Proposal

Hibah Reworking Skripsi/Tesis Mahasiswa

Judul Artikel :
FEASIBILITY AND SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT OF VARIOUS HEAD FOR MICRO
HYDRO POWER PLANT DESIGN IN JEMBER

Pengusul:
Wiwik Yunarni Widiarti, S.T., M.T., NIDN 0013067001
Ririn Endah Badriani, S.T., M.T., NIDN 0028057202
Nov Dion Fuadillah, NIM 171910301049
Muhammad Abdi Illahi Al'furqoni, NIM 171910301049

FAKULTAS TEKNIK
UNIVERSITAS JEMBER
KEMENTERIAN PENDIDIKAN DAN KEBUDAYAAN
APRIL, 2021
 SURAT PERNYATAAN
HIBAH REWORKING SKRIPSI/TESIS MAHASISWA
LP2M UNIVERSITAS JEMBER

Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya:

Nama : Wiwik Yunarni Widiarti, ST., MT.

NIP : 197006131998022001
Fakultas : Teknik
Prodi : Teknik Sipil

Menyatakan bahwa saya akan melakukan re-working hasil skripsi mahasiswa:

Nama : Nov Dion Fuadillah

NIM : 171910301049
Judul : Studi Kelayakan Ekonomi Perencanaan Pembangkit Listrik Tenaga Mikro
Hidro Di Sungai Jompo, Kabupaten Jember
Nama : Muhammad Abdi Illahi Al'furqoni
NIM : 171910301165
Judul : Studi Kelayakan Ekonomi Perencanaan Pembangkit Listrik Tenaga Mikro
Hidro Di Desa Jamintoro, Kecamatan Sumberbaru, Kabupaten Jember.

Target Jurnal 1 : Water Practice & Technology

Quartile Scopus/WoS : Scopus Q3
Target accepted : 2021/ 2022
Target Jurnal : 1

Saya menyatakan bahwa semua yang terlibat sebagai penulis telah menyetujui untuk dipublikasikan pada
jurnal yang dimaksud.

Demikian surat pernyataan ini kami buat dengan sebenar-benarnya.

Jember, 19 April 2021

Yang menyatakan,

Wiwik Yunarni Widiarti, ST.,MT.

NIP. 197006131998022001

*) Coret yang tidak perlu

Keterangan Jurnal yang dituju :
Alternatif Target 1:
https://iwaponline.com/wpt/issue
Alternatif Target 2:
https://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/toc/jwama/current
Rencana Jadwal Pelaksanaan :

N
Kegiatan Mei Juni Juli Agustus
o
1 Survei dan inventarisasi data baru
2 Pengolahan dan analisis
3 Writing + Proof reading
4 Submit and review

Rencana Anggaran Biaya :

N Jumla
Uraian satuan Biaya satuan Biaya Total
o h
1 Biaya penelitian tambahan
Perjalanan Jember – Tanggul 1 paket 1.000.000 1.000.000
Ground Cheking data 1 paket 2.000.000 2.000.000
Pengolahan data (HR
3 OB 1.500.000 4.500.000
mahasiswa)
2 Biaya terjemahan 1 ls 1.000.000 1.000.000
3 Biaya proof reading / artikel 1 ls 1.000.000 1.000.000
4 Biaya Publikasi 1 ls 4.500.000 4.500.000
5 Biaya lain lain 1 ls 1.000.000 1.000.000
15.000.000
 FEASIBILITY AND SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT OF VARIOUS HEAD FOR MICRO
HYDRO POWER PLANT DESIGN IN JEMBER

Wiwik Yunarni Widiarti1, Ririn Endah Badriani1, .Nov Dion Fuadillah1, Muhammad Abdi Illahi Al Furqoni1
1
Departement of Civil Engineering, Jember University, Jember, Indonesia

Abstract. Provision of a low-cost renewable power generation system is a good alternative in supplying electricity in
various regions. Jember Regency is a mountainous area with abundant water resources that can build a micro hydro-
power plant. The purpose of this study is to assess the financial feasibility of a design with a variety of potential
discharges and head of a micro-hydropower plant (MHP) to provide electrical energy in off-grid managed areas in
villages in Jember District. The development of these 4 cases uses 2 MHP locations with different discharges and
altitudes, and each location is simulated with a variation of the turbine. The performance of four different cases is
simulated through a feasibility and sensitivity analysis to obtain the most optimal design. The parameters of the financial
feasibility analysis used are NPV, BCR, and IRR. Whereas in the sensitivity analysis, the changes that plan are changes
in interest rates, operating life, and river flow discharge. The MHP plan that yields the most benefits is case 4, which has
a large head with a choice of turgo turbines. Financial feasibility obtains NPV = $ 192,089.97; BCR = 2.74; IRR =
21.36%. The sensitivity analysis results in changes in the maximum interest rate are 21.35%, the minimum operational
time for MHP is five years, and the minimum flow rate is 0.062 m 3/s. These results can be used as a reference in
determining the type of turbine.

