Netsanet Zelalem MSC Thesis

INTEGRATION OF HYDROPOWER IN THE
ONGOING RESERVOIR STUDIES OF LAKE

TANA SUB-BASIN
By Netsanet Zelalem
Arba Minch University

School of Post Graduate Studies
August, 2008
INTEGRATION OF HYDROPOWER IN THE
ONGOING RESERVOIR STUDIES OF LAKE
TANA SUB-BASIN
By
Netsanet Zelalem
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Science in
Hydraulic and Hydropower Engineering
Arba Minch University
August, 2008
CERTIFICATION i
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certify that they have read the thesis: Integration of Hydropower
in the Ongoing Reservoirs Studies of Lake Tana Sub-Basin and here by
recommended for the acceptance by the Arba Minch University in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Hydraulic
and Hydropower Engineering.
_____________________________
(Supervisor)
Date _________________________
____________________________
(External Examiner)
Date ________________________
____________________________
(Co-supervisor)
Date _______________________
____________________________
(Internal Examiner)
Date _______________________
Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008 ,AMU

DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT ii
DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT
I, Netsanet Zelalem Cherie, declare that this thesis is my own work and that it
has been presented and will not be presented by me to any other University for
similar or any other degree award.
Signature ________________________________
Date ________________________________
The thesis is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties, as

well as other intellectual property laws and treaties. It may not be reproduced by
any means, in full or in part, except for short extracts in fair dealing, for research
or private study, critical scholarly review or discourse with an acknowledgement,
without written permission of the directorate of post graduate studies, on behalf
of both the author and University of Arba Minch.
Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

ABSTRACT iii
ABSTRACT
Currently, there are five reservoirs proposed for irrigation purpose only in Lake
Tana sub basin. These are: Gumera-A, Megech, Ribb, Gilgel Abbay-B and Jema.
Among these Megech, Ribb, Gumera-A and Gilgel Abbay-B are the focus of this
study. At Megech reservoir two alternatives are proposed. The first alternative is
for irrigation only and the second is for irrigation and water supply.
The proposed irrigation area of: Megech of alternative one is 14622 ha, Megech
of alternative two is 7311 ha, Ribb 19925 ha, Gumera 1400 ha and Gilgel Abbay-
B 12490 ha.
Integration of hydropower in the proposed reservoir study is analyzed by using

Excel Spreadsheet. A sequential routing technique is used to see options of
hydropower generation.
Final output from sequential routing shows the estimated firm power generation
of Gilgel Abbay-B, Megech alternative two, Gumera-A and Megech alternative
one is 5.614 Mw, 0.61 Mw, 0.13 Mw and 35kw respectively without affecting the
irrigable area. But, from the analysis one can see as the irrigable area decreases
the hydropower generation will increase and vice versa because of the rise of
reservoir water level.
Economic analysis is done for Megech reservoir to show the economic feasibility
of hydropower projects. The result from benefit-cost analysis shows that
hydropower projects have B/C ratio of 1.9 which indicates its feasibility, where as
for irrigation project B/C ratio 0.37 which is not economically feasible.

ACKNOLEDGEMENT iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express the deepest gratitude and grateful acknowledgement to

my adviser, Dr. Ing. Nigussie Tekle for his constant guidance and constructive
criticism with encouragement throughout this thesis work and my co-adviser, Mr.
Solomon Tassew for his invaluable advices, suggestions and help.
I want to express sincerest appreciation to Professor Dr. JSR Murthy for his
valuable comment, suggestions and criticism.
I extend my acknowledgement to Dr.Semu Moges who gave me the opportunity
to attend this program.
There are people who should deserve a great acknowledgment for their
contribution to me during research time without whom the study here in AMU
would have only been a dream: Nigussie Damte, Selam Yonass, Tsehay
Mengistu, Belayneh Siyum, Mulu Sewnet, Sirak Tekleab, Genet Elalla, Derege
Beyene and Tedi „Esquanch‟ are a few of them.
A special thank to my brothers Wondu Gudeta and Gashaw Mola and my sister
Tsiyon Mihiretu, for their dedication and for taking good care of my family during
my study.
Grateful acknowledgements are extended to my parents for their love, constant
encouragement, moral support and faith that made me who I am.
I extend thanks to Awassa TVET College, in which my former employer, for
providing financial support during this study and Ministry of Water Resources
deserves great appreciation for their financial support to my thesis work.
Finally, Sincerest thanks to my wife, Lemlem Estifanos, for her love,
understanding, devotion and all she has done for me. She has always been a
great source of inspiration, has always been a solid support throughout my work
and has made a great difference in my life.

DEDICATION v
DEDICATION
I DEDICATE THIS THESIS MANUSCRIPT
TO
MY UNCLE ENDAWEKE CHERIE,
MY MOTHER TIRU WUBIE AND
THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE WORKING FOR
HUMANITY AND HUMAN WELFARE.
“For it is by grace you have been saved,

through faith-and this is not from your selves, it is
the gift of GOD-not by works, so that no- one can
boast”Eph.2:8-10.

TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CERTIFICATION……………………………………………………………………………………..i
DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT ..................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………….iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................................... iv
DEDICATION…………………………………………………………………………………………v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ ix
LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………...x
LIST OF TABLES IN THE APPENDICES ............................................................................ xi
LIST OF FIGURES IN THE APPENDICES ........................................................................ xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .................................................................. xiii
CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
1.1. Background ................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Statement of the Problem ......................................................................................... 4
1.3. Objective of the Study................................................................................................ 5
1.3.1. General Objective .....................................................................................5
1.3.2. Specific Objective: ....................................................................................5
1.4. Scope and Limitation of the Study .......................................................................... 5
CHAPTER TWO................................................................................................................... 6
LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 6
2.1. General......................................................................................................................... 6
2.2. Irrigation Potentials and Extent of Exploitation in Ethiopia .................................. 7
2.3. Power Potentials and Extent of Exploitation in Ethiopia ...................................... 8
2.4. Power Generation from Irrigation Water Release ............................................... 11
2.5. Turbines ..................................................................................................................... 12
2.5.1. General ...................................................................................................12
2.5.2. Selection of Hydraulic Turbines ..........................................................13
2.6. Review of Previous Studies .................................................................................... 15
2.6.1. Design of Dams in Lake Tana Sub-Basin Projects (Gilgel Abbay, Megech
and Ribb )-WWDSE and TAHALE Pvt. Ltd .......................................................15
2.6.2. Gumera Irrigation Project –WWDSE and ICT Pvt. Ltd ............................15
2.6.3. Country Wide Master Plan Studies – EVDSA/WAPCOS (1988-90)........16
2.6.4. Study by BCEOM in Association with ISL and BRG 1999 ......................16
CHAPTER THREE ............................................................................................................. 18
STUDY AREA .................................................................................................................... 18

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
3.1. Abbay Basin .............................................................................................................. 18

3.2. Lake Tana Sub-Basin .............................................................................................. 18
3.3. Project Location and Descriptions ......................................................................... 21
3.3.1. Megech Irrigation project ........................................................................21
3.3.2. Ribb Irrigation project ..............................................................................23
3.3.3. Gumara-A Irrigation project.....................................................................24
3.3.4. Gilgel Abbay Irrigation Projects ...............................................................26
CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................... 28
DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 28
4.1 General........................................................................................................................ 28
4.2. Precipitation and Evaporation Data ....................................................................... 28
4.2.1. Precipitation and Evaporation at Megech Dam Site................................29
4.2.2. Precipitation and Evaporation at Ribb Dam Site .....................................30
4.2. 3. Precipitation and Evaporation at Gumera-A Dam Site ...........................30
4.2.4. Precipitation and Evaporation at Gilgel Abbay-B Dam Site.....................31
4.2. 5. Reservoir of Evaporation at Proposed Dam Sits ....................................31
4.2.6. Estimating the Missing Data ...................................................................33
4.2.7. Quality checking .....................................................................................34
4.2.8. Aerial Precipitation ..................................................................................36
4.3. Hydrological Data ..................................................................................................... 37
4.3.1. Estimating the Missing Streamflow Data.................................................38
4.3.2. Method of Determining the Flow at Desired site .....................................40
4.3.2.1. Simple Area Ratio Method ....................................................................... 40
4.3.2.2. Data Generation Method .......................................................................... 41
4.4. Other Data ................................................................................................................. 42
CHAPTER FIVE ................................................................................................................. 44
METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................... 44
5.1. Integrating Hydropower ........................................................................................... 44
5.2. Methods of Computing Hydropower Potential ..................................................... 46
5.2.1. Flow-Duration Curve Method ..................................................................46
5.2.2. The Sequential Streamflow Routing (SSR) Method ................................46
5.3. Procedures for Computation of Firm and Secondary Power ............................. 47
5.4. Selection of Turbine and Power House ................................................................ 53
5.4.1. Selection of Turbine ................................................................................53
5.4.2. Selection of Power House.......................................................................56
5.5. Economic Evaluation of Megech Irrigation Project ............................................. 58
5.5.1. General ...................................................................................................58
5.5.2. Methods of Economic Evaluation ............................................................58
5.5.2.1. Benefit-Cost Ratio (B/C ratio) ................................................................. 58
5.5.2.2. Net Present Value (NPV).......................................................................... 59
5.5.2.3. Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) .............................................. 59
5.5.3. Cost of Projects ......................................................................................59
5.5.4. Case1: Economic Analysis of Irrigation Project ......................................63
5.5.5. Case-2: Economic Analysis of Hydropower Project ................................63

TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
CHAPTER SIX ................................................................................................................... 65

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................................... 65
6.1. General .................................................................................................................. 65
6.2. Option-1: Without Affecting the Extent of Irrigated Land. .................................. 65
6.2.1. Firm and Secondary Power Potential .....................................................65
6.2.2. Discharge Released................................................................................68
6.2.3. Rule Curve for Option-1 ..........................................................................71
6.3. Option-2: With Reduction in Proposed Irrigation Land ....................................... 72
6.3.1. Results of Option-2 .................................................................................75
6.4. Results of Economic Analysis ................................................................................ 76
CHAPTER SEVEN ............................................................................................................. 77
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 77
7.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 77
7.2 Recommendations .................................................................................................... 78
REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 80
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................... 83
APPENDIX – A :Tables ...................................................................................................... 84
APPENDIX – B :Figures ................................................................................................... 106

LIST OF TABLES ix
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Chapter One
TABLE:1. 1.ENERGY DEMAND PROJECTION (1990-2004) .................................................................................. 4
Chapter Two
TABLE: 2.1. THE OVERALL UNRESTRICTED FULL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF THE ABBAY BASIN.................... 8
TABLE: 2.2. HYDROPOWER POTENTIAL OF ETHIOPIA ........................................................................................... 9
TABLE: 2.3. MAIN FEATURES OF THE HYDROPOWER PLANT CURRENTLY IN OPERATION .................................. 10
TABLE: 2.4. TYPICAL KAPLAN TURBINE OPERATIONAL RANGE…………………………………………...…...14
Chapter Four
TABLE: 4. 1.SUMMARY OF COMPUTED EVAPORATION………………………………………………………..…32
TABLE: 4. 2. RAINFALL STATIONS IN THE STUDY AREA .................................................................................... ...32
TABLE: 4. 3. REPRESENTATIVE STATIONS OF THE RESPECTIVE PROJECTS ....................................................... 32
TABLE: 4. 4. STATIONS USED TO FILL MISSING RAINFALL AT BAHIR DAR GAUGING STATIONS .......................... 33
TABLE: 4. 5. RELATIVE CATCHMENT AREAS INFLUENCED BY EACH STATION ..................................................... 36
TABLE: 4. 6. ESTIMATED MEAN MONTHLY RAINFALL AT GILGEL ABBAY-B RESERVOIR ..................................... 37
TABLE: 4. 7. LOCATION OF STREAM FLOW GAUGING STATIONS IN THE STUDY AREA ....................................... 37
TABLE: 4. 8. DRAINAGE AREA AT DAM SITES AND STREAM GAUGING STATIONS ............................................... 41
TABLE: 4. 9. IRRIGATION WATER REQUIREMENT OF THE PROJECTS .................................................................. 43
Chapter Five
TABLE: 5. 1. ESTIMATED VALUES OF PARAMETERS FOR GILGEL ABBAY-B AND MEGECH ALTERNATIVE-2 ..... 49
TABLES: 5. 2A. PARAMETERS USED IN SSR FOR MEGECH ALTERNATIVE-2 ..................................................... 49
TABLE: 5.2B. SAMPLE SSR FORMAT FOR MEGECH ALTERNATIVE-2……………………………..………….50
TABLE: 5. 3. CHARACTERSTICS RANGE OF KAPLAN TURBINE………………………………………………......56
TABLE: 5. 4. INVESTMENT COST OF MEGECH IRRIGATIONPROJECT…………………………………………59
TABLE: 5. 5. COMPARISION OF INVESTMENT COST ON PROPOSED CROPS FOR MEGECH
IRRIGATION PROJECT………….………………………………………..…………………………….…60
CHAPTER SIX
TABLE: 6. 1. POWER GENERATION FROM OPTION-ONE ............................................................ 66
TABLE: 6.2. ESTIMATED VALUES OF COEFFICIENT USED IN DEVELOPING RELEASE RUEL…….…...…69
TABLE: 6.3. SUMMARISED POWER OUT PUT FOR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS OF IRRIGABLE AREA
AND AT 95% RELIABILITY OF RESERVOIR…………………………………………………………....74

LIST OF FIGURES x
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Chapter Two
Figure: 2. 1. Schematic Representation of Hydropower Integration on Irrigation projects…………….12
Chapter Three
Figure: 3. 1. Location of the study Area…………………………………………………..………………...20
Figure: 3.2. Location of Watershed in the Study Area…………………………..…………………………21
Figure: 3.3. Megech Watershed…………………………………………………..…………………………22
Figure: 3.4. Ribb Watershed………………………………………………………………..………………..24
Figure: 3.5. Gumera Watershed…………………………………………………………………………..…25
Figure: 3.6. Gilgel Abbay Watershed……………………………………………………………………..…26
Chapter Four
Figure: 4.1. Location of Meteorological Stations in Lake Tana Sub Basin…….…….………………….29
Figure: 4.2. Double Mass Curve for Gonder Rainfall Station……………………..………………………35
Figure: 4.3. Double Mass Curve for Bahir Dar Station……………………………..………………….…..35
Figure: 4.4. Location of Streamflow Gauging Station…………………………………..…………….……38
Figure: 4.5. Correlation between Gauging Stations at Ribb near Adiss Zemen And
Upper Ribb near Debre Tabor…………………………………………………..………….….39
Figure: 4.6. Correlation between Streamflow Gauging Stations at Addis Zemen
and Azezo…………………………………………………………………………….……….….39
Figure: 4.7. Correlation between Flow at Dam Site and at Gumea Gauging Station and at
Dam Site…………………………………………………………………….…………..………42
Chapter Five
Figure: 5.1. Release Rule Chart for Gilgel Abbay-B Reservoir……..…………………..……….……….51
Figure: 5.2. Reservoir Rule Curve Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir……………………………..……….………51
Figure: 5.3. Range of Specific Speed and Net Head for Different Turbines…………………………………….……54
Figure: 5.4. Cash Flow Diagram for Megech irrigation project……….………………………………...……….……..62
Figure: 5.5. Cash Flow Diagram for Megech Hydropower Project……………………………………….64
Chapter Six
Figure: 6.1. Power Duration Curve of Megech (Alternative-2) Reservoir…………………..……….….66
Figure: 6.2. Power Duration Curve of Gilgel Abbay – B Reservoir………………………..…………….67
Figure: 6.3. Annual Monthly Power of Megech (Alternative-2) Reservoir……………..………………..67
Figure: 6.4. Annual Monthly Power of Gilgel Abbay – B reservoir……………………..………………..68
Figure: 6.5. Annual Monthly Release Volume of Megech (Alternative-2) Reservoir………..………….71
Figure: 6.6. Annual Monthly Reservoir Elevation of Megech (Alternative-2) Reservoir......................72
Figure: 6.7. Relationship between Power Generation and Irrigation Area …………………..………....72

LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDICES xi
LIST OF TABLES IN THE APPENDICES
Page
TABLE: A- 1. GORGORA RAINFALL STATION ...................................................................................................... 85
TABLE: A- 2. MAKSEGNIT RAINFALL STATION........................................................................................... 86
TABLE: A- 3. CHILGA (AYKEL) RAINFALL STATION ............................................................................................. 87
TABLE: A- 4. ZEGE RAINFALL STATION .............................................................................................................. 88
TABLE:A- 5. DEBRE TABOR RAINFALL STATION................................................................................................. 89
TABLE: A- 6. BAHIR DAR RAINFALL STATION .................................................................................................... 90
TABLE: A- 7. DANGILA RAINFALL STATION ......................................................................................................... 91
TABLE:A- 8. ENGIBARA RAINFALL STATION ....................................................................................................... 92
TABLE: A- 9. GONDER RAINFALL STATION ......................................................................................................... 93
TABLE: A- 10. STATIONS USED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF DOUBLE MASS CURVE GROUP-I ....................... 94
TABLE: A- 11. STATIONS USED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF DOUBLE MASS CURVE GROUP-2 ...................... 95
TABLE: A- 12. STREAM FLOW FOR MEGECH NEAR AZEZO STATION ................................................................. 96
TABLE: A- 13. FLOW AT MEGECH GAUGE STATION ........................................................................................... 97
TABLE: A-14. STREAMFLOW STAIONS FOR RIBB NEAR ADDIS ZEMEN…………………………..………......98
TABLE: A- 15. RIBB MONTHLY FLOW AT DAM SITE .......................................................................................... 99
TABLE: A- 16. UPPER RIBB GAUGING STATION............................................................................................... 100
TABLE: A- 17. GUMERA STATION NEAR BAHIR DAR ........................................................................................ 101
TABLE: A- 18. MEAN MONTHLY STREAMFLOW AT GUMERA DAM ................................................................... 102
TABLE: A- 19. STREAM FLOW OF GILGEL ABBAY RIVER AT GAUGING STATION .............................................. 103
TABLE: A- 20. FLOW AT GILGEL ABBAY-B DAM SITE ...................................................................................... 104
TABLE: A- 21. CLIMATE DATA FOR EVAPORATION COMPUTATION .................................................................... 105

LIST OF FIGURES IN THE APPENDICES xii
LIST OF FIGURES IN THE APPENDICES
Page
FIGURE: B- 1. DOUBLE MASS CURVE OF THE RAINFALL STATIONS IN THE STUDY AREA .................................. 107
FIGURE: B- 2. ELEVATION – AREA – VOLUME FOR RESPECTIVE RESERVOIRS. ............................................. 110
FIGURE: B- 3. SSR OUTPUTS OF MEGECH RESERVOIR FOR ALTERNATIVE ONE ............................................. 112
FIGURE: B- 4. SSR OUTPUTS OF MEGECH RESERVOIR FOR ALTERNATIVE TWO ............................................. 123
FIGURE: B- 5. SSR OUTPUTS OF RIBB RESERVOIR .......................................................................................... 132
FIGURE: B- 6. SSR OUTPUTS OF GUMERA-A RESERVOIR ............................................................................... 140
FIGURE: B- 7. SSR OUTPUTS OF GILGEL ABBAY-B RESERVOIR ...................................................................... 151
FIGURE: B- 8. MAP OF GUMERA PROJECT AND CATCHMENT ........................................................................... 162
FIGURE: B- 9. ISOHYTAL MAP OF LAKE TANA SUB BASIN.................................................................................. 163
FIGURE: B- 10. TWO AND THREE DIMENSIONS REPRESENTATION OF THE ELEVATION OF LAKE TANA ........... 164
FIGURE: B- 11. LOCATION MAP OF MEGECH DAM AND GAUGING SITE ............................................................ 165
FIGURE B- 12: LAYOUT AND LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED POWER HOUSE .................................................... 166
FIGURE: B- 13. THISSEN POLYGONS OF GILGEL ABBAY WATERSHED ....................................................... 166
FIGURE: B- 14. LOCATION OF MAIN TOWNS DAMS IN THE STUDY AREA ........................................................... 167
Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis August2008, AMU

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS xiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Alt. Alternative
ARBIMID Abbay River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan Project
B/C Benefit Cost ratio
CRF Cost Recovery Factor
DEM Digital Elevation Model
DMC Double Mass Curve
EEPCo Ethiopia Electrical Power Corporation
EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return
EM Engineering Manual
EMA Ethiopian Mapping Agency
FAO Food and Agriculture organization
GWh//year Giga Watt hour per year
Ha Hectare
ICS Inter connected System
ICTPL Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Private Limited
Kw Killo Watt
LTB Lake Tana Sub Basin
m asl meter above sea level
Mm3 Million cubic meter
MW Mega Watt
NPV Net Present Value
PDC Power Duration Curve
RoR Run off River hydropower schemes
R.W.L Reservoir Water Level
SCS Self Contained System
SSR Sequential Streamflow Routing
SWAT Soil and Water Assessment Tool
USBR United States Bureau Reclamation
WAPCOS Water And Power Consultancy Service
WWDSE Water Works Design and Supervision Enterprise

CHAPTER ONE 1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
In developing countries, owing to rapid growth in population, it is unquestionable to
plan development activities which can ascertain fast improvement on living standard
of the nation.
It is preferential to plan Multi-dimensional development activities with limited amount
of resources with consideration for efficient utilization. This can be achieved by
optimum development of water resources.
The need for the optimal development of water resources has become more urgent
than ever before because water is becoming a scarce resource as a result of the
growing demand for various purposes such as hydropower, irrigation, water supply,
etc.
In Ethiopia, most large dam projects were implemented only for single purpose i.e.,
either for power, irrigation or water supply. To do this, there are inevitable
competitions and conflicts of interest between the different water users, and
projects that are often plagued by the lack of a cohesive approach.
Now a days, there is a growing recognition that planning considerations extend far
beyond the interest of single purpose projects, and needed to be viewed at the river
basin multipurpose development aspects, which results in a number of benefits
associated with social well-being such as secure water supply, irrigation for food
production, hydroelectric generation, flood control, watershed management,
improved navigation, etc. that makes the projects economically viable and
environmentally acceptable.

CHAPTER ONE 2
Multipurpose reservoir operation involves various interactions and trade-offs among

purposes, which are sometimes complementary but often competitive or conflicting.
Reservoir operation may be based on the conflicting objectives of maximizing the
amount of water available for conservation purposes and maximizing the amount of
empty space for storing future flood waters to reduce the downstream damages
which is one of the objectives of Lake Tana irrigation projects.
Dams which are planned to be constructed in Lake Tana sub basin are: Megech,
Ribb, Gumera-A and Gilgel Abbay-B, rivers are originally single purpose, only for
irrigation. However, these dams will have importance to generate electricity
immediately at the designed distance downstream of the dam; it can supply water
for the downstream-irrigated land and also for domestic water supply so that these
dams serve for multipurpose uses.
Eighty-three percent of Ethiopians currently lack access to electricity, with 94
percent still relying on fuel wood for daily cooking and heating [18]. This represents
only 17% of the total population of the country has electricity access. This electricity
access is almost entirely concentrated in the urban areas, but although 85% of the
populations live in the rural areas, less than 1% has access to electricity service.
The majority of the populations, primarily living in rural areas, lack a number of
facilities as a result of poverty and insufficient access to energy.
The Ethiopian government is therefore pursuing plans and programs to develop
hydropower and irrigation in an effort to substantially reduce poverty and create an
atmosphere for social change. It has been shown that access to electricity, including
rural electrification, is a key to poverty reduction in Ethiopia.

CHAPTER ONE 3
Integrating hydropower schemes on the proposed Reservoirs have many

advantages:
 Raising income level of rural population.
 Reduction of firewood consumption consequently decreasing deforestation
and soil degradation.
 Promotion of local industry and facilitation of job opportunity for rural
residents and mitigation of population drifts towards urban areas.
 Multi-purpose projects give multi use for the community around the project
sites thus increases the interest of dwellers towards the development of
future water resource projects in the area.
 The availability of electricity can support advanced development methods
such as tele-education, familiarizing schools which are found in rural areas
with new technologies and it could provide access to distant information and
support for farmers and other entrepreneurs.

