Professional Documents
Culture Documents
______________
A Feasibility
Presented to the
College of Engineering
Naval State University
Naval, Biliran
______________
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Subject RD Meth 501
(Research Project)
______________
October 2018
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
following existence without their feasibility study it wouldn’t have been possible.
We would like to express our deep and sincere gratitude to Engr. Reymar
Zamora, the instructor and panellist of this study. Their wide knowledge and
To Biliran Electric Cooperative, Inc, for providing us the data that we need
in our study.
study. Most especially to the almighty God, for His unconditional love and
guidance throughout the entire span of working this study and giving us wisdom
that we needed to complete the paperwork’s and other matter that makes this
study successful.
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Project Understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Electricity Tariff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
DEFINITION OF TERMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Site Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
MARKET ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
BILECO Consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
SYSTEM STRUCTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Intake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Penstocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
INVESTMENT ESTIMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Return of Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
RECOMMENDATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21