DSpace Institution

DSpace Repository http://dspace.org

Hydraulic engineering Thesis

2022-02

GIS BASED IDENTIFICATION OF

MICRO TO SMALL HYDROPOWER
POTENTIAL SITE (ON FETAM RIVER
WATERSHED TRIBUTARY OF BLUE
NILE, ETHIOPIA)

Fasikaw, Nibret Baye

http://ir.bdu.edu.et/handle/123456789/14677
Downloaded from DSpace Repository, DSpace Institution's institutional repository
 BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY
BAHIR DAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SCHOOL OF RESEARCH AND GRADUATE STUDIES
FACULITY OF CIVIL&WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING
HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING

MASTER THESIS ON:

GIS BASED IDENTIFICATION OF MICRO TO SMALL HYDROPOWER POTENTIAL
SITE
(ON FETAM RIVER WATERSHED TRIBUTARY OF BLUE NILE, ETHIOPIA)

BY:
Fasikaw Nibret Baye

February, 2022
Bahir Dar, Ethiopia
 BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY
BAHIR DAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SCHOOL OF RESEARCH AND GRADUATE STUDIES
FACULITY OF CIVIL&WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING

MASTE R THESIS ON:

GIS BASED IDENTIFICATION OF MICRO TO SMALL HYDROPOWER
POTENTIAL SITE (ON FETAM RIVER WATERSHED, TRIBUTARY OF BLUE NILE,
ETHIOPIA)

BY
Fasikaw Nibret Baye

Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the

Degree of Masters of Science in Hydraulic Engineering

Main Adviser: Mengiste Abate (PhD)

Co-Adviser: Mr. zigibel Firew

February, 2022
Bahir Dar, Ethiopia

ii
iii
©2022 Fasikaw Nibret Baye

All right reserved

iv
DECLARATION
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “GIS BASED IDENTIFICATION OF MICRO TO
SMALLHYDROPOWER POTENTIAL SITE (ON FETAM RIVER WATERSHED,
TRIBUTARY OF BLUE NILE, ETHIOPIA)”, submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Science in hydraulic engineering under faculty of civil
and water resource engineering, Bahir Dar Institute of Technology, is a record of original work
carried out by me and has never been submitted to this or any other institution to get any other
degree or certificates. The assistance and help I received during the course of this investigation
have been duly acknowledged.

Fasikaw Nibret 12/05/2022

Name of the candidate signature Date

v
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First and for most I am so grateful to the Almighty GOD, for his mercy and grace up on me
during all these days and blessings all along the way. GOD, what you have done for me in all my
life is really beyond what I can strength. Generally, thanks for everything. My sincere
appreciation and special thanks go to my Supervisor, Dr. Mengiste Abate. I thank him or his
supervision, encouragement, critical comment, continuous discussion and helpful guidance,
above all, his unselfish contributions of this thesis since the early age of the work. Every
discussion I had with him has been educating and enlightening to make a deep impression on me.
My heartfelt appreciation and thanks are extended to Ethiopian Road Authority (ERA) joint
program in collaboration with the Bahir Dar Institute of Technology for granting me this
opportunity to study for a Master of Science degree and funding for the research. I would like to
express my deepest gratitude, appreciation to my co- advisor Zigibel Firew for his critical
comment and my friends for providing me valuable and constructive comments to update my
thesis and their assistance in technical and material facilities for my thesis work.
I would also like to extend this special thanks to my best brother Asmiro Nibret who facilitates to
get this chance and an encouragement to accomplish my study.
Finally, I would like to be owe many thanks to my family for their endless Support.