CHAPTER ONE 4
1.2. Statement of the Problem

Ethiopia is a country endowed with a large hydropower potential but to develop as
single purpose may require huge financial resources which cannot be handled with
the Ethiopian existing condition.
In the case of rural electrification, it is very expensive and revenues are frequently
poor; however, if we integrate with other projects it needs only small amount of
additional capital cost for full development [2].
If we see areas considered in this study, there is no access to electricity till this time.
The author of this paper tries to show the opportunity of generating hydropower to
the nearby villages of the respective irrigation projects and the benefits gained from
optimal design and operation by integrating hydropower with irrigation projects.
Table1. 1.Energy demand projection (1990-2004) [26]
Since 90% of the total power is contributed
Year Total
from hydropower, we need to find ways (G.C) Demand
to meet the immense power demand in (GWh/Year)
the near future. 1990 5500
With reference to 1990 G.C Ethiopia needs 2000 13400
2.5 times by year 2000 2010 35000
9.7 times by year 2020 2020 53400
17 times by year 2040 table1.1 illustrate this 2030 72700
fact. 2040 93700

CHAPTER ONE 5
1.3. Objective of the Study
1.3.1. General Objective
 Integrating hydropower with irrigation projects which are planned to be

implemented in Lake Tana sub-basin (i.e., on Megech, Ribb, Gumera-A and
Gilgel Abbay-B).
1.3.2. Specific Objectives:
 To show the possible options for hydropower integration in the proposed

reservoirs based on alternative irrigable land.
 To quantify the firm power and secondary power of the respective project
sites.
 To develop reservoir operation rules for the respective project sites.
1.4. Scope and Limitation of the Study
There are around six irrigation projects that are proposed to be implemented around
Lake Tana sub basin; but this study focuses only on four reservoirs (Megech,
Gumera-A, Ribb and Gilgel Abbay-B)
Preliminary economic analysis and turbine selection is done for Megech only
because of time constraint.
Since the projects are at pre-feasibility some data such as project cost, agricultural
costs are adopted from projects‟ draft report and from master plan and hence some
of the data may be changed through time.

CHAPTER-2 LITRATURE REVIEW 6
CHAPTER TWO
LITRATURE REVIEW
2.1. General
The optimum development of water resources is considered to be key element in

the socio- economic development of a country. As hydropower does not consume
or pollute the water it uses to generate power, it leaves this vital resource available
for other uses. At the same time, the revenues generated through electricity sales
can finance other infrastructure essential for human welfare. This can include
drinking water supply systems, irrigation schemes for food production,
infrastructures enhancing navigation, recreational facilities and ecotourism.
There are contradictions between power generation and irrigation. Taking water
away from a river or from a reservoir for irrigation will result in a reduction in the
water flow for power generation. Moreover, in most cases the supply schedule for
irrigation does not coincide with that for power generation. However, we can make
use of the drops of head from the irrigation reservoir to develop power generation,
or make use of the tail water of the power station for irrigation, i.e., to let the flow
first pass through the water turbine, and then go on for irrigation.
Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis August 2008, AMU

2.2. Irrigation Potentials and Extent of Exploitation in Ethiopia
Ethiopia‟s total land area is estimated at 1.13Million km 2. Out of this about 66 % is

considered as arable land (i.e. suitable for crops). Out of this total arable land 27.9
Million hectares or 22.8% of the total land area is already cultivated. 10.3%
(12596900 ha) and 12.5% (15287500 ha) is intensively and moderately cultivated
respectively.
In the Ethiopian context, the irrigation sub-sector is classified as small (less than
200ha), medium (200 to 3000ha) and large-scale (over 3000ha) schemes.
Ethiopia‟s irrigation potential has been estimated to be in the order of 3.5 million
hectares. The total area currently irrigated by modern irrigation schemes in Ethiopia
is approximately in the order of 160000ha, i.e. 4.6% [25].
Currently, the government emphasis is to develop the sub-sector to fully tap

irrigation potential of Abbay basin as shown in table 2.1, by assisting and
supporting farmers to improve irrigation management practices and the promotion
of modern irrigation systems like the projects that will be implemented around Lake
Tana sub basin is one part among the activities.
The net command area of Gumera-A, Megech of alternative one and two, Ribb and
Gilgel Abbay-B accounts 14000ha, 14622ha (7311ha + Gonder water supply)
19925ha and 12490 ha respectively. For efficient use of Megech reservoir two
alternatives are planned: One alternative is increasing the command area by 100%
of 7311ha. The second alternative, the reservoir used for irrigating 7311ha
command area as well as supplying domestic water supply for Gonder town. These
two cases are considered in our analysis as alternative one and alternative two of
Megech reservoir.

Table: 2. 1. The overall unrestricted full development potential of the Abbay basin
at each sub-basin [31,5]
S.No Sub-Basin Name Sub-Basin Agriculture Maximum Identified
2
Area(km ) Suitable Irrigable Irrigable
Land(km2) Land(km2) Area(ha)
1 Lake Tana 15054 10497 4639 113669
2 North Gojjam 14389 10330 4245 11716
3 Beshelo 13242 8538 3474 -
4 Weleka 6415 3903 1973 -
5 Jimma 15782 6819 6408 11687
6 South Gojjam 16762 11414 5459 19789
7 Mugar 8188 5885 3384 -
8 Guder 7011 3990 3990 8040
9 Fincha 4089 3048 1165 17358
10 Didessa 19630 18235 14809 52617
11 Angar 7901 6684 4177 26563
12 Wombera 12957 9222 3916 2357
13 Dabus 21032 18978 8513 8816
14 Beles 14200 11358 2908 138720
16 Dinder 14016 1975 59555
17 Galegu/Rahad 23160 4655 1794 54995
Total 199812 147572 72829 525957
2.3. Power Potentials and Extent of Exploitation in Ethiopia

Ethiopia possess abundant water resources and hydropower potential, second only
to the Democratic Republic of Congo in all of Africa, yet only three percent of this
potential has been developed. Ethiopia's economically exploitable hydropower
potential is in order of more than 139,244Gwh/year as shown in table 2.2.
However, only 3 % of the total potential has been utilized so far. This enormous
potential classifies Ethiopia as one of the world's leading countries in hydro
potential.

Ethiopia is also fortunate in having a combination of vast water resources and

suitable topography that permit much of this potential to be developed at a
remarkably low-cost.
There has been little financial and institutional support to develop smaller scale
power projects in conjugation with other projects, irrigation for our case. Yet
distributed power generation through Pico (≤ 10 kW), micro (11 kw-500 kW), mini
(501 kw-1000 kW) and small hydropower (1 Mw – 10Mw) could be an attractive
option for meeting rural energy needs in many areas of Ethiopia [11].
Table: 2.2. Hydropower potential of Ethiopia [9, 11, 22]

S. Basin Name Basin Coverage Annual Hydropower
No. Area % Runoff Potential
Km2 (Bm3) MW Gwh/year
1 Blue Nile 192853 17.1 52.62 12854 78820
2 Omo-Gibe 74912 6.6 17.96 3662 22454
3 Baro-Akobo 73958 6.6 11.81 2244 13760
4 Genale-Dawa 172681 15.3 5.88 1512 9270
5 Tekeze 81034 7.2 8.20 690 4230
6 Wabi Shebele 207497 18.4 3.16 887 5440
7 Awash 113604 10.1 4.6 729 4470

8 Rift Valley Lakes 51664 4.6 5.63 130 800
9 Danakel 66489 5.9 0.86 == ==
10 Aysha 4717 0.4 0.02 == ==

11 Ogaden 82157 7.3 0.86 == ==
12 Mereb 6065 0.5 == == ==
Total 1,127,631 100 111.6 22, 708 139,244

Presently, the Ethiopian electric power system is essentially based on very few
medium sized hydropower plants, with minor contribution from thermal. The total
firm energy production capacity of the existing hydropower schemes is about 2,338
Gwh/year (see table 2.3), which accounts for 90% of the total electric energy
produced in the country.
Table: 2. 3. Main features of the hydropower plant currently in operation

[25, 9, 8, and 22]
No Basin T yp e System Ins ta l l ed Firm Ye ar
P la n t of th e Ca p ac i t y Energy of
Nam e s c hem (MW ) Production Com m is s io n
Gwh/year
1. Koka Awash Storage ICS 43.32 80 1960
2. Awash-II Awash RoR ICS 32 135 1966
3. Awash-III Awash RoR ICS 32 135 1971
4. Finchaa Abbay Storage ICS 134 618 1973

5. Melka Wabishe Storage ICS 153 311 1988
Wakana belle
6. Tis Abbay-I Abbay RoR ICS 11.4 55 1964
7. Tis Abbay-II Abbay Storage ICS 73 331 2001

8. Gilgel Gibe-I Omo- Storage ICS 184 622 2003
Gibe
9 Yadot* RoR SCS 0.35 1.2 1991
10 Sor* Baro – RoR SCS 5 47 1992

Akabo
11 Dembi* - SCS 0.8 2.8 1994
Total 2,338
* Small hydropower plants in the SCS

The Ethiopian electric supply system is characterized mainly by two distinct

divisions: the Inter-Contained System (ICS) and a number of Self-Contained System
(SCS).
The ICS receives most of its energy from relatively large hydro generating stations
and supplies the main demand centers.
The existing situation in hydropower development, in connection with the available

potential and demand, leaves much to be desired. According to the Ethiopian
Electric and Power Corporation (EEPCO) energy forecast, the country would face
severe shortage of hydroelectric energy for many years to come unless new plants
are added to the system. The study indicates that the power generation needs to
grow at annual rate of about 10% to fulfill the demand [9].
To cope up with this energy shortage as we have seen these days, special attention
has recently been given to the development of hydropower sector. This study has its
own role for the contribution of maximizing power coverage.
2.4. Power Generation from Irrigation Water Release
It is possible to plan a power generation plant using release for: irrigation water
demand, river maintenance, water supply and using reservoir overflow.
When water for irrigation, river maintenance flow, water supply and any other water
utilization, if any, are discharged from the dam to the river through a water utilization
outlet pipe to immediately downstream of the dam are all available for power
generation by utilizing the outlet pipe. This concept of hydropower integration can be
further illustrated in fig.2.1 below.

QI is irrigation discharge
QM is river maintenance
QF is water over flow during full water level
QO is the summations of water supply
and additional flow release for
power maximization or other uses.
P is power house
I is stream inflow
Figure: 2. 1. Schematic representation of hydropower integration on

irrigation projects [10].
Even though, the release at the downstream of reservoir sites have a great range of
pprojects
fluctuations during irrigation period, power integration concept can be achieved by
adjusting additional release(Qo) as shown in fig 2.1.
2.5. Turbines
2.5.1. General
Hydraulic turbines are machines which use the energy of water and convert it into
mechanical energy. The most common types of hydraulic turbines are broadly
classified in to the following two types:
1. Reaction Turbines. These turbines use the available energy partly converted in
to kinetic energy and substantial magnitude remains in the form of pressure
energy. These turbines obtain the motive force by deflection of water under
pressure in a closed passage formed by the turbine blades. The most common
reaction turbines listed under this category are: Francis, Kaplan, Propeller and
Driaz.
2. Impulse Turbines. These turbines use all the available potential energy which is
converted in to kinetic energy with the help of contracting nozzles. The impulse
wheel or runner is usually a solid disc or hub upon which are mounted buckets
that are designed to split the jet and cause it to turn through nearly 1700 while

sliding over the inner surface as the bucket travels away from the nozzle. Pelton
wheel and Turgo-impulse are belong to this category.
The details of these turbines is found in [19, 14, 17] and in any hydraulics and
hydropower books.
2.5.2. Selection of Hydraulic Turbines
The selection of turbine for an efficient use is based on the estimated head and
discharge available to generate power.
To produce a given power at a specified head for the lowest possible cost, the
turbine and generator unit should have the highest speed practicable. However, the
speed may be limited by mechanical design, cavitation tendency, vibration and loss
of overall efficiency.
In addition, greater speed requires the turbine to be placed lower with respect to the
tail water, which generally increases excavation and structural costs. The highest
speed need to develop high specific speed which is useful in reducing the runner
size and power house dimensions.
The selection of turbine as mentioned above and from the procedure of selecting
turbine as mentioned in chapter four are mainly based on net head over the turbine
and discharge through the turbine.
The Kaplan turbines are fairly suitable for the purpose of three main reasons:
• Relatively small dimensions combined with high rotational speed
• A favorable progress of the efficiency curve
• Large overloading capacity
Since both head and discharge are highly variable and the net head in the
considered reservoirs are less than 55m Kaplan turbine is found suitable for all
projects.

This turbine works for net heads ranging from 2 m up to 50m; even it can range up
to 60m [6, 17]. Kaplan turbine offers also an advantage with its large range of
capacities up to 500 m3/s.
Table: 2. 4. Typical Kaplan turbine operational range [24]

Turbine Type Hmin/Hmax Qmin/Qmax
Kaplan 0.4 0.4

2.6. Review of Previous Studies
Because of the importance of the Abbay, very many studies had been carried out in
the past, concerning the basin. Though, there were not very specific studies for the
development of specific project sites in lake Tana - sub basin except the recent
progress works under taken by consultant of water works, design & supervision
enterprise and TAHAL Engineering Ltd., only water exclusively, all the studies under
taken, pertaining to Lake Tana, or Abbay [29].
2.6.1. Design of Dams in Lake Tana Sub-Basin Projects (Gilgel Abbay, Megech
and Ribb )-WWDSE and TAHALE Pvt. Ltd
Studies related to Megech and Ribb at feasibility level such as Hydrological

investigation, dam hydrological study, design of dams & appurtenant structures,
socio-economic study & resettlement planning, environmental impact assessment,
watershed management studies are undertaken by water workes design and
supervision in association with TAHAL Engineering Pvt.Ltd.
Important updated data such as crop water requirements, extent of irrigation area,
domestic water supply and reservoir data are taken from these studies reports.
2.6.2. Gumera Irrigation Project –WWDSE and ICT Pvt. Ltd
The meteorological and hydrological, irrigation and drainage, hydrological studies

and hydrogeological investigations of Gumera Irrigation Project at feasibility level of
study is undertaken by water works design and supervision in association with
Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.
From these studies, I have taken irrigation water requirement data, extent of
irrigation area and reservoir data of Gumera - A reservoir.

2.6.3. Country Wide Master Plan Studies – EVDSA/WAPCOS (1988-90)
These studies were carried out during 1988-90 for country wide water and land
resources development, covering all river basins. These were primarily desk
studies for identifying potential irrigation and the study addressed the Abbay basin
also, along with other basins. The USBR studies were reviewed in detail for the
Abbay basin, and subsequently this study came out with modifications in the
hydropower sites based on country wide data collection and analysis, coupled with
detailed map studies.
2.6.4. Study by BCEOM in Association with ISL and BRG 1999
The study entitled “Abbay River Basin integrated development Master Plan Project”
has been carried out with the following water resources oriented objectives.
To prepare water allocation and utilization plans under alternative development
scenarios and to generate data, information and knowledge that will contribute to
the future water allocation negotiations with downstream countries.
The hydrological and hydro meteorological studies are more relevant for review in
this section. These aspects have been covered in Section II, volume III of the
master plan study report. The basic climatic features, the climate data of the Abbay
river basin are discussed first. The rainfall data procured by the study was for 173
stations; the data length varied from 3 to 40 years, with associated monthly gaps.
The data for other climatic factors were available for 108 stations.

All data and analysis as well as typical design for structures were presented in the
Phase 2 report - Section II - Volume V - Water Resources Development - Part 1 -
Irrigation & Drainage). Necessary data extracted from this report and additional
details are presented in Appendixes E and G of the master plan.
Data of irrigation dams, irrigation structure, drainage and farm input and livestock
information is surveyed well in this master plan part and I use this information for
economic analysis part.

CHAPTER-3 STUDY AREA 18
CHAPTER THREE
STUDY AREA
3.1. Abbay Basin
The Abbay Basin is perhaps the most important basin in Ethiopia. It accounts for
about 17.5% of Ethiopian land area, 25% of its population and 50% of its annual
average surface water resources. In the Lake Tana, it has the country‟s largest
fresh water lake, covering an extent of 3000 km2. The Abbay has an average annual
runoff of about 50 Bm3. The river of Abbay contributes on an average, 62% of Nile
river flows in Aswan dam. [29]
3.2. Lake Tana Sub-Basin
The Lake Tana sub-basin is located at the headwaters of the Abbay (Blue-Nile)
basin (see fig. 3.1). The drainage area of the lake is 15,319 square kilometers, of
which 3000 square kilometers is the lake area. It has maximum dimensions of 78 km
in length, 67km in width and 14m in depth. The geographical location of the Tana sub-
basin extends from 10.95oN to 12.78oN latitude and from 36.89oE to 38.25oE
longitude.
Based on the rainfall pattern, according to the study of National Meteorological

Service Agency (NMSA, Jan 1996) the year is divided into two seasons: a rainy
season mainly centered during the months of June to September, and a dry season
from October to March. In the southern parts of the basin the months of April and
May are an intermediate season where minor rains often occur.

The mean annual rainfall at Bahir Dar (south portion of the basin) is 1450mm,
1200mm at Addis- Zemen (Eastern portion) and 1050 at Gondar Air Port
meteorological station (northern portion), indicating the spatial variation of rainfall in
the basin. Rainfall distribution, both in time and space, decreases northwards in the
basin (see Fig B-9 in appendix-B). Of the total annual rainfall, 70% to 90% occurs
during the June to September rainy season. The mean annual flow at the outlet of
Lake Tana is about 3.5 billion cubic meters and it varies from a maximum of 7 billion
cubic meters to a minimum of 1 billion cubic meters in high and low water years
respectively.
The topography of Lake Tana sub basin (LTB) ranges from flat to cliff. The flat areas
dominantly cover the low-lying areas LTB plains and a gently sloping terrain lies in
between the low-lying and highland areas. The very steep terrain lies mainly along
the boarder of the sub basin and mainly on mount Guna on the east, Armachiho on
north and Sekela high lands on the southern part of the basin. The altitude in the
basin ranges from 1772 to 4100 m asl. at the bed of Lake Tana and the eastern
extreme of the sub basin (mount Guna) respectively.
In Lake Tana sub – basin there are about six proposed irrigation projects at different
level of studies. These are: Gumera-A, Megech, Ribb, Gilgel Abbay-B, Jema and
North East Lake Tana. Among these Megech, Ribb, Gumera-A and Gilgel Abbay are
the focus of this study (see fig. 3.1 and 3.2).

Figure: 3. 1. Location of the study area

Figure: 3. 2. Location of watershed of the study area
3.3. Project Location and Descriptions
3.3.1. Megech Irrigation project
The Megech River originates from the high mountain ranges located to the North and
Northeast of Gonder town, in the Gonder Administrative Region at an elevation of
nearly 2500 m. The catchment area of Megech River up to its entrance to with Lake
Tana is about 700 km2 whereas the catchement area upto the damsite is 432.5 km 2.
The river traverses a length of 55 km before it meets the Lake Tana (see fig. 3.3).

Figure: 3. 3. Megech Watershed
The project commands an irrigation area of 7311 ha and proposed to expand to

1422 ha. The project irrigation command located about 14 km downstream of the
storage dam.

3.3.2. Ribb Irrigation project
The Ribb River originates from the high range of mountains located to the east of
Lake Tana. The river traverses a length of 114 km before it enters Lake Tana.
The Ribb dam site is located on the Ribb River 47 km from the origin. The riverbed
elevation at the dam axis is about 1,874 m at coordinates E 37° 59‟ 45” and N 12°
02‟ 30”.
Approximate longitudinal section of the Ribb watershed along the main river course
shows that it is characterized as a steep mountainous watershed up to the Ribb
dam site (at about 50 km course), below this point the river slope gets flatter
(See Fig.3-4). The Upper Ribb watershed (844 Km2) is characterized as a
mountainous, wedge shaped and a steep sloped (3.6%) watershed. The highest
elevation of the watershed is about 4,100 m in its south eastern part, where at the
dam site the elevation drops below 1,900 m.
There is hydrological characteristics similarity between the Ribb dam site (685 km 2)
and the Megech dam site watersheds. It should be mentioned that 50 Km
downstream of the Upper Ribb gauging site , the Ribb river slope is gets flatter with
low velocity and deposition of suspended sediment in the river course and over the
banks in case of excessive flooding.

Figure: 3. 4. Ribb Watershed
3. 3.3. Gumara-A Irrigation project
The project area is located in Fogera & Dera woredas of South Gonder
Administrative zone of Amhara Nation Regional state (ANRS). It falls between
Latitude 110-45‟ and 110-55‟N and longitude 37030‟ and 37050‟E. The project area is
situated at a distance of about 35 km from Bahir Dar and at about 42 km from Debre
Tabor. Woreta and Anbesame towns, the capitals of Fogera and Dera woredas,
respectively are very close to the project area.
Gumara River is one of the main streams on the east side, flowing into Lake Tana.
The river along with the tributaries originates from the high mountain ranges to the
east of Lake Tana. The town Debre -Tabor is in the vicinity of the origin. The
general elevation in this zone is 3,050 meters.

The river flows generally in westerly direction for a length of 98 km till Lake Tana
(see fig.3.5). The catchment area from the head to Tana is 1,893 km 2. Map of
Gumera project is shown in appendix Fig. B - 8.
Figure: 3. 5. Gumera Watershed

The cultivable command Area (CCA), which represents the cultivable area has been
assessed as 14,000 ha which works out to 84% of the gross command area.
The command area starts downstream of the diversion weir which is proposed on
River Gumera about 28 km downstream of proposed dam. In the initial reach the
command area is only on one side i.e. on only on the right bank of River Gumera
but after 5.90 km the command area starts on the left bank of the river also [28]

3.3.4 Gilgel Abbay Irrigation Projects

Gilgel Abbay River regarded by some hydrologists as source of the Blue Nile
(Abbay) River originates at 3520 masl near Sekela village. The stream drains from
its source in the north-westerly direction towards Lake Tana (~1786 m asl). It
receives its major tributary Jemma River before it crosses the Dangila-Bahirdar road
near Wetet Abay town. The other major tributary, Koga River, is joining down stream
of the road crossing. Both are right bank tributaries. Most of the catchment area is
cultivated agricultural land. The Gilgel Abay catchment located at North Western
highlands of Ethiopia belongs to one of the highest rainfall receiving area.
Figure: 3. 6. Gilgel Abbay Watershed

There are two projects proposed for irrigation using Gilgel Abbay river i.e Gilgel
Abbay-A and Gilgel Abbay–B. In this study we consider only Gilgel Abbay-B. The
net irrigation area proposed in the master plan is 12490 ha [4].
This project area is located in the Gilgel Valley, between Wetet Abay and Lake Tana
between altitudes of +1830 and +1860 m asl (see fig. 3.1).

CHAPTER-4 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS 28
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS
4.1 General
It is very important to collect adequate and quality data to do successful research

work on any field of study. The types of data collected from various organizations for
this specific study are as follows: The meteorological data, Stream flow data and
topographic Maps for the respective projects are collected from Ethiopian National
Meteorological Service Agency, Ministry of water resource, Ethiopian Mapping
Agency and Master plan study and from hydrology final report of the respective
projects. The range of all data considered for analysis in this paper is 20 years
period (1987-2006).
4.2. Precipitation and Evaporation Data
Among the meteorological stations in the Lake Tana sub basin(see fig 4.1), the
following meteorological stations have relatively better records: Bahir-Dar, Debre
Tabore, Maksegnit, Zege, Dangila, Gonder, Gorgora and Enjibara from which
rainfall, maximum and minimum air temperature, evaporation, relative humidity,
sunshine hours and wind speed are collected.
The above stations are grouped further to fill the missing rainfall data of
representative Stations (see table 4.3) and used for consistency checking based on
altitude and average area rainfall distribution from Isohyetal map developed for the
area (see appendix fig.B-9)

Figure: 4. 1. Location of meteorological stations in Lake Tana sub basin
4.2.1. Precipitation and Evaporation at Megech Dam Site

Stations which have a record of more than 20 years available rainfall data around
the Megech watershed are Gorgora, Gonder, Maksegnit and Chilga. These stations
are used to fill the missing rainfall data of Gonder station, which is taken as the
representative station for the Megech project area because of rainfall pattern and
geographical proximity (see fig. 4.1 above and B-9 in appendix).
Evaporation over Megech reservoir is determined from Gonder station which has
better metrological data.

4.2.2. Precipitation and Evaporation at Ribb Dam Site

Zege, Bahir Dar and Debre Tabor stations, which have nearly the same altitude,
have mean rainfall ranging from1300mm-500mm. These stations are used to fill the
missing data of the specific stations and the rainfall over the reservoir is estimated
based on Debre Tabor rainfall station (see fig. 4.1 and B-9 in appendix).
The location of the key meteorological and hydrological stations around the Ribb
dam site is shown in fig. 4.1and fig.4.4.
The elevation of Ribb dam site is about 1870m asl which is less than the altitude of
Debre Tabor (2612m asl) and hence could not be used for analysis of evaporation
over Ribb reservoir. Since Gonder (1967m asl.) meteorological station is at about
the same elevation as Ribb reservoir, this data has been adopted for evaporation
rate computation over the reservoir.
4.2. 3. Precipitation and Evaporation at Gumera-A Dam Site

The data available ranging from 1987 to 2006 were collected from the observed raw
data at gauging stations of Bahir Dar, Debre Tabor, Zege, Wereta which are located
around the project area of Gumera which have relatively long years data and having
slight variations of rainfall distribution. Among the stations Bahir Dar is the ideal
representation of the command area for analysis by the same reason as of Megech
and Ribb dam site.
The other climatic data like the temperature at various resolution levels, mean wind
speed, mean relative humidity and mean sun shine hours were available on
comparatively long term basis at Bahir Dar.

