See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/289142770

Estimating E&M powerhouse costs

Article  in  International Water Power and Dam Construction · February 2009

CITATIONS READS

12 4,965

1 author:

Cesar Alvarado Ancieta

IHE Delft Institute for Water Education
28 PUBLICATIONS   49 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Planung und Detaillierte Engineering Design für die Bauausführung der Alto Piura Bewasserung und 300 MW Wasserkraft Projekt: 20-m-hoch Tronera Sur Damm-
Wehranlage, Sandfang und 13-km-lange Überleitungstunnel, Huancabambafluss, Piura, Perú View project

Technische und Ökonosmische Machbarkeitsstudie für die zweite Drückstollen des 1008 MW Mantaro Wasserkraftanlage Complex: neue 20-km-lange Drückstollen und
neue 592 MW Mollepata Wasserkraftanlage View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Cesar Alvarado Ancieta on 25 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

INTERNATIONAL WATER POWER & DAM CONSTRUCTION

FEBRUARY 2009
FEBRUARY 2009

Project finance
Estimating the costs of E&M equipment

Decommissioning dams
Trends in training

Serving the hydro industry for 60 years: 1949-2009

 PROJECT COSTS

Estimating E&M powerhouse costs

After compiling statistical data on costs of electrical and mechanical equipment for 81 selected
hydro power projects (60% 2007-2008 and 40% 2002-2006), useful diagrams which allow a
close cost estimation of E&M in powerhouses with Pelton, Francis, Kaplan, Kaplan-Rohr, Bulb
turbine or Francis pump turbines have been composed. Paper by Cesar Alvarado-Ancieta

M
ANY mathematical formulae (Gordon-Penman, 1979;
Nachtnebel, 1981; Gordon, 1981, 1983; Gordon-Noel,
1986; Aggidis-Luchinskaya-Rothschild-Howard, 2008)
have been developed for estimation of costs, or gener-
ating costs, of small and large hydro power projects. These often
focus on specific topics such as costs of the dam type, tunnelling
work, penstock installation, civil works for powerhouses, electrical
and mechanical equipment for powerhouses, etc. Focusing on E&M
equipment, the existing formulae have been developed taking into
account specific cost data for a region or country, while also consid-
ering global costs of planning a hydro plant.
When working on a project, hydro consultants need to carry out a
cost estimation analysis for each specific case. This can be a time-con-
suming task when carrying out feasibility studies and final reports.
Therefore, a detailed analysis of costs continually needs to be carried
out. The author has developed a simplified methodology based on
current information from E&M equipment contractors or suppliers.
Useful diagrams which allow a close cost estimation of E&M
equipment in powerhouses which feature Pelton, Francis, Kaplan,
Kaplan-Rohr (for low heads up to 15m), Bulb or Francis pump tur-
bine units have been developed based on the compilation of statis-
tical data for over 81 hydro power projects. The data was obtained
from existing publications, journals, call for tenders, award of ten-
ders, websites and suppliers of E&M equipment. The data also con-
tains projected costs from some projects – found on existing reports
or national authority references.
C OMPILED DATA
The compiled data corresponds to information of the E&M contracts
for powerhouses only, which include costs of turbines, governors,
valves, cooling and drainage water systems, cranes, workshops, gen-
erators, transformers, earthing systems, control equipment, telecom-
munication systems (including remote central control room) and
auxiliary systems (including draft tube gates, heating and ventilation,
domestic water and installation). Other electrical and mechanical

Figure 1: Costs of E&M equipment and installed power capacity in powerhouses for 81 hydro power plants in America, Asia, Europe and Africa
1000

Argentina Armenia Austria Canada Cost of electrical and mechanical

Chile China Congo Ecuador equipment in a powerhouse
El Salvador Ethiopia Germany Iceland (data series 2002-2008)
Iran Kenya Laos Madagascar Valid for 2009
Mexico Nepal Nicaragua Pakistan
Peru Portugal Rep. Dominicana Rwanda
Romania Russia South Africa Sudan
1000 Turkey Uganda USA Brazil
Cost [US$ x 106]

100

10

The cost includes turbines, governors, valves, cooling and

drainage water systems, cranes, workshop, generators,
transformers, earthing system, control equipment,
telecommunications systems and auxiliary systems.

