Fig. 5. Int roduct i on of capacity at hydroelectric power plants in Russia from
1961 t hrough 1995.
1200 - -
" 1 0 0 0 - ~
800 - -
7 3 , 7 %
600-
4 0 0 - -
T h e r ma l el ect r i c
p o we r p l a n t s
6 7 , 7 %
1 0 , 9 N Nu c l e a r p o we r 12 7 %
pl ant s
0 / ~ [ I I I ~ I
1990 1991 1992 t 993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Type of electric
power plant
Nuclear power
plants
Hydroelectric
power plants
Thermal electric
power plants
Total
Electric-power production
billions of kwh %
1990 f 1998 1990 I 9 9 8
118.3 103.5 10.9 12.7
166.8 158 .5 15.4 19.5
797.0 550. i 73.7 67.7
1082.1 812.1 100 100
Fig. 6. Product i on of electric power at electric power plants of Russia.
observed in recent years. This applies especially to st ruct ures in hydroprojects that have been in service for 40 years
and longer.
Mechanical equipment at water-development works is being replaced and reconditioned at unsatisfactory rates
at virtually all hydroelectric plants, and the imperative repair and reconditioning require the crane equipment of the
spillway dams and powerhouses. Work to increase t he reliability of hydroproject performance should be conducted at
o
m
900
800
700
600
500
400
300 -
200 -
t 0 0 -
67%
!
I
i
1 3 % I
R u s s i a
r ~ Thermal el ect r i c p o we r pl ant s
Nucl ear p o we r pl ant s
[ ] Hydr oel ect r i c p o we r pl ant s
72%
17%
N
E u r o p e a n
p o r t i o n
72%
I I
S i b e r i a F a r East
Fi g. 7. St r u c t u r e of r e g i o n a l e l e c t r i c - powe r p r o d u c t i o n in Rus s i a d u r i n g 1998.
kopeks/kWh
1 6 -
I 3,0
i : !
8
4
0 m
A v e r a g e r a t e f o r
e l e c t n c p o w e r
d e l i v e r e d to
F O R E M
[5.4
19.2
J3,5
10 kopeks/kWh
¥ 3.6
[1
Nucl ear State r egi onal Hydroelectric Excess
p o we r powe r pl ant s p o we r plants suppl i ed by
plants operated by operated by • joint-stock
joint-stock joint-stock c ompa ny
compani es c ompa ni e s Energo
Fi g. 8. Ra t e s c h a r g e d for d e l i v e r y of el ect r i c power t o FORt ~M by gr oups of s uppl i e r s .
a n u m b e r of facilities in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h n e w ; higher seismicity s t a n d a r d s for r e g i o n s in w h i c h theses hydroprojects
are located ( t h e Zeya, Chirkey, Miatla, a n d C h i r - Y u r t hydroelectric plants).
Analysis of o v e r h a u l a n d r e c o n d i t i o n i n g c o s t s for w a t e r - d e v e l o p m e n t w o r k s for federal-level hydroelectric
plants o v e r the past five y e a r s indicates t h a t these expenditures h a v e risen b y a factor of three in c o m p a r a b l e prices;
here, p l a n n e d allotments for certain entities h a v e b e e n appreciably exceeded. O n the o n e h a n d , this indicates that
questions c o n c e r n i n g t h e safety o f w a t e r - d e v e l o p m e n t w o r k s h a v e n o t g o n e u n h e e d e d b y o p e r a t i n g personnel at t h e
pl ant s, a nd a l ar ge v o l u me of ove r ha ul a n d r e c o n s t r u c t i o n is u n d e r wa y at t he h y d r o p r o j e c t s . On t he ot her ha nd, t hi s
is an i n d i c a t o r of t h e i n c r e a s i n g p r o b l e ms a s s o c i a t e d wi t h t he agi ng of s t r uc t ur e s . One s h o u l d expect t hat i n t he
f ut ur e, d e ma n d for t h e s e e x p e n d i t u r e s wi l l i nc r e a s e , becaus e t o d a y o n l y pr i or i t y wor k is i n c o r p o r a t e d as a c o mp o n e n t
p a r t - o f t he pr i ce, a n d ma n y p r o b l e ms a r e b e i n g moved ahead t o t he d i s t a n t f ut ur e ( r e p a i r of br i dge pa s s a ge wa ys ,
me c ha ni c a l and c r a ne e q u i p me n t , r oof i ng, e t c . ) .