4.2.4. Precipitation and Evaporation at Gilgel Abbay-B Dam Site

The meteorological stations in watershed Gilgel Abbay having better records are:
Dangila , Engibara and Merawi. Since the rainfall patter in the watershed is highly
variable, the rainfall over Gilgel Abbay-B is estimated from a real precipitation (see
section 4.2.8).
Evaporation over the reservoir of Gilgel Abbay is determined from Bahir Dar and
Dangila meteorological stations as shown in section 4.2.5.
4.2. 5. Reservoir of Evaporation at Proposed Dam Sits

Evaporation over open water bodies such as lakes, reservoirs etc. can be
determined indirectly by one or more of several methods such as water balance,
energy balance, Penman- Monteith's formula and pan evaporation technique.
For the present Study the Penman – Monteith method was selected to determine
the monthly evaporation rates at four relevant climate stations: Debre Tabor, Bahir
Dar, Dangila and Gondar.
Open water evaporation (E) is estimated from potential evapotranspiration (ETo)
which is calculated using FAO CROPWAT version 4.3 program which uses the
Penman-Monteith method and then applies an aridity correction factor. The
estimated potential evapotranspiration which is computed by CROPWAT program is
converted to open water evaporation from the principle as stated in [16]. It says, with
a depth of water higher than 5m and if it is clears of turbidity, the conversion factor
ranges from 0.65 to 1.25 for temperate climate condition. For Ethiopia, the aridity
correction factor is estimated to be 1.2 [29, 30].

Table: 4.1. Summary of computed evaporation value (mm)
Project
Name Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Megech 152 147 179 169 176 146 121 126 147 154 145 142
Gumera- 133.
A 1 140.4 180.1 193.8 206.1 174 291.8 261.8 147.0 186.9 142.4 129.2
Ribb 152 147 179 169 176 146 121 126 147 154 145 142
Gilgel 133.
Abbay-B 1 140.4 180.1 193.8 206.1 174 291.8 261.8 147.0 186.9 142.4 129.2
Table: 4. 2. Rainfall stations in the study area

S.No Station Latitude Longitude Altitude
Name (Deg. and min.) (Deg. and min.) (m asl.)
0 0
1 Enjibara 10 58‟ 36 54‟ 2670
2 Gorgora 12015‟ 37018‟ 1830
3 Gondar 12033‟ 37025‟ 1967
4 Zege 11041‟ 37019‟ 1800
5 Maksegnit 12022‟ 37033‟ 1450
6 DebreTabore 12014‟ 37002‟ 1800
7 Aykel(chilga) 12032‟ 37003‟ 2150
8 Bahir Dar 11036‟ 37025‟ 1770
9 Dangila 11017‟ 36054‟ 2140
10 Woreta 11055‟ 37041‟ 1980
Table: 4. 3. Representative stations of the respective projects

S.No Name of Stations used for filling missing Representative station
reservoirs Records
1 Megech Gorgora, Gonder, Maksegnit and Gonder
Chilga
2 Ribb Zege, Bahir Dar and D/Tabor Debre Tabor
3 Gumera Bahir Dar, Debre Tabor, Zege, Bahir Dar
Wereta

4.2.6. Estimating the Missing Data
Twenty years of rainfall data of seven stations were collected at seven stations in
the sub-basin.
Various methods are available to estimate missing rainfall records of gauged
stations. The methods used for the analysis of data in this study are the normal-ratio
method.
The normal-Ratio method (NRM) is used where the mean annual precipitation of
any of the adjacent stations exceeds the station in question by more than 10% and it
Nx  PA P P P 
is given as Px    B  C ..... n  -------------------------------------- (4.1)
n  N A N B NC Nn 
Where: PX is the precipitation for the station with missing records

PA, PB, PC…Pn are the adjacent stations precipitation
NA, NB, NC, NX & Nn are long-term mean annual precipitation values at the
respective stations.
Sample calculation of estimating the missing rainfall of Bahir Dar rainfall station in
Month of April of year 1991 is shown as follows:
Table: 4. 4. Stations used to fill missing rainfall at Bahir Dar gauging stations
S.No Name of the Long term mean annual Station precipitation
stations rainfall (mm) (mm)
1 Bahir Dar Nx = 933 Px

2 Zege N1 =1520 65.7
3 Debre Tabor N2 = 1465 63.4
4 Enjibara N3 = 2370 102.5

Nx  P1 P P 
Px    2  3 
3  N1 N 2 N 3 
933  65.7 63.4 102.5 
Px     
3  1520 1465 2370 
Px = 40.35 mm
4.2.7. Quality checking
A time series observation data is relatively constant and homogeneous if the

periodic data are proportional to an appropriate simultaneous period.
This proportionality can be tested by double mass curve analysis (DMCA) in which
accumulated rainfall data is plotted against the mean value or the sum of all
stations. In DMC analysis the graph is plotted between the cumulative rainfalls of a
single station as ordinate and the cumulative rainfall of the group of stations as
abscissa. The DMC for Bahir Dar and Gonder is shown in fig. 4.2 and 4.3
respectively. The other rainfall stations were analyzed with this method and there
was no break in the slope of the curve which implies that there is no inconsistency in
all stations. The DMC constructed for the stations were shown in appendix fig.B-1.

Double Mass Curve Gondar

25000
Cummulative Annual Rainfall,Gondar
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
876.3
2900
4603
6254
8126
10947
13507
16174
17930
19820
Group M e an Annual Cum m ulative Rainfall
Figure: 4. 2. Double mass curve for Gonder rainfall station
Double Mass Curve B/Dar

35000
30000
25000
B/Dar
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
1640
3373
5002
6473
8898
10528
12439
14173
15632
17469
19477
21270
23301
25235
26876
28476
30066
31709
33525
35546
Group Mean Annual Rainfall
Figure: 4. 3. Double mass curve for Bahir Dar station

4.2.8. Aerial Precipitation
For hydrological application, it is often necessary to compute estimate of mean

aerial precipitation for a watershed from rain gauge observations. The precipitation
at one geographical point may not be representative of the precipitation on a large
area. For most hydrological analysis, the area distribution of precipitations required
for the representative portion of the watershed. As we have seen in table 4.3, except
Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir three of the four reservoirs assign representative stations
but for Gilgel Abbay because of the rainfall patter (see in appendix –B, fig.B-9)
greatly varies. Hence, the precipitation over Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir is estimated
from aerial precipitation developed using Thiessen polygon (see fig.B-13 in the
appendix). The rainfall gauging stations used for developing Thiessen polygons are
Merawi, Engibara and Dangila.
Table: 4. 5. Relative catchment areas influenced by each station

Item Dangila Engibara Merawi Total Area
Area Km2 829.8 838.5 2164.7 3833
% 21.6 21.9 56.7 100
Mean monthly rainfall at Gilgel Abbay-B Reservoir is estimated using the following
equation and the values are shown in table 4.6.
P1 A1  P2 A2  P3 A3  ...Pn An )
Pi  ( ………………………… (4.2)
A1  A2  A3  ... An

Table: 4. 6. Estimated mean monthly rainfall at Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir

Stations Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Dangila 1.80 2.5 26.1 45.3 141.0 265.4 356.4 371.8 252.7 130.8 29.2 5.5
Enjibara 8.73 7.7 34.7 66.7 207.3 366.0 502.8 533.8 410.1 196.9 51.8 16.1
Merawi 0.20 1.3 26.4 10.6 171.3 310.8 490.9 367.1 291.0 136.4 11.4 5.6
G/Abbay.B 2.4 3.0 28.2 30.4 172.6 313.0 464.4 404.6 308.7 148.4 24.1 7.9
4.3. Hydrological Data
Stream flow records are obtained from the Hydrology Department of Ministry of
Water resources for the following gauging stations. The length of streamflow data
used in this paper is 20 years mean monthly data. Table 4.4 shows the location of
gauging stations from which streamflow data is collected.
Table: 4. 7. Location of Stream flow gauging stations in the study area

Station River Location North East Watersheds
No. (Degree) (Degree) Area(km2)
1007 Megech Near Azezo 12.48 37.45 462
1005 Ribb Near Addis Zemen 12 37.72 1592
1006 Gumera Near Bahir-Dar 11.83 37.63 1394
2002 G/Abbay Near Merawi 11.37 37.03 1664
1009 Upper Ribb Near Debre Tabor 12.05 37.96 844

Watershed
Figure: 4. 4. Location of Stream Gauging Stations
4.3.1. Estimating the Missing Streamflow Data
To fill the missing recorded stream flow gauging data, various methods are
available. The missing values were filled with multiple station correlations. In order
to correlate stations, the stations should have related physiographic, climatic and
drainage characteristics of the catchments, geographic proximity also considered.

Correlation b/n Ribb at A.zemen and Upper Ribb
Ribb at Addis Zemen 40

35 y = 0.5668x - 0.3022
30 2
R = 0.9656
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Upper ribb
Figure: 4. 5. Correlation between gauging stations at Ribb near Adiss Zemen and
Upper Ribb near Debre Tabor.
Correlation Between Megech and Ribb
100
y = 2.4854x - 0.2833
80
R2 = 0.9644 Correlation Between Megech
60
Ribb
and Ribb
40 Linear (Correlation Between
Megech and Ribb)
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Megech
Figure: 4. 6. Correlation between streamflow gauging stations at

Addis Zemen ( for Ribb) and Azezo (for Megech)

4.3.2. Method of Determining the Flow at Desired site
4.3.2.1. Simple Area Ratio Method
The area ratio method is commonly used to determine the flow at the required sites
from the main or tributary rivers stream gauge values. This method uses the
drainage area to interpolate flow values between or near gauged sites on the same
stream. Flow values are transferred from a gauged site, either upstream or
downstream to the un-gauged site. [20]
The recommended guidelines for area ratio method to assess the available stream
flow for the potential assessment purpose can be estimated as
n
 A 
Qsite   site  Q gauge ---------------------------------------- (4.3)
 Agauge 
Where: - Qsite - discharge at the reservoir site
Qgauge-discharge at the gauge site
Asite - drainage area at the reservoir site
Agauge - drainage area at the gauge site
n – Varies between 0.6 and 1.2
This method is used under the following conditions.
Asite
If the Asite is within 20% of the Agauge ( 0.8   1.2 ) then n = 1 to be used [21].
Agauge

Table: 4. 8. Drainage area at dam sites and stream gauging stations

S.No Reservoirs Agauge Asite ASite
2 2 AGauge
(km ) (Km )
1 Megech 462 424 0.9
2 Ribb 1592 685 0.43<0.8
3 Gilgel Abbay-B 1655 2044 1.2
4 Gumera-A 1394 410 0.3<0.8
Area ratio of Megech and Gilgel Abbay-B dam site is in range of 0.8 to 1.2 hence
stream flow at respective dam site is determined by using the simple area ratio
techniques.
Whereas, area ratio for Ribb is less than 0.8, equation 4.3 cannot be applied but we
can estimate from Upper Ribb gauging station which have a drainage area of 844
km2 , it is located near Debre Tabor. There area ratio is 0.81 (685/844) which is
>=0.8 hence equation - 4.3 can be applied.
Stream flow at Gumera-B dam site is estimated using correlation techniques (see
section 4.3.2.2 below).
4.3.2.2. Data Generation Method
Correction to streamflow data is required if a gauging station is not located in the

immediate vicinity of the study site. Standard hydrologic methods should be used to
adjust the streamflow information of the gage to represent flow at each project sites.
Hydrologic characteristics of the watershed such as drainage area, topography, soil,
and precipitation patterns should be considered. Streamflow evaluation at existing
dams is often easier than at undeveloped sites because existing streamflow records
and other hydrologic data can be used.

Correlation technique is used to extend a period of record if one or more sites with
similar flow variations can be found. If good correlation does not exist, other
techniques such as examination of precipitation records should be considered.
The stream flow at Gumera-A, is adopted from the hydrologic report [29] but it is
only eighteen years record, the rest two years is estimated by checking its
correlation with the gauging station near Bahir Dar and it shows good correlation
(see fig. 4.7) and hence from gauging station the streamflow at dam site can be
generated.
Mean monthly stream flow(1987-2004)

Mean monthly stream
150
y = 0.2913x - 0.0648
flow at dam
site(Mm3)
R2 = 0.9992
100
50
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Mean monthly stream flow Gauging station(Mm3)
Figure: 4. 7. Correlation between flow at dam site and at

Gumera-A gauging station.
4.4. Other Data

The data categorized under this are irrigation water demand, domestic water supply
data of Gonder town, Topographic data of the respective watershed and Elevation-
Area-Volume curve of the reservoirs.

1. Irrigation requirement data is collected from draft reports of the respective

projects [4, 28, and 30
Table: 4. 9. Irrigation water requirement of the projects (mm)

Project Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Name
Megech 143 164 170 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 157
Ribb 290 138 155 197 60 0 0 0 0 53 78 17
Gumera-A 251.7 307.4 263.7 131.8 33.2 0 207.4 35.8 86.4 161.0 28.4 259
Gilgel 132.1 173.7 147.3 50.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 84.7 134.5
Abbay-B
2. Gonder water supply. In addition to fulfilling irrigation water demand Megech

reservoir is also proposed for domestic water supply of Gonder town. Hence
water supply demand is incorporated in Megech reservoir operation. The data
of Gonder water supply town after 50 years projection is taken from [30]
3. Topographic data. From top map of scale1:50000 which is collected from

Ethiopian Mapping Agenc and Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of 90m by 90m
resolution analysis using SWAT-2005 and ArcGIS softwares is done to easily
see the nature of the topography and the available potential head for
hydropower but the nature of topography below the proposed reservoirs is
almost flat so that there is no significant head from natural land slope to
generate hydropower. The figures from 3.3 up to 3.6 show the topographic
nature of the study area.
Elevation ~ Area ~Volume curves of the respective reservoirs are taken
from projects draft report as shown in appendix-B, fig.B-2.

CHAPTER – 5 METHODOLOGY 44
CHAPTER FIVE
METHODOLOGY
5.1. Integrating Hydropower
Because hydropower generation is the second objective of the reservoir after

fulfilling irrigation requirements, the reservoir is operated to get as much hydropower
as possible within the constraints of the irrigation release rules. For this purpose,
integrating hydropower generation has been developed in this study.
The integration is based on irrigation and domestic water supply requirement. A

monthly basis is used to define how much water is released for hydropower
generation.
To show the hydropower potentials of the respective projects three reservoir
regulation curves (maximum, minimum, and average limit) are developed as shown
in appendix B-3 up to B-7.
The hydraulic power is given by Pp   0 .  Q  H …………………………………... (5.1)
Where; efficiency ( ) term used in the water power equation represents the
combined efficiencies of the turbine and generator (and in some cases, speed
increasers) Generator efficiency is usually assumed to remain constant at 98
percent for large units and 90 to 95 percent for units smaller than 5 Mw [17].
The smaller standardized Kaplan turbine has an efficiency of 91 percent and an
overall efficiency of 85 percent can be used for this studies.
Flow discharge (Q) used in the water power equation would be the flows that are
available for power generation. Where the sequential streamflow routing method is
used to compute energy, discrete flows must be used for each time increment in the
period being studied.

Net head (H) = Hg -  losses (hf) ………………………………………………….... (5.2)

Where: Hg = gross head.
Losses (hf ) = trash rack and penstock head losses, in m.
For Hg = (FB) - (TW) …………………………………..……………….. (5.3)
Where: FB = forebay elevation (NWL)
TW = tail water elevation
Head losses (hf) include primarily friction losses in the trash rack, intake structure,
and penstock. Hydraulic losses between the entrance to the turbine and the draft
tube exit are accounted for in the turbine efficiency.
For preliminary studies and for analysis of projects with short penstocks, it is usually
adopted affixed penstock head loss based on the average discharge as given by
equation 5.5 as shown below.
A preliminary penstock diameter can be estimated by using a velocity of 17% of the
existing velocity [15].
VR  0.17(2 gH ) 0.5 ………………………….…………………... (5.4)
Where VR = velocity of flow in the penstock at the rated discharge, m/s
g = gravitational constant, 9.81m/s2
H = gross head, m
Normally, VR ≤ 7.6m/s and D ≤ 12.2m.
V 1.9
h f  2.58.k s . 1.1 ……………………………………………....(5.5)
D
Where: hf = friction loss in penstock, m per 1000m of penstock length
D = penstock diameter in m.

Diameter of Megech and Ribb = 2.5m and, and 3m for Gumera, 3 m for Gilgel
Abbay [26, 28, 30]
V = average velocity of flow in penstock, m/s
Ks = a constant representing friction loss coefficient
(For steel penstocks, assume Ks = 0.34)
5.2. Methods of Computing Hydropower Potential
Two analytical techniques are available to determine the energy potential of a

hydropower site, namely
1. Flow-duration curve method non-sequential and
2. The sequential streamflow routing (SSR) method. [13, 24, 15]
5.2.1. Flow-Duration Curve Method

This method has the advantage of being relatively simple and fast, once the flow-
duration curve has been computed. However, it is restricted to run-of-river situations
where the head varies with the flow. This method is not suitable for our cases
because the head in storage reservoir varies independently with flow.
5.2.2. The Sequential Streamflow Routing (SSR) Method

The sequential streamflow routing method uses the continuity equation to route
stremflow through the project. The advantages of SSR are that it can be used to
projects where head varies independently of streamflow and thus it accounts for the
variations in reservoir elevation resulting from reservoir regulation.
The primary disadvantage of SSR is involvement of a trial and error procedure and
hence very tedious. The routings may be daily, weekly, or monthly intervals. The
analysis here is based on monthly intervals.

One of the applications of SSR in storage projects is to maximize firm energy

output; hence this method is applied in this paper to quantify the firm energy.
If hydroelectric power is included as a project purpose, detailed sequential routings
are necessary to develop water management criteria, to coordinate power
production with other project purposes [23].
Power production is a function of both head and flow, which requires a detailed
sequential study when the conservation storage is relatively large and head can be
expected to fluctuate significantly.
Sequential steramflow routing analysis is done using Microsoft Office Excel

Spreadsheet, and Goal Seek function which is imbedded in Excel tools to maximize
the accuracy of iteration (see the format of SSR format in table 5.2).
5.3. Procedures for Computation of Firm and Secondary Power

Based on the above governing equation, the firm and secondary energy estimates
are made by computing successive head and streamflow conditions over the length
of the study period (20 years), as follows:
1. Adjust the reservoir storage equation based on the average value of: Stream
inflow, evaporation, rainfall, irrigation water demand and domestic water
supply (in case of Megech) which are already determined in chapter four.
2. Compute the release at downstream of reservoirs over the length of the
period considered using different scenarios of irrigation land.
3. Adjust the release from the reservoirs by setting a release rule
(See case-1 and 2 below).
4. Assume the initial reservoir storage, 85% of normal reservoir capacity
5. Compute the end storage (using equation 5.8).
6. Estimate the corresponding reservoir pool elevation corresponding to the
storage computed in step-5.

7. Compute the head loss (using equation 5.5).

8. From average tail water depth which is taken from hydrological report
[26, 28, 30], compute the net head using steps 6 up to 8.
9. Assume an average overall efficiency of 85 percent estimate the monthly
available power during the study period considered using power equation 5.1.
10. Compute firm energy output from step-9 (see table 5.2).
11. Compute the secondary power from firm power which is computed in step-10.
12. Repeat steps 3-12, for different irrigated area alternatives to see the probable
options of power integration.
Various operational plans are used in an attempt to maximize power output while
meeting necessary commitments for other project purposes. When the optimum
output is achieved, a water management guide curve can be developed.
The curve is developed based on the following objectives:
 Maximizing firm energy production.
 Minimizing the reduction hectare from initially proposed magnitude.
 Maximizing uniformity in energy production.
 Keeping the reliability of the reservoir ≥ 95%.
To attain these objectives a release rule is set for different cases as follows:
Case-1 Reservoir release during irrigation period
a. When irrigation requirement is less than regulated flow (firm flow release
from the reservoir)
R = I + K*q…………………………………………………………... (5.6)
Where: I = Monthly water requirement. For Megech alt-2, I = summation of
Irrigation requirement and Gonder domestic water supply but for others,
I = only irrigation requirement.
K = A coefficient adjusted by trial and error (%)
q = Regulated firm flow which is computed as
q = C * Q……………………………………………….……………. (5.7)
Where: Q = is mean flow of respective rivers
C = Constant (%)

Table: 5. 1. Estimated Parameters of Gilgel Abbay-B and Megech of alt-2

Reservoir Q(m3/s) C (%) q K (%)
Megech Alt-2 5.7 42.56 2.42 100
Gilgel Abbay-B 66.47 30.09 20 100
The estimated parameters used in reservoir regulation for different scenario of

irrigation area are shown in table 6.2 (see cahapter-6)
For all reservoirs except Megech of alt-2 the above release rule holds true but for
Megech of alt-2, R = I + K*q, if I  7.5 Mm3 otherwise R = I
b. When irrigation requirement is greater than regulated flow
For all reservoirs, R = I
Case-2 Reservoir release during non-irrigation period
1. For reservoir of Megech alt-1, Ribb, Gumera-A, R = q
2. For Gilgel Abbay-B, R = 1.7*q
3. Megech alternative-2, here during non irrigation period there is domestic
water supply for Gonder town hence the release rule is the same as that of case-1.
Based on these release rules for Megech alt-1, Megech alt-2, Ribb, Gumera-A and
Gilgel Abbay-B reservoirs are developed (see chapter-6, and in appendix-B, fig.B-3
up to B-7.
A sample rule curve and release rule chart for Gilgel Abbay-B of 12490 ha irrigable
area is shown below in figure 5.2 and 5.1 respectively:
Table: 5. 2a. Parameters used in SSR for Megech alternative-2

Reservoir Elevation Volume Degree of reliability 95
Characteristics M asl Mm3 Allowable failure 12
Maximum operation Degree
level 1947 181.4311 of regulation ( C ) 42.5613
Minimum operation Regulated firm
level 1914 28.3928 discharge (q), m3/s 2.43
% of irrigation area 100 Iterate here 0
% Regulation (K) 100 Mean flow (Q)= 5.7 m3/s

Table: 5.2b. Sample SSR format for Megech alternative-2

Inflow at Dam Total Irrigation Regulated Release Required
Site Area G.W.S Firm flow(q) Rule ( R ) Flow Storage
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Month (m /s) (Mm ) (Mm /ha) (Mm ) (Mm ) (Mm ) (Mm ) (Mm ) (Mm )
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
154.2
Jan-87 0.25 0.66 0.001 10.5 2.5 6.5 13 13.0 140.9
Feb-87 0.11 0.26 0.002 12 2.5 5.9 14.5 14.5 125.6
Mar-87 0.06 0.17 0.002 12.4 2.9 6.5 15.3 15.3 109.5
Apr-87 0.06 0.15 7E-04 4.83 2.9 6.3 7.71 7.7 101.0
May87 0.85 2.28 0 0 2.9 6.5 9.37 2.9 93.2
Jun-87 2.21 5.73 0 0 2.5 6.3 8.81 2.5 89.6
Jul-87 3.87 10.4 0 0 2.5 6.5 9.02 2.5 91.0
Aug-87 16.4 43.8 0 0 2.5 6.5 9.02 2.5 126.6
Sep-87 3.71 9.62 0 0 2.5 6.3 8.81 2.5 128.4
Oct-87 1.07 2.87 0 0 2.5 6.5 9.02 2.5 122.0
Nov-87 0.54 1.39 9E-04 6.65 2.5 6.3 9.19 9.2 113.7
Dec-87 0.17 0.44 0.002 11.5 2.5 6.5 14 14.0 99.4
Jan-88 0.07 0.19 0.001 10.5 2.5 6.5 13 13.0 85.8
Feb-88 0.09 0.22 0.002 12 2.5 6.1 14.5 14.5 70.8
Mar-88 0.02 0.06 0.002 12.4 2.9 6.5 15.3 15.3 54.9
etc.
---extension of the above table

Reservoir. Reservoir Generated
Area Net Loss elevation Net Elev. Spill Deficit Power
2 3 3 3
(Km ) (m) (Mm ) (m) (m) (Mm ) (Mm ) (Kw)
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
7.3 0.13 1 1943.6 48
6.9 0.15 1 1941.7 46 0 0 1862
6.4 0.14 0.9 1939.3 44 0 0 2187
5.9 0.17 1 1936.7 41 0 0 1958
5.6 0.13 0.7 1935.3 40 0 0 983
5.2 0.09 0.5 1933.6 38 0 0 1107
5 -0 -0 1932.9 37 0 0 1057
5.1 -0.2 -1 1933.2 38 0 0 1055
6.5 -0.1 -1 1939.5 44 0 0 1231
6.5 0.04 0.2 1939.8 44 0 0 1250
6.3 0.07 0.5 1938.7 43 0 0 1210
6 0.13 0.8 1937.4 42 0 0 1235
5.5 0.13 0.7 1934.7 39 0 0 1705
4.8 0.15 0.7 1932.2 37 0 0 1478
4.1 0.14 0.6 1928.8 33 0 0 1604
3.2 0.17 0.5 1924.8 29 0 0 1389

Release Volume, 12490 ha

100
90 Release
80 Volume
Volume, Mm3
70
60
Irr.Req.
50
40
30
20 Firm Flow
10
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Months
Figure: 5. 1. Release rule chart for Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir
Reservoir Water Level, 12490 ha

1905
1900
Minimum
1895 R.W.L
Reservoir .W.L, m asl
1890
1885
Average
1880
R.W.L
1875
1870
1865 Maximum
1860 R.W.L
1855
Months
Figure: 5. 2. Reservoir rule curve for Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir
Sequential routings are used to coordinate power production with irrigation release
and water supply (in case of Megech) to determine the average annual potential
energy available from the reservoirs.
The typical constraints in a reservoir operation [13], including conservation of mass

and other hydrological and hydraulic constraints, minimum and maximum storage
and release, hydropower and water requirements.