vi
 ABSTRACT
The renewable energy is very important segment of human life in modern world. In Ethiopia
most of the people live in rural areas where modern energy access was almost negligible.
Hydropower is a clean, renewable and reliable energy source that serves environmental and
energy policy objectives. The objective of this study was to identify suitable potential sites for
Run of river hydropower in of Fetam river watershed which is a tributary of Abay River located
in the Amhara region. Different constraints of spatial data layers have been used. GIS based
parametric flow duration curve method and Multi Criteria Decision Analysis was carried out in
hydropower potential locations for small scale hydropower in Fetam watershed, the input data
was compiled and analyzed using GIS data layers, including topographic characteristics,
discharge and precipitation data.
Check measured head using differential leveling where three sample sites are data collected. The
ranking of suitability of potential sites based on: mean monthly stream discharge, net head
available, Road access and distance of small town from sites.
From all suitable 15 potential sites were site-12 most suitable sites and site- 8 least suitable site
have maximum (17.292GWh) and minimum (0.272 GWh) power potential respectively. The total
annual energy potential of from selected sites were estimated about 92.082 GWh, 61.171 GWh
and 12.808 GWh for 30%, 50% and 90% flow exceedance respectively. From selected fifteen
potential sites in the study area, seven sites are mini and eight sites are small scales hydropower.
The study concluded that the assessed or identified run of river hydropower potential sites seem
to be perennial as observed from the discharge map and from the hydropower suitability map.
Therefore, responsible institution should install gauge station to measure stream flow which is
pertinent information’s for hydropower study.

Key Words: Energy, Fetam watershed, GIS, Hydropower, MCDA, Run of river, Suitability,

vii
 List of Acronyms
AAU Addis Ababa University
AMU Arba Minch University
DEM Digital Elevation Model
EEPCo Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation
FDC Flow Duration Curve
PMFDC Parametric flow duration curve
GHG Green House Gas
GIS Geographic Information System
HPPs Hydro Power Plants
KW Kilo Watt
GWh/yr Giga Watt Hours per year
GWh Giga watt hour
MW Mega Watt
Km2 Kilometer square
MCDA Multi Criteria Decision Analysis
MHP Micro Hydropower Plant
MWIE Ministry of Water Irrigation and Electricity
AVAP Average Annual Precipitation
GPS Global Position System
IDW Inverse distance weight
ROR Run Off River
SHP Small Hydropower Plant
AHP Analytical Hierarchy Process

GDP Growth Domestic Population

US United State

viii
 Table of Contents
DECLARATION........................................................................................................................................ v

ACKNOWLEDGMENT .......................................................................................................................... vi

ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................. vii

List of Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................. xiv

LIST OF FIGURE .................................................................................................................................. xvi

1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Back Ground ........................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2. Problem of Statement ....................................................................................................................... 5

1.3 Objectives of the study ....................................................................................................................... 5

1.3.1 General Objective ...................................................................................................................... 5

1.3.2 Specific Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 6

1.4. Research Questions .......................................................................................................................... 6

1.5 Scope of the Study ............................................................................................................................. 6

1.6 Significance of the Study .................................................................................................................. 7

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 8

2.1. General Description of Hydropower ................................................................................................ 8

2.3. Present and Future Development of Hydropower .......................................................................... 8

2.3.1. Small hydro power project classification ............................................................................... 8

2.3.2. Classification based on the Mode of power capacity ............................................................. 9

2.3.3. Mode of head concentration .................................................................................................... 9

2.3.4. Mode of discharge regulation .................................................................................................. 9

ix
 2.3.5. Run-of-River ........................................................................................................................... 10

2.3.6. Storage Hydropower .............................................................................................................. 10

2.3.7. Pumped storage....................................................................................................................... 10

2.4. Flow Duration Curve (FDC) ......................................................................................................... 10

2.5 Hydropower Potential Calculation ........................................................................................... 11

2.6. Micro and Small hydropower –an important rural energy source............................................... 11

2.7. Components of micro and small hydropower ......................................................................... 12

2.8. Small hydropower as a choice ....................................................................................................... 12

2.9. Selection of Site for a hydro-electric power plant ......................................................................... 14

2.10. Methodology for hydropower potential estimation ..................................................................... 15

2.11. GIS and Multi criteria analysis tool for site suitability............................................................... 16

2.12. GIS in hydropower potential estimation ...................................................................................... 17

3. MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 18

3.1. Description of the study area ......................................................................................................... 18

3.2. Topography ..................................................................................................................................... 19

3.3. Climate ............................................................................................................................................ 21

3.3.1. Rainfall .................................................................................................................................... 21

3.3.2 Temperature............................................................................................................................. 22

3.4. Administrative Structure of the Watershed ................................................................................... 22

3.4.1 Administrative Woreda in the Watershed ............................................................................ 22

3.4.2. Small town in the watershed .................................................................................................. 23

3.5. Data availability and analysis ........................................................................................................ 24

3.5.1. Data availabillity ..................................................................................................................... 24