The federal law "On the safety of "water-development works," which was enacted in 1997, deft'ned new reqvire-
me'nts f or the safe operation of str'uctures, delimited the authority of the Gover'nment of the Russzan Federation and
W i t h r e s p e c t t o r a t e d
c a p a c i t y , %
2000
100
6 0 1 40
20
0
L e s s t h a n ' Mor e t h a n
3 0 year s 30 y e a r s
W i t h r e s p e c t t o n u m b e r
o f s e t s , u n i t s
2000
- 350 -} 68%
300-1 269
250 -1
200-1 32Vo
"5 150-1 129
:m 0
L e s s t h a n " M o r e t h a n
3 0 y e a r s 3 0 y e a r s
S e r v i c e l i f e , y e a r s
100
80
60
o~
40
20
0
W i t h r e s p e c t t o r a t e d
c a p a c i t y , %
2005
64
t
Less t h a n ' M o r e t h a n
30 y e a r s 3 0 y e a ~
W i t h r e s p e c t t o n u m b e r
o f s e t s , u n i t s
2005 7 9 %
350 -1 314
== 300 j r - - n
'~ 250 -1
200 1
z 1 5 o - 1 21%
,oo-1 s.4,,
~ 5 ° j I I
z 0
L e s s t h a n M o r e t h a n
30 year s :~0 y e a r s
S e r v i c e l i f e , y e a r s
100
80
60
o~ 40
20
0
W i t h r e s p e c t t o r a t e d W i t h r e s p e c t t o n u m b e r
c a p a c i t y , % o f s e t s , u n i t s
2010 2010 84%
350 -1 335
78 ~ 3 o o l ....
250 -1
200-1
"6 150-1
22 .~ lOOJ 16% 63
s°ll I
r - ~ z 0 ,
L e s s t i t a n M o r e t h a n L e s s t h a n Mo r e t h a n
3 0 y e a ~ 3 0 y e a r s 3 0 y e a r s 30 y e a r s
S e r v i c e l i f e , y e a r s
Fig. 9. St r uc t ur e of equipment at Russi an hydroelectric pl ant s based on servi ce life.
agencies of executive authority of subjects of the federation, defined rules and duties for the owners of the structures
and operating organizations, and established the order of legal and financial accountability f or the consequences of
emergencies at water-development works. In this connect i on, a set of measures to fulfill r equi r ement s of t he f eder al
taw " On t he safety of wat er-devel opment works" shoul d be developed and i mpl ement ed by t he hydr oel ect r i c pl ant s,
j oi nt - st ock companies i nvol ved with power generat i on and electrification and the Russian j oi nt - st ock company Uni t -
ed Power Unified Power Sys t em of Russia as owners of wat er-devel opment works, and design and sci ent i fi c-research
or gani zat i ons. It is possible t o designate t he following as priority measures:
formul at i on of saf et y declarations for wat er-devel opment works;
pr epar at i on of mat er i al s for a Russian regi st er of wat er-devel opment works; and,
devel opment of r egul at or y- met hodi cal document s implementing positions of the Feder al law " On t he s af et y
of wat er - devel opment works. "
Considering the high potential risk of water-development works f or the life and health of people, property, and
the environment, funding must be provided f or their repair and reconditioning by the inclusion of the required volume
of expenditures for these operations as a component part of the price charged for electric power. Sci ent i fi c-t echni cal
pr obl ems of this industrial br anch should be resolved wi t hi n the framework of the branch sci ent i fi c-t echni cal pr ogr a ms
BSTP 0. 05 "Hydroel ect ri c power plants and power-generat i ng st ruct ures" and "Safet y of power - gener at i on wor ks; "
this will requi re appropri at e funding from t he NI OKR fund of the Russian j oi nt -st ock company Unified Power Sys t em
of Russi a.