1
1 10 100 1000 10000
P [MW]

WWW.WATERPOWERMAGAZINE.COM FEBRUARY 2009 21

 PROJECT COSTS

10 MW 100 MW 1000 MW
1000

12.15M$, 25 MW 17.75 M$ 38 M$,150 MW

79.30 MW
38.90 M$,170 MW
13.65 M$ 20.05 M$
5.25 M$ 60.5 MW 65 MW 32.5 M$,110 MW
25 MW 29.93 M$,105 MW
11.78 M$ 21.43 M$
16.85 MW 65 MW 53.57 M$,99 MW
0.82 M$
2.5 MW 2.80 M$ 8.33 M$ 60 Mio US$
7 MW 12.67 MW 13.50 M$ 40 50
40 MW 30 58 M$,70 MW
2.68 M$ 20
5.35MW 15

1000 MW
10 21M$,25 MW
1 MW 2.52 M$
100

4.85MW 5
3
2
1 Mio US$
0.5
H [m]

100 MW
0.1 MW
10

Cost of electrical and mechanical

The cost includes turbines, governors, equipment in a powerhouse per
valves, cooling and drainage water systems, unit with a Pelton Turbine
cranes, workshop, generators, transformers, (data series 2002-2008)
earthing system, control equipment, Valid for 2009
telecommunications systems and auxiliary systems.

10 MW
0.1 MW 1 MW
1

1 10 100 1000
Q [m3/s]
Figure 2: Costs of E&M equipment in powerhouses per unit with Pelton turbine

equipment not suitable for use in powerhouses are not included. The
global amount of contracts obtained from suppliers comprises the
items mentioned above with a few exceptions (mainly due to the fact
that some suppliers only provide either electrical and mechanical
equipment and not both). However, these main suppliers are always
in consortium – meaning the global cost of E&M is not affected.
The data, which is presented on Table 1, corresponds to 81 hydro
power projects in 32 countries. The data comprises approximately
28 hydro power projects in America (90% Latin America), 9 in
Europe, 35 in Asia and 9 in Africa. From these, 33 are from 2007
and 16 from 2008. The remaining 40 corresponds to the period
between 2002 and 2006.
The hydro plants have net heads ranging from 9m to 800m and
power capacities from 0.5MW up to the 800MW per unit. Taking into
account the cost inflation over the past few years, the costs of E&M
equipment for the period 2002-2008 have been revised and updated.
These include different factors such as price of metals, project region,
index of prices, exchange rates, escalation of prices and cost confidence.
M ETHODOLOGY
The result of this analysis is the availability of 81 points to be plot-
ted with data on installed power capacity (P in MW), net head (H in
m), design discharge (Q in m3/sec), number of units and total costs
of E&M equipment (Cost in million US$) in order to provide 81
points per generating unit. These are divided by type of turbine:
Pelton, Francis, Kaplan, Kaplan-Rohr, Bulb or Francis pump-turbine.
Figure 1 shows the 81 points available on E&M equipment plot-
ted by global costs and installed power capacity. A general tenden-
cy is found as a function of the power capacity, which serves as a
reference for estimation of E&M equipment in generating costs
under the proposed formula:
Cost = 1.1948P0.7634 Generating cost for E&M equipment in
Million US$, 12/2008.
where P is the power or installed capacity in MW.
Formulae based on parameters such as head, design discharge,
power and/or number of units have a large range of variablity in the
result of costs, therefore they should be limited depending on dif-
ferent range of heads, discharge, etc. These type of formulae cannot
be easy applied for cost estimation of E&M equipment of the dif-
ferent type of units. Therefore, the methodology followed here is
based on the appliance of cost estimation diagrams, which are con-
sidered more suitable taking into consideration the parameters avail-
able for a hydro plant.
In order to plot the data the envelope curves for the three main
types of turbine were defined according to available information
from manufacturers. The rated flow and net head determine the
set of turbine types applicable to the site and the flow environ-
ment. Suitable turbines are those for which the given rated flow
and net head plot within the operational envelopes (the envelope
curves are described on Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5). A point defined as
above by the flow and the head will usually plot within several of
these envelopes. It should be remembered that the envelopes vary
from manufacturer to manufacturer and those plotted here are the
usual operational envelope curve for Pelton, Francis, Kaplan,
Kaplan-Rohr and Bulb turbines. Together with the defined enve-
lope curves for the range of head and discharges, the additional
scale for installed power has been plotted. This means the para-
meters of head (H), discharge (Q) and power (P) are available for
each plotting position. These are defined together with a cost per
unit. The different points define the probable curve of cost among
the available points.
DIAGRAMS FOR ESTIMATING E&M EQUIPMENT COSTS
Costs of E&M equipment for hydro plants with Pelton units
The available data comprises 20 plotting positions for HPPs
with Pelton units (see Figure 2). The range for determination
of costs starts from a lower cost of US$0.5M for an installed
power below 1MW to an upper cost of US$60M for 200MW
installed power.