During the reservoir operation, the user tries to maximize hydropower generation
under the constraints of irrigation water demand and domestic water supply release.
Hydraulic constraints are defined by the reservoir continuity equation.
S(t+1) = S(t) + I(t) – R(t)  t = 1,2,…,T, ………………………………………..(5.8)
Where S (t+1) is storage at time step t+1, some times called end storage.
S (t) is storage at time step t, initial reservoir content at time t = 1 is assumed to be
85% of its full capacity.
I (t): Reservoir net inflow at time step t (including reservoir inflow, precipitation, and
evaporation).
R (t): Reservoir outflow at time step t (including irrigation water demand, water
supply and additional flow release to get maximum power during non-irrigation
periods.
T: The total number of time steps in the considered period).
When the routing has been carried out for the time period t to t+1, the reservoir
content at time t+1 will be known. The next step is to compute the reservoir content
at t+2 and so on thought the period to be routed.
Constraints that should be fulfilled in reservoir routing are:

1. Maximum and minimum permissible reservoir releases:
Rmin ≤ R (t) ≤ Rmax  t = 1, 2…T…………………………..………….(5.9)

For Megech: 0  Qt  20 [m3/s]
Ribb: 0  Qt  20 [m3/s]
Gumera-A: 0  Qt  20 [m3/s]
Gilgel Abbay-B: 0 ≤ Qt ≤ 70 [m3/s]
2. Maximum and minimum permissible reservoir storages:
Smin ≤ S(t) ≤ Smax  t = 1,2,…,T,.......................................................(5.10)

For Megech: 28.39  St  181.85 [Mm3]
Ribb: 27  St  233 7 [Mm3]
Gumera-A: 34.3  St  306.71 [Mm3]
Gilgel Abbay-B: 138  St  498.745 [Mm3]

3. Maximum and minimum permissible water level at specified sites:
RWLmin ≤ RWL (t) ≤ RWLmax  t = 1, 2… T ……………….…..… (5.11)

For Megech: 1907.5  RWL  1947.1 [m asl]
Ribb: 1901.77  RWL  1940 [m asl]
Gumera-A: 1923.9  RWL  1960 [m asl]
Gilgel Abbay-B: 1871.24  RWL  1900 [m asl]
5.4. Selection of Turbine and Power House
5.4.1. Selection of Turbine
For reservoir of Megech irrigation project there are two alternatives of irrigation
planning is proposed.
1. Irrigating 14622 ha only
2. Irrigating 7311 ha and fulfilling domestic water supply of Gonder town
The installed power generated from this project is computed as follow

E  9.81QH g T ……………………………………………….(5.12)
Where:  = The overall efficiency of turbine and generator

Q = Mean stream flow (m3/s)
H g = Gross head over the turbine (m)
T = Period of generation
For Megech reservoir: Annual energy generation (Gwh) is computed as
E = 9.81*0.85*5.7*(1947.1-1894)*8760/1000000
= 22.11 Gwh/year
Installed power (P) = (E*1000)/ (8760*Pf ) (Mw)………………………………… (5.13)
Where: Pf = Plant factor = (Energy used)/ (Energy available)
It is assumed to be 0.6
P = 22.11 *1000/ (8760*0.6)
= 4.21 Mw
Since the flow is highly variable, two turbines are proposed for Megech Reservoir
this alternative.
Power for unit turbine = 2.11 Mw = Pd
FSL =1947.1m
TWL = 1894.37M
Design head = (FSL-TWL)/1.25………………………...………….…….(5.14)
Hd = 42.184 m
2334
Trial specific speed N s  from U.S Bureau of Reclamation……….(5.15)
Hd
Ns = 359.36 rpm this value is in the range of Kaplan

turbine as shown in table 5.2, and fig. 5.3, is selected for this project.
Specific speed, NS
cs
C
E
d
e
e
I
Ns
Net head, H [1]
Figure: 5. 3. Ranges of specific speed and net head for different turbines

The trial value of N is solved from the specific speed equation using the trial values
of Ns determined in the previous section.
P
From N s  N 5
…………………………………………………….. (5.16)
4
H
Where Ns = specific speed
N = rotational speed (r.p.m)
P = Power developed (Kw)
H = effective head (m)
5
4
359.36 * 42.184
N
2105
N = 841.05 r.p.m
Since the turbine is connected to a synchronous electric generator, it is necessary to

consider asynchronous speed of rotation. For this turbine speed (N) to be
synchronous, the following equation must be fulfilled.
N  120 f
p …………………………………………………….. (5.17)
Where: f = frequency cycle/sec (50-60 Hz c/s)
p = number of poles  (divisible by 4 for head up to 200 m)
(Divisible by 2 for head above 200 m)
P = 120*50/841.05
= 7.13  8
However, as per the latest trends, the number of poles is used as a multiple of four
for better dissipation of magnetic flux though some standard generators are having
a multiple of 2 poles only.

But according to Donald if the head is expected to vary less than 10% from the
design head, the number of poles taken as the lower multiple of four, otherwise take
the next higher poles.
( H Max  H Min )
Head variation = *100% …………………………………… (5.18)
Hd
(51.54  18.37)
Head variation = * 100%
42.184
= 78.63%
Therefore the designed number of poles is 8.
120* 50
The design speed N  = 750 r.p.m
8
Since from design speed value = 750 r.p.m, and design head of 42.184m. Kaplan
turbine is best suitable.
Table: 5. 3. Characteristics range of Kaplan turbine
Type of runner Ns H (m) Efficiency (%)

Kaplan 300-1000 <60 93-95
5.4.2. Selection of Power House
The power house shelters the turbines, generating units, control and auxiliary
equipment, and erection and service areas.
The power house can be either surface power house or underground power house.
Since surface power house is cheaper than underground power house we
recommend surface power house for Megech hydropower.
The powerhouse would be located so as to maximize the available head and
minimize the length of the headrace tunnel; this eliminates the need for an upstream
surge-chamber and allows for the shortest possible tailrace.

The location of power house is determined based on the geological conditions and
nature of the topography. But for the calculation of head loss, we locate the power
house at a distance of 150m downstream of the dam (see the general layout in
appendix Fig. B -12).
The power stations have the structures in the order of
Dam Intake Penstock Power station (turbine) Tailrace Outlet
The penstock is comprised of steel and concrete lined vertical shaft, (diameter 3.5
m, 200 m long). Part of the shaft may be lined with concrete only.

5.5. Economic Evaluation of Megech Irrigation Project
5.5.1. General
As we have seen earlier, the power production increases as the irrigable land
decreases (see fig. 6.7) because of the advantage of gross head. To show the
feasibility of integrating hydropower in the irrigation projects we need to perform the
economic analysis. Therefore, the purpose of the economic analysis is to compare
the economic benefits of irrigation projects and hydropower projects. We have done
the economic analysis only for Megech irrigation project.
5.5.2. Methods of Economic Evaluation

Economic evaluation is measured by computing the values of economic efficiency
measures. Once the economic values of benefits and costs have been derived, the
project‟s economic result can be presented in three forms [12]:
 Benefit-Cost Ratio (B/C ratio)
 Net Present Value (NPV) and
 Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR), in order to confirm whether the
project is feasible or not.
The economic evaluation is computed for an average of 50 years of the scheme life.
Both the cost and benefit streams are discounted at a rate of 10 %.
5.5.2.1. Benefit-Cost Ratio (B/C ratio) Method

A project is evaluated in terms of benefits per one monetary unit of cost. A project
would be worth investing if it meets the criterion where the B/C ratio is greater
than1.
n
Bt
 (1  i)
t 0
t
B/C Ratio  n
…………………………..………………….. (5.19)
Ct

t  0 (1  i )
t
Where: Bt = Benefit at time t, i = Discount rate

Ct = Cost at time t, n = Number of years

5.5.2.2. Net Present Value (NPV)

It is economically feasible if its NPV > 0. When the NPV is positive, it means that the
benefits of the project are greater than its costs.
n
Bt  Ct
NPV   ……………….....…………………….(5.20)
t 0 (1  i ) t
5.5.2.3. Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR)
EIRR is the discount rate at which the NPV is just equal to zero. The criterion for
project selection is that the EIRR must be greater than the social discount rate.
n n
Bt Ct

t  0 (1  r )
t

t  0 (1  r )
t ………………………………………..(5.21)
Where: r = EIRR
5.5.3. Cost of Projects
Generally, the total cost of the projects consists of investment cost on civil, irrigation
cost, and running cost of the project. Further more the administration; legal and
related activities are also incurred under total cost of the project.
Table: 5.4. Investment costs for Megech irrigation project [3]

Name Reservoir Dam Total Irrigation Total Total Total Total
of the capacity cost Dam Cost area Irrigation. Investment project
3
projects Mm $/ha cost $/ha irrigated Cost(M$) Cost cost
M$ ha $/ha (M$)
Megech 181.43 14655 214 8617 14622 102.076 23262 340
N.B: $ = represents US dollar

The following crops are proposed for Megech irrigation project; maize, sorghum,
teff, rice, cotton, haricot bean, pepper and sunflower [3].
As shown in table 5.5, maize is selected as representative crop for Megech
Irrigation area because of the following reasons:
 Its percentage of area coverage is larger than the other proposed crops.
 Its weighted percentage is larger than the other proposed crops.

Table: 5. 5. Comparisons of investment cost on proposed crops for Megech

irrigation project [3, 7]
Propo Total Frequ

sed Yield growing ency Yield Benefit Benefit Weighted
area Harve Quintal/ Birr % of (%) R
S Name of cover Quintal period st ha Birr /ha total a
N Crops age /ha (days) /year /year /Quintal /year = ben n
o (%) =( 4)*(6) (7)*(8) efit [(3)+(10)]/2 k
1 (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (1) (11) 12
1 Maize
35 24 118 2.7 64.8 163 10562.4 23.5 29.3 1
2 sorghum
5 10 130 2.3 23 190 4370 9.7 7.4 6
3 Teff
12 7 130 2.3 16 228.85 3661.6 8.1 10.1 4
4 Rice
15 12 135 2.3 27.6 193.2 5332.3 11.9 13.5 3
5 Cotton
13 9 195 1.6 14.4 206.35 2971.4 6.6 13 2
6 Haricot 5 7 130 2.5 17.5 212.5 3719 9 9.8 7
Pepper 5 1.1 125 2.6 2.86 387.4 1108 8.8 6.9 5

7
Sunflower 10 5 98 3.4 17 780 13260 2.7 6.4 8
8
100 44984.7
It is assumed that the construction (investment) period takes 5 years and the project
will be at full operation for the rest of the period i.e. 45 year.
The annual investment cost of the project is converted in to its present worth by
using present worth factor (PWF) for a service year of the project which is given by:
(1  i )n  1
PWF  ………………………………….….……………. (5.22)
(1  i) n .i
Where: i = Annual interest rate
i = 10 % which is adopted in master plan for the project
under consideration.
n = Estimated life of the project
n = 5 years during the investment and 45 years during operation period.
PWF = 3.79 and 9.86 for n = 5 and 45 respectively.
From table 5.4, the annual investment costs = 23,262*7/5
= 32,566.8 birr/ha/year …. (i)

Operation costs which accounts to be 0.5% investment cost

= 23262*7*0.005 = 814.2 birr/ha/year
In addition to the above costs there are additional costs as shown below which are
calculated for Megech irrigation project [3, 7].
 Urea/DAP fertilizer cost~ 75kg/year/ha =75*110 = 8,250 birr/ha/year
 Agro-chemicals cos~3kg(liter)/year = 3*75 = 225 birr/ha/year
 Labor(man-day)= 88 days * 6 birr/day
= 528 birr/ha/year
 Labor(Ox-day) = 16 days/year/ha*12 birr/day = 192 birr/ha/year
 Livestock = 1.14 Tropical Livestock Unit(TLU) /ha*150 birr/tone*2.28 ton/year,
DM = 389.88 birr/ha/year
Sub total2 = 9,585 birr/ha/year.
Total sum = 814.2 + 9,585 = 10,399 birr/ha/year……………………….. (ii)
Present cost = 32,566.8*3.790787+10,399*9.8628/ (1+0.1) ^4
= 193,506 birr/ha…………………………………….……… (iii)
According to the 1994 census, the total population of the 19 peasant association
(PA) was 50,409 people in 1994. Within 19 PA 23,759 people live inside the
command area.
By 1997, according to the projected growth rate for each wereda, the population is
estimated at 26,880 people, or 5,508 households. The average livestock population
per household (household survey) is 3.4 cattle with 1.02 oxen and 3.35 poultry [3].
1. Sales of Small Ruminants

It is assumed that a household sells 1 medium sized sheep per year and also in the
same year 2 medium sized sheep served for household meat demand.
One sheep* 138 birr = 138.00 birr, a total of 5,508*138 = 760,104 birr/year
From poultry, it is assumed that a household sells 6 hens /year
= 6*10*5,508= 330,480 birr/year
Sub total1 = 330,480 + 760,104 = 1,090,584 birr/year

2. Sale of Animal Hides

Two hides * 40.00 birr = 80.00 birr, a total of 5,508*80 = 440,640 birr/year
3. Sale of Butter
It is assumed that a household has one dairy – cow which gives milk on average for
nine continuous months. It is possible to get 0.25 kg of butter per week from a single
dairy for sale as the respondent farmers said [7].
Income from milk per year = 0.25 kg x 22.00 birr x 4 weeks x 9 months
= 198.00 birr, a total of 5,508*198 = 1,090,584 birr/year
Total income obtained form livestock and livestock products
= sale of small ruminants + sale of animal hide + sale of butter
= 1,090,584 + 440,640 + 1,090,584 = 2,621,808 birr/year
Total income obtained form livestock and livestock products
= 2,621,808/14622 = 179.3 birr/ha/year.
Total benefit from agriculture = Income from crops + income from livestock
and livestock- products
= 10,562.4 birr/ha/year + 179.3 birr/ha/year
= 10,741.7 birr/ha/year……………………….(iv)
179.35 birr/ha/year 10,741.7 birr/ha/year

B            
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ___ 49 50
C            
32,566.8 birr/ha/year 10,399 birr/ha/year
Designation: B = Benefit, C = Cost
Figure: 5.4. Cash flow diagram for Megech irrigation project
The corresponding present worth= 179.3*3.790787+10,562.4*9.8628/ (1+0.1) ^4

= 71,832.5 birr/ha…………………….……..(v)

5.5.4. Case1: Economic Analysis of Irrigation Project

Economic analysis is the major item used for determining the costs and benefits
from the project.
From (iii) and (v), NPV = 71,832.7-193,506 = -121, 673 birr/ha < 0
B/C = 71,832.7/193,506 = 0.37 < 1
The result of economic analysis of Megech irrigation project shows that it is not
economically feasible.
5.5.5. Case-2: Economic Analysis of Hydropower Project

Costs in the case of power integration associated to irrigation dams: In such project
component is introduced turbines, intake, penstock and a powerhouse installed at
the toe of the dam. The power works thus generally includes the main cost of such
development corresponds to the electromechanical equipment of the powerhouse.
Since the cost of the additional power components are small as compared to the
dam cost, a simple formula has been derived for the whole works package
comprising the civil works (with 30% contingencies), penstocks (with 15%
contingencies) and electromechanical and electrical equipment (with 15%
contingencies).
In addition to the above costs, the annual operation and maintenance costs are
estimated to be 0.50% and 2.5% of the construction cost respectively.
The total investment cost of a hydropower project is give by:
C = 1470 P-0.29……………………………………………………... (5.24)
C = cost per installed kW in US $
P = total installed power in MW
The above formula (only valid at reconnaissance level for irrigation projects) [3]
From equation (5.24)
C = 968.89 US$/kW, P = 4.21 Mw or 4210 kw
Total Investment cost = 968.89*7*4210 birr (since 1 US $ = 7 birr in 1997/98 G.C)
= 28,553,188.3 birr
Annual Investment cost = 28,553,188.3 birr/5 = 5,710,638 birr/ha……….. (a)

The economic analysis of the projects could take into account the following annual
operation and maintenance costs, as percentage of construction costs:
 Civil works = 0.50 % * 2,879,874.57= 142,765.94 birr…….........…....(b)

 Equipment = 2.50 % * 2,879,874.57 = 713,829.71 birr……................(c)
Total annual cost of hydropower = (b) +(c) = 856,596 birr/year…. …...….….(d)
7,738,500 birr/year
B       
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ___ 49 50
C            
5,710,638 birr/year 856,596 birr/year
Figure: 5.5. Cash flow diagram for Megech hydropower project
Sum of annual cost at beginning of 5th year = 856,596*9.8628 =8,448,435 birr

Present cost = 5,710,638*3.790787+ 8,448,435/ (1+0.1) ^4
= 27,418,207 birr……………………………….….………….. (e)
In the SCS the general tariff is 0.35 Birr/kWh
Installed capacity = 4210 Kw
The power expected to be generated will be 36.88 GWh/year
The income from selling = 0.35 birr/kWh*22.11*106 KWh/year
= 7,738,500 birr/year……………….…….…..….. (f)
Future benefit at the beginning of 5th year = 9.8628*7738500
= 76,323,278 birr
Present worth = 76,323,278/(1.1)^4 = 52,129,826 birr……….….…..….…(g)
From (e) and (g), NPV = 52,129,826-27,418,207 birr
NPV = 247,116,19 birr >0
B/C = 52129826/27418207= 1.9 >1
EIRR = 18.37 % > 10 %
Each of the above methods shows Megech hydropower project is economically
feasible.

CHAPTER – 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 65
CHAPTER SIX
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
6.1. General
The general objective of this paper is to integrate hydropower in the ongoing

reservoir studies for irrigation development in Lake Tana sub basin. To achieve this
objective different scenarios are set to maximize the firm power without affecting the
irrigated area and with the reduction of the irrigated area by some percentage.
6.2. Option-1: Without Affecting the Extent of Irrigated Land.
6.2.1. Firm and Secondary Power Potential
The proposed dam for irrigation is aimed to irrigate maximum potential with
reliability ranges from 80% to 100% as shown in the draft report for the respective
projects.
A reliability different from 100% indicates there will be a deficit some time in the life
of the project; but firm power by its definition is the power we can get for almost all
the time, i.e. its reliability not less than 95% and above [14]. Based on this concept,
the results of this option are shown in table 6.1. From this option Ribb reservoir has
no significant power without irrigable area reduction whereas best result is attained
from Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir and Megech of alternative two give 5.614 Mw and
607.5 kw respectively at 95% dependability (see table 6.1, fig.6.1 and fig.6.2)

Table: 6. 1. Power generation from option-one

Power Energy Average Gross
Project Firm Power Installed Production Inflow Head
3
Name kw Mw Gwh/year m /s m
Megech
a. Alt-1 35.54 4.21 22.1 5.70 53.1
b. Alt-2 607.53 4.21 22.1 5.70 53.1
Ribb 0 5.05 26.5 7.19 50.5
Gumera-A 129.36 6.73 35.41 9.41 51.5
Gilgel -Abbay-B 5614.80 49 257 66.47 53
Secondary power is the power generated in excess of primary power. We can

quantify its magnitude for a desired percentage of time from power duration curve
by subtracting the firm power from the corresponding total available power. From
the power duration curves prepared for different scenarios we can figure out the firm
and secondary power potential.
Power duration curve and annual monthly power for different scenarios of irrigation
area is shown in appendix-B-3 up to B-7. Figure 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 show the
power duration curves and annual monthly power for Megech of alt-2 and Gilgel
Abbay-B for 100% of proposed irrigation area respectively.
PDC for G.W.S + 7311 ha

2600
2400
2200
2000
1800
Power, kw
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
Figure: 6. 1. Power duration curve of Megech (Alternative-2) reservoir

PDC for 12490 ha

16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
Figure: 6. 2. Power duration curve for Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir
Power, 7311 ha + G.W.S

3000
Minimum Power
2500
Average Minimum Power
2000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
Figure: 6. 3. Annual monthly power of Megech (Alternative-2) reservoir

Power, 12490 ha
16000
Minimum Power
14000
Average Power
12000
Mximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
Figure: 6. 4. Annual monthly power of Gilgel Abbay-B reserrvoir
6.2.2. Discharge Released

Irrigation requirement during summer is almost nil. To maximize power generation
additional regulated discharge is allowed for release during non irrigation period by
trial and error till maximum power achieved and keeping the reliability of 95% and
above.
Based on the release rule as developed earlier for respective reservoir (see chapter-
5), regulated discharge release from reservoir outlet for different scenarios of
irrigation area is shown in appendix from fig. B-3C up to B-7C. These figures
comprises the release volume ( R ) which is computed by trial and error, firm flow or
regulated firm flow (q) and irrigation requirement (I) which is adopted from the
respective projects report. Table 6.2 shows parameters (coefficients) used in
developing release rule and fig.6.5 and 6.6 show sample monthly release volume
chart of Megech alt-2 and Gilgel Abbay-B respectively.

Table: 6. 2. Estimated values of coefficients used in developing release rule

for 95% reservoir reliability
Project Proposed Reduction
Type Area for Area Q C q K
Megech irr.( ha) % ha 5.7 % m3/s %
Alt-1 14622 100 14622 5.7 2.8 0.16 5
95 13890.9 5.7 9.8 0.56 9
90 13159.8 5.7 12.26 0.70 10
85 12428.7 5.7 10.68 0.61 100
80 11697.6 5.7 25.26 1.44 100
75 10966.5 5.7 26.67 1.52 100
70 10235.4 5.7 26.81 1.53 100
65 9504.3 5.7 28.95 1.65 100
60 8773.2 5.7 34.56 1.97 100
55 8042.1 5.7 35.96 2.05 100
50 7311 5.7 40.85 2.33 100
Alt-2 7311+G G+100% G+7311 5.7 42.56 2.43 100
G+95% G+6945 5.7 38.95 2.22 100
G+90% G+6580 5.7 41.75 2.38 100
G+85% G+6214 5.7 44.39 2.53 100
G+80% G+5849 5.7 47.37 2.70 100
G+75% G+5483 5.7 50.65 2.89 100
G+70% G+5118 5.7 53.16 3.03 100
G+65% G+4752 5.7 56.79 3.24 100
G+60% G+4387 5.7 59.1 3.37 100
Gumera-A 14000 100 14000 9.4 5.18 0.49 10
95 13300 9.4 21.25 2.00 18
90 12600 9.4 36.12 3.40 40
85 11900 9.4 44.62 4.20 56.5
80 11200 9.4 50.52 4.76 57
75 10500 9.4 56.05 5.28 58
70 9800 9.4 56.3 5.30 60
65 9100 9.4 58 5.46 68
60 8400 9.4 64.27 6.05 69
55 7700 9.4 66.93 6.30 71
50 7000 9.4 69.9 6.58 73

---continued from the previous table

Ribb 19925 80 15940 7.2 11.67 0.84 4
75 14943.8 7.2 25.15 1.81 4.3
70 13947.5 7.2 30.57 2.20 5.6
65 12951.3 7.2 40.86 2.94 15
60 11955 7.2 48.92 3.52 27
55 10958.8 7.2 53.92 3.88 32
50 9962.5 7.2 59.98 4.32 37.2
G/Abbay-B 12490 100 12490 66.5 30.08 19.99 100
95 11865.5 66.5 30.24 20.10 100
90 11241 66.5 30.48 20.26 100
85 10616.5 66.5 30.76 20.45 100
80 9992 66.5 31.14 20.70 100
75 9367.5 66.5 31.44 20.90 100
70 8743 66.5 31.74 21.10 100
65 8118.5 66.5 32.07 21.32 100
60 7494 66.5 32.42 21.55 100
55 6869.5 66.5 32.79 21.80 100
50 6245 66.5 33.09 22.00 100
N.B: G = Gonder domestic water supply

Release Volume,7311 ha + G.W.S

18
16 Rel;ease Volume
14 Irr. + G. W.S.Req
Volume, Mm3
12 Firm Flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
Figure: 6. 5. Annual monthly release volume of Megech (Alternative-2) project
6.2.3. Rule Curve for Option-1

A rule curve is a guide line for reservoir operation and it is developed based on
detail sequential analysis for a combination of demands (Irrigation release, domestic
water supply and evaporation requirement). Based on this, a rule curve is developed
for 100% irrigable area. The developed curve set for three conditions i.e. for
minimum, average and maximum limits. The minimum curve is the lowest reservoir
level which defines the generation of firm power. To achieve the firm power
reservoir water elevation should not fall below the minimum level. Rule curves
developed for all reservoirs except Ribb are shown in appendix, fig. B-3D, 5D, 6D,
7D. A sample guide curve is shown in fig.6.6 below for Megech alternative two, of
7311ha irrigable land.