3.5.2. Digital elevation model ........................................................................................................... 25

x
 3.5.3. Fetam watershed and Stream link by using model builder ................................................ 25

3.5.4. Metrological data .................................................................................................................... 26

3.5.5. Estimating missing Precipitation Data ................................................................................. 28

3.5.6. Consistency analysis ............................................................................................................... 29

3.5.7. Homogeneity checking for rainfall station ........................................................................... 31

3.5.8. Stream flow data ..................................................................................................................... 33

a. Graphical representation of gauged stream flow data ................................................................. 35

b. Spearman`s rank-correlation coefficient method ............................................................................ 36

a) Checking the stability of variance using F-test .......................................................................... 38

b) Checking the Stability of mean by using t-test .......................................................................... 39

3.5.9. Stream flow data analysis ...................................................................................................... 40

3.5.10. Develop flow duration curve for gauged site...................................................................... 41

3.6. Methodology used in hydropower potential estimation ................................................................ 43

3.6.1. GIS Technology....................................................................................................................... 43

3.6.2. Potential head drop estimation of the site ............................................................................ 45

3.6.3. Watershed GIS based raster grid value development of discharge ................................... 46

3.6.4. Development of parametric duration equation map for key percent of

Exceedance ........................................................................................................................................ 50

3.7. Selection of suitable sites for run of river hydropower based on sensitive criteria ..................... 52

3.8. Suitability analysis of the Run of River Hydropower sites based on GIS based multi
criteria analysis (GIS-MCA) ................................................................................................................. 52

3.8.1. The application of Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) .................................................... 53

3.9. Conceptual frame work of the overall work flow of the study using figure ................................. 55

3.10. General work flow of the study using GIS model builder .......................................................... 56

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................... 57

xi
 4.1. Identification of suitable sites for run of river hydropower potential .......................................... 57

4.2. Power and energy determination for the identified sites .............................................................. 60

4.2.1. Discharge Raster Map ............................................................................................................ 60

4.2.2. Head Drop Raster map .......................................................................................................... 61

4.3. Theoretical hydropower potential of Fetam Watershed ............................................................... 64

4.3.1. Prediction of Installed Plant capacity ................................................................................... 64

4.3.2. Mean Power of Fetam watershed (P50) ................................................................................ 67

4.3.3. Prediction of dependable plant capacity .............................................................................. 69

4.4. Estimated technical hydropower potential in the selected sites .................................................... 69

4.5. Prioritization analysis for best operating suitable hydropower site using GIS based multi
criteria analysis (GIS- MCA) ................................................................................................................ 73

4.5.1 Standardization of Criteria..................................................................................................... 75

4.5.2. Pair wise comparison of alternative and criteria ................................................................. 81

4.5.3. Normalization of matrix and weight determination ............................................................ 82

4.5.4. Evaluation of matrix consistency .......................................................................................... 82

4.5.5. Making final map using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method.................................. 84

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................... 88

5.1. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................... 88

5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 90

REFERENCE ........................................................................................................................................... 91

APPENDIX ............................................................................................................................................... 96

xii
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: classification of hydropower plant based on power capacity ............................................ 9

Table 2: Uper Fetam stream flow percentile points for t-distribution ........................................... 37

Table 3: Lower Fetam stream flow percentile points for t-distribution......................................... 37

Table 4: Uper Fetam stream flow percentile points for F-test and T test....................................... 39

Table 5: Lower Fetam stream flow percentile points for F-test and T test ................................... 39

Table 6: Average annual flow with Q percent discharge ............................................................... 51

Table 7: The criteria and limit factor to identify potential feasible sites ...................................... 52

Table 8: Firm Power Suitable Hydropower potential sites ........................................................... 57

Table 9: Range of head for hydropower potential sites ................................................................ 59

Table 10: Percent area coverage of Head drop distribution within 500m increment .................... 62

Table 11: error estimation between Measured Head drops by leveling survey and Head Drop
through Focal Statistics .................................................................................................................. 63

Table 12: Installed capacity at Q30 in kw ..................................................................................... 65

Table 13: Power for Q30 and Q50 (in Kw)................................................................................... 66

Table 14፡ mean power (P50) capacity of the site in kw ................................................................ 67

Table 15: Technically available power (kW) at selected percent of exceedance ........................... 71