Keyword: Feasibility, head, micro-hydro, sensitivity analysis, turbine

1. Introduction
Electrical energy is an essential requirement for
Indonesia, especially for household, agricultural and
industrial activities. The growing demand for
electricity in Indonesia, this level of demand
influences the increasing problems of the government
to meet the demand for electricity supply because the
dependence of community activities on electrical
energy is quite significant. (Andriani et al, 2016;
Kumar, 2009). Indonesia is estimated to experience an
increase in electricity demand, amounting to 6.42% per
year (RUPTL, 2019).
Increasing the need for electrical energy in
everyday life is a significant problem now and in the
future. Therefore, it is necessary to use energy
resources, especially renewable energy sources,
because of their high potential, micro-hydropower
plants (National Information System for Energy,
2016). Micro hydro-power plants (MHP) are electricity
generators from alternative energy that is
environmentally friendly by utilizing river discharge
velocities with a certain height with a generating
capacity ranging from 5 kW to 100 kW (Morales et al.
2015; Hussein et al., 2010). The relationship between
power, discharge, and headwater is directly
proportional. The greater the velocity and the higher
the flow will, the greater the electrical energy
generated from the MHP (Garg, 2005; Hosseini et al,
2008). With the availability of discharge data, the
selection of the head according to the planned
discharge can be made in accordance with the
availability of the existing flow.
The availability of discharge and head in the rural
areas of Jember Regency can provide renewable power
plants through micro-hydro. The first research site is in
the Poreng River in the Rawatamtu sub-watershed,
Jember Regency, East Java with latitude -8.539167
coordinates and 113,0904167 longitudes (Aldio,
2021). The second site is in the Jamintoro Village
Watershed, Sumberbaru Sub-district, Jember District,
with latitude -8,33064 and longitude 113,214181
(Santoso, 2021). Based on these two studies, the
provision of a proper micro-hydro is a challenge to
research.
Several studies examining feasibility have been
conducted. Based on the feasibility analysis conducted
by Nair (2016) in Pulau Tioman, Malaysia, the optimal
mini hydro design can save costs, efficiency,
operations, and capacity factors by simulating planning
through the various turbines used. From this study, the
NPV generated was $ 612.106 and a payback period of
10.8 years in the construction of a micro hydro-power
plant on Tioman Island, Malaysia. Based on the results
of the NPV, planning at the location using a Pelton
turbine is the turbine that produces the most electrical
power. Andriani (2016) conducted a study on the
analysis of costs and benefits of MHP in Tanjung Tiga
watershed with the results of the research, namely, the
benefits obtained were $ 23.105 for 12 years and six
months. The amount of costs that villagers must pay
for electrical energy sources that do not come from
MHP is $ 50.506. The discharge from the Enim
watershed can still be used for MHP in the next few
years until the source of electrical energy is replaced
by the state electricity company.
This research aims to examine the feasibility of
planning an MHP financially and analyze the
sensitivity with several parameters on the Poreng River
and the Jamintoro River with different head and
turbine types.
2. Methodology
2.1 Data and Study Area
Jember Regency is a city with several rivers that can
be used as micro hydro power plants, for example, the
Bedadung River and the Jamintoro River. Some of
these river flow coastal communities take advantage of
the large river flow discharge to irrigate agricultural
land and daily life from the weirs that have been built
along the river (Hidayah et al., 2017).
Case 1 and case 2 are located on the Poreng River
in the Rawatamtu sub-watershed in Jember District,
East Java, with latitude -8,539167 coordinates and
longitude 113,0904167. The river has a discharge of
0,897 m3/s and has a fairly low head elevation of 5,54
m (Aldio, 2021).
In case 3 and case 4, the location used is the
Jamintoro river in Jember District with an area of
707,035 Ha at the coordinates of latitude -8,33064 and
longitude 113,214181. This river has a discharge of
0,158 m3/s and a significant head elevation of 59,19 m
(Santoso, 2021).
2.2 Method
In this study, the first step in analyzing the feasibility
of planning a micro hydro-power plant (MHP) is to
calculate the annual energy production released by an
MHP. The annual energy produced by a micro hydro-
power plant can be calculated by the amount of
electricity generated (kW) and the time required (T)
for one year (8760 hours), which is deducted first
assuming 24 days of maintenance per year (576 hours).
In theory, we can use equation (1) as follows (Harvey
et al., 1993):
Energy per year = P x (8760 – T) (kWh) (1)
With P is the power generated by the MHP, and T is
the maintenance time for the MHP components. Using
equation (1), you will get energy per year multiplied
by the price of electricity per kWh.
The next step is to design a budget for the
construction of an MHP based on 4 cases. A micro
hydro-power plant has several components: intake,
headrace, forebay, penstock, power house, and tailrace.
After calculating the planned cost budget based on 4
cases, calculate financially during the operation of the
MHP.
After analyzing the costs required based on the 4
cases, then doing a cost flow analysis to determine
how much profit will be obtained when this MHP
operates per year. The annual yield can be found by
calculating the power multiplied by the cost of goods
sold.
A feasibility study with an operational length of
MHP for 15 years can be carried out after knowing the
benefits during the operation of the micro hydro-power
plant (MHP). The four cases will be analyzed based on
three parameters: NPV, BCR, and IRR, which then
explores the sensitivity based on changes in interest
rates, age of MHP, and changes in river flow
discharge.
2.2.1 Financial Analysis
A feasibility study with an operational length of a
micro hydro-power plant for 15 years can be carried
out after knowing the benefits during the operation of
the MHP. The four cases will be analyzed based on
three parameters: NPV, BCR, and IRR, which then
explores the sensitivity based on changes in interest
rates, age of MHP, and changes in river flow
discharge.
1. Costflow (CF)
There are 4 (four) main tasks for PLTMH construction
that must be completed: civil works, mechanical
works, electrical works, and network works for
interconnection access. These four main tasks
determine the number of investment costs or cost flow
(CF), which consists of 4 (four) costs, namely the cost