22 FEBRUARY 2009 INTERNATIONAL WATER POWER & DAM CONSTRUCTION

 PROJECT COSTS

Table 1 – Hydro power parameters and E&M cost statistics for data
series, years 2002-2008.
# Year Country Hydropower Power Unit Net Head Design Unit E&M Contract/ E&M Updated Contract/ Type of # of E&M Updated Cost
Project P [MW] Power H [m] Flow Q Flow Qu Projected Cost 12/2008 Tubine units 12/2008 [Mio. US$]
Pu [MW] [m3/s] [m3/s] Cost [Mio.] [Mio. US$] per Unit
[US$] [EUR]
1 2008 Peru Pucara 130 65 475 30 15 40 0 42.86 Pelton 2 21.43
2 2007 Cheves III 212 106 443 50 25 45 0 49.01 Francis 2 24.50
3 2004 Poechos I 15.4 7.7 42 45 22.5 12 0 14.40 Kaplan 2 7.20
4 2007 Poechos II 10 5 17 60 30 8 0 8.57 Kaplan 2 4.29
5 2008 Machu Picchu II 99 99 345 32 32 50 0 53.57 Pelton 1 53.57
6 2008 Santa Rita 255 85 220 126 42 77 0 80.00 Francis 3 26.67
7 2006 El Platanal 220 110 600 45 22.5 0 25 65.00 Pelton 2 32.50
8 2006 Nicaragua Larreynaga 17 8.5 90 22 11 11.2 0 12.92 Francis 2 6.46
9 2008 El Salto YY 25 12.5 90 32 16 16 0 16.00 Francis 2 8.00
10 2008 Pakistan Daral Khawar 38 12.7 293 19.5 6.5 25 0 25.00 Pelton 3 8.33
11 2003 Allai Khwar 121 60.5 662 21 10.5 21.8 0 27.30 Pelton 2 13.65
12 2003 Duber Khwar 130 65 516 29 14.5 32 0 40.10 Pelton 2 20.05
13 2007 Madian 160 80 160 116 58 51.6 0 55.29 Francis 2 27.64
14 2006 Gabral Kalam 135 45 200 75 25 36 0 41.59 Francis 3 13.86
15 2007 Turkey Umut-1 4.1 2.1 81 6 3 2.2 0 2.40 Francis 2 1.20
16 2007 Umut-2 22.1 7.4 145 18 6 12 0 12.86 Francis 3 4.29
17 2007 Umut-3 11.8 5.9 77 18 9 8 0 8.57 Francis 2 4.29
18 2007 Ege-1 8.2 2.7 114 8.5 2.8 3.8 0 4.11 Francis 3 1.37
19 2007 Ege-2 7.8 2.6 80 11.4 3.8 3.4 0 3.60 Francis 3 1.20
20 2007 Ege-3 11.9 4.0 93 15 5 5.8 0 6.17 Francis 3 2.06
21 2007 Yaprak-1 9.69 4.8 81 8 3 4.7 0 5.04 Pelton 2 2.52
22 2007 Yaprak-2 10.7 5.4 144 9 3 5 0 5.36 Pelton 2 2.68
23 2007 Basak 6.85 3.4 120 10 4 3.5 0 3.75 Francis 2 1.88
24 2007 Tuna 33.7 16.9 502 20 10 15.2 0 23.56 Pelton 2 11.78
25 2007 Uzuncayir 96 32 55 210 70 0 33 49.43 Francis 3 16.48