Unfinished Construction on Hydroprojeets
Radi cal changes in fundi ng for t he devel opment of hydraulic power engineering (free b u d g e t f i nanci ng is
cur t ai l ed) , and also t he cur r ent lack of an al t er nat i ve clearly defined and effective mechani sm for i nves t ment in
t he s ubbr anch has resul t ed in a sharp drop off in t he i nt roduct i on of capacities, long wai t i ng peri ods for l ar ge- scal e
hydr opr oj ect s , and ext r emel y ineffective use of capi t al expendi t ur e made available by the Russi an j oi nt - st ock c o mp a n y
Unified Power System of Russi a, and t he degr adat i on of the i ndust ri al and employee pot ent i al of cons t r uct i on-
assembl y organizations.
At t he present t i me, 16 water-power ent i t i es are under const ruct i on in Russia (Tabl e 1). Significant r esour ces
are bei ng expended for t he const ruct i on of t he maj ori t y, including the l argest of these plants. Of the volume of capital
expenditures required to introduce the first generating set, 6~.5~ of the resources have been expended in constructing
the Boguchany hydroelectric plant, the 5q.7Yo for the Bureya plant, 69Yo f or the Ust'-Srednekan plant, 96.2Yo f or the
Zelenchuk plant (second generating set), 79.1~o f or the Aushigersk plant, etc.
Hydr opr oj ect s are bei ng constructed in a so-called sluggish regime, where allotted r esour ces are e xpe nde d for
160-
140-
120-
I00-
80-
6 0 -
40-
20-
0 . . . . . .
1994
Actual /
/
Normalized ( average)
i L i t
1995 1996 1997 1998
Year
Fig. 10. Average dur at i on of overhaul for single set by year.
wages, mai nt enance of t he base and social sphere, trench excavations, and onl y a smal l r emai nder for t he execution
of t hemat i c tasks. I f the attained level (f or example, one billion per year) is not increased, we cannot expect the
introduction of capacities at three basic large-scale construction sites before 2005, although t hey had been placed on
hold long ago, since the Boguchany, Bureya, and Ust' -Srednekan plants have been under const ruct i on f or 24, 2I, and
9 years, respectively. At the same t i me, t he need t o introduce a number of hydr oel ect r i c pl ant s is di c t a t e d by an acut e
regional fuel and power short age. Thi s appl i es, above all, to t he Far East - t he Bur e ya hydr oel ect r i c pl ant ; Nort hern
Ca uc a s i a - the I r gana, Zar amagsk, Zelenchuk, and Auishigersk plants; and, t he Ma ga da n Obl ast - t he Ust ' - Sr ednekan
pl ant . At the pr esent t i me, a number of pr oj ect s have been pl aced under conser vat i on, or i nsi gni fi cant out l ays have
been earmarked for t hem - the Bel oporozhsk, Tel ' mamsk, Got sat l i n, and Upper Kr as noyar s k hydr oel ect r i c plants.
The "Concept of short-tervn and moderat el y urgent prospects f or the const ruct i on and i nt roduct i on of capacities
on priority wat er-power projects const ruct ed wi t h i nvest ment resources of the Russi an j oi nt - st ock company Unified
Power System of Russi a prior to 2006" was devel oped by a working group of speci al i st s pr oceedi ng f r om analysis of
t he actual st at us of const ruct i on, specific efficiency indicators of t he hydr opr oj ect , and t he power defi ci ency in the
region where t he pl ant is l ocat ed t hr ough t he auspices of the Russi an j oi nt - st ock c ompa ny Uni fi ed Power Syst em of
Russia. Of the five al t er nat e schemes anal yzed in t he concept, t he group pr oposes t he following speci f i ed scheme:
1. Separ at i on of seven pri ori t y pr oj ect s from the t ot al of 16: t he Bur eya, Boguchany, a nd Ust ' - Sr ednekan
hydroelectric pl ant s, and the I r gana, Zelenchuk, Aushigersk, and Zar amagsk hydr oel ect r i c pl ant s i n Nor t her n Cau-
casia_
2. Separ at i on of the first phase f r om t he st ar t - up compl exes at t he hydr oel ect r i c pl ant s under const ruct i on
- introduction of t he first generat i ng set at a reduced head.
3. A search for addi t i onal capi t al fundi ng to complete const ruct i on of t he pl ant s, bri ngi ng t he annual financing
for these purposes t o 1.5-1.6 billion rubles, which will be 1.5-1.6 t i mes gr eat er t han t he fi nanci ng c ur r e nt l y available.