Reservoir W.L, 7311 ha + G.W.S

1950
1940 Minimum
R.W.L
Reservoir W.L, masl
1930
1920
Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximum
R.W.L
1890
Months
Figure: 6. 6. Annual monthly reservoir elevation of Megech (Alternative-2) project
6.3. Option-2: With Reduction in Proposed Irrigation Land

This option of maximizing power is done by varying simultaneously both the irrigable
area and release. Even though, reducing irrigation area results in reduced discharge
release at reservoir outlet, it increases the reservoir gross head. But, one can see
the variation of head is very significant rather than discharge variation. Hence,
power generation is considerably increased by reducing the irrigation area (as
shown in figure 6.7).
Relationship Between % of Irrigable Area and Power

Generation
1200
Gumm
1000
era-A
Power (kw)
800
Megech
600
Alt-2
400
200 Megech
Alt-1
0
45 55 65 75 85 95 105
Irrigable Land (%)
Figure: 6. 7. Relationship between power generation and irrigation area

Since the primary purpose of the proposed dams is for irrigation purpose, a criterion
is set not to reduce the irrigated area by more than 50% of the proposed irrigable
area. Based on this different scenario of irrigation areas are analysed in reservoir
sequential routing for 95% reservoir reliability and the results are shown in table 6.3
for different dependability of time.

Table: 6. 3. Summarised power out put for different scenarios of irrigable area
and at 95% reliability of reservoir
Net Dependable Power , kw
Project Reduction Area 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Name % ha % % % % % % % % % % %
0 14622 570.4 68.71 68.7 68.7 63.5 59.7 54.9 50.1 44.8 35.5 24.5
95 13890.9 541.9 242.4 242 242 221 210 190 175 158 120 86.4
Megech
90 13159.8 538.9 300.4 300 300 273 258 233 218 195 144 107
of Alt-1
85 12428.7 550.1 523.5 523 521 470 445 404 376 327 240 187
80 11697.6 618.9 618.9 619 602 554 524 480 444 380 297 221
75 10966.5 653.3 653.3 653 634 581 553 514 468 400 336 233
70 10235.4 656.7 656.7 657 638 589 556 523 471 402 371 234
65 9504.3 709.1 709.1 709 673 640 592 570 507 443 404 253
60 8773.2 846.7 846.7 846 789 745 698 649 595 543 467 302
55 8042.1 980.8 980.8 949 902 852 800 759 686 584 509 350
50 7311 1001 1001 981 926 872 830 775 699 600 512 357
G+100% G+7311 1424 1377 1287 1229 1159 1102 1034 953 865 608 456
Megech G+95% G+6945 1361 1356 1307 1231 1172 1104 1049 964 854 616 490
Of Alt-2 G+90% G+6580 1414 1385 1354 1290 1197 1138 1082 999 864 642 515
G+85% G+6214 1444 1363 1333 1301 1244 1165 1115 1017 839 671 538
G+80% G+5849 1488 1418 1324 1288 1253 1202 1150 1043 813 700 564
G+75% G+5483 1516 1421 1349 1294 1243 1214 1180 1035 827 698 592
G+70% G+5118 1514 1451 1384 1295 1251 1182 1142 1035 835 663 604
G+65% G+4752 1470 1427 1369 1311 1246 1145 1117 1037 874 730 602
G+60% G+4387 1455 1415 1388 1345 1284 1248 1134 1019 838 634 504
100 14000 1946 1806 1480 790 733 644 534 455 178 129 54.3
95 13300 1849 1768 1530 902 768 700 612 548 518 426 205
90 12600 1760 1682 1503 1284 1156 1006 908 841 761 654 300
Gumera
A 85 11900 2212 1773 1671 1551 1472 1296 1147 1087 959 623 395
80 11200 2290 2153 2030 1743 1599 1518 1463 1400 1203 589 546
75 10500 2214 1942 1787 1735 1645 1531 1446 1335 1222 929 635
70 9800 2341 2234 2051 1838 1768 1635 1508 1414 1305 1089 663
65 9100 2300 2225 2077 1985 1935 1828 1662 1571 1459 1199 830
60 8400 2429 2232 2147 2084 1954 1831 1735 1625 1555 1217 893
55 7700 2455 2352 2239 2136 2016 1909 1803 1691 1622 1387 930
50 7000 2421 2360 2296 2231 2077 1993 1896 1827 1746 1442 1092
N.B: G = Gonder domestic water supply

----continued from the previous table

80 15940 867.1 806 410 349 349 333 293 259 226 195 78.3
75 14943.8 853.4 787.1 753 753 658 568 497 430 414 312 169
Ribb
70 13947.5 915.2 915.2 883 812 759 701 628 542 413 342 205
65 12951.3 1223 1128 1045 947 917 878 776 698 517 442 274
60 11955 1376 1298 1183 1096 1043 958 880 771 691 515 328
55 10958.8 1419 1407 1274 1207 1111 1067 937 803 776 564 344
50 9962.5 1564 1486 1402 1330 1228 1140 1008 904 852 537 358
100 12490 10162 10018 9869 9404 9165 8278 7225 6848 6503 5615 4609
95 11865.5 10102 9950 9818 9373 9121 8264 7281 6886 6535 5667 4671
Gilgel 90 11241 10023 9886 9773 9337 9083 8300 7300 6905 6587 5718 4725
Abbay
B 85 10616.5 9954 9848 9736 9293 9050 8351 7342 6939 6649 5768 4774
80 9992 9972 9836 9705 9300 9032 8373 7375 6976 6730 5816 4815
75 9367.5 9941 9811 9666 9279 9002 8362 7387 6977 6796 5866 4863
70 8743 9901 9740 9619 9252 8969 8434 7435 6979 6861 5913 4911
65 8118.5 9894 9731 9554 9199 8917 8466 7488 7001 6932 5963 4956
60 7494 9884 9692 9551 9173 8868 8456 7541 7007 7007 6013 5001
55 6869.5 9881 9697 9522 9155 8888 8447 7612 7088 7061 6062 5042
50 6245 9871 9679 9467 9123 8870 8433 7696 7153 7059 6112 5076
6.3.1. Results of Option-2

Results of second option, i.e. with reduction of area up to 50%, Power duration
curve, monthly power generated, release volume and the developed rule curves of
reservoir operation are listed in appendix fig. B-3 up to B-7 of A, B, C, and D
respectively. Table 6.3 illustrates the dependable power generated for different
scenarios of irrigation area.

6.4. Results of Economic Analysis
Determination of some of the costs used for our analysis needs experience and
detail market survey. We adopt unit costs from the master plan developed in
1998/99.
Since our aim is to compare the economic benefits gained from irrigation and
hydropower, the unit cost doesn‟t alter the results because generally the cost varies
proportionally for both irrigation and hydropower conditions.
The out put result of economic analysis which is done for Megech reservoir shows
that the benefit cost ratio for irrigation project is 0.37 and for hydropower condition
1.9. This indicates that integrating hydropower with irrigation reservoirs is
economically feasible. For different options of irrigable area as cited earlier, we can
come up with the corresponding power generation but the extent of irrigable area
may be determined by social and intangible economic reasons.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS 77
CHAPTER SEVEN
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Conclusion
Hydropower integration is done for Megech of alternative one and two, Gumera-A,
Ribb and Gilgel Abbay-B of which Gilgel Abbay-B project shows better result for firm
power generation. We can get also significant firm power from Megech in both
alternatives and Gumera-A as shown in chapter six. On the other hand Ribb
irrigation project has no considerable firm power with option one.
When we evaluate the projects for option two all of the five projects have substantial
power as shown on table 6.3.
Generally, from the total expenses of hydropower projects large share is allocated
for dams and appurtenant structures. The cost of dams in Lake Tana projects is
more than 63% of the total investment cost. Since most of the expenses are already
incorporated in the irrigation projects, additional expenses for power generation due
to cost of turbine, intake, penstock, generator, civil costs, etc. constituting very small
amount as compared to the total investment costs for full hydropower development
if it were isolated project. The economic analysis (see 5.4.2) demonstrates this fact.
The benefit cost ratio result indicates that Megech irrigation project is not
economically feasible.
Nevertheless, it has been noticed that the household income in the command area
is very small, 295 Birr/year [4] and improving the situation in this area could be a
sufficient reason for implementing the proposed irrigation project.

7.2 Recommendations
Based on the current study the following recommendations can be drawn for
maximum power generation:
 Even though power is a function of reservoir head water level and discharge,
the power is highly fluctuated with head variation due to irrigation release.
Irrespective of the economic analysis and other factors, the power can be
maximized with slight reservoir height increment.
 Since the routing is done manually and it is a trial and error procedure on
spreadsheet, it is cumbersome to analyse variation of power in every hectare
increment and decrement. The power production in every area reduction can
be analysed for detail analysis using latest softwares such as: HEC-5, HEC-
ResSim.…etc.).
 The data, especially irrigation water requirements, are taken from draft
reports and it may be changed during final design in that case the results
found so far may be changed and updated data should be analysed with
time.
 The data considered in this paper is 20 years monthly data and monthly basis
routing a better analysis can be drawn if short time steps and long years of
historical records are considered.
 Since the topography of the projects area is having significant gradient

upstream of the proposed dam location (see fig.3.3 up to 3.6), additional
power generation can be attained from river runoff.

 Economic analysis for other projects should be done to see the feasibility of
the respective projects.
 The best integration should be decided based on the performance of

economic feasibility indicators such as Net Present Value (NPV), Benefit cost
ratio (B/C) and Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) for all the projects.

REFERENCES 80
REFERENCES
1. Adam Harvey, et,al(1993) “Micro-hydro Design Manual”, Publishing SRP

Exeter, Great Britain.
2. Adriaan N. Zomers(2001) “Rural Electrification” Ph.D. thesis, Twenty
University, Press(www.tup.utwente.nl/uk/catalogue/technical/rural-electrification)
3. BCEOM – French Engineering Consultants, in association with ISL and BRGM,
(1999) “Abbay River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan Project”, phase 2
Volume I Main report, volume II part 1 climatology, part 2 Hydrology, Volume VI
part 2 Large dams and Hydropower schemes, phase 3 volume IV part
hydropower schemes 7,Phase 2 section III Volume 2 Dam project profile
(1999) “Abbay River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan Project” phase 3
Volume IV Irrigation and Drainage Prefeasibility studies ,Part 1 GilgelAbbay,
Part 3 Megech, part 5 Ribb
(1998) “Abbay River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan Project”
phase3, part 1, Main Report, Addis Abeba, Ethiopia.
6. Commission of the European communities (1998),”Layman's Handbook on
How to Develop a Small Hydro Site” Second Edition, European Commission.
7. Co-SEARAR(2004),”Abrajit Micro Earth Dam Irrigation Project Socio-
economic Feasibility Level of Study Report” , Bahir Dar
8. Dereje Tadesse (2005) “Evaluation Of Selected Hydropower Potential Sites,
A Case Study In Abbay River Basin, Ethiopia” M.Sc. thesis, Arba Minch
University.
9. Geremew G.Amenu (2000) “Reservoir Inflow for Forcasting and Operation
Planning, the Case of Gilgel-Gibe Hydropower Scheme, Ethiopia”, M.Sc.
thesis, Trodheim.

REFERENCES 81
10. Japanese Institute of Irrigation and Drainage (March1987), “Small-Scale

Hydropower Generation”, Engineering Manual for Irrigation and Drainage,
Japanese.
11. Keneni Elias (2007) “Potential Assessment of Micro Hydropower for Rural
Electrification in Some Selected Sites of Genale-Dawa Basin”, Ethiopia”,
M.Sc. thesis, Arba Minch University, Ethiopia.
12. Leland Blank & Antony Tarquin(2002),”Engineering Economy”, Fifth
Edition,Published by McGraw-Hill, New York
13. Long Le Ngo (October 2006) “Optimizing reservoir operation A case study of
the Hoa Binh reservoir, Vietnam” Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Environment &
Resources Technical University of Denmark.
14. M.M. Dandekar, K.N. Sharma (1990) “Water Power Engineering”,Vikas
Publishing House PVT LTD.
15. Maidment, D.R. (1993) “Handbook of Hydrology”, McGraw-Hill Inc., USA
16. Martin.Smith (1989). “Guidelines for computing crop water requirements
(Crop Evapotranspiration), FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No.56”, Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy
17. Mosonyi E. (1963) “Water Power Development”. Volume One, Publishing
House of the Hungarians academy of Science, Budabest.
18. Paul J. Block (2007) “Integrated Management of the Blue Nile Basin in
Ethiopia, Hydropower and Irrigation Modeling”, University of Colorado
19. R.S.Varsheney(2001), “Hydropower Structures, including canal structures
and small hydro”, Fourth Edition, Published in Nem Chand & Bros
20. Rumenuk, R.P and Grubbs, J.W(1996) “Methods of Estimating Low Flow
Characterstics of Un-gauged Stream in Selected Areas, US Geological
Survey Water Resource Investigations Report 96-4124 Tallassee”, Florida.
21. Sileshi B.(2000) “Investigation of Water Resources Aimed at Multi-Objective
Development with Respect to Limited Data Situation: The Case of Abaya-
Chamo Basin, Ethiopia”, Ph. D. thesis, TU Dresden.
22. Techan Gari Bosona (2004) “Reservoir Operation Planning For Melka
Wakena Hydropower Scheme”, M.Sc. thesis, Arba Minch University, Ethiopia.

REFERENCES 82
23. U.S Army Corps of Engineers (31 October 1997) “Hydrologic Engineering
Requirements for Reservoirs” Civil Engineering manual Publication Number,
EM 1110-2-1420
24. U.S Army Corps of Engineers (31 December 1985) “Engineering and Design –
Hydropower” Civil Engineering manual Publication Number, EM 1110-2-1701.
25. UNESCO, World Water Assessment Program (December 2004) “National
Water Development Final Report For Ethiopia” Addis Ababa – Ethiopia
26. WAPCOS - Water and power consultancy service, (1990) “Preliminary Water
Resource Development Master Plan For Ethiopia” Main report, Annex G
Multipurpose and Major Irrigation Projects.
27. WaterWatch (2006), “Remote Sensing Studies of Tana-Beles Sub Basins.
WaterWatch Remote Sensing Services, A Nile Basin Initiative project”
www.waterwatch.nl
28. Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise, in association with
Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. (Jun 2007) “Gumara
Irrigation Project, Irrigation and Drainage Report”
29. .Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise, in association with
Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. (Jun 2007) “Gumara
Irrigation Project, Meteorological and Hydrological Report”
30. Water Works Design & Supervision Enterprise, in association with
Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. (Jun 2007) “Megech,
Ribb, Irrigation Project, Meteorological and Hydrological Report”
31. . Yilma Demissie E. (2006) “Assessement of Impact of Abbay Basin
Irrigation Development on the Water Resource of the River, A Case of
Tributaries Development Scenario”, M.Sc. thesis, Arba Minch Universrty

APPENDIX-A 83
APPENDICES

APPENDIX-A 84
APPENDIX - A
TABLES

APPENDIX - A 85
Table: A- 1. Gorgora Rainfall Station
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1987 0 0 0 11.6 112.7 64.7 132.3 210 126.5 60.7 34.6 0
1988 0 7.9 0.6 0 34.5 183.6 357.4 286 105.9 68.6 0 0
1989 0 0.355 18.3 37.56 31.2 238.6 293.3 207 46.8 40.9 0 0
1990 4.8 0 2.048 23.39 22.582 91.99 251.5 173 163.9 18.66 0.304 0
1991 0 2.356 0 71.37 22.278 92.31 199.2 209 105.7 64.76 9.99 0.863
1992 0 0.131 0 4.2 24.128 55.9 155.3 308 86.1 59.28 4 0
1993 0 1.3 16.6 33.4 66.5 193.4 125.1 251 117.9 17.6 25.2 0
1994 0 0.253 1.479 8.103 47.259 272.1 335.5 287 176.4 0 11.7 0
1995 0 0 14.8 2.8 88 130.1 297.8 238 110 22.6 0 0
1996 0 0 53.2 68 113.7 316.9 413.8 341 286.8 0 30.7 0
1997 0 0 26 30.2 203.9 138.8 294.9 152 99.7 434.3 91 5.3
1998 0 0 34.9 13.7 54.1 298 376.3 186 91.8 29.1 0 0
1999 9.5 0 0 24 44.1 285.5 225.5 201 50.4 233.4 0 5.2
2000 0 0 0 64.1 35.3 327.5 310.9 191 83.9 161.7 18.2 0
2001 0 0 0 13.9 196.8 149.7 318.9 374 172.9 1.4 4.2 10.3
2002 0 3 3.5 6.7 3.5 238.5 252.6 245 142.1 30 0 0
2003 0 7 4.357 1.155 30.441 158.9 225.3 210 153.4 33.57 0 0
2004 0 0.7 0 52.1 18.8 173.2 311.8 242 136.7 58.7 8.6 2.5
2005 0.6 1.1 45.5 11.7 63.4 176.6 217 198 190 4.5 8.6 0
2006 0 0 0 30.9 112.3 168.6 257.2 298 204.6 93 0 13.2

APPENDIX - A 86
Table: A- 2. Maksegnit Rainfall Station

1987 0 0 8.3 39.8 23.5 121.9 167.1 313 59.7 104.7 17.52 0.951
1988 0 14.65 0.359 4.042 89.4 28.4 315.9 290 63.2 60.8 38.4 0
1989 0 0 10 7 68.153 92.8 268.4 216 71.4 10.1 4.6 4.2
1990 3.7 0 0 18 5.9 90.4 245.8 149 178.4 0 0 0
1991 0 0 0 72.4 22.6 159.6 192.7 194 129.2 16.6 0 0
1992 0 0.4 2.1 24.4 11.2 34.9 114.9 146 155.3 58.9 63.2 29.7
1993 2.8 0 3.6 51.9 102.1 122.3 163.8 151 63.8 39 21.9 1.6
1994 0 0 4.5 7.3 31.5 62.5 133.8 280 90.5 0 41 0
1995 0 0 2.3 26 31.6 68.3 231.8 297 2.4 1.4 2.357 0.3
1996 0 0 46.3 89.9 174.2 350.4 351.8 306 101.9 9.2 45.1 0
1997 0 0 55.2 82.9 175 202.9 369.9 347 54.7 188.2 33.1 1.2
1998 12.6 0 46.4 0 109.4 176 370.9 518 76.9 50.4 0 0
1999 4.2 0 0 6.1 57.6 239.8 543.5 487 134.4 106.9 19.4 9.7
2000 0 0 0 81.2 37.7 168.2 410.9 438 117.1 67.5 5.7 6.4
2001 0 0 11.2 23.1 125.2 262.5 557.2 556 65 56.8 19.1 2.1
2002 0 0.2 12.4 30.2 38.8 125.4 271.5 266 42.5 0 1 0
2003 0 10.2 4.406 1.054 29.236 154.5 217.8 133 145.1 31.46 0 0
2004 4.6 2.7 7.9 43.1 5 118.6 319.6 309 80.1 8.9 40.7 1.1
2005 0 0 39.3 49.1 17.5 145.5 290.3 242 118.7 19.7 0 0
2006 0 0 9.4 21.8 101.8 133.5 436.8 266 120.2 67.6 13.6 0

APPENDIX - A 87
Table: A- 3. Chilga (Aykel) Rainfall Station
1987 3.509 0 3.526 27.4 106.73 168.7 210.4 208 91.9 194.9 4.3 0
1988 0 11.5 0.5 2.9 153.7 153.1 355.7 244 138.6 177.3 29 0
1989 0 0 16.9 87.8 135.2 154.8 320.2 246 135.3 82.2 10.4 0
1990 3.9 0 1.3 32.3 52.2 153.3 257.3 208 237.2 59.4 0 0
1991 0 0 0 231.6 24.103 99.87 195.8 250 149.8 139.1 2.9 2.8
1992 0 0 0 49.5 0 56.36 165.3 223 118.5 64.14 27.2 0
1993 0 1.9 5.1 143.3 112.5 109.3 320.1 233 292.9 117.9 4.2 0.7
1994 0 0.366 2.133 12.1 50.3 281 214.4 273 215.5 42.4 3.7 14.1
1995 0 0 57.9 33.8 111.5 155.9 300.6 320 121.6 41 6.8 0.2
1996 0 6.9 37.8 62.4 72.8 269.3 204.8 196 166.6 30.8 28.3 0
1997 0 0.5 6.1 95.4 156.6 203.4 208.1 195 134.2 227 75.6 0
1998 0 0 17.4 2.7 92.7 235.8 311 326 117.4 124.6 1.6 0
1999 0 0 0 27.7 120.8 157.4 391 274 189.1 154.3 0 4.4
2000 0 0 4.2 81.5 100.7 137.3 268.8 244 202 202.5 45.9 0
2001 0 3.6 2 29.5 144.8 267.3 307.6 290 104.3 120.8 0 0
2002 0 0 0 1 100.7 185 238.4 323 174.6 69.7 0 0
2003 0 6.9 0.3 2.5 34.7 143.1 225.3 223 221 54.8 0 0
2004 0 0 11 50.9 2.5 185.6 320.7 208 138.7 90.8 23.2 0
2005 0.216 3.467 36.8 18.6 40.6 234.8 261.5 72.4 157.1 20.36 7.871 0
2006 2.6 0 2.3 21.2 219.5 115.9 364.6 284 231.2 155.7 0 0

APPENDIX - A 88
Table: A- 4. Zege Rainfall Station
1987 0 0 13.4 200 214.8 225.8 244.9 290 145.5 55.6 0.5 0
1988 0 8.2 0 0 87.2 99.3 422.1 335 243.8 53.1 0 0
1989 0 0 0.2 0.2 130.1 97 335.8 406 93.3 27.1 15.2 0
1990 0 0 0 0 0 28.5 134.4 319 304.8 36.2 0 0.8
1991 6.478 2.487 52.98 65.74 147.19 319.7 1.63 600 399.4 163.8 2.012 2.934
1992 0 0 9.756 99.46 82.087 149.9 332 444 210.4 183.8 73.11 13.88
1993 2.449 2.74 47.9 67.64 168.51 235.4 463 392 301.2 150.9 26.5 1.087
1994 1.968 7.729 7.988 27.07 131.12 275.3 381.6 449 227.7 30.25 22.33 20.32
1995 0.142 2.617 33.62 33.93 62.1 212 557.4 346 172.1 0 0 0
1996 0 0 34.6 32.6 148 323.5 460 411 288.8 20.9 53.1 0
1997 0 0 20.7 2.1 265 240.5 373.4 193 245 204.9 4 2.7
1998 0 0 30.9 0 56.2 271.5 434.7 679 270.5 114.3 0 2.7
1999 39.5 0 0 2 26.7 193.5 552.8 638 176.8 251.1 16.3 0
2000 0 0 0 86.3 102.67 151.2 464.3 516 140.5 148.1 3.6 0
2001 0 0 0 0.9 29.7 268.7 322.8 365 287.7 84.4 10.4 1.3
2002 0 1.4 0 15.4 5 386.7 648.9 508 204.3 37.1 0 0
2003 0 0 0 0 0.1 168.6 572.3 503 344.1 42.1 0.2 0
2004 2.1 0 9.5 1.2 2.1 143.8 538.4 385 305.5 154.3 11.9 0
2005 0 0 78.6 31.9 74.7 199.8 384.4 381 343.8 94 35.2 0
2006 0 0 0 1.6 195.3 189.6 663.6 391 268 162.1 4.015 4.267