26 2008 Ilisu 1200 400 130 1080 360 0 164.5 246.75 Francis 3 82.25
27 2007 Borcka 300 150 87.5 600 200 0 67.6 101.26 Francis 2 50.63
28 2008 Akocak 80 40 250 23 11.5 0 18 27.00 Pelton 2 13.50
29 2007 Akkoy I 103.5 34.5 149 81 27 0 24.7 37.00 Francis 3 12.33
30 2008 Laos Nam Pha 120 60 130 108 54 49.5 0 49.50 Francis 2 24.75
31 2007 Rwanda Nyabarango 29 14.5 66.5 50 25 16.9 0 18.05 Francis 2 9.03
32 2005 Madagascar Sahanivotry 14 7 240 7 3.5 3.5 0 5.60 Pelton 2 2.80
33 2007 South Africa Lima 1520 380 629 140 70 372.3 0 398.89 Francis-pump 4 99.72
34 2008 Nepal Upper Tamakoshi 317.2 79.3 802 44 11 71 0 71.00 Pelton 4 17.75
35 2002 Middle Marsyangdi 72 36 120 70 35 0 20 29.90 Francis 2 14.95
36 2007 Kenya Tana1 11 5.5 73 15 7.5 8.4 0 9.00 Francis 2 4.50
Tana2 15.2 7.6 58 30 15 12.6 0 13.52 Francis 2 6.76
37 2005 Armenia Gegharot 2.5 2.5 297 1 1 0.8 0 0.82 Pelton 1 0.82
38 2008 Austria Obervellach II 50 25 795 17.6 8.8 0 16.2 24.30 Pelton 2 12.15
39 2006 Limberg II 480 240 365 144 72 0 33 80.85 Francis-pump 2 40.43
40 2004 Kopswerk II 450 150 800 72 24 0 60 114.00 Pelton-pump 3 38.00
41 2007 El Salvador Cerrón Grande, Unit 3 87 87 57 170 170 42 0 45.00 Francis 1 45.00
42 2008 Chile Lircay 19 9.5 106 20 10 12 0 12.00 Francis 2 6.00
43 2007 La Confluencia 163.2 81.6 344 52.5 26.3 37.5 0 39.99 Francis 2 20.00
44 2007 Ecuador Pilatón-Sarapullo 50 25 120 45 22.5 39.2 0 42.00 Pelton 2 21.00
45 2007 Toachi-Alluriquín 140 70 191 82.4 41.2 108.2 0 115.93 Pelton 2 57.96
46 2007 Mazar 162 81 162 120 60 0 39.9 59.77 Francis 2 29.89
47 2007 Abitagua 220 55 123 206 51.5 88.8 0 95.14 Francis 4 23.79
48 2005 Germany Rheinfelden 114 28.5 9.2 1500 375 0 52 78.00 Kaplan-Rohr 4 19.50
49 2006 Waldeck I 74 74 200 28 28 0 24 35.88 Francis-pump 1 35.88
50 2007 China Jinping II 4800 600 318 1760 220 0 120 567.96 Francis 8 71.00
51 2004 Three Gorges Right Bank 2800 700 138 2400 600 198 0 440.00 Francis 4 110.00
52 2006 Caojie 512 128 20 3220 805 0 51 153.00 Kaplan 4 38.25