of procurement of goods (B1), civil building costs
(B2), operational costs (B3), and transportation costs
(B4). Mathematically, cost flow (CF) can be expressed
in equations (2) and (3) as follows (NVE, 2016):
CF 0 =B 1+ B 2+ B 3+ B 4 (2)
CF=CF 0 +Tax 10 % (3)
with CF0 is the cost flow before tax and CF is the cost
flow after tax. The tax used is 10% of the total planned
budget.
2. Cash in flow (CIF)
CIF is the proceeds from the sale of electrical energy
during the operation of the MHP, which is based on
reliable discharge. Equation (1) is used to determine
the energy produced in a year so that sales results can
be known, then energy sales revenue (I) for one year is
in equation (4) as follows (IRENA, 2012):
CIF=I x Selling price per kWh (4)
Where CIF is the cash in flow during the operation of
the power plant, and I am the electrical energy
generated for one year. The next step will be
calculating the annual cash in flow in order to find out
the net income for one year the power plant operates.
3. Annual Cash in flow (A)
Annual cash in flow is the difference between income
and cost. These costs include fixed costs (operational
costs, maintenance costs, employee salaries, etc.) for
one year the power plant operates. The following
equation (5) is used in determining annual cash in flow
(IRENA, 2012).
A=CIF – Expenses per year (5)
With A is the annual cash in flow of the micro hydro-
power plant, which operates for one year, and CIF is
cash in flow.
2.2.2 Feasibility Study
A feasibility study is a procedure for predicting the
results of an examination or assessing a planned joint
scheme by considering the benefits (Krieger et al.,
2016). This study can evaluate precisely the prospect
of a business/project in the future and has become an
essential requirement for starting a project (Liaquat et
al., 2010).
The main objective of a feasibility study is to
evaluate three types of feasibility, namely technical,
operational and economic feasibility. In this study,
only the cost of the construction project and the cost of
implementing the project are considered. Feasibility
studies also depend on many factors, such as project
risk before and after the project and potential returns
on investment (Mukherjee & Roy, 2017).
The analysis used to determine the feasibility of
MHP can be measured by calculating the net present
value (NPV), benefit-cost ratio (BCR), and internal
rate of return (IRR). The feasibility analysis of MHP is
carried out by preparing a discounted cash in flow with
a value of 3.75%, because the impact of time on all
costs and benefits in the future must also be taken into
account.
1. Net Present Value (NPV)
Net present value is the method used by most large
companies to evaluate investments. NPV is used to
determine whether a project is feasible. Projects that
have positive values should be implemented, but
negative present values must be rejected. Because
NPV is positive, the combined present value of all
cash inflows exceeds the present value of cash flows.
Using equation (6) as follows, the NPV value can be
found (Khan, 1999).
n
Bt −C t
NPV =∑ (6)
t=0 ( 1+i )t
Where NPV is the net present value ($), NCFt is the
net cash flow generated by an innovation project in a
year ($), i is the discount rate (3.75%), and t is the year
of investment. The decision criterion, if the NPV is
greater than 0, the project investment is accepted; if
the NPV is less than 0, the project investment is
rejected.
2. Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR)
Benefit-cost ratio is the ratio between income divided
by costs incurred by showing the level of efficiency in
the use of capital. The BCR formula based on Shively
(2012) is in equation (7) as follows:
Bt
BCR= (7)
Ct
With Bt is the revenue earned in year t ($), and Ct is
the cost incurred in year t ($). The decision criteria, if
BCR is greater than 1, the project investment is
accepted. If BCR is less than 1, the project investment
is rejected.
3. Internal Rate of Return (IRR)
Investors use the internal rate of return to assess the
feasibility of their investment. The rate of return is
how quickly the investment returns capital to
investors. In other words, IRR is the interest rate
where the net present value of all cash flows (both
positive and negative) from a project or investment is
equal to zero (Moten J., 2013). A higher IRR indicates
the value of the project. The internal rate of return is
used to evaluate the attractiveness of a project or
investment. The BCR formula based on Rejekiningrum
and Krido (2015) is in equation (8), as follows:
NPV
1
IRR=i1 + ( i 2−i 1 ) 1 2
(8)
NPV −NPV
With IRR is the internal rate of return, NPV is the net
present value, i1 is the interest rate that gives positive
NPV1 results, and i2 is the interest rate, showing
negative NPV2 results.
2.2.3 Sensitivity Parameters
Sensitivity analysis is an analysis to see the effects that
will occur due to changing circumstances. The purpose
of sensitivity analysis is to assess what will happen
with the feasibility analysis of an investment or
business activity if there is a change in the calculation
of costs or benefits.
The sensitivity analysis looks at the feasibility of
a business against the difference between the estimated
business results and the results generated at the
business location. In this study, the interest rate, the
project's economic life, and the flow rate were used as
sensitivity parameters. Based on the sensitivity
variable, the four cases will be analyzed.
3. Result and Discussion
For optimal results, the four cases will be examined
using several calculations. For each case, the results
will be analyzed for their feasibility and based on
different sensitivity parameters. The analysis of each
case is shown in the calculations below.
3.1 Case
In this study, to find the potential for micro-
hydropower plant planning, 4 cases were planned to be
used to find the most optimal potential for power
generation. For the representation of the four cases, the
following case data has been explained in Table 1
below:
differences in each case are based on the location of
the MHP, head elevation, and water flow rate,
resulting in 4 cases to be analyzed.
It can be seen in table 1 that case 1 is located on
the Poreng river with a head elevation of 5,54 m using
a crossflow turbine which has a turbine efficiency of
87%, in case 2 the location used is the same as case 1
and a designed low head elevation of 5,54 m uses a
Kaplan turbine as a producer of electrical energy
which has a turbine efficiency of 92%, case 3 is
located on the Jamintoro river which has a head
elevation of 59,19 m, the turbine used is Pelton with a
turbine efficiency of 87%, case 4 is the same location
with case 3 but the turbine used is Turgo which has a
turbine efficiency of 93% and this plan has a head
elevation of 59,19 m..