4. Since concur r ent i nt r oduct i on of capaci t i es at three of t he very l ar gest pr oj ect s is unr eal in t he financial
sense, it is proposed t o concent r at e capi t al out l ays for the s t ar t - up of the first gener at i ng set i ni t i al l y at t he Bureya,
t hen at the Boguchany, and t her eaf t er at t he Ust ' -Srednekan hydroel ect ri c pl ant s.
These measur es will make it possible to revi ve the proj ect s appr eci abl y and bri ng t he dat e of t hei r pl acement
in service t hat much closer. The dynami cs of t he completion of const ruct i on oil t he s t ar t - up pha s e s of t he pri ori t y
proj ect s at the pr esent rat es of fi nanci ng ( appr oxi mat el y 1 billion r ubl es/ year ) and t he i ncreased f i nanci ng (approxi -
mat el y 1.5 billion r ubl es / year ) is shown gr aphi cal l y in Fig. 11 (Tabl e 2). The proposed measures wi l l make it possible
to introduce the f i rst generating sets at all pri ori t y projects prior to 2006. I t shoul d be poi nt ed out t h a t i nt r oduct i on
of t he first hydroel ect ri c generat i ng set on each proj ect is an ext r emel y i mpor t a nt t ask, since i t s s ol ut i on will make
it possible to:
begin to rei nvest some of t he profits in t he construction;
i mpl ement some of t he funct i onal i t y i nst al l ed by the builders (conservat i on, lighting, wa t e r pumpi ng, etc.);
a n d ,
r e g u l a t e e x p e n d i t u r e s .
T AB L E 1. Techni coeconomi c Ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Hy d r o e l e c t r i c P l a n t s Co n s t r u c t i o n ( pr i ces as of 1 J a n u a r y 1999)
Hydr oel ect r i c plant,
region
Power Es t i ma t e d const r uct i on
p a r a me t e r s cost ( Cl ass "A" es t i mat e)
N, E, bil- mi l l i ons r ubl es / r ubl e s /
MtV l i ons of of r ubl es kW k Wh
k Wh
Ca pi t a l expendi -
t ur es al l ocat ed as
of 1 J a n u a r y 1999
mi l l i ons %
of r u b l e s
Cost of
s t a r t - up
compl ex
(first
phase of
s t a r t - up
compl ex) ,
millions
of r ubl es
Ut i l i zat i on
of st ar t - up
complex
(first
phase of
s t ar t - up
complex),
%
Comme nt s
Hydr oel ect r i c pl ant s ) r i or i t i zed for funding by t he Russi an j oi nt - s t ock c ompa ny Unified Power Syst em of
60 0.22 101 1683 0.46 64 63.4 62.3 79.1 Aushi ger sk, Republic
of Kabar di no- Bal kar
3000 17.60 2601.2 867 0.15 1056 40.6 1696.6
(1590.4)
2000 7.10 2547.5 1274 0.36 589 23.1 1653.7
(1074.3)
352 0.81 257.4 731 0.32 130 50.5 58.49
160 0.12 265.2 1658 2. 2I 255 96.2 265.2
800 1.30 897.3 1122 0.69 600 66.9 456.6
570 2.55 1800.6 3159 0.71 589 32.7 1289.7
(702.4)
Boguchany,
Kr as noyar s k Kray
Bureya,
Amur Obl a s t
Zar amagsk, Republic
of Nor t he r n Osetia
Zet enchuk, Republic
of Karachay-Cherkess
Irgana, Republ i c
of Daghes t an
Us t ' - Sr ednekan,
Magadan Obl ast
Russia
P o w e r d e m a n d
l a r g e b a c k l o g
63.9 Large backl og,
(64.5) power d e ma n d
35.6 Power d e ma n d
(54.7) l arge backl og
49.4 Power d e ma n d
l arge backl og
96.2 Large backl og
55.0 Power d e ma n d
l arge backl og
68.5 Power
(69.0) large
demand.