APPENDIX - A 89
Table:A- 5. Debre Tabor Rainfall Station
1987 16.1 0.3 58.3 21.4 155.8 146.7 273.8 369.6 56.1 65.1 27.2 0.0
1988 0.1 66.0 3.6 17.2 54.9 223.0 435.1 366.7 261.6 144.3 23.4 3.5
1989 6.2 0.2 84.3 45.8 94.8 85.3 304.7 425.5 139.3 103.6 6.6 37.7
1990 7.9 2.5 8.5 8.6 49.2 129.9 438.2 442.4 287.3 54.3 4.6 0.3
1991 6.2 2.4 51.1 63.4 141.9 308.1 438.6 578.4 385.0 157.9 1.7 2.8
1992 0.0 0.0 12.8 86.0 38.6 115.9 329.5 393.4 133.8 99.7 68.1 5.9
1993 0.8 2.0 86.3 74.5 199.4 137.2 429.8 289.9 208.8 118.6 23.3 1.1
1994 1.8 9.1 7.7 17.0 89.7 237.7 493.8 631.5 248.0 10.0 24.8 31.7
1995 0.0 0.0 22.7 34.6 100.4 73.0 399.7 403.6 186.9 5.0 23.4 25.3
1996 4.3 1.2 49.4 92.1 146.1 187.0 369.4 374.0 155.4 30.6 76.2 4.4
1997 3.4 0.0 73.7 43.1 197.6 215.1 439.7 359.0 197.0 305.0 12.3 82.5
1998 13.6 0.0 21.2 6.9 203.6 126.2 399.6 410.8 245.4 75.9 0.5 0.0
1999 34.5 0.0 0.0 9.5 44.3 181.4 476.5 345.7 182.1 275.0 11.2 19.5
2000 0.0 0.3 6.3 118.3 61.1 168.1 423.6 462.4 232.2 137.8 35.1 0.5
2001 0.0 1.3 17.2 24.0 95.4 197.5 496.7 410.0 184.8 60.1 4.5 7.2
2002 0.4 0.0 60.2 45.1 47.2 203.3 256.6 313.4 132.8 2.9 16.0 18.8
2003 0.0 13.9 24.1 28.1 10.5 86.2 435.7 396.8 221.7 16.7 33.3 14.8
2004 0.5 37.6 33.7 75.5 19.1 141.0 333.7 295.2 120.8 85.8 42.5 12.7
2005 1.3 0.0 34.1 10.3 56.3 224.4 473.6 436.0 384.1 86.8 22.8 0.0
2006 0.0 1.4 6.8 63.2 147.3 170.0 482.2 452.5 255.0 47.5 0.0 7.9

APPENDIX - A 90
Table: A- 6. Bahir Dar Rainfall Station

1987 0.0 0.1 0.8 8.3 197.6 234.5 208.1 302.4 133.3 97.2 9.3 0.0
1988 1.2 26.9 0.0 0.0 31.7 164.9 467.3 273.6 192.2 113.6 31.0 8.8
1989 0.0 0.0 7.9 9.8 123.0 169.6 412.4 513.0 269.2 76.0 16.4 3.3
1990 4.6 6.3 1.0 19.8 15.9 83.6 559.5 463.3 224.2 40.0 0.0 0.0
1991 0.0 0.1 32.5 40.3 60.2 196.1 557.2 368.1 245.0 100.5 0.9 1.8
1992 0.0 0.0 4.3 63.7 49.9 114.4 290.5 446.8 154.1 209.6 65.3 0.0
1993 5.5 0.0 12.2 27.3 106.3 207.8 476.5 362.8 252.0 114.9 18.9 0.0
1994 0.0 0.8 0.0 21.7 103.5 190.3 314.1 272.0 145.6 19.2 3.7 5.6
1995 0.0 4.1 8.4 19.2 76.5 261.4 417.5 259.5 106.2 20.5 8.4 4.7
1996 0.0 0.7 28.0 49.0 99.2 261.6 295.2 359.3 211.9 48.4 26.7 0.0
1997 0.0 0.0 19.4 29.1 237.5 121.7 233.5 217.5 179.7 145.5 23.4 10.1
1998 0.0 0.0 18.8 0.6 107.6 196.5 384.1 358.0 240.6 115.3 1.1 0.0
1999 9.0 0.0 0.0 8.1 50.5 130.9 393.6 485.7 196.3 197.3 3.0 0.0
2000 0.0 0.0 0.3 90.3 61.2 153.7 314.2 517.2 225.8 173.3 27.8 0.0
2001 0.0 0.0 1.0 22.7 54.8 249.3 380.6 562.1 142.5 92.7 12.5 16.9
2002 0.0 1.2 8.2 15.9 2.0 437.2 465.0 405.0 154.9 17.8 0.5 1.0
2003 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.2 239.2 616.2 451.1 258.3 74.2 5.2 5.7
2004 8.7 20.5 5.1 39.2 7.3 144.3 503.3 294.5 232.0 89.9 7.4 0.0
2005 0.7 9.0 85.6 9.9 74.6 188.8 533.3 247.5 278.0 52.8 7.4 0.0
2006 3.1 0.2 0.1 6.7 151.2 225.5 563.9 364.1 211.0 153.7 0.0 3.7

APPENDIX - A 91
Table: A- 7. Dangila Rainfall Station

1987 8.0 0.1 25.5 74.1 232.9 262.4 323.4 383.3 153.7 124.8 15.4 4.4
1988 4.2 15.7 0.0 0.0 91.2 354.4 349.9 384.9 287.6 270.1 29.5 0.0
1989 0.0 0.0 60.3 73.9 157.2 226.8 448.2 369.2 238.5 58.9 4.4 8.5
1990 5.9 0.0 5.2 0.8 62.1 245.4 469.9 479.2 268.0 59.5 5.1 0.3
1991 6.8 2.6 56.0 69.4 142.5 337.6 480.6 633.8 421.8 173.0 2.7 0.0
1992 0.0 0.0 10.3 105.1 86.7 140.6 292.8 345.7 200.6 155.2 85.3 34.9
1993 0.0 2.0 45.9 60.8 166.2 237.7 369.4 344.8 324.2 147.3 15.7 0.0
1994 1.6 6.2 0.0 29.5 135.9 279.9 248.4 355.5 180.0 32.7 35.4 12.8
1995 0.6 0.0 61.1 41.5 130.2 209.2 220.8 263.0 177.9 54.8 3.3 30.4
1996 0.0 1.9 125.3 95.2 182.4 185.6 339.8 385.9 249.7 74.2 43.2 0.3
1997 0.0 0.0 35.7 52.4 235.0 240.1 351.4 369.7 180.4 163.6 90.5 3.4
1998 0.0 0.0 22.7 13.9 186.1 307.5 282.3 333.6 254.2 148.3 6.4 0.0
1999 2.0 0.0 0.8 36.3 243.7 280.8 388.8 370.8 329.5 263.9 35.8 7.8
2000 0.0 7.1 7.5 77.0 135.3 227.4 313.0 436.1 237.8 265.3 70.0 2.5
2001 0.0 0.0 14.5 13.9 157.3 321.3 380.0 253.3 150.3 97.6 3.3 0.0
2002 0.0 0.9 11.9 14.8 52.1 278.8 298.9 345.7 182.7 123.0 30.3 2.0
2003 0.0 4.5 7.5 2.2 23.1 330.6 338.9 279.0 301.9 26.8 55.0 0.0
2004 0.0 9.1 2.3 90.5 60.7 230.5 487.9 363.8 266.6 94.7 21.0 0.0
2005 4.0 0.5 29.2 7.4 80.3 270.9 303.5 344.7 420.9 95.1 25.0 0.0
2006 2.9 0.0 0.0 47.9 258.9 339.7 440.2 392.9 227.6 186.8 6.8 3.0

APPENDIX - A 92
Table:A- 8. Engibara Rainfall Station
1987 20.9 0.0 33.1 70.0 286.0 363.8 555.8 444.3 251.2 297.7 22.8 25.8
1988 8.9 33.4 15.1 9.8 252.6 345.9 452.9 586.9 399.3 163.3 28.9 0
1989 2.6 1.6 80.4 57.4 200.3 342.3 620.4 674.9 288.3 122.5 20.64 20.48
1990 30.4 0.0 45.1 4.2 186.2 221.4 510.2 480.4 418.3 105.4 22.4 0
1991 20.2 7.5 82.6 102.5 229.5 498.4 709.4 935.6 622.7 255.4 3.03 3.431
1992 0.0 0.0 14.0 164.2 194.7 249.2 367 483.9 407.9 223.2 53.9 25.5
1993 0.0 10.9 60.4 142.2 212.9 367.2 436.2 545.3 421.6 239.6 56.4 5
1994 7.0 22.3 0.0 42.6 209.0 435.7 416.1 560.3 383.4 75.4 37.5 42.3
1995 0.0 5.9 61.4 45.6 195.5 266.8 411.1 480.6 389.4 58.4 12.6 23.3
1996 2.6 7.9 76.6 164.8 300.0 297.8 555.1 587.9 247.5 153.2 9.6 0
1997 7.2 3.9 21.2 47.6 317.5 367.9 543.1 515.1 367.4 327.8 272.7 37.2
1998 13.3 0.0 10.3 27.6 262.5 439.2 401.1 441 359.7 249.3 46 4.7
1999 17.4 0.0 0.0 69.3 295.3 517.5 388.4 497.1 441.9 347.3 98 14.5
2000 0.0 0.0 6.5 100.2 186.2 444.6 425.4 536.3 484.9 400.8 62.8 48.4
2001 0.0 20.0 24.2 68.2 191.3 327.6 418.4 521.5 529 137.7 43.5 20.8
2002 21.8 0.0 24.7 29.3 93.3 372.9 576.2 500.2 336.6 159 39.9 2.5
2003 0.0 18.1 61.8 14.9 75.0 375.3 570.4 397.3 402.8 80.2 81.4 4.3
2004 18.8 9.1 21.6 103.4 55.4 320.2 605.1 388 422.3 133.3 71.3 44.1
2005 1.2 5.9 51.0 25.6 76.8 385.2 490 494.9 621.3 140.4 36.85 0
2006 2.2 8.1 4.4 44.8 325.0 380.7 604.1 603.7 406.1 268 15 0

APPENDIX - A 93
Table: A- 9. Gonder Rainfall Station
1987 12.8 0 2.1 36.5 210.6 207.5 232.6 195.2 125.1 90.6 17.4 3.7
1988 0 32.6 0 12.2 62.2 190.5 306.6 304.1 92.1 83.3 7.7 0.7
1989 0 1.4 38.7 32.4 59.7 206.4 269.1 279.7 108.1 34.5 7 11.9
1990 4.2 0 6.5 29.7 18 59.4 361.1 235.2 127.1 1.4 1.2 0
1991 0 9.3 0 93.89 29.308 35.9 285.9 269.9 67.5 64.9 35.9 0
1992 0 0 2.7 51.7 80.7 86.8 249.5 218.2 117.6 79.6 11.9 21.6
1993 0 3.5 30.8 78.5 104.2 166.6 305.4 201.9 136.6 86.7 16.5 0.5
1994 0 1 0 7.8 84.5 156 289.4 265.9 125 37.9 20 2.8
1995 0 0 34.5 23.9 99.3 105.9 283 307.1 91.8 11.9 0.9 19.8
1996 0 4.4 22.2 83.6 183.8 194.7 249.3 290 75.8 67.7 23.2 0.4
1997 0 1.8 28.4 42.8 124.2 176.8 239.9 230.4 33.1 200.3 40.2 13.7
1998 0 0 10 3.7 88.5 169.2 241.3 359.5 79 79.6 3 0
1999 22.2 0 0 26.4 80.1 92.5 285.4 242.5 133.4 239.6 7.1 33.1
2000 0 1.4 2.6 46 38.4 229.5 284.7 232.6 105.5 169.2 1.2 0
2001 0 0.6 2.1 29.4 56 254.8 358.5 310.4 74.5 91.6 10 0
2002 0 1.402 6.895 16.6 87.1 197.4 312.7 247.6 76.8 45.2 5.8 4.2
2003 0 22.1 11.1 0 37.9 244.2 318.7 280.7 134.9 21.7 0 0
2004 1.6 3.7 5.9 37.6 1.4 181.4 378.3 312.3 112.4 67.6 65.7 0
2005 0 11.2 60.8 12.1 24.2 137.5 304.1 274.2 169.3 42.8 17.4 0
2006 0 0 10.8 27.8 152.6 98.7 291.5 305.3 192.5 87.4 29.9 35

APPENDIX - A 94
Table: A- 10. Stations used for the construction of Double Mass Curve Group-I
Gorgora Gonder Makisegn Chilga Group Group Group Group
1 2 3 4 2,3,4 3,4,1 4,1,2 1,2,3
1987 753 1134.1 856.7975 1019.166 1003.354 876.3211 968.7553 914.6325
1988 1797.5 2226.1 1761.744 2284.966 2090.936 1948.070 2102.855 1928.448
1989 2711.01 3275 2514.525 3473.766 3087.763 2899.768 3153.260 2833.513
1990 3462.91 4118.8 3206.125 4478.366 3934.430 3715.798 4020.023 3595.943
1991 4240.839 5011.295 3992.973 5574.679 4859.649 4602.831 4942.271 4415.036
1992 4938.084 5931.595 4633.773 6278.397 5614.588 5283.418 5716.025 5167.817
1993 5786.184 7062.795 5357.073 7618.803 6679.557 6254.020 6822.594 6068.684
1994 6926.078 8053.095 6007.973 8727.301 7596.123 7220.451 7902.158 6995.715
1995 7830.078 9031.195 6671.030 9876.501 8526.242 8125.869 8912.591 7844.101
1996 9454.178 10226.29 8145.830 10952.30 9774.809 9517.436 10210.92 9275.434
1997 10930.57 11357.89 9655.430 12253.90 11089.07 10946.63 11514.12 10647.96
1998 12014.87 12391.69 11016.13 13483.50 12297.10 12171.50 12630.02 11807.56
1999 13093.77 13553.99 12624.93 14802.00 13660.30 13506.90 13816.59 13090.90
2000 14286.57 14665.09 13957.23 16088.90 14903.74 14777.56 15013.52 14302.96
2001 15528.77 15852.99 15635.03 17359.00 16282.34 16174.26 16246.92 15672.26
2002 16453.47 16854.69 16423.43 18451.40 17243.17 17109.43 17253.19 16577.2
2003 17277.49 17925.99 17149.76 19363.30 18146.35 17930.18 18188.93 17451.08
2004 18282.39 19093.89 18091.36 20394.20 19193.15 18922.65 19256.83 18489.21
2005 19199.49 20147.49 19013.36 21247.94 20136.26 19820.26 20198.31 19453.45
2006 20376.79 21378.99 20183.66 22644.94 21402.53 21068.46 21466.91 20646.48

APPENDIX - A 95
Table: A- 11. Stations used for the construction of Double Mass Curve
Group-II
Zege. D/Tabor. B/Dar. Dangila Engibara Group Group Group Group Group
1 2 3 4 5 2,3,4,5 3,4,5,1 4,5,1,2 5,1,2,3 1,2,3,4
1987 1390.904 1190.4 1191.6 1607.937 2371.404 1590.335 1640.461 1640.1 1536.07 1345.21
1988 2639.504 2789.739 2502.8 3395.437 4668.404 3339.095 3301.536 3373.2 3150.11 2831.87
1989 3744.004 4123.786 4103.4 5041.337 7100.208 5092.183 4997.237 5002.3 4767.84 4253.13
1990 4567.604 5557.531 5521.6 6642.680 9124.208 6711.505 6464.023 6473.0 6192.73 5572.35
1991 6331.975 7694.973 7124.322 8969.656 12594.52 9095.868 8755.118 8897.7 8436.44 7530.23
1992 7929.877 8978.673 8522.932 10426.81 14778.02 10676.61 10414.41 10528. 10052.3 8964.57
1993 9789.278 10550.37 10107.13 12140.81 17275.72 12518.51 12328.23 12439. 11930.6 10646.8
1994 11371.28 12353.17 11183.63 13458.71 19507.32 14125.71 13880.23 14172. 13603.8 12091.7
1995 12791.29 13627.77 12370.04 14651.51 21457.92 15526.81 15317.69 15632. 15061.7 13360.1
1996 14563.29 15117.87 13750.04 16335.01 23860.92 17265.96 17127.31 17469. 16823.0 14941.5
1997 16114.89 17046.27 14967.57 18057.21 26689.52 19190.14 18957.30 19476. 18704.5 16546.4
1998 17974.99 18549.97 16390.17 19612.21 28944.22 20874.14 20730.40 21270. 20464.8 18131.8
1999 19871.69 20129.67 17864.57 21572.41 31630.92 22799.39 22734.90 23301. 22374.2 19859.5
2000 21484.56 21775.37 19428.37 23351.44 34327.02 24720.55 24647.85 25234. 24253.8 21509.9
2001 22855.76 23274.07 20963.47 24742.94 36629.22 26402.42 26297.85 26875. 25930.6 22959.0
2002 24662.16 24370.77 22472.17 26084.03 38785.62 27928.15 28000.99 28475. 27572.6 24397.2
2003 26292.16 25652.57 24123.57 27453.53 40867.12 29524.20 29684.09 30066. 29233.8 25880.4
2004 27845.76 26850.67 25475.77 29080.63 43059.72 31116.70 31365.47 31709. 30807.9 27313.2
2005 29469.46 28580.35 26963.37 30662.06 45388.89 32898.67 33120.94 33525. 32600.5 28918.8
2006 31348.78 30214.15 28646.57 32568.76 48050.99 34870.12 35153.77 35545. 34565.1 30694.5

APPENDIX - A 96
Table: A- 12. Stream flow for Megech near Azezo Station

Station Number : 111007
Time-Series Type : Mean Flow (m3/s) Area: 462 sq.km
Latitude : 12:29: 0 N Longitude : 37:27: 0 E
1987 0.269 0.116 0.07 0.064 0.928 2.407 4.213 17.82 4.045 1.169 0.586 0.181
1988 0.078 0.099 0.025 0.016 0.058 0.318 24.21 36.99 10.11 4.304 1.741 0.514
1989 0.263 0.095 0.146 0.176 0.601 2.185 4.415 16.17 4.27 0.4 0.129 0.036
1990 0.121 0.058 0.033 0.028 0.114 0.604 11.05 13.82 7.357 1.172 0.419 0.257
1991 0.135 0.094 0.117 0.221 0.101 2.836 4.462 19.04 4.205 1.349 0.423 0.17
1992 0.103 0.062 0.097 0.42 0.251 0.424 7.685 19.51 15.48 2.528 1.314 0.74
1993 0.309 0.253 0.252 0.292 0.803 3.441 8.921 24.22 13.86 4.395 1.236 0.303
1994 0.323 0.154 0.093 0.086 0.385 2.526 11.71 39.96 12.52 1.531 0.878 0.469
1995 0.251 0.171 0.155 0.147 0.929 3.495 12.02 43.84 6.567 0.468 0.156 0.091
1996 0.028 0.014 0.012 0.194 1.494 11.53 15.27 33.23 7.821 2.056 0.985 0.48
1997 0.297 0.195 0.191 0.192 1.078 6.009 22.8 19.33 4.297 2.882 1.587 0.509
1998 0.205 0.166 0.215 0.2 0.376 2.163 24.88 53.35 16.02 5.778 1.106 2.037
1999 1.772 1.449 1.387 1.5 3.03 2.851 11.99 35.81 18.19 10.79 6.166 4.633
2000 3.796 2.684 2.829 4.014 3.793 5.201 12.71 26.66 12.41 8.79 4.663 3.648
2001 3.089 3.248 4.447 4.545 5.509 2.583 22.06 43.07 9.563 2.736 1.458 0.556
2002 0.372 0.217 0.222 0.142 0.284 1.308 17.91 18.92 7.319 2.659 2.089 1.66
2003 1.321 1.307 1.251 1.123 1.078 6.495 16.76 38.88 11.78 4.843 2.842 2.353
2004 1.591 1.519 1.406 2.093 1.422 4.027 20.81 33.92 9.099 6.049 3.657 2.963
2005 2.539 2.344 2.757 2.386 2.444 16.1 14.57 32.81 18.83 7.995 5.007 3.6261
2006 3.123 2.93 2.807 2.858 4.241 2.177 23.81 58.73 24.04 10.51 7.064 5.3109

APPENDIX - A 97
Table: A- 13. Flow at Megech gauge station (Mm3)
1987 0.72 0.281 0.187 0.166 2.49 6.24 11.28 47.72 10.48 3.13 1.52 0.48
1988 0.209 0.24 0.067 0.043 0.16 0.82 64.85 99.07 26.2 11.5 4.51 1.38
1989 0.704 0.23 0.391 0.456 1.61 5.66 11.83 43.31 11.07 1.07 0.33 0.1
1990 0.324 0.14 0.088 0.075 0.31 1.57 29.6 37.02 19.07 3.14 1.09 0.69
1991 0.362 0.227 0.313 0.573 0.27 7.35 11.95 50.99 10.9 3.61 1.1 0.46
1992 0.276 0.15 0.26 1.125 0.67 1.1 20.58 52.25 40.13 6.77 3.41 1.98
1993 0.828 0.612 0.675 0.757 2.15 8.92 23.89 64.88 35.91 11.8 3.2 0.81
1994 0.865 0.373 0.249 0.23 1.03 6.55 31.36 107 32.45 4.1 2.28 1.26
1995 0.672 0.414 0.415 0.381 2.49 9.06 32.19 117.4 17.02 1.25 0.4 0.24
1996 0.075 0.034 0.032 0.52 4 29.9 40.89 89.01 20.27 5.51 2.55 1.29
1997 0.795 0.472 0.512 0.498 2.89 15.6 61.06 51.78 11.14 7.72 4.11 1.36
1998 0.549 0.402 0.576 0.536 1.01 5.61 66.63 142.9 41.53 15.5 2.87 5.46
1999 4.746 3.505 3.715 3.888 8.12 7.39 32.12 95.9 47.15 28.9 16 12.4
2000 10.17 6.493 7.577 10.75 10.2 13.5 34.03 71.41 32.15 23.5 12.1 9.77
2001 8.274 7.858 11.91 11.78 14.8 6.7 59.1 115.3 24.79 7.33 3.78 1.49
2002 0.996 0.525 0.595 0.38 0.76 3.39 47.96 50.69 18.97 7.12 5.41 4.45
2003 3.538 3.162 3.351 2.911 2.89 16.8 44.9 104.1 30.54 13 7.37 6.3
2004 4.261 3.675 3.766 5.606 3.81 10.4 55.75 90.86 23.58 16.2 9.48 7.94
2005 6.801 5.671 7.384 6.183 6.55 41.7 39.03 87.87 48.81 21.4 13 9.71
2006 8.366 7.088 7.517 7.655 11.4 5.64 63.77 157.3 62.32 28.1 18.3 14.2

APPENDIX - A 98
Time-Series Type : Mean Flow (m3/s)

Latitude : 12: 0: 0 N Longitude : 37:43: 0 E Area : 1592.0 sq km
Table: A-14: Stream flow for Ribb near Addis Zemen Station
1987 0.434 0.251 0.25 0.166 2.317 3.317 6.927 34.95 12.705 1.78 0.73 0.322
1988 0.162 0.123 0.039 0 0.197 2.633 58.64 91.36 47.428 15.34 2.976 1.171
1989 0.99 0.572 0.495 0.506 0.639 4.782 26.93 68.06 22.126 6.911 2.673 1.806
1990 1.153 0.771 0.508 0.471 0.393 1.043 34.32 55.89 45.929 7.833 3.019 2.495
1991 1.831 0.699 0.508 1.301 1.36 20.39 48.57 96.72 70.417 6.227 2.032 1.149
1992 0.425 0.138 0.081 2.032 1 1.102 49.12 123.2 42.275 10.36 21.071 0.991
1993 1.091 0.541 0.389 1.613 4.189 4.807 41.08 54.38 44.819 10.46 2.341 0.62
1994 0.349 0.087 0.053 0.074 0.764 7.221 66.89 95.26 50.059 1.992 0.709 0.445
1995 0.309 0.243 0.231 0.66 0.565 1.42 33.16 71.47 29.139 1.838 1.032 0.828
1996 0.548 0.419 0.602 1.467 7.904 29.167 65.58 83.99 22.321 7.225 2.951 1.368
1997 0.742 0.4 0.659 0.457 4.638 7.617 44.29 52.27 13.02 8.562 7.808 1.631
1998 0.707 0.318 0.258 0.175 1.288 3.856 48.36 66.48 43.012 12.4 3.983 0.945
1999 0.805 0.491 0.363 0.298 0.386 3.416 45.27 70.81 39.862 41.03 12.955 13.08
2000 5.046 0.467 0.303 0.987 0.682 2.009 40.95 77.41 35.076 16.2 5.193 1.499
2001 0.803 0.481 0.492 0.427 0.531 15.312 57.55 73.22 26.7 5.056 1.844 0.881
2002 0.543 0.284 0.286 0.452 0.13 7.594 22.83 46.65 24.059 3.115 1.243 1.226
2003 0.704 0.509 0.565 0.131 0.062 3.974 44.27 65.97 44.303 8.415 4.071 3.103
2004 2.247 1.819 1.375 2.431 1.597 4.83 38.73 55.68 22.251 7.631 3.599 2.306
2005 1.293 0.880 1.585 0.627 0.955 9.082 44.826 60.456 40.669 10.574 4.841 3.406
2006 2.535 1.981 0.563 0.764 5.095 10.551 50.809 81.374 54.444 15.671 8.740 7.063