Table 1. All Case of Micro Hydro Powerplant Design 3.2 Power of Various Case
Discharge Head
Case Location Turbine
(m3/s) (m) The micro hydro-power plant operates continuously in
1 Poreng River Crossflow 0,897 5,54 one year (8760 hours), but in one year, it will be rested
2 Poreng River Kaplan 0,897 5,54
for two days in one month for maintenance so that in
3 Jamintoro River Pelton 0,158 59,19
4 Jamintoro River Turgo 0,158 59,19
one year, it takes about 576 hours to make repairs.
Therefore, equation (1) can be seen in the calculations
in table (2) below.
The case is planned to determine which plan has the
most potential to generate the most optimal profit. The

Table 2. Energy Per Year Generated based on All Design Cases

Turbine
Discharge Head Power Energy Per Year
Case Location Turbine Efficienc
(m /s)
3
(m) (kW) (kWh)
y
1 Poreng River Crossflow 0,897 5,54 87% 39,26 321303,84
2 Poreng River Kaplan 0,897 5,54 92% 41,97 343457,93
3 Jamintoro River Pelton 0,158 59,19 87% 74,98 613652,69
4 Jamintoro River Turgo 0,158 59,19 93% 78,84 645251,11

Based on table 2, it can be seen that case 1 produces According to the calculation results in table 3, there
energy of 321303,84 kWh, case 2 has the energy of are differences in costs in each case required based on
343457,93 kWh, case 3 is 613652.69 kWh, and case 4 the MHP planning design. The most significant
produces a power of 645251,11 kWh. The calculation funding of the four cases is in case 3, planning at $
of energy per year generated by each plan will be used 124.582,91, while case 1 is the MHP plan with the
to calculate the benefits obtained during the one year smallest cost of $ 107.339,97.
the MHP operates.
2. Cash In Flow
3.3 Cost and Benefit of Different Case The cost of goods sold (COGS) of electrical energy
used is the cost of electric power sales based on off-
1. Cost Flow grid management, which is $ 0,048. Thus, the price per
The construction of the micro-hydropower plant in the kWh is obtained as follows:
Poreng River and the Jamintoro River is estimated to
cost money, which can be seen in the following Table 4. Cash In Flow
detailed information: Case
COGS E CIF
($/kWh) (kWh) ($)
Table 3. Investment Costs 1 0,048 321303,84 15.428,22
CF0 Tax 10% CF 2 0,048 343457,928 16.492,01
Case 3 0,048 613652,688 29.466,09
($) ($) ($)
4 0,048 645251,112 30.983,38
1 97.581,79 9.758,17 107.339,97
2 99.331,99 9.933,19 109.265,19
3 113.257,19 11.325,72 124.582,91 From the results in table 4, case 1 can generate annual
4 112.215,93 11.221,59 123.437,52 profit of $ 15.428,22; case 2 for $ 16.492,01; case 3
for $ 29.466; and in case 4, it made a profit of $
30.983,38. The calculation of profit per year shows
that case 4 has the most advantage compared to other incurred by present value, which is negative. Equation
cases. (7) is used to find out how many BCR values are
generated in each case that has been designed in table
3. Annual Cash In Flow 7 below:
For the approach to determining the Annual Cash In
Flow, expenditures consist of operational costs, Table 7. Benefit-Cost Ratio
maintenance, and taxes, which are assumed to be 10% Cost Benefit
Case BCR Feasibility
of total annual revenue. Annual cash in flow can be ($) ($)
calculated using equation (5) in table 5 as follows: 1 130.482,31 231,423.35 1,77 Feasible
2 134.003,21 247.380,12 1,85 Feasible
Table 5. Annual Cash In Flow 3 168.782,06 441.991,48 2,62 Feasible
Maintenance 4 169.912,58 464.750,66 2,74 Feasible
Annual Cash
CIF and
Case In Flow
($) Operation The calculations in table 7 show that the investment
($)
($)
funds used in these four cases are smaller than the
1 15.428,22 1.542,82 13.885,40
2 16.492,01 1.649,20 14.842,81
benefits, so that the value of the benefit-cost ratio
3 29.466,09 2.946,61 26.519,49 (BCR) in case 1 is 1,77, case 2 is 1,85, case 3 of 2,62
4 30.983,38 3.098,34 27.885,04 and case 4 of 2,74. This value can be interpreted that
the MHP project implemented according to the present
Based on table 5, it can be seen that after calculating value is feasible to be developed.
the annual cash in flow, it is found that the case that
produces the most net profit is case 4 using a turgo 3. Internal Rate of Return (IRR)
turbine at the location of the Jamintoro river. Case 4 The internal rate of return (IRR) is the internal interest
resulted in a net profit of $ 27.885,04. The results of rate that shows the project's ability to generate profits.
the four cases will then be analyzed based on the The basis of the IRR value is the same as the interest
feasibility of the NPV, BCR, and IRR. rate, which makes the NPV value equal to zero. If the
IRR is greater than the current interest rate, the project
3.4 Feasibility of Financial is viable. Equation (8) is used to analyze the feasibility
based on the IRR, which can be seen in Table 8 below:
1. Net Present Value
Net present value (NPV) is defined as the present Table 8. Internal Rate of Return
value of the net income that will be obtained in the Annual Cash In Flow IRR
Case Feasibility
($) (%)
future if the money is valued now. The operational
1 13.885,40 9,73% Feasible
length of the MHP is assumed to be 15 years. By using
2 14.842,81 10,59% Feasible
equation (6), the feasibility analysis based on the NPV 3 26.519,49 19,89% Feasible
in the four cases can be seen in Table 6 below: 4 27.885,04 21,36% Feasible

Table 6. Net Present Value The calculation results in Table 8 show that the IRR
Annual Cash In
Cas NPV values of the four cases were 9,73%, 10,59%, 19,89%,
Flow Feasibility
e
($)
($) and 21,36%, respectively. By looking at the value of
1 13.885,40 49.777,45 Feasible the IRR, it means that the project can generate profits.
2 14.842,81 58.685,56 Feasible Therefore, the project can be said to be economically
3 26.519,49 175.492,96 Feasible feasible.
4 27.885,04 192.089,97 Feasible
3.5 Sensitivity analysis
Based on the results of the calculation with the
prevailing interest rate in Indonesia, namely 3,75%, Sensitivity analysis is an analysis conducted to
the NPV value in case 1 is $ 49.777,45; case 2 for $ determine the effect of changes in production
58.685,56; case 3 for $ 175.492,96; and case 4 for $ parameters on changes in the performance of the
192.089,97. If viewed with the NPV parameter, the production system in generating profits. Sensitivity is
four cases are feasible to be implemented for 15 years analyzed based on different parameters, namely
because they produce a value of more than 0. changes in interest rates, age changes, and discharge
changes. The results of the sensitivity analysis will be
2. Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) shown in Tables 9, 10, 11, and Figure 1 as follows:
The benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is defined as the ratio of
present value net income, which is positive with costs

Table 9. Sensitivity analysis based on changes in interest rates

Case Investment Annual CIF Net Present Value NPV max.
($) ($) Interest r. 3,75% Interest r. 13,75% Interest r. 23,75% (%)
 ($) ($) ($)
1 107.339,97 13.885,40 49.777,45 -20.976,49 -51.266,88 9,71%
2 109.265,19 14.842,81 58.685,56 -16.946,91 -49.325,84 10,57%
3 124.582,91 26.519,49 175.492,96 40.361,21 -17.489,88 19,88%
4 123.437,52 27.885,04 192.089,97 49.999,97 -10.830,01 21,35%