53 2008 Dagang-shan 2600 650 210 1440 360 0 75 336.00 Francis 4 84.00
54 2005 Xiaowan 4284 714 216 2280 380 0 60 540.00 Francis 6 90.00
55 2003 Longtan 4900 700 140 4095 585 0 81 700.00 Francis 7 100.00
56 2006 Brasil Anta 28.8 14.4 30 118 59 25.7 0 29.64 Kaplan 2 14.82
57 2002 Pedra do Cavalo 165 82.5 105 180 90 0 32 64.00 Francis 2 32.00
58 2002 São Salvador 250 125 22.8 1340 670 0 30 75.00 Kaplan 2 37.50
59 2008 San Antonio 3150 72 13.9 28600 650 318* 0 365.76 Bulb 12 30.48
60 2008 Jiraú 3300 75 15.1 27500 625 636* 0 636.00 Bulb 19 33.47
61 2007 Iceland Kárahnjukár 690 115 600 135 22.5 0 99 148.30 Francis 6 24.72
62 2006 Canada Revelstoke, Unit 5 512 512 145 400 400 82.6 0 95.26 Francis 1 95.26
63 2007 Portugal Picote II 248 248 125 230 230 0 46 69.00 Francis 1 69.00
64 2008 Alqueva II 260 130 72 406 203 0 94 141.00 Francis-pump 2 70.50
65 2008 Romania Lotru-Ciunget 510 170 800 75 25 0 77.8 116.70 Pelton 3 38.90
66 2005 Congo Imboulou 120 30 17 1200 300 69 0 87.63 Kaplan 4 21.91
67 2007 Uganda Bujagali 255 51 22 1375 275 87 0 113.10 Kaplan 5 22.62
68 2007 Argentina Los Caracoles 125.2 62.6 150 90 45 45 0 48.21 Francis 2 24.11
69 2006 Sudan Merowe 1250 125 50 3000 300 0 250 525.00 Francis 10 52.50
70 2005 Gilgel
Gibe II 420 105 487 92 23 0 60 119.70 Pelton 4 29.93
71 2004 Ethiopia Beles 460 115 308 180 45 0 77 115.50 Francis 4 28.88
72 2007 Iran Sia Bishe 1000 250 500 224 56 0 64.5 193.24 Francis-pump 4 48.31
73 2002 Karen IV 1020 255 162 740 185 0 22 239.80 Francis 4 59.95
74 2002 Upper Gotvand 1016 254 141 840 210 0 23 248.40 Francis 4 62.10
75 2007 Russia Uglich 70 70 12 700 700 0 24.9 32.37 Kaplan 1 32.37
76 2008 Motygin-skaya 1250 125 27 5250 525 0 350 350.00 Kaplan 10 35.00
77 2008 USA Cannelton 84 28 6.5 1500 500 0 40.9 61.35 Rohr 3 20.45
78 2008 Smithland 72 24 5.9 1500 500 0 39.6 59.37 Rohr 3 19.79
79 2005 Rep. Dominicana Pinalito 50 25 590 10 5 0 7 10.50 Pelton 2 5.25
80 2008 Mexico El Gallo 30 15 44 80 40 18.7 0 19.80 Francis 2 9.90
81 2008 Chilatán 14 7 75 22 11 11.7 0 12.40 Francis 2 6.20