backl og
Hydr oel ect r i c plants not i ncl uded in t he list of pl ant s pr i or i t i zed for f undi ng by t he Russi an j oi nt - st ock company Uni f i ed
Power Sys t e m of Russia
Lower Bur eya, 321 1.60 981 3056 0.61
Amur Obl a s t
Vilyui-3, 360 1.20 1012 2811 0.84
Sakha- Yakut
Tot machevsk, 45 0.16 88 1956 0.55
Ka mc ha t ka ObIast
Tel ' mams k, 450 1.80 1001 2224 0.56
I r kut sk Obl a s t
Got sat l i n, Republ i c 100 0.31 145 I450 0.47
of Daghes t an
Sovetsk, Republ i c of 60 0.23 125.4 2090 0.55
Kabar di no- Bal kar
Upper Kr asnoyar sk, 100 0.21 264.2 2642 1.26
Republ i c of Kara-
chay- Cher kess
Bel opor ozhsk, 130 0.33 277 2131 0.84
Republ i c of Karelia
Zagorsk pumped- 1200 1.70 650 542 0.38
st or age power plant,
Moscow Obl as t
30 3
538.2 53.2
4 4.5
80 8
10 6.9
4.5 3.6
62 22.4
610 93.9
Excl uded from pri ori t y pr oj ect s in
view of low capi t al -fundi ng a l l ot me nt
Fi nanci ng is specified from l ocal
Admi ni s t r at i on and Federal budge t for
compl et i on of t he hydroel ect ri c pl a nt
The Russi an j oi nt -st ock company
Unified Power Syst em of Russi a is.
not par t i ci pat i ng in financing.
Fi nanci ng acqui red t hrough l ocal
Admi ni s t r at i on and Federal budge t
Pl aced on conservation list in 1993
Excl uded from pri ori t y pr oj ect s in
view of low capi t al -fundi ng a l l ot me nt
Low backl og. Fi nanci ng from ot he r
Invest ors
Insi gni fi cant reserves al l ocat ed for
const r uct i on of Upper Kr asnogor sk
~lant
Pl aced in conservation
Funded from resources of publ i c
j oi nt - st ock company Mos6nergo
and cr edi t offered by EBRR
Prospects for Development of Russian Hydraulic Power Engineering
An a l y s i s of t he s i t u a t i o n wi t h i n c o mp l e t e p r o j e c t s s u g g e s t s s e r i o u s a p p r e h e n s i o n over t he fact t h a t t h e p e r i o d
of t he d e v e l o p me n t of h y d r a u l i c power e n g i n e e r i n g i n Ru s s i a , a n d u t i l i z a t i o n of i t s wa t e r - p o we r r esour ces i s c l os e t o
c o mp l e t i o n . Ther e are s e r i o u s gr ounds f or t hi s s u p p o s i t i o n . Perspective design has been completely suspended; not
much, i f any, reliable sources of financing are being considered; and, the construction, scientific, and design potentials
have markedly enervated. All this represents symptoms of the stagnation and freezing of the development of the most
effective trend in electric power engineering.
= =
o
:=
E
I mp l e me n t a t i o n o f s t a r t - u p c o m p l e x e s ( f i r s t p h a s e s o f s t a r t - u p c o m p l e x e s ) f o r
aver age a n n u a l l evel of i nvest ment b y R u s s i a n j o i n t . s t o c k c o m p a n y U n i f i e d P o we r
System o f Ru s s i a f r o m 2 0 0 0 t o 2 0 0 6 ; e x a m p l e c i t e d i s f o r 1.5 b i l l i o n r u b l e s p e r y e a r
2000
1600
1200
g00
400
0

:!: i . i ' , e = =
IBo~luchany plantJ ~ -
- p \
C~> (Pl ants of Nort hern C a u c a s i a ~
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Year
Impl ementati on of start-up compl exes (fi rst p h a s e s o f s t a r t - u p c o m p l e x e s ) at
aver age a n n u a l l evel o f i n v e s t m e n t b y R u s s i a n j oi nt ~st ock c o m p a n y U n i f i e d P o w e r
System o f Ru s s i a f r o m 2 0 0 0 t o 2 0 0 6 ; a t t 9 9 9 l evel , f o r e x a m p l e , 0 . 9 8 b i l l i o n r u b l e s
L~UU{
500
ZOO
0 ~ o l a n t ~ p
P
0 ~ ~ ~
2000 200 ! 2002 2004 2005 2006 2003
Ye a r
[~ Ust' -Srednekan h y d r o e l e c t r i c p l a n t ( f i r st p h a s e of
start-up c o m p l e x )
~J Bureya pl ant (first phase of start-up c o mp l e x )
[~ Boguchany pl ant (first p h a s e o f s t a r t - up c o m p l e x )
Hydroel ectri c p o w e r p l a n t s of Northern C a u c a s i a
~] (Aushi gersk, Zaramagsk, Z e l e n c h u k , a n d I r g a n a p l a n t s )
Y e a r o f i n t r o d u c t i o n o f g e n e r a t i n g set s o f f i r s t
phases of start-up c o m p l e x e s
Fig. 11. Participation of Russian j oi nt -st ock company Unified Power System of Russia in financing
of entities at commercial priority hydroel ect ri c power plants.