$300,000

$200,000
Net Present Value

$100,000

$-
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

$-100,000

$-200,000
Year

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4

Figure 1. Sensitivity analysis based on changes in the length of operation of the power plant

Table 10. Sensitivity analysis based on changes in Poreng River flow rate
Net Present Value
Head Discharge min.
Case Turbine Discharge (0,89 m3/s) Discharge (0,69 m3/s) Discharge (0,49 m3/s)
(m) (m3/s)
($) ($) ($)
1 Crossflow 5,54 49.777,45 13.518,29 -21.513,09 0,613
2 Kaplan 5,54 58.685,56 19.928,12 -17.519,22 0,584

Table 11. Sensitivity analysis based on changes in Jamintoro River flow rate
Net Present Value
Head Discharge min.
Case Turbine Discharge (0,158 m3/s) Discharge (0,098 m3/s) Discharge = 0,038 m3/s
(m) (m3/s)
($) ($) ($)
1 Pelton 59,19 175.492,96 58.678,54 -53.522,35 0,066
2 Turgo 59,19 192.089,97 72.462,65 -47.476,23 0,062

Poreng River
80,000
60,000
Net Present Value ($)

f(x) = 188773.714285714 x − 110049.843809524

40,000 f(x)
R² = =0.999869217511029
176596 x − 108065.106666667 Crossflow
R² = 0.99986893324084 Linear (Crossflow)
20,000
Kaplan
-
Linear (Kaplan)
(20,000) 0.3 0.45 0.6 0.75 0.9 1.05