Reference sources for contract costs were existing publications, journals, calls for tenders, websites of E&M equipment suppliers
Reference sources for projected costs were existing reports of studies and national authorities.
The contract cost for San Antonio and Jiraú is for 12 and 19 units respectively.

WWW.WATERPOWERMAGAZINE.COM FEBRUARY 2009 23

PROJECT COSTS

10 MW 100 MW 1000 MW
1000

90 M$, 714 MW
84 M$, 650 MW
24.72 M$, 115 MW

4.29 M$, 7.37 MW

100 M$, 700 MW

110 M$, 700 MW
1.88 M$, 3.43 MW
24.5 M$, 106 MW
20 M$, 81.6 MW 71 M$, 600 MW
28.88 M$, 115 MW
26.67 M$, 85 MW
60 M$,
13.86 M$, 45 MW
255 MW
27.64 M$, 80 MW 29.89 M$, 81 MW 62 M$, 254 MW

1000 MW
24.75 M$, 60 MW

12.33 M$, 34.5 MW

24.11 M$, 62.6 MW

95.26 M$, 512 MW

6 M$, 9.5 MW

82.25 M$, 400 MW

1 MW
1.37 M$, 2.7 MW

69 M$, 248 MW
120 Mio
100

23.79 M$, 55 MW
14.95 M$, 36 MW

32 M$, 82.5 MW
US$

8 M$, 12.5 MW
6.46 M$, 8.5 MW
2.06 M$, 3.95 MW

50.63 M$, 150 MW

1.2 M$, 2.07 MW

1.2 M$, 2.59 MW

6.21 M$, 7 MW
4.29 M$, 5.88 MW
4.5 M$, 5.5 MW

9 M$, 14.5 MW
6.76 M$, 7.6 MW

45 M$, 87 MW
16.48 M$, 32 MW

52.5 M$, 125 MW

110

9.9 M$,15 MW
H [m]

100
0.5 90
80
70
60
50

100 MW
40
0.1 MW
1 Mio US$

2 5 10 15 20 25 30
10

Cost of electrical and mechanical

The cost includes turbines, governors, equipment in a powerhouse
valves, cooling and drainage water systems,
per unit with Francis Turbine
cranes, workshop, generators, transformers,
earthing system, control equipment, (data series 2002-2008)
telecommunications systems and auxiliary systems. valid for 2009

10 MW
0.1 MW 1 MW
1

1 10 100 1000
Q [m3/s]
Figure 3: Costs of E&M equipment in powerhouses per unit with Francis turbine

Figure 4: Costs of E&M equipment in powerhouses per unit with Kaplan, Kaplan-Rohr and Bulb turbine

10 MW 100 MW 1000 MW
1000

The cost includes turbines, governors, Cost of electrical and mechanical

valves, cooling and drainage water systems, equipment in a powerhouse per unit
cranes, workshop, generators, transformers, with Kaplan, Kaplan-Rohr, Bulb Turbine
earthing system, control equipment,
telecommunications systems and auxiliary systems. (data series 2002-2008) Valid for 2009
5 Mio US$

1000 MW

1 MW
100

10 15
40 Mio US$

20

7.20 M$, 30
H [m]

7.7 MW 35 M$,
14.82 M$, 14.4 MW
125 MW 37.5 M$,
22.62 M$, 51 MW 125 MW
38.25 M$, 128 MW
5.36 M$, 21.91 M$, 30 MW
5 MW 33.47 M$, 72 MW
30.48 M$, 75 MW
100 MW

0.1 MW 32.37 M$, 70 MW

10

19.50 M$, 20.45 M$,

28.5 MW 28 MW
19.79 M$,
24 MW
10 MW

0.1 MW 1 MW
1

1 10 100 1000
Q [m3/s]

24 FEBRUARY 2009 INTERNATIONAL WATER POWER & DAM CONSTRUCTION

 PROJECT COSTS

10 MW 100 MW 1000 MW
1000

66 M$, 380 MW
48.31 M$, 250 MW
54 M$, 240 MW

30 M$, 74 MW

1000 MW
1 MW
100

60 M$, 130 MW
H [m]

70
60
50

100 MW
0.1 MW 40

20 Mio US$
30
10

The cost includes turbines, governors, Cost of electrical and mechanical

valves, cooling and drainage water systems, equipment in a powerhouse per unit
cranes, workshop, generators, transformers, with a Francis Pump Turbine
earthing system, control equipment,
(data series 2002-2008) Valid for 2009
telecommunications systems and auxiliary systems.