In addition, trends in power consumption and power supply throughout the country and individual regions,
which have been set, especially recently, should be analyzed, even if briefly. Figure 12 shows the dynamics of growth
in electric consumption at the midpoint of the cur r ent year as compared with the corresponding period of last year
throughout Russia on the whole, and the Unified Power System of the East. The noted trend has acquired a stable
character and rather high rates. For September 1999, the increase in power consumption amounted to 8.2~o throughout
Russia on the whole, and 10.5Yo throughout the Uni f i ed Power System of East as compared with Sept ember 1998. A
return of consumption to the 199t level, which may occur after three-four years, will require that we confront the
following complex problems:
an increase of 240-billion k Wh in volume pr i mar i l y at thermal electric plants will lead to additional use of 85
million tons of specific fuel (40 billion rubles);
the status of the entire complex of fuel-power equipment at the thermal electric plants is even more complex
than at the hydroelectric plants;
the equipment taken out of service during t he drop off in consumption will, as a rule, be in need of recondi-
tioning and modernization;
it is doubtful that consumpt i on will remai n at the t991 level; and,
forced changes in the fuel balance will occur in the country. Even today, the Russian joint-stock company
Gazprom requires a 30°7o reduction of gas in the bal ance, and it is unreal to cover this reduction with fuel oil, since oil
production will not increase, and the loading of underutitized coal plants will also be unable to cover this reduction.
Under these conditions, the problem of mai nt ai ni ng active, and introducing new nonfuel capacities is becoming
even more urgent. In our opinion, therefore, the need has arisen for serious analysis of prospects for continuation of
water-power construction after 2006 based on compl et i on of the introduction of capacities at the hydroelectric plants
under consideration prior to complete realization of their power output and new construction, if possible, with the
creation of a certain backlog prior to this period. For" this purpose, the development of a program of water-power
construction is extremely expedient after 2005 wi t h proper substantiation of the effectiveness of capital expenditures
on each p'ro)ect and the i nvest ment -f ormul at i on st ruct ure.
Significant untapped water-power resources make it possible to propose a large set of specific projects in
virtually all regions of the country. Basic preliminary indicators of several of these projects are presented in Table 3.