(40,000)
(60,000)
Discharge (m3/s)
 Jamintoro River
250,000
Net Present Value ($)
200,000
f(x) = 1993234.28571429 x − 123031.96952381
150,000 f(x)
R² = =0.999998344927313
1899604.28571429 x − 127147.762857143
R² = 0.999600228555038
100,000
50,000
-
0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
(50,000)
Discharge (m3/s)
Figure 2. Relationship between Discharge vs Net Present Value
From Table 8, it can be seen that the sensitivity to
changes in interest rate values, changes in the
maximum interest rate that occurs in each planned case
are 9,71%; 10,57%; 19,88%; and 21,35%, respectively.
Figure 2 describes the minimum age for a micro-
hydropower plant based on the four cases carried out
with a minimum length of time consecutively ten
years, nine years, six years, and five years. Tables 10
and 11 show the minimum discharge so that the four
cases are able to generate profits. The minimum
discharge required is in case 1 of 0,613 m 3/s; case 2 of
0,584 m3/s; case 3 amounting to 0,066 m 3/s; and case 4
of 0,062 m3/s. Figure 3 explains that the ability of
MHP to generate profits is greatly influenced by
discharge. The greater the river's discharge, the greater
the energy produced so that the profits obtained from
the sale of electrical energy will be greater.
Based on the three parameters of the sensitivity
analysis, it can be concluded that the MHP planning in
case 4 has the best results compared to the three cases
that have been designed so that case 4 is the most
appropriate for changes in interest rates, age of MHP
and river flow discharge.
4. Conclusion
The comparison of the 4 cases can provide guidance
and illustrate the determination of the optimal MHP
design based on the availability of discharge and head.
From the analysis used based on NPV, BCR, and IRR
in the 15th year with an interest rate of 3.75%, it can
be concluded that the four micro-hydro power plant
cases are feasible. But the results show that case 4 is
the most profitable design, with a power output of
78,84 kW and a cost of $ 123.437,52. Based on the
financial feasibility and sensitivity analysis, case 4
yielded a feasibility value based on the NPV is $
192.089,97; BCR is 2,74; The IRR is 21,36% and the
sensitivity is based on changes in the maximum
interest rate of 21,35%, the minimum length of
Pelton
Linear (Pelton)
Turgo
Linear (Turgo)
0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18
operation of the micro hydro power plant is 5 years
and the minimum river flow rate is 0,062 m 3/s. Based
on these results, a MHP plan was chosen in case 4,
which has a head elevation of 59,19 m. This shows
that the head elevation is very important to be used as
an indicator in selecting the MHP location.
Several opportunities for the development of
micro-hydropower plants exist in Indonesia. If the
MHP design can be appropriately realized, it will give
good results in the production and benefits of
renewable energy. The community is expected to pay
attention to the environment, especially forest
maintenance, to protect watersheds that are water
sources, and forests play a crucial role in supporting
the availability of water sources. Supervision and
assistance from the technical implementing
departments of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral
Resources (ESDM) of the provincial and regional
governments are urgently needed to realize sustainable
MHP development.
References
Harvey, A. et.al. (1993), “Micro-Hydro Design Manual.
A guide to small-scale water power schemes”.
Intermediate Technology Publications, ISBN 1
85339 103 4.
Andriani, Y, et al. (2016). “Benefits and Costs Analysis
of Micro Hydro Electric Power Generation of
Enim Watershed Tanjung Tiga for Sustainable