Table 16: Summery of the annual energy output at selected site in Fetam watershed .................. 72

Table 17: Standardize to be maximize and minimize for better efficient site selection ................ 76

Table 18: Pair wise Comparison of Criteria ................................................................................. 82

Table 19:Normalization and Weight Determination ..................................................................... 82

Table 20:Normalization and Weight sum Determination ............................................................. 83

Table 21: Classification of run-off hydropower plant.................................................................... 86

Table 22. Summarized suitability rank of suitable runoff river hydropower potential sites. ........ 87

xiv
 LIST OF FIGURE

Figure 1 : Location of Fetam watershed ....................................................................................... 19

Figure 2 : Topography of Fetam Watershed ................................................................................. 20

Figure3: Slope map of Fetam Watershed ...................................................................................... 21

Figure 4: Rainfall distributions in Fetam watershed using IDW .................................................. 22

Figure 5: Weredas found in Fetam watershed .............................................................................. 23

Figure6 : Location of small Town and Community in the watershed .......................................... 24

Figure 7: Fetam Watershed Stream Link, Gauging Station and Outlet ........................................ 26

Figure 8: Location of selected Rain gauge station ........................................................................ 27

Figure 9: Double Mass Curv for Enjibara Station .......................................................................... 31

Figure 10: Double Mass Curve for Tilili Station ......................................................................... 31

Figure 11: Double Mass Curve for Shindi Station ........................................................................ 31

Figure 12: Homogeneity Test for Shindi‟s Base Station .............................................................. 32

Figure 13: Homogeneity Test for Enjibara‟s Base Station ........................................................... 32

Figure 14: Homogeneity Test for Tilili‟s Base Station ................................................................. 33

Figure 15: Verification of time series upper Fetam stream flow data in different years .............. 36

Figure 16: Verification of time series Lower Fetam near Galibed stream flow data in different
years ............................................................................................................................................... 36

Figure 17 : Fetam watershed of runoff factor estimator sites ....................................................... 41

Figure 18: flow duration curve for uper Fetam River at gauge station ......................................... 43

Figure 19:flow duration curve for lower Fetam River at gauge station ........................................ 43

Figure 20:Fetam watershed head map work flow using model builder ........................................ 46

Figure 21: Fetam watershed rain fall interpolation work flow using model builder ..................... 47

Figure 22 : Rainfall Raster Map of Fetam Watershed .................................................................. 47

xvi
Figure 23: Discharge output of each cell in Fetam watershed without loss .................................. 48

Figure 24: Average grid Flow with considering loss. .................................................................... 49

Figure 25: Runoff Factor Map ....................................................................................................... 50

Figure 26: Parametric flow Duration equation for Fetam watershed .......................................... 51

Figure 27 : Conceptual Frame work.............................................................................................. 55

Figure 28.General Work flow using GIS model builder ............................................................... 56

Figure 29: Suitable Sites for micro to Small scale hydropower potential in Fetam watershed .... 58

Figure 30: Range of Head drop for Hydropower Potential sites. .................................................. 59

Figure 31: Discharge Raster map for Q90 .................................................................................... 61

Figure 32: Raster Map of Head Drop for Fetam Watershed ......................................................... 62

Figure 33: Installed Power potential (P 30) in kw for Selected Hydropower Sites ...................... 66

Figure 34: Mean Discharge of Fetam Watershed. ........................................................................ 68

Figure 35: Grid based mean hydropower potential for Fetam watershed Suitable Sites ............ 68

Figure 36: Spatial distribution of Fetam hydropower suitable sites based on their Firm power
potentials ........................................................................................................................................ 69

Figure 37: Road map of Fetam watershed ................................................................................... 74

Figure 38: Location of small town in and around from Fetam watershed .................................... 75

Figure 39: Standardized hydro power of Fetam Watershed. ........................................................ 76

Figure 40: standardized stream discharge map............................................................................... 77

Figure 41: Standardized Head map of Fetam Watershed ............................................................. 78

Figure 42: Euclidian distance from Fetam watershed small town (m) ......................................... 79

Figure 43: Standardized Euclidian distance from small town ....................................................... 79

Figure 44: Euclidian Distance from road of Fetam watershed...................................................... 80

xvii
Figure 45: Standardized Euclidian Distance from road. ............................................................... 81