It is even apparent from this rat her brief list of perspective projects t hat the possibility exists for the construction
of moderate and large-scale projects of both a local, and also regional and system-wide character, and above all,
T AB L E 2. P a r t i c i p a t i o n of Ru s s i a n J o i n t - St o c k Co mp a n y Uni f i ed Power S y s t e m of Ru s s i a in Fi -
n a n c i n g of P r o j e c t Co n s t r u c t i o n I nvol vi ng P r i o r i t y Co mme r c i a l Hydr oel ect r i c Po we r Pl a n t s . De l a y e d
I mp l e me n t a t i o n of St a r t - u p Co mp l e x e s ( Fi r s t Ph a s e s of S t a r t - u p Compl exes) wi t h Fo r c e d I mp l e me n -
t a t i o n of F i r s t P h a s e of S t a r t - u p Compl e x at Bu r e y a Hy d r o e l e c t r i c Pt ant
Hydr oel ect r i c pl a nt
St a r t - u p compl ex 3. x 20
Boguchany ( f i r st p h a s e of st ar t -
2 x 180
up compl ex)
Bur eya ~ (fi rst phase of s t ar t - up 2 x 185
compl ex)
Zar amags k ( s t a r t - u p compl ex) 15
Zel enchuk pl a nt s ( s t a r t - up compl ex) 80
wi t hout Lar ge Zel enchuk pl ant
I r gana (fi rst phas e of s t ar t - up
compl ex)
Us t ' - Sr e dne ka n (fi rst phase of s t a r t :
up compl ex) 36.3
Tot al
Capacity, Year Tot al
MW 2000 2001 2002 2 0 0 3 2004 2005 2006
20 2 x 20 60
t 00 30 130
. . . . . 180 t 80 360
300 500 675 830 830 1000 415 4550
. . . . 185 -- 185 370
600 800 1000 1 2 0 0 1400 600 600 6200
- 15 . . . . . 15
83 44 20 20 20 20 20 227
- 8 0 8 0
117 75 192
293 - 107 - - 186 293
250 250 200 150 150 156 906
. . . . . . 36.3 36.3
200 200 200 200 300 800 800 2700
11443
1650 1849 2025 2 4 0 0 2706 2420 1835
14885
(2126)
*The Bu r e y a h y d r o e l e c t r i c p l a n t is t he mos t c r i t i c a l p o we r p r o j e c t under c o n s t r u c t i o n by t he Ru s s i a n
j o i n t - s t o c k c o mp a n y Uni f i ed Powe r Sys t e m of Rus s i a. Th e t o t a l r emai ni ng e s t i ma t e d c os t of t he f i r st
p h a s e of t h e s t a r t - u p c ompl e x a t 2000 pr i ces i s 8, 360 mi l l i o n r ubl es , i ncl udi ng: 6, 200 mi l l i on r ubi e s for
c o mme r c i a l e nt i t i e s ; and, 2 , i 6 0 mi l l i on r ubl es for t he f l ood zone. The p r o p o s e d s our c e s of f i nanci ng
ar e; 6, 200 mi l t i o n r ubi es f r om t h e Rus s i an j o i n t - s t o c k c o mp a n y Uni fi ed Powe r S y s t e m of Rus s i a , a nd
2, 160 mi l l i o n r u b l e s f r om t h e b u d g e t of t he Ru s s i a n F e d e r a t i o n a nd ot her s our c e s .
1 2 -
1 0 - -
8 -
6 -
4 - -
2 -
0 -
Unified Power System
of the East
12
10.5
6,2 ~ . 2
5,3
Unified Power System
of Russi a as a whole
May June July August September
Fi g. 12. Dy n a mi c s of g r o wt h in el ect r i c c o n s u mp t i o n i n Russi a over s e v e r a l mo n t h s
of 1999 as c o mp a r e d wi t h c or r e s pondi ng mo n t h s of 1998.
in p o we r - d e f i c i e n t r e gi ons . Speci al a t t e n t i o n s houl d be f ocus ed on t wo pr oj ect s. One in the Far East - the Middle
Urchur hydroelectric plant with a total capacity of more than 5 million k W and generation of approximately 25 billion
kWh - wo u l d ma k e i t pos s i bl e in t he d i s t a n t f ut ur e t o sol ve t he p r o b l e m of t he r e gi on' s e l e c t r i c s u p p l y on a nonf ue l
10
TABLE 3. Power and Economic Indicators of Several New Water-Power-Construction
Projects (Price Level of 1 January 1991)
Region and name of
hydroelectric power plant
Northern Caucasia
Rated
capacity
MW
Generqation of Capital expenditures
electric power
billions billions of US dollars/ US dollars/
of kWh US dotIars kW kWh
Series of hydroelectric .plants
on Baksan River
Series of hydroelectric plants
on Andiinskoe Koisu River
Digorsk hydroelectric plant
Avarskoe hydroelectric plant
370 0.75 0.51 i378 0.68
1060 2.7 0.91 858 0.34
i 30 0.5 692 0.18
180 1444
0.09
0.6 0.26 0.43
Northwest
Morsk hydroelectric plant 33 0. t4 0.09 2727 0.64
Rynda hydroelectric plant 100 0.4 0.22 2200 0.55
Iokan'gsk hydroelectric plant 138 0.7 0.64 4638 091
Siberia
Katun' hydroelectric plant 1460 5.I 3.t9 2185 0.63
with counter regulator
Moka hydroelectric plant 1200 4.6 0.94 783 0.20
Series of hydroelectric
plants on Lower Angara
Shitkinsk hydroelectric plant
Far East
3580 17.9 3.03 846 0.17
390 1.54 0.56 1436 0.36
Lower Nimansk hydroelectric plant
Gilyui hydroelectric plant
Middle Uchur hydroelectric plant
with counter regulator
Lower Timptonsk hydroelectric
plant with counter regulator
t 6 0 0
460
3700
1300
1.8
1.15
17.2
6.3
I 0.86
0.73
4.87
1. 85
1433
1587
1316
1423
0.48
0.63
0.28
0.29
basis, and appreciably intensify the region' s export potential, above all, to Japan. This prospect is currently under
investigation. The Lower Angara hydroelectric pl ant s wi t h a total generation of more than 17 billion k wh per year
represent the second proj ect at the regional and s ys t em- wi de levels. In combination with the Boguchany hydroelectric
plant, which is under consideration, their i mpl ement at i on would make it possible to transmit more than 30 billion
kWh of electric power per year to the European port i on of the country from this complex alone. For comparison:
the generation of the Vol ga-Kama series of hydroelectric plants is approximately 40 billion kWh.