APPENDIX - A 99
Table: A- 14. Ribb Monthly Flow at Dam site (m3/s)
1987 1.4325 0.8514 0.9179 1.0023 0.8562 3.3828 4.1295 3.585 3.6896 3.7472 1.1574 0.9066
1988 0.5779 0.6347 0.3328 0.1575 0.9528 3.8689 60.684 63.622 18.454 9.7028 3.7277 2.7684
1989 2.5046 2.1857 2.5988 2.3066 1.9243 3.8738 7.7209 50.026 32.38 8.4773 0.9844 0.5855
1990 0.2851 0.1094 0.2186 0.2027 0.1691 0.2345 15.544 25.464 20.883 3.3581 1.1435 0.9025
1991 0.597 0.0763 0.2186 0.3532 0.5852 8.7741 20.9 41.620 32.148 2.6193 0.6895 0.2833
1992 0.1829 0.0594 0.0349 0.6895 0.2148 0.2617 22.352 56.439 19.202 4.521 9.4478 0.2106
1993 0.53 0.3401 0.3855 1.0015 1.6818 1.7255 19.426 19.134 17.838 4.5647 0.6542 0.0399
1994 0.1542 0.0909 0.0852 0.0893 0.198 3.0765 30.526 43.576 22.783 0.6711 0.241 0.1355
1995 0.0641 0.0381 0.3806 0.9788 0.0146 0.8116 20.699 32.633 25.211 1.6411 0.2295 0.1356
1996 0.2776 0.1737 0.4959 1.2921 2.6799 11.59 45.413 59.754 17.211 2.6767 1.6557 1.1225
1997 0.6891 0.4529 0.5795 0.8993 1.6395 4.7049 38.327 38.668 6.7096 2.6166 7.8077 1.6638
1998 1.4203 0.0893 0.0641 0.0357 0.4618 1.5924 41.447 30.336 20.359 3.1166 0.3271 0.1355
1999 0.53 0.2492 0.1583 0.1161 0.1615 1.258 13.974 18.074 5.4768 5.3769 2.4754 1.3075
2000 0.8433 0.5657 0.4074 1.163 0.6412 2.7254 14.965 27.895 10.506 7.2315 4.6651 2.3634
2001 2.0152 1.6882 0.6793 0.6956 0.6744 4.2139 26.229 33.435 14.434 5.8769 4.364 0.823
2002 0.6907 0.5032 0.6509 0.5349 0.3685 4.4533 6.6779 4.2877 2.1094 0.646 0.3693 0.3263
2003 0.1642 0.1184 0.1776 0.036 0.0364 0.8326 11.066 16.066 12.005 2.7975 1.2544 0.7512
2004 0.5057 0.4734 0.3497 0.7474 0.416 1.9766 10.497 13.160 7.4898 3.5647 1.4269 0.965
2005 0.3497 0.1596 0.4837 0.0431 0.1938 3.9326 20.376 27.565 18.463 4.6188 1.9818 1.3215
2006 0.9211 0.6659 0.0136 0.1061 2.0987 4.6082 23.128 37.188 24.8 6.9637 3.7753 3.0039

APPENDIX - A 100
Table: A- 156. Upper Ribb Gauging Station, Latitude: 12: 3: 0 N, Area: 844.0 sq km
Longitude: 37:59: 0 E, Time-Series Type: Mean Flow (m3/s)
1987 1.765 1.049 1.131 1.235 1.055 4.168 5.088 4.418 4.546 4.617 1.426 1.1
1988 0.712 0.782 0.41 0.194 1.174 4.767 74.77 78.39 22.737 11.96 4.593 3.4
1989 3.086 2.693 3.202 2.842 2.371 4.773 9.513 61.64 39.896 10.45 1.2129 0.7
1990 0.3513 0.135 0.269 0.2497 0.208 0.289 19.153 31.38 25.73 4.138 1.409 1.1
1991 0.7356 0.094 0.269 0.4352 0.721 10.811 25.752 51.28 39.61 3.227 0.8495 0.3
1992 0.2253 0.073 0.043 0.8495 0.265 0.3224 27.541 69.54 23.659 5.57 11.641 0.2
1993 0.653 0.419 0.475 1.234 2.072 2.126 23.935 23.58 21.979 5.624 0.806 0.1
1994 0.19 0.112 0.105 0.11 0.244 3.7907 37.612 53.69 28.071 0.827 0.297 0.2
1995 0.079 0.047 0.469 1.206 0.018 1 25.504 40.21 31.063 2.022 0.2827 0.2
1996 0.342 0.214 0.611 1.592 3.302 14.28 55.954 73.63 21.206 3.298 2.04 1.4
1997 0.849 0.558 0.714 1.108 2.02 5.797 47.223 47.64 8.267 3.224 9.62 2.1
1998 1.75 0.11 0.079 0.044 0.569 1.962 51.067 37.38 25.085 3.84 0.403 0.2
1999 0.653 0.307 0.195 0.143 0.199 1.55 17.218 22.27 6.748 6.625 3.05 1.6
2000 1.039 0.697 0.502 1.433 0.79 3.358 18.439 34.37 12.945 8.91 5.748 2.9
2001 2.483 2.08 0.837 0.857 0.831 5.192 32.318 41.2 17.784 7.241 5.377 1.0
2002 0.851 0.62 0.802 0.659 0.454 5.487 8.228 5.283 2.599 0.796 0.455 0.4
2003 0.2024 0.146 0.219 0.0444 0.045 1.0258 13.635 19.8 14.792 3.447 1.5455 0.9
2004 0.6231 0.583 0.431 0.9209 0.513 2.4354 12.933 16.21 9.2283 4.392 1.7581 1.2
2005 0.4309 0.197 0.596 0.0531 0.239 4.8454 25.105 33.96 22.749 5.691 2.4418 1.6
2006 1.1349 0.82 0.017 0.1307 2.586 5.6779 28.496 45.82 30.556 8.58 4.6516 3.7

APPENDIX - A 101
Table: A- 167. Gumera Station near Bahir Dar
Time-Series Type : Flow (m3/s) , Area : 1394.0 sq km

Latitude : 11:50: 0 N Longitude : 37:38: 0 E
year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1987 4.2 2.4 1.8 1.1 9 38.8 92.5 340.1 110.6 27.4 12.4 5.5
1988 2.5 1.4 0.9 0.6 1.1 5.2 436.7 426.4 229.1 147 25.5 11.8
1989 5.7 2.7 1.6 1.3 2.3 27.6 166.8 391.1 169.7 41.921 14.939 13.2
1990 6.4 2.2 1.6 1 1.4 3.5 144.2 487.1 285.3 53.4 10.7 5.2
1991 2.7 1.3 1 1.2 2.2 37.8 224.6 452.9 200.7 63.5 12.5 12.9
1992 8.2 5.2 7.4 2.2 5.1 5.4 114.4 426.9 184.9 135.8 38.7 17.1
1993 7.2 3.2 1.9 2.4 5.7 26.6 232.3 376.5 261.3 101.2 30.4 12.7
1994 6.4 3.2 1.6 0.9 2.8 52.2 230 523 317.6 53.7 18.2 11.1
1995 5.8 4.1 4 3.6 4.2 13 167.1 402.1 256.4 66.5 44.1 34.1
1996 19.9 9 9.1 9 21.8 148.4 481.9 540 264.5 99 57.4 40.8
1997 28.9 19.3 17.8 12.9 20.3 125.4 381.9 402.7 207.5 158.8 141.7 45.3
1998 9.551 7.442 7.3 6.8502 5.1 27.8 181 372.2 240.7 74.4 22 22.4
1999 17.4 3.9 1.8 1.3 1.8 12.9 198.4 263.8 136.1 160.5 32.7 24.02
2000 36.82 9.465 8.76 6.6 4.7 34.5 292.8 467.5 136.1 130 33.1 13.9
2001 8.3 4.6 4.5 3.3 4.7 37.5 249.2 537.9 149.9 36.7 15.2 9.7
2002 7.4 4.8 5.2 4.3 3.1 64.6 246.7 421.1 207.7 33.1 17.6 13.7
2003 10.1 7.4 8.3 6.1 5.9 37.5 241.6 471.9 407.4 124.9 20.7 13.5
2004 9.9 7.9 6.9 7.8 6.4 24.4 209.4 284.8 137.9 55 21 14.1
2005 4.13 3.388 3.73 2.6979 3.546 14.26 76.8 121.7 132.13 40.333 9.2774 6.037
2006 4.391 3.585 3.41 3.3684 6.764 17.77 90.67 189.29 140.84 24.924 9.7686 5.862

APPENDIX - A 102
Table: A- 178. Mean Monthly Streamflow at Gumera Dam, Million m3)
1987 2.11 1.22 0.93 0.62 4.05 15.8 35.1 118 41.33 11.79 5.601 2.654
1988 1.29 0.73 0.52 0.37 0.61 2.48 145 144.9 81.61 53.9 10.87 5.402
1989 2.76 1.39 0.88 0.73 1.17 12 80.5 133.8 61.8 21.02 12.83 5.961
1990 3.06 1.15 0.87 0.58 0.78 1.68 52.2 163.4 100.3 21.12 4.923 2.528
1991 1.35 0.7 0.57 0.63 1.14 14.1 80.5 148.3 71.84 25 5.593 5.843
1992 3.84 2.43 3.38 1.14 2.42 2.51 43.8 144.5 67.01 50.48 15.93 7.56
1993 1.6 0.7 0.42 0.53 1.27 5.87 51.2 83.01 57.62 22.31 6.698 2.803
1994 1.41 0.7 0.36 0.2 0.61 11.5 50.7 115.3 70.02 11.84 4.012 2.449
1995 1.28 0.89 0.87 0.8 0.94 2.87 36.8 88.67 56.54 14.65 9.731 7.528
1996 4.4 1.91 2.01 1.98 4.81 9.87 106 119.1 58.33 21.84 12.66 8.977
1997 6.38 4.27 3.91 2.85 4.46 12.4 84.2 88.8 45.75 35.01 31.26 10
1998 1.43 0.8 0.7 0.48 1.12 6.12 39.9 82.06 53.07 16.41 4.847 4.945
1999 3.84 0.86 0.4 0.29 0.4 2.83 43.8 58.17 30.02 35.4 7.201 2.473
2000 1.95 1.1 0.95 1.46 1.04 7.61 64.6 103.1 30.02 28.67 7.299 3.063
2001 1.83 1.02 1 0.73 1.03 8.28 54.9 118.6 33.05 8.087 3.361 2.15
2002 1.63 1.06 1.15 0.95 0.68 14.2 54.4 92.85 45.8 7.292 3.871 3.024
2003 2.24 1.64 1.83 1.33 1.31 8.28 53.3 104.1 89.83 27.55 4.557 2.984
2004 9.95 7.88 6.9 7.77 6.44 24.4 209 284.8 137.9 55.03 21 14.13
2005 1.138 0.922 1.02 0.721 0.97 4.09 22.3 35.39 38.42 11.68 2.638 1.694
2006 1.214 0.98 0.93 0.916 1.91 5.11 26.3 55.08 40.96 7.196 2.781 1.643

APPENDIX - A 103
Table: A- 189. Stream flow of Gilgel Abbay River at Gauging station

Station Name : GELGEL A. NR. MARAWI, Station Number : 111002
3
Time-Series Type : Flow (m /s) Area : 1664.0 sq km
Latitude : 11:22: 0 N Longitude : 37: 2: 0 E
Yea Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1973 5.0 3.9 3.0 3.0 8.8 31.7 96.9 199.7 148.2 70.7 18.8 8.7
1974 6.1 4.2 3.5 2.4 13.4 57.5 178.4 192.0 158.0 42.1 13.8 7.6
1975 4.2 3.6 3.1 2.5 2.9 23.7 171.2 235.9 172.0 58.0 25.0 13.4
1976 7.1 4.8 3.9 3.6 7.2 50.2 148.5 223.6 139.0 36.2 27.8 10.3
1977 6.1 4.4 4.0 2.8 5.7 42.2 175.4 204.9 143.6 68.5 23.8 10.6
1978 6.0 4.3 3.8 3.5 3.8 23.1 126.8 189.8 197.4 77.5 19.5 10.9
1979 6.9 4.2 2.8 2.5 4.3 29.0 134.3 193.5 164.2 61.5 22.5 11.3
1980 7.0 5.2 3.8 4.7 4.9 41.1 187.9 236.9 141.9 46.1 15.0 8.0
1981 5.2 3.6 2.7 2.5 6.7 23.5 227.7 215.6 166.0 53.6 13.6 7.3
1982 5.8 4.9 5.2 3.1 4.8 31.3 160.0 196.9 132.4 57.7 13.2 7.4
1983 4.8 3.4 2.4 1.7 4.0 18.4 102.2 213.5 130.5 66.9 22.2 7.5
1984 4.9 3.3 2.7 2.0 5.7 62.7 155.7 195.9 145.8 32.3 10.1 6.7
1985 4.1 2.8 2.5 3.0 9.9 36.4 167.8 231.8 155.2 37.0 10.1 6.6
1986 2.2 2.2 2.8 1.9 1.9 26.2 126.7 143.7 127.2 47.9 11.4 7.1
1987 4.0 3.0 2.5 2.2 11.9 55.2 133.7 161.7 126.1 63.2 20.0 9.3
1988 5.8 4.2 2.7 1.9 4.1 28.8 155.5 207.6 155.5 72.2 19.7 8.4
1989 4.9 3.0 3.3 3.0 7.2 39.4 194.8 230.2 139.2 44.3 12.9 8.6
1990 5.1 3.6 2.6 2.0 2.9 13.9 101.6 176.3 133.5 41.1 9.8 5.4
1991 3.7 2.5 2.1 4.4 8.9 55.3 190.6 217.3 162.8 42.1 11.0 6.3
1992 4.2 2.9 2.3 3.8 6.6 30.6 121.4 195.6 145.1 89.8 29.4 10.9
1993 5.5 3.8 3.2 5.0 9.0 74.9 187.9 179.3 154.8 89.7 22.9 8.2
1994 4.8 3.4 2.4 2.1 7.2 61.5 147.6 177.6 118.6 23.4 10.5 6.4
1995 3.6 2.5 1.9 1.9 11.1 45.2 92.6 199.0 131.8 25.4 10.2 5.6
1996 3.6 2.3 4.1 3.9 19.7 85.2 203.0 223.5 141.7 85.5 68.1 47.9
1997 2.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 18.4 60.8 160.9 196.7 125.1 63.6 35.7 10.5
1998 4.5 2.5 1.9 1.3 10.1 64.3 142.7 184.6 153.7 96.1 18.3 6.5
1999 3.7 2.1 1.4 1.7 8.9 57.7 163.0 186.9 127.1 122.5 19.7 7.6
2000 3.4 2.0 1.5 3.1 6.1 49.0 146.0 203.2 134.2 127.0 36.7 9.0
2001 3.8 2.3 1.8 1.8 6.0 67.2 150.9 205.9 128.7 41.2 13.9 5.4
2002 3.1 1.8 1.4 1.0 1.0 38.2 144.9 168.4 99.7 28.9 10.1 4.2
2003 2.2 1.5 1.2 0.7 0.9 43.5 178.4 184.2 173.8 32.7 10.2 4.0
2004 2.3 1.4 0.9 2.3 1.1 27.4 137.4 166.0 137.7 64.0 11.4 5.1
2005 2.6 1.5 1.6 1.0 1.7 33.7 130.9 118.2 120.2 50.3 15.8 14.2
2006 12.2 9.8 8.6 8.1 32.1 84.2 139.8 217.1 187.4 75.3 49.2 33.4

APPENDIX - A 104
Table: A- 20. Flow at Gilgel Abbay-B Dam site (m3/s)
Yea Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1987 4.9 3.7 3.1 2.7 14.7 68.2 165.1 199.8 155.8 78.1 24.7 11.5
1988 7.2 5.2 3.3 2.3 5.1 35.6 192.0 256.4 192.0 89.2 24.3 10.4
1989 6.1 3.8 4.0 3.7 8.9 48.7 240.6 284.3 172.0 54.7 16.0 10.6
1990 6.3 4.4 3.2 2.4 3.6 17.2 125.5 217.7 164.9 50.7 12.0 6.7
1991 4.6 3.1 2.5 5.4 10.9 68.3 235.4 268.4 201.0 52.0 13.6 7.8
1992 5.2 3.6 2.8 4.7 8.2 37.7 150.0 241.6 179.2 110.9 36.3 13.5
1993 6.8 4.7 3.9 6.2 11.1 92.5 232.1 221.5 191.2 110.8 28.3 10.1
1994 5.9 4.2 3.0 2.6 8.9 76.0 182.3 219.4 146.5 28.9 12.9 7.9
1995 4.4 3.1 2.3 2.4 13.7 55.8 114.4 245.7 162.7 31.4 12.6 7.0
1996 4.4 2.8 5.0 4.8 24.4 105.2 250.7 276.1 175.0 105.6 84.1 59.1
1997 3.6 2.4 2.2 2.1 22.7 75.1 198.7 243.0 154.5 78.5 44.1 13.0
1998 5.5 3.1 2.3 1.6 12.5 79.4 176.2 227.9 189.9 118.7 22.6 8.1
1999 4.6 2.6 1.8 2.1 11.0 71.3 201.4 230.8 157.0 151.3 24.3 9.4
2000 4.2 2.5 1.8 3.8 7.5 60.6 180.4 251.0 165.7 156.8 45.3 11.1
2001 4.7 2.9 2.2 2.2 7.4 83.0 186.4 254.3 158.9 50.9 17.1 6.7
2002 3.8 2.2 1.7 1.3 1.2 47.2 179.0 207.9 123.1 35.8 12.5 5.2
2003 2.7 1.9 1.5 0.8 1.1 53.7 220.4 227.5 214.6 40.4 12.6 5.0
2004 2.9 1.7 1.2 2.8 1.4 33.9 169.7 205.0 170.0 79.0 14.1 6.3
2005 3.2 1.8 2.0 1.3 2.1 41.6 161.7 146.0 148.5 62.1 19.5 17.5
2006 15.0 12.1 10.6 10.0 39.6 103.9 172.7 268.1 231.4 93.0 60.8 41.2

APPENDIX - A 105
Table: A- 191. Climate data for evaporation computation

Bahir Dar
Elements Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
o
T Max( C) 26.5 34.3 37.5 39.3 40 35.6 32.5 32.1 31.9 32.4 31 30.3
o
T Min( C) 7.4 19.3 22.5 26 27.2 25 23.8 23.5 23.3 22.4 19.2 16.6
R.H (%) 60 53 50 49 59 72 79 82 76 70 67 63
S.H(hour) 9.7 10.3 10.7 10.1 9.2 6.5 4.9 5.4 6 9.5 8.4 9.3
W.S(Km/day) 43.2 51.8 51.8 69.1 60.5 60.5 51.8 51.8 51.8 51.8 51.8 43.2
Gonder
o
T Max( C) 27.8 28.9 29.9 29.5 28.6 25 22.9 22.9 25.3 26.2 27 27.2
o
T Min( C) 11.5 12.9 14.8 15.7 15.5 14.1 13.3 13.3 12.9 12.6 12.4 11.8
R.H (%) 41.9 38.4 37.2 40.3 50.4 63 78.9 79.2 72.3 60.8 50.8 45.6
S.H(hour) 9.4 8.9 8.3 7.6 7.1 4.9 4.2 5 7.2 7.5 8.7 8.9
W.S(Km/day) 138 153 162 155 162 164 124 109 121 117 125 131
Debre Tabor
o
T Max( C) 23.9 24.4 24.5 24.8 24.3 22.3 19.1 19 20.4 21 21.6 22
o
T Min( C) 8.6 9.6 10.4 11 11 10 9.4 9.4 8.9 8.6 8.4 8.1
R.H (%) 46.7 43.8 46.5 48.9 57.4 75.9 86.8 86.6 80.1 71.2 61.9 56
S.H(hour) 8.2 7.8 7.8 7.1 7.3 5.4 4.6 5.2 6.6 7.2 7.8 8
W. 101 109 111 111 118 120 94.8 107 104 83.1 84.8 92.2
S(Km/day)
Dangila
o
T Max( C) 25.9 27.5 28.1 27.9 26.6 24.1 22.1 22.3 23.6 24.3 24.9 25.6
o
T Min( C) 4.2 5.8 7.8 9.3 10.1 10.6 10.9 10.9 10.3 8.8 6.9 4.9
R.H (%) 60 62 58 77 71 79 83 83 81 75 68 64
S.H(hour) 9 9.7 7.9 9.1 7.5 5.2 3.6 5.1 6.5 7.1 9.1 7.9
W.S(Km/day) 69.1 69.1 69.1 77.8 77.8 77.8 77.8 77.8 69.1 69.1 60.5 60.5
N.B: T = Tempratur, R.H = Relative Humidity, S.H = Sunshine Hours, W.S = Wind Speed

APPENDIX - B 106
APPENDIX – B
FIGURES

APPENDIX - B 107
Figure: B- 1. Double mass curve of the rainfall stations in the study area
Double mass curve Gorgora

25000
Rainfall, Gorgora station

Cummulative annual 20000
15000
10000
5000
0
1003
2091
3088
3934
4860
5615
6680
7596
8526
9775
11089
12297
13660
14904
16282
17243
18146
19193
20136
21403
Group mean annual cummulative Rainfall
Double Mass Curve Aykel(Chilga)

25000
20000
Cummulative Average
Rainfall,Chilga(Aykel)
15000
10000
5000
0
914.6
2834
4415
6069
7844
10648
13091
15672
17451
19453
Group Mean Annual Cummulative Rainfall
Double Mass Curve Maksegnit

25000
CummulativeAnnual
Rainfall, Maksegnit
20000
15000
Series1
10000
5000
0
968.8
3153
4942
6823
8913
11514
13817
16247
18189
20198

APPENDIX - B 108
Double Mass Curve Dangila

35000
30000
25000
Dangila
20000
15000
10000
5000
0 1536
4768
8436
11931
15062
18705
22374
25931
29234
32601
Goup Mean Anuual Cummulative Rainfall
Double Mass Curve Zege

35000
30000
25000
Zege
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
1590
5092
9096
12519
15527
19190
22799
26402
29524
32899
Double Mass curve D/Tabor

35000
30000
25000
D/Tabor
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
1640
4997
8755
12328
15318
18957
22735
26298
29684
33121

APPENDIX - B 109
Double Mass Curve Engibara

60000
50000
Engibara
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
1345
4253
7530
10647
13360
16546
19860
22959
25880
28919
Group Mean Annual Cummulativa Rainfall
Double Mass Curve B/Dar

35000
30000
25000
B/Dar
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
1640
5002
8898
12439
15632
19477
23301
26876
30066
33525
Double Mass Curve Gondar

25000
Cummulative Annual Rainfall,Gondar
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
2900
4603
6254
8126
876.3
10947
13507
16174
17930
19820
Group M e an Annual Cum m ulative Rainfall

APPENDIX - B 110
Figure: B- 2. Elevation – Area – Volume for Respective Reservoirs.
Elevation-Area-Volume Curve of Megech

Area (km2)
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
1970
1960
1950
1940
1930
Elevation,m asl
1920
1910
1900
1890
1880
1870
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400
Volume (Mm3)
TOTAL VOLUME (MCM) AREA (km2)
(A)
Elevation~Area~Volume of Ribb Reservoir
Area, Km 2
11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
1940
1930
Elevation, masl
1920
1910
1900
1890
1880
1870
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Volume,Mm3 Volume,Mm3 Area,KM2
(B)

APPENDIX - B 111
Volume~Area~Elevation Curve of Gumera-A

Area,Km2
12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
1965
1960
1955
1950
Elevation, m asl
1945
1940
1935 Volume, Mm3

1930
1925
1920
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
Volume,Mm3 Volume~Elevation
Area~Elevation
(C)
Elevation-Area-Volume Curve of Gilgel Abbay-B

25 20 15 Area (km2) 10 5 0
1910
1900
Elevation, m asl
1890
1880
1870
1860
1850
1840
1830
1820
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Volume(Mm3) Elevation~Volume
Elevation~Area
(D)

APPENDIX - B 112
Figure: B- 3. SSR outputs of Megech reservoir for alternative one

(A). Power duration curve (C). Release Volume
(B). Annual power generated (D). Reservoir Rule Curve
PDC for 14622 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 14622 ha
4000
Minimum Power
3500
Average Power
3000
Power, kw
Maximum Power
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
30
Release Volume
25 Irr.Req.
Volume, Mm3
20
Firm Flow
15
10
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 113

4000
Minimum R.W.L
3500
Reservoir Volume, m asl

Average R.W.L
3000
2500
Maximum R.W.L
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Jan Feb M ar Apr M ay Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Months
(D)
PDC for 13890.9 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 13891 ha
35000
Series1
30000
Series2
25000 Series3
Power, kw
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Months
(B)
25
Releas e Volum e
20 Irr. Req.
Firm Flow
Volume, Mm3
15
10
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 114