Development”. In OIDA International Journal of
Sustainable Development.
Garg, S. K. (2005). “Irrigation Engineering and
Hydraulic Structures, 19th ed”. Khanna
Publishers: New Delhi, India. p. 1175.
Hosseini, S. M. H., Forouzbakhsh, F., Fotouhi, M., and
Vakilian, M. (2008). “Determination of
installation capacity in reservoir hydro-power
 plants considering technical, economical and Available online:
reliability indices. Electr. Power Energy Syst”. http://195.251.42.2/cgi-bin/nisehist.sh?
pp. 393–402. [CrossRef]. objtype=xartes (accessed on 16 April 2021).
Hidayah, E., Indarto, and Sri Wahyuni. (2017). NVA. (2016). “Cost Base for Small Hydropower Plants
“Proposed Method to Determine the Potential in Georgia < 13 Megawatt”.
Location of Hydropower Plant: Application at Pratama, A. (2020). “Design of a Micro Hydro Power
Rawatamtu Watershed, East Java”. In Procedia Plant (MHP) in the Jompo Tributary (Rawatamtu
Engineering. Sub-watershed)”.
I. Hussein and N. Raman, (2010). “Reconnaissance Rejekiningrum, P., & Krido S. S. (2015). “Financial
studies of micro hydro potential in Malaysia”. In Feasibility Analysis for Development Of Solar
Proceedings of the International Conference on Power Automatic Irrigation with Disc Irrigation
Energy and Sustainable Development: Issues and System in West Nusa Tenggara”. In Irrigation
Strategies (ESD ’10), pp. 1–10. Journal. pp. 125-136.
IRENA. (2012). “Renewable Energy Technologies: RUPTL PLN. (2019). “Electricity Supply Business
Cost Analysis Series”. In International Renewable Plan”. pp. 1–735.
Energy Agency. Vol. 1. Issue 3/5. Santoso, Muhammad. (2021). “Planning for a Micro
Khan, M.Y. (1999). “Theory & Problems in Financial Hydro Power Plant (PLTMH) in Jamintoro
Management”. Boston: McGraw Hill Higher Village, Sumberbaru Sub-district, Jember
Education. District”.
Krieger, T., Martig, D. S., van den Brink, E., & Berger, Shively, Gerald. (2012). “An Overview of Benefit-Cost
T. (2016). “Working on self-compassion online: A Analysis”.
proof of concept and feasibility study”. Internet
Interventions, 6, 64-70.
Kumar, A., Mohanty, P., Palit, D., and Chaurey, A.
(2009). “Approach for Standardization of Off-
Grid Electrification Projects”. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 13 1946-56
Liaquat, A. M., Kalam, M. A., Masjuki, H. H., & Jayed,
M. H. (2010). “Potential emissions reduction in
road transport sector using biofuel in developing
countries”. Atmospheric Environment, 44(32),
3869-3877.
Mbaka, John Gichimu, and Mercy Mwaniki. (2017).
“Small Hydro-Power Plants in Kenya : A Review
of Status , Challenges and Journal of Renewable”.
Journal of Renewable Energy and Environment
3(September 2017): 20–26.
Morales, Sergio et al. (2015). “An Overview of Small
Hydropower Plants in Colombia: Status, Potential,
Barriers and Perspectives”. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews.
Moten, J. and C. Thron. (2013). “Improvements on
Secant Method for Estimating Internal Rate of
Return, International Journal of Applied
Mathematics and Statistics”. 42:12,
http://www.ceser.in/ceserp/index.php/ijamas/articl
e/view/1929.
Mukherjee, M. & Roy, S. (2017). “Feasibility Studies
and Important Aspect of Project Management”.
International Journal of Advanced Engineering
and Management. Vol. 2. No. 4, pp. 98-100.
Nair, Pratap & Nithiyananthan. (2016). “Feasibility
Analysis Model for Mini Hydropower Plant in
Tioman Island, Malaysia”.
National Information System for Energy, Greece.
 Daftar Artikel Terbit& Under Review
di Jurnal/Prosiding sd 24 April 2021
a.n Wiwik Yunarni Widiarti, dkk
Nama Dosen Lain Yang terlibat:
Ririn Endah Badriani
Retno Utami Agung Wiyono
Entin Hidayah
Gusfan Halik