10 MW
0.1 MW 1 MW
1

1 10 100 1000
Q [m3/s]
Figure 5: Costs of E&M equipment in powerhouses per unit with Francis pump-turbine

Costs of E&M equipment for hydro plants with Francis units
The available data comprises 43 plotting positions for plants
equipped with Francis units (Figure 3). The determination of costs
ranges from US$0.5M for 1MW installed capacity up to a maxi-
mum cost of US$120M for an 800MW plant.
Costs for hydro plants with Kaplan, Kaplan-Rohr, Bulb Units
The available data comprises 14 plotting positions for plants
equipped with Kaplan/Rohr/Bulb units (see Figure 4). The range for
determination of costs on E&M equipment starts from a lower cost
of US$5M for an installed power of 5MW up to US$40M for an
installed power of 150MW.
Costs hydro plants with Francis pump-turbine units
The available data comprises five plotting positions for plants
equipped with Kaplan, Kaplan-Rohr and Bulb units (Figure 5). The
range for determination of costs on E&M equipment starts from a
lower cost of US$20M for an installed power of 70MW up to
US$70M for installed power of 380MW.
C ONCLUSIONS
• Diagrams have been developed to estimate water to wire power
plant equipment costs within an accuracy of 5 to 10 %.
• Equipment costs are currently escalating at about 8 to 10% per
annum for projects from 2008. Price escalation of hydro power
projects from the year 2002 can reach between 70 and 80% for a
period of seven years. It is expected, however, that inflation costs
will come down as a result of the current credit crisis.
• The diagrams presented were found suitable for a close estimation
of costs of E&M equipment per unit under a comparison of costs
from current hydro power projects. These diagrams have been
developed to provide a quick way to determine costs of electrical
and mechanical equipment (at pre-investment, due diligence study,
pre-feasibility and feasibility level) based on main parameters such
as head, design discharge and power.
• The value of the cost curves in the diagrams needs to be updated
each year.
• The original data set was composed of 89 plotting positions, but
eight points have unsuitable locations in the diagrams, particular-
ly the Francis turbine and pump-turbine charts. Such points were
not used. As an example, the cost of E&M equipment for La Muela
II pumped storage project in Spain – according to the information
reported in July 2008 – was US$55M for four units of 213MW
each, a head of 520m and a unit discharge of 48m3/sec. It will mean
a cost per unit of around US$14M. It is considered that some fac-
tors influence the cost estimation of these units, leading to an under-
estimated contract cost value. Seven points of projects awarded in
the last two years had similar underestimated contract cost. The
causes for these underestimated values were not found.
• An improvement in data available could be performed taking into
account the type of turbine axis. This can have a significant impact
on E&M equipment costs. IWP & DC
Cesar Adolfo Alvarado-Ancieta, Civil Engineer, Dipl.-
Ing., M. Sc., Hydropower, Dams, Hydraulic Engineering
Email: cesalv@yahoo.com
References
[1] Gordon, J.L. and Penman, A.C. (1979). Quick estimating techniques for
small hydro potential. Water Power & Dam Construction, V. 31, p. 46-51.
[2] Gordon, J.L. (1981). Estimating hydro stations costs. Water Power &
Dam Construction, V. 33, p. 31-33.
[3] Gordon, J.L. (1983). Hydropower costs estimates. Water Power & Dam
Construction, V. 35, p. 30-37.
[4] Gordon, J.L. and Noel, C.R. (1986). The economic limits of small and
low-head hydro. Water Power & Dam Construction, V. 38, p. 23-26.
[5] Nachtnebel, H.P. (1981): Bewertung der Kleinwasserkraftwerke, in:
Österreichische Wasserwirtschaft, Jahrgang 33, Heft 11/12.
[6] Aggidis, G.A. - Luchinskaya, E. - Rothschild, R. - Howard, D.C. (2008).
Estimating the costs of small-scale hydropower for the progressing of world
hydro development. Hydro 2008, Ljubljana, Slovenia - The International
Journal on Hydropower & Dams.

WWW.WATERPOWERMAGAZINE.COM FEBRUARY 2009 25

View publication stats