1950
1940 Minimum
Reservoir W.L, m asl

R.W.L
1930
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximum
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 13159.8 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 13160 ha
4000
Minimum Power
3500
Average Power
3000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
Release volume, 13160 ha
25
Releas e volum e
20 Irr.Requirem ent
Firm Releas e
Volume, Mm3
15
10
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 115

1950
Minimum
Reservoir Water Level, m asl

1940 R.W.L
1930
Average
1920 R.W.L
1910
Maximum
1900 R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 12428.7 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, kw
(A)
Power, 12428.7 ha
4000
Mi nimum Power
3500
Average Power
3000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
Release Volume,12428.7 ha
25
Release Volume
20 Required Release
Firm Release
Volume, Mm3
15
10
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 116
Reservoir Water Level,12428.7 ha

1950
Minimu
1940 m
Reservoir W.L, m asl R.W.L
1930
Averag
1920 e
R.W.L
1910
Maxim
um
1900
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 11697.6 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 11698 ha
4000
Minim um Power
3500
Average Power
3000
Maxim um Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
25
Release Volume
20 Irr. Req
Volume, Mm3
Firm Flow
15
10
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 117
Reservoir Water Level, 11698ha

1950
Minimum
1940
R.W.L

1930
Average
1920
R.W.L
1910
Maximum
1900
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 10966.7 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 10967 ha
4000
Minimum Power
3500
Average Power
3000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
20
18 Release Volume
16 Irr.Req.
Volume, Mm3
14 Firm Flow
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 118

1950
Minimum
1940

R.W.L
1930
Average R.W.L
1920
1910
Maximum
R.W.L
1900
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 10235.4 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 10235 ha
4000
Minimum
3500
Average Power
3000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
20
18 Releas e Volum e
16 Irr.Req.
14 Firm Flow
Volume, Mm3
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 119

1950
Minimu
1940
m R.W.L
Reservoir, m asl
1930
Average
1920 R.W.L
1910
Maximu
1900 m R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 9504.3 ha
4000
3500
3000
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 9504 ha
4000
Minimum Power
3500
Average Power
3000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
18
16 Release Volume
14 Irr.Req.
Volume, Mm3
12 Firm Flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 120

1950
Minimu
1940
m R.W.L

1930
1920
Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximu
m R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 8773.2 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 8773 ha
4000
Minimum Power
3500
Average Power
3000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
Release Volume, 8773.2
16
Release Volum e
14
Irr. Req.
12
Volume, Mm3
Firm Flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 121

1950
1940 Minimum

R.W.L
1930
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximum
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 8042.1 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 8042 ha
4000
Minim um Power
3500
Average Power
3000
Maxim um Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
16
Releas e Volum e
14
Irr. Req.
12
Volume, Mm3
Firm Flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 122

1950
1940 Minimum

R.W.L
1930
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximum
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for 7311 ha
3900
3600
3300
3000
2700
Power, kw
2400
2100
1800
1500
1200
900
600
300
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 7311 ha
4000
3500 Minimum Power
3000 Average Power

Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
16
Firm Flow
14
Release Volume, Mm3
Irr.Req.
12
Release Volume
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)

APPENDIX - B 123

1950
1940
Minimum
R.W.L
Reservoir W.L
1930
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximum
R.W.L
1890
Months
( D)
Figure: B- 4. SSR outputs of Megech reservoir for alternative two
PDC for G.W.S + 7311 ha
2600
2400
2200
2000
1800
Power, kw
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 7311 ha + G.W.S
3000
Minimum Power
2500
Average Minimum Power
2000 Maximum Power

Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 124
Release Volume,7311 ha + G.W.S

18
16 Rel;ease Volume
14 Irr. + G. W.S.Req
Volume, Mm3
12 Firm Flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
Reservoir W.L, 7311 ha + G.W.S
1950
1940 Minimum
R.W.L
Reservoir W.L, masl
1930
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximum
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for G.W.S + 6945.45
2600
2400
2200
2000
1800
Power, kw
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 6946.45 ha + G.W.S
2500
Minimum Powere
2000 Average Power

Maximum Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 125
Release Volume, 6945.45 ha

16
14 Firm Flow
12 Irr.and G. W.S. Req
Volume, Mm3
10 Release Volume
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
Reservoir W.L, 6945.45 ha + G.W.S
1950
1940 Minimu
m R.W.L
1930
1920
Average
R.W.L
1910
1900
Maximu
1890 m R.W.L
Months
( D)
PDC for G.W.S + 6579.9 ha
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
Power, kw
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
2500
Minimum Power
2000 Average Power
Maximum Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 126
Release, 6579.9 ha + G.W.S

16
Releas e Volum e
14
Irr. and G.W.S Req.
12
Volume, Mm3
Firm Flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
Reservoir W.L,6579.9 ha + G.W.S
1950
Minimum
1940
R.W.L
Reservoir W.L,m asl
1930
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximum
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
Power, kw
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 6214.35ha + G.W.S
2500
Minimum Power
2000 Average Power
Maximum Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 127

16
Release Volume
14
Irr. and G.W.S Req.
12
Volume, Mm3
Firm flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
Reservoir Water Level, 6214.35 ha + G.W.S
1950
1940 Minimum
R.W.L
1930
Average
1920
R.W.L
1910
Maximum
1900
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
2400
2200
2000
1800
Power, kw
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
2500
Minimum Power
2000 Average Power

Maximum Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 128

16
Release Volume
14
Irr. and G.W.S Req
12
Volume, Mm3
Firm Flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
1950
Minimu
1940 m
R.W.L
1930
Average
1920 R.W.L
1910
Maximu
1900 m
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
2400
2200
2000
1800
Power, kw
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
2500
Minimum Power
2000 Average Power

Maximum Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 129

16
Release Volume
14
Irr.and G.W.S Req.
12 Firm Flow
Volume, Mm3
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
1950
1940 Minimum
R.W.L
1930
Average
1920
R.W.L
1910
Maximu
1900 m R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
Power, kw
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
2500 Minim um Power
Average Power
2000 Maxim um Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 130

16 Release Volume
14 Irr. and G.W.S
12 Firm Flow
Volume, Mm3
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
1950
Minimum
1940 R.W.L
1930
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximu
m R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
PDC for G.W.S 4752.15 ha
2400
2200
2000
1800
1600
Power, kw
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
2500 Minim um Power
Average Power
2000
Maxim u Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 131

16
Release Volume
14
Irr. and G.W.S Req.
12
Volume, Mm3
Firm Flow
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
1950
Minimum
1940
R.W.L
1930
Average
1920 R.W.L
1910
Maximu
1900 m R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
2600
2400
2200
2000
1800
Power, kw
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
2500
Minimum Power
Average Power
2000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)

APPENDIX - B 132

16
Release Volum e
14
Irr. and G.W.S
12 Firm flow
Volume, Mm3
10
8
6
4
2
0
Months
(C)
1950
Minim
1940 um
R.W.L
1930
Avera
1920 ge
R.W.L
1910
Maxim
um
1900
R.W.L
1890
Months
(D)
Figure: B- 5. SSR outputs of Ribb reservoir

PDC for 15940 ha
7000
6000
5000
Power, kw
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)

APPENDIX - B 133
Power,15940 ha
7000
Minimum Power
6000
Average Power
5000
Power, kw
Maximum Power
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
Release Volume,15940 ha
50
45 Monthly Releas Volume
40 Irr. Req
Volume, Mm3
35 Firm Flow
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
Reservoir W.L,15940 ha
1950
1940 Minimum
R.W.L
1930
1920 Maximum
R.W.L
1910
1900
Average
1890 R.W.L
1880
Months
(D)
PDC for 14943.75 ha
7000
6000
5000
Power, kw
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)

APPENDIX - B 134
Power,14944 ha
7000
Minimum Power
6000
Average Power
5000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
50
Release Volume
45
40 Irr. Req
Firm Flow
Volume, Mm3
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
Reservoir Water Level,14944 ha
1950
1940 Minimu
m R.W.L
1930
1920 Maximu
m R.W.L
1910
1900
Average
1890 R.W.L
1880
Months
(D)
PDC for 13947.5 ha
7000
6000
5000
Power, kw
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)

APPENDIX - B 135
Power, 13948 ha
7000
Minimum Power
6000 Average Power
5000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
Release Volume, 13948ha
45
Release Volume, Mm3
40
35
Irr. Req.
Volume, Mm3
30 Firm Flow
25
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
1950
Minim
1940 um
1930 R.W.L
1920 Averag
e
1910 R.W.L
1900 Maxim
1890 um.R.
W.L
1880
Months
(D)
PDC for 12951.25 ha
6000
5000
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)

APPENDIX - B 136
Power, 12951 ha
6000
5500 Minimum Power
5000 Average Power
4500
Maximum
Power, kw
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
40
Release Volume
35
Irr.Req.
30
Firm Flow
Volume, Mm3
25
20
15
10
5
0
Months
( C)
Reservoir W.L, 12951 ha
1950
Minim
1940 um
R.W.L
1930
1920 Averag
e
1910 R.W.L
1900
Maxim
1890 um
R.W.L
1880
Months
(D)
PDC for 11955 ha
6000
5000
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)

APPENDIX - B 137
Power, 11955 ha
6000
Minimum Power
5000 Average Power
Maximum Power
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
40
35
Release Volume
30 Irr. Req.
Volume, Mm3
25
Firm Flow
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
1950
Minimu
1940 m
1930 R.W.L
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maimu
1890 m
R.W.L
1880
Months
(D)
PDC for 10958.75 ha
5000
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)

APPENDIX - B 138
Power, 10959 ha
5000
4500 Minimum Power
4000 Average Power
3500 Maximum Power
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
35
Release Volume
30
Irr. Req.
25
Volume, Mm3
Firm Flow
20
15
10
0
Months
(C)
1950
Minimu
1940
m
1930 R.W.L
1920 Averag
e
1910 R.W.L
1900 Maxim
um
1890
R.W.L
1880
Months
(D)
PDC for 9962.5 ha
4500
4000
3500
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)

APPENDIX - B 139
Power, 9963 ha
4500
Minimum Power
4000
3500
Average Power
3000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
35
Release Volume
30
Irr.Req.
25 Firm flow
Volume,Mm3
20
15
10
0
Months
(C)
1950
Minimu
1940 m
1930 R.W.L
1920 Average
R.W.L
1910
1900 Maximu
1890 m
R.W.L
1880
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 140
Figure: B- 6. SSR outputs of Gumera-A reservoir

PDC for 14000 ha
6400
5600
4800
Power, kw 4000
3200
2400
1600
800
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 14000 ha
7000
Minimum Power
6000
Average Power
5000
Power, kw
Maximum Power
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
50
Release Volume
45
40 Irr.Req
Volume, Mm3
35 Firm Flow
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
1970
1960 Minimum
R.W.L
1950
1940 Average
R.W.L
1930
1920
Maximum
1910 R.W.L
1900
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 141
PDC for 13300 ha

6000
5500
5000
4500
4000
Power, kw
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Time, %
(A)
Power, 13300 ha
6000 Minimum Power
5000 Average Power
Maximum Power
Power, kw
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
Release, 13300 ha
45
40 Release Volume
35 Irr.Req
Volume, Mm3
30 Firm Flow
25
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
1970
Minimum
1960
R.W.L
1950
1940 Average
R.W.L
1930
1920
Maximum
1910 R.W.L
1900
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 142
PDC for 12600 ha

6000
5000
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Time, %
(A)
Power, 12600 ha
6000
Minimum Power
5000 Average Power
Maximum Power
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
Release, 12600 ha
45
40
Release Volume
35
Irr.Req.
Volume, Mm3
30
Firm Flow
25
20
15
10
5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Months
(C)
1970
1960 Minimum
R.W.L
1950
1940
Average
R.W.L
1930
1920
Maximum
1910 R.W.L
1900
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 143
PDC for 11900 ha

6000
5000
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 11900 ha
6000
Minimum Power
5000
Average Power
4000
Power, kw
Maximum Power
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
Release, 11900 ha
40
35 Release Volume
Volume, Mm3
30 Irr.Req.
25 Firm Flow
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
1970
1960 Minimum
R.W.L
1950
1940
Average
1930 R.W.L
1920
Maximum
1910 R.W.L
1900
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 144
PDC for 11200 ha

6000
5000
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 11200 ha
6000
Minimum Power
5000
Averag Power
4000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
Release, 11200 ha
40
35
Release
Volume, Mm3
30 Irr.Req.
25 Firm Power
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
1970
1960 Minimum
R.W.L
1950
1940
Average
1930 R.W.L
1920
Maximum
1910
R.W.L
1900
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 145
PDC for 10500 ha

6000
5000
4000
Power, kw
3000
2000
1000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 10500 ha
6000
Minim um Power
5000
Average Power
4000
Power, kw
Maximum Power
3000
2000
1000
0
Months
(B)
Release, 10500 ha
35
Release Volume
30
Irr.Req.
25 Firm Flow
Volume, Mm3
20
15
10
0
Months
(C)
1970
1960 Minimum
R.W.L
1950
1940 Average
R.W.L
1930
1920
Maximum
1910 R.W.L
1900
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 146
PDC for 9800 ha

5000
4500
4000
3500
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 9800 ha
5000
4500 Minimum Power
4000 Average Power
3500 Maximum Power
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
Release, 9800 ha
35
Release Volume
30
Volume, Mm3
Irr.Req.
25
Firm Flow
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
1970
1960 Minimum
R.W.L
1950
1940 Average
R.W.L
1930
1920
Maximum
1910 R.W.L
1900
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 147
PDC for 9100 ha

4500
4000
3500
3000
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 9100 ha
4500
Minimum Power
4000
Average Power
3500
Maximum Power
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
Release, 9100 ha
30
Release Volume
25
Irr.Req.
Volume, Mm3
20 Firm Flow
15
10
0
Months
(C)
1970
1960 Minimum
R.W.L
1950
Average
1940
R.W.L
1930
Maximum
1920
R.W.L
1910
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 148
PDC for 8400 ha

4500
4000
3500
3000
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 8400 ha
4500
4000 Minimum Power
3500 Average Power
3000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
Release, 8400 ha
30
Release
25 Irr.Req.
Volume, Mm3
20 Firm Flow
15
10
0
Months
(C)
1970
Reservoir Water Level
1960 Minimum
R.W.L
1950
1940 Average
R.W.L
1930
1920 Maximum
R.W.L
1910
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 149
PDC for 7700 ha

5000
4500
4000
3500
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 7700 ha
5000
4500 Minimum Power
4000 Average Power
3500 Maximum Power
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
Release, 7700 ha
30 Release Volume
25 Irr.Req.
Volume, Mm3
Firm Flow
20
15
10
5
0
Months
(C)
1970
Minimu
1960 m
R.W.L
1950
Average
1940 R.W.L
1930
Maximu
1920 m
R.W.L
1910
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 150
PDC for 7000 ha

5000
4500
4000
3500
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 7000ha
5000
4500 Minimum Power
4000 Average Power
3500 Maximum Power
Power, kw
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Months
(B)
Release, 7000 ha
30
Release
25 Irr.Req.
Firm Flow
Volume, Mm3
20
15
10
0
Months
(C)
1965
1960 Minimum
1955 R.W.L
1950
1945
Average
1940
R.W.L
1935
1930
1925 Maximum
1920 R.W.L
1915
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 151
Figure: B- 7. SSR outputs of Gilgel Abbay-B reservoir

PDC for 12490 ha
16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 12490 ha
16000
Minimum Power
14000
Average Power
12000
Mximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
100
90 Release
80 Volume
Volume, Mm3
70
60
Irr.Req.
50
40
30
20 Firm Flow
10
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900
Minimum
1895 R.W.L
1890
1885
Average
1880
R.W.L
1875
1870
1865 Maximum
1860 R.W.L
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 152
PDC for 11865.5 ha

16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 11865.5 ha
16000
Minimum Power
14000
Average Power
12000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
100
Release
80 Volume
Volume, Mm3
60
Irr. Req.
40
20 Firm Flow
0
Months
(C)
Reservoir Water Level, 11865.5 ha
1905
1900 Minimu
m
1895
R.W.L
1890
1885 Averag
1880 e
1875 R.W.L
1870
Maximu
1865 m
1860 R.W.L
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 153
PDC for 11241 ha

16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 11241 ha
16000
Minimum Power
14000
Average Power
12000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
100
90 Release
80 Volume
Volume, Mm3
70
60
Irr.Req.
50
40
30
20 Firm Flow
10
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimu
m
1895
R.W.L
1890
1885 Averag
1880 e
1875 R.W.L
1870
Maxim
1865
um
1860 R.W.L
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 154
PDC for 10616.5 ha

16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 10616.5 ha
16000
Minimum Power
14000
Average Power
12000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
100
90 Release
80 Volume
Volume, Mm3
70
60
Irr. Req.
50
40
30
20 Firm Flow
10
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimu
m,
1895
R.W.L
1890
1885 Average
1880 R.W.L
1875
1870
Minimu
1865 m R.W.L
1860
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 155
PDC for 9992 ha

16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 9992 ha
16000
Minimum Power
14000
Average Power
12000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
100
90 Release
80 Volume
Volume, Mm3
70
60 Irr. Req.
50
40
30 Firm Flow
20
10
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimu
m
1895
R.W.L
1890
1885 Averaeg
1880 R.W.L
1875
1870
Maximu
1865
m
1860 R.W.L
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 156
PDC for 9367.5 ha

16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 9367.5 ha
16000
Minimum Power
14000
Average Power
12000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
100
90 Release
80 Volume
Volume, Mm3
70
60
Irr.Req.
50
40
30
20 Firm Flow
10
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimu
m
1895
R.W.L
1890
1885 Averag
1880 e R.W.L
1875
1870 Minimu
1865 m
1860 R.W.L
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 157
PDC for 8743 ha

16000
14000
12000
10000
Power, kw
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 8743 ha
16000
Minimum Power
14000
Average Power
12000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
120
Release
100 Volume
Volume, Mm3
80
Irr. Req.
60
40
Firm Flow
20
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimum
1895 R.W.L
1890
1885
Average
1880
R.W.L
1875
1870
1865 Maximum
R.W.L
1860
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 158
PDC for 8118.5 ha

18000
16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 8118.5 ha
18000
Minimum Power
16000
14000 Average Power
Power, kw
12000 Maximum Power

10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
120
Release
100
Volume
Volume, Mm3
80
Irr. Req.
60
40
Firm Flow
20
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimu
1895 m R.W.L
1890
1885
Average
1880 R.W.L
1875
1870
1865 Maximu
m R.W.L
1860
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 159
PDC for 7494 ha

18000
16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 7494 ha
18000
Minimum Power
16000
Average Power
14000
12000
Maximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
120
Release
100
Volume
Volume, Mm3
80
Irr. Req.
60
40
Firm Flow
20
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimu
R.W.L
1895
1890
1885 Averag
1880 e
1875 R.W.L
1870 Maximu
1865 R.W.L
1860
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 160
PDC for 6869.5 ha

18000
16000
14000
Power, kw
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 6869.5 ha
18000
Minimum Power
16000
Average Power
14000
Maximum Power
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
Releaswe Volume, 6869.5 ha
120
Release
100
Volume
Volume, Mm3
80
Irr. Req.
60
40
Firm Flow
20
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimum
1895 R.W.L
1890
1885
Average
1880
R.W.L
1875
1870
1865 Maximum
1860 R.W.L
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 161
PDC for 6245 ha

18000
16000
14000
12000
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0
Time, %
(A)
Power, 6245 ha
18000
16000
Minimum Power
14000 Average Power
12000 Maximum Power
Power, kw
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Months
(B)
120
Release
100
Volume
Volume, Mm3
80
Irr. Req.
60
40
Firm Flow
20
0
Months
(C)
1905
1900 Minimu
1895 m
R.W.L
1890
1885 Average
1880 R.W.L
1875
1870
Maximu
1865 m
1860 R.W.L
1855
Months
(D)

APPENDIX - B 162
T o Go nd ar
37o 45'E 38 o 00 ' E
12 o 00' N
Ribb
n a
Ta
N
ke
La
ta
ere
W
Hod Gebeya
De bre Ta bo r
Gum ara Dam Site - A

Diversion Dam Di vers ion dam
Jig na
si t
Gum Kinti Gumara Reservoir A & B

mu
ara
Ha
um ara
S en dega G Dr y W eather Road
11 o 4 5' E
Roa d
ar
rD
To A nbe sam e
hi
Mi Me
Ba
m Towns
a
it t era
To
ar
y
m
Gu
Com m and area (T entative)

Gum ara D a m Site - B
Gum ara C atc hm ent
Lak e
Subc atchm ent Boundar y
Ri ver
0 10 20 30 Kilom eters
Figure: B- 8. Map of Gumera project and Catchment [29]

APPENDIX-B 163
Figure: B- 9. Isohytal map of Lake Tana sub basin [30]

APPENDIX-B 164
Figure: B- 10. Two and three dimensions representation of the elevation of Lake Tana
sub basin [27].

APPENDIX-B 165
Figure: B- 11. Location map of Megech dam and gauging site [30]

APPENDIX-B 166
Figure B- 12: Layout and location of the proposed power house
Figure: B- 13. Thissen Polygons of Gilgel Abbay watershed

APPENDIX-B 167
Figure: B- 14. Location of main towns and dams in the study area

Netsanet Zelalem MSC Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Netsanet Zelalem MSC Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTEGRATION OF HYDROPOWER IN THE

ONGOING RESERVOIR STUDIES OF LAKE

Arba Minch University

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the

Arba Minch University

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008 ,AMU

DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT

The thesis is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties, as

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

Integration of hydropower in the proposed reservoir study is analyzed by using

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

I would like to express the deepest gratitude and grateful acknowledgement to

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

I DEDICATE THIS THESIS MANUSCRIPT

MY UNCLE ENDAWEKE CHERIE,

MY MOTHER TIRU WUBIE AND

THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE WORKING FOR

HUMANITY AND HUMAN WELFARE.

“For it is by grace you have been saved,

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

3.1. Abbay Basin .............................................................................................................. 18

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

CHAPTER SIX ................................................................................................................... 65

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

LIST OF TABLES IN THE APPENDICES

TABLE: A- 2. MAKSEGNIT RAINFALL STATION........................................................................................... 86

TABLE: A- 3. CHILGA (AYKEL) RAINFALL STATION ............................................................................................. 87

TABLE: A- 4. ZEGE RAINFALL STATION .............................................................................................................. 88

TABLE:A- 5. DEBRE TABOR RAINFALL STATION................................................................................................. 89

TABLE: A- 6. BAHIR DAR RAINFALL STATION .................................................................................................... 90

TABLE: A- 7. DANGILA RAINFALL STATION ......................................................................................................... 91

TABLE:A- 8. ENGIBARA RAINFALL STATION ....................................................................................................... 92

TABLE: A- 9. GONDER RAINFALL STATION ......................................................................................................... 93

TABLE: A- 13. FLOW AT MEGECH GAUGE STATION ........................................................................................... 97

TABLE: A-14. STREAMFLOW STAIONS FOR RIBB NEAR ADDIS ZEMEN…………………………..………......98

TABLE: A- 15. RIBB MONTHLY FLOW AT DAM SITE .......................................................................................... 99

TABLE: A- 16. UPPER RIBB GAUGING STATION............................................................................................... 100

TABLE: A- 17. GUMERA STATION NEAR BAHIR DAR ........................................................................................ 101

TABLE: A- 18. MEAN MONTHLY STREAMFLOW AT GUMERA DAM ................................................................... 102

TABLE: A- 20. FLOW AT GILGEL ABBAY-B DAM SITE ...................................................................................... 104

TABLE: A- 21. CLIMATE DATA FOR EVAPORATION COMPUTATION .................................................................... 105

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis Augus 2008, AMU

LIST OF FIGURES IN THE APPENDICES

FIGURE: B- 2. ELEVATION – AREA – VOLUME FOR RESPECTIVE RESERVOIRS. ............................................. 110

FIGURE: B- 5. SSR OUTPUTS OF RIBB RESERVOIR .......................................................................................... 132

FIGURE: B- 6. SSR OUTPUTS OF GUMERA-A RESERVOIR ............................................................................... 140

FIGURE: B- 7. SSR OUTPUTS OF GILGEL ABBAY-B RESERVOIR ...................................................................... 151

FIGURE: B- 8. MAP OF GUMERA PROJECT AND CATCHMENT ........................................................................... 162

FIGURE: B- 9. ISOHYTAL MAP OF LAKE TANA SUB BASIN.................................................................................. 163

FIGURE: B- 13. THISSEN POLYGONS OF GILGEL ABBAY WATERSHED ....................................................... 166

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis August2008, AMU

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis August2008, AMU

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis August2008, AMU

Multipurpose reservoir operation involves various interactions and trade-offs among

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis August2008, AMU

Integrating hydropower schemes on the proposed Reservoirs have many

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis August2008, AMU

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Zelalem Netsanet M.Sc. Thesis August2008, AMU