A. PUBLIKASI ARTIKEL ILMIAH DALAM JURNAL 5 TAHUN TERAKHIR

No Judul Autor Jurnal/Prosidding Tahun
1 Perbandingan Aplikasi IHACRES dan E Hidayah, WY Prosidding 2014
HEC-HMS untuk Peramalan Banjir di Widiarti Pertemuan Ilmiah
DAS Sampean Baru. Tahunan (PIT)
HATHI XXXI
dengan tema
“Pengelolaan
Sumber Daya Air
Berkelanjutan
dalam Rangka
Mitigasi Bencana”
yang
Diselenggarakan
di Padang, 22-24
Agustus 2014
2 Assessment Of Displacement Flow E Hidayah, IPTEK The 2015
At Ketandan Creeks To Optimizing WY Widiarti, A Journal for
Land Use In Jember New City Ratnaningsih Technology and
Housing Science 26 (1)
3 Comparison Of Scs Uh And Clark M Arifin, E Jurnal Rekayasa 2018
Methods For Rainfall–Runoff Model Hidayah, WY Sipil dan
In Deluwang Watershed Widiarti Lingkungan 2
(01), 77-86
4 Asesmen Kinerja DAS Bedadung Gusfan Halik, Prosidding 2019
Kabupaten Jember – Jawa Timur Desy L.,K, Sri Pertemuan Ilmiah
Wahyuni, Tahunan (PIT)
Entin H, Wiwik HATHI XXXVI
Y dengan tema
“Pengelolaan
Sumber Daya Air
pada Daerah
Semi Kering
Kepulauan:
Hambatan,
 Tantangan dan
Peluang” yang
Diselenggarakan
di Padang, 23
November 2019
5 Evaluasi Kinerja Kantong Lumpur Wiwik Prosidding 2019
Berdasarkan Laju Angkutan Sedimen Yunarni, Sri Pertemuan Ilmiah
(Studi Kasus: Bendung Talang Wahyuni, Tahunan (PIT)
Kabupaten Jember) Entin Hidayah, HATHI XXXVI
Gusfan Halik, dengan tema
Ririn Endah “Pengelolaan
Sumber Daya Air
pada Daerah
Semi Kering
Kepulauan:
Hambatan,
Tantangan dan
Peluang” yang
Diselenggarakan
di Padang, 23
November 2019
6 Karakteristik Aliran Anak Sungai E Hidayah, W Kern: Jurnal 2019
Ketandan, Das Bedadung Yunarni, A Ilmiah Teknik Sipil
Ratnaningsih 3 (2)
7 Pemilihan Model Hujan Aliran Gusfan Halik, Konferensi 2019
Sebagai Dasar Pengelolaan Alokasi Trlesca Wahyu Nasional Teknik
Air di DAS Bedadung Kabupaten N, Wiwik Sipil (KoNTekS)-
Jember Yunarni, 13
Hernu S, Entin
Hidayah
8 Sedimentation Management At Putu Adetya Jurnal Rekayasa 2019
Rayap Irrigation Channel Tersier Ii In Pariartha, Sipil dan
Patrang Sub-District Of Jember Entin Hidayah, Lingkungan 3(1):6
Regency Wiwik Yunarni 1
Widiarti
9 Pengembangan Sistem Jaringan Ayu Rahmad Jurnal Rekayasa 2019
Distribusi Air Bersih di Jayanti a Sipil dan
Kecamatan Genteng Kabupaten , Ririn Endah Lingkungan, ISSN
Banyuwangi Menggunakan Badriani b, 2 2548-9518
Program EPANET 2.0 , Yeny Vol. 3, No. 2,
Dhokhikah b Tahun 2019,
p.172-178
10 Evaluation of pipe network Wiwik IOP Conf. Series: 2020
distribution system using EPANET Yunarni, Sri Earth and
2.0 (a case study of the city of Wahyuni, ENVIRONMENTAL
Jember) Retno Utami Science 437
A.W, Entin (2020) 012043
 Hidayah,
Gusfan Halik,
Dian Singgih
11 Perbadingan Estimasi Curah Hujan MZ Alhamda, Rekayasa Sipil 14 2020
MRR Dan TRMM 3B42 Sebagai Inout E Hidayah, W (2), 112-119
Model Hidrologi HBV Studi Kasus Yunarni
DAS Bedadung

12 Pengendalian Sedimentasi Pada PA Pariartha, Jurnal Rekayasa 2020

Saluran Irigasi Rayap Tersier II E Hidayah, WY Sipil dan
Patrang Kabupaten Jember Widiarti Lingkungan 3 (1),
61-70
13 Geolistrik Konfigurasi Wenner Untuk Eri Teras Jurnal, 2020
Pendugaan Air Tanah Di Perumahan Kusworowati Jurrnal Teknik
Grand Puri Bunga Nirwana Jember Gusfan Halik,, Sipil, Universitas
WY Widiarti Malikussaleh, Vol
10, No 1, Maret
2020, P ISSN
2088-0561, E
ISSN 2502 - 1680
14 Analisis Karakteristik Sedimen Qohri Hangga Teras Jurnal, 2020
Dengan Metode Yuda,Wiwik Jurrnal Teknik
Xrd Di Sub Das Jeru, Pace, Dan Yunarni W, Sipil, Universitas
Pakisan Ririn Endah B Malikussaleh, Vol
10, No 1, Maret
2020, P ISSN
2088-0561, E
ISSN 2502 - 1680
15 Prediksi Laju Hajar Crisia JRS-Unand 2021
Sedimentasi Pada Sungai Jatiroto Cahyani1,
Entin
Hidayah2,
Retno Utami
Agung
Wiyono3
Gusfan Halik4,
Wiwik Yunarni
Widiarti5