The lag in transmission-line construction, which had been noted even at the time of the USSR, has, after
its dissolution, progressed, resulted in ineffective utilization of peak capacities at hydroelectric p/ants, especially
in Siberia and Trans-Baikal, limited the sale of electric power to paying foreign consumers, and dictates the need
for urgent correction of the future program for transmissionqine construction to distribute the capacities of the
hydroelectric plants. In this connection, it is expedient to commission appropriate subdivisions of the Russian joint-
stock company Unified Power System of Russia with the participation of design and scientific-research institutes no
later than the first half of 2000 to develop and i nt roduce for consideration by management of the Russian joint-stock
company Unified Power System of Russia "Program f or transmission-line const ruct i on f rom 2006 to 2010, " which
t akes into account the di st ri but i on and effective use of capacities introduced at electric power plants under the varying
conditions after the breakup of the USSR, and possible realization of electric power in countries near and well removed
f r om our borders.
I nvest ment s
Virtually none of the above-indicated problems in hydraulic power engineering can be resolved without a
reliable investment mechanism. The basic means of improving investment policy in the field of hydraulic power
engineering should, in our opinion consist in the following;
a price increase for electric power supplied by federal hydroelectric plans to a level that will not lead to a
price rise in the FORt~M, but will be sufficient for the formulation of investment, the creation of a centralized fund
for the Russian joint-stock company Unified Power System of Russia through resources derived from the indicated
price increase with subsequent targeted expenditure of the fund's resources for the development of water power;
11
the inclusion of vigorously accelerated depreciation of plants owned by 2oint-stock companies in the prices paid
for electric power produced by these plants;
a trend by the Government of the Russian Federation in the State Duma as a legislative initiative of pr opos al s
to l ower pr ope r t y t axes for wat er - power pr oj ect s from 2 to 1% for a t ar get ed increase in t he per cent age of pr of i t s
di r ect ed t owar d t he devel opment of t he hydr oel ect r i c power plants;
regulation of the order of financing for zones flooded by reservoirs during construction of hydroelectric plants
a,s entities of federal ownership, which addresses:
budget financing of work i nvol ved wi t h pr epar at i on of t he fl ooded zones, and al so r est r uct ur i ng of c ompe n-
sat i ng pa yme nt s for reservoi r zones as a speci al component part of t he net cost of the cons t r uct i on of hydr oel ect r i c
power pl ant s; and,
cooper at i on bet ween gover nment agencies in at t r act i ng addi t i onal i nvest ment s for pr epar at i on of t he f l ooded
zones in hydr opr oj ect s under const r uct i on, bear i ng in mind the submi ssi on by federal and r egi onal aut hori t i es of t a x
exempt i ons for t he const ruct i on and oper at i on of hydroelectric power pl ant s as c ompe ns a t i on to pl ant s owned by
j oi nt - st ock compani es for t he creat i on of gover nment pr oper t y in t he f or m of a reservoir f or t he hydroel ect ri c pl ant .
12