Figure 46: Suitability of Hydropower potential sites using AHP Method .................................... 85

xviii
 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Back Ground

Ethiopia is known for its huge water resources. It is known as the Water Tower of Africa as the
result of the abundant water resources in the country. Developing this abundant resource holds
the key to fulfill the country‟s economy growing energy and water demand in various sectors
such as agriculture, transportation, industries and service. The population of the country increases
with a growth rate of 2.3 per cent has led to a staggering 14 per cent increase in energy demand.
The country is making significant efforts to satisfy demand, maintain growth and supply a
population where currently only 25 per cent have power connectivity (Dagmawi, 2015).
Different strategies have been proposed to reduce the GHG emission and mitigate the
effect of climate change. Studies have shown that the life cycle GHG emissions from the
technologies that use renewable energy resources are less compared with those
technologies based on fossil fuel (Nikolaisen, 2015).
According to United Nations 1.6 billion people live in extreme poverty. Around 2.4
billion people rely on traditional biomass for cooking and heating purposes and roughly a
quarter of the world‟s population with 1.6 billion people does not have access to
electricity. Access to modern, safe and affordable energy and energy services is
considered as one of the attributes having a great potential to reduce poverty (John,
2014).
Even if Ethiopia has a huge potential of renewable energy (hydro, wind, solar,
geothermal), it is suffering from energy crisis throughout characterized by frequent
blackouts and interruption. This is because of the unbalance between the increasing
energy demands versus energy production in the country. Even due to the limited energy
production, there are places; especially remote areas, where energy is not available/
accessed and the people around are living in darkness. In addition to this limited
production, the country was concentrating in large energy production systems. But it is
difficult to use most of the potentials that the country had and to make all people access
to this modern energy without small energy production systems. And it is the aim of this
thesis work to assess the potentials and viability of a small hydropower (SHP) system of
the selected sites.
1
The increasing demand for energy, especially from renewable and sustainable sources,
spurs the development of small hydropower plants and encourages investment in new
survey studies. Preliminary hydropower survey studies usually carry huge uncertainties
about the technical, economic and environmental feasibility of the undeveloped potential
(Larentis et al, 2010). Hydropower is a clean, renewable and reliable energy source that
serves national environmental and energy policy objectives. It is one of the most
important renewable sources for production of electric power due to several obvious
reasons. It is derived from the falling water, either from rivers or streams, flowing
downhill along the river course due to force of gravity. The energy associated with this
flowing water is known as kinetic energy that is released through the friction of flowing
water with the rocks and the sediment in the river beds. Harnessing the kinetic energy
from the flowing water for moving turbines generates hydropower (Kurse et al, 2010).
The small-scale use of hydropower has been practiced since pre historic times.
Energy is considered one of the most important ingredients of economic development.
Studies have shown that a strong correlation exists between the energy consumption and
the economic development in a country (Pirlogea et al, 2012). Therefore, a continuous
availability of clean energy at affordable cost is a must for sustainable economic
development. It is therefore very important to assess the hydropower potential and well
document all the potential sites in a country. Many countries rich in water resources have
up-to-date information about the hydro potential of their countries. The reliable
information about the magnitude and extent of resources in a country helps in future
energy planning and selection of potential sites for hydropower development. Ethiopia is
endowed with huge hydropower potential, which has not been properly exploited. About
95% of the energy consumption in the country is based on firewood and fire wood
derivatives. A total of about 5% of the population mainly in bigger cities have access to
electricity. In today‟s time, undoubtedly, electrical energy is becoming an essential
commodity for the modern life. Every sector, like industry, technology, transportation,
public utilities or the domestic life is now totally dependent on electrical power. The
dependence on electrical power is becoming more and more, which has resulted into
increasing demand for it. Electricity, in the present times, is not only an essential

2
commodity for urban areas but gradually becoming equally essential for rural areas also
(Nehimia, 2005).

Access to energy is among the key elements for the economic and social development of
Ethiopia. The energy sector in Ethiopia can be generally categorized in to two major
components: traditional and modern (traditional biomass usage and modern fuels i.e.
electricity and petroleum). As more than 80% of the country's population is engaged in
the small-scale agricultural sector and live in rural areas, traditional energy sources
represent the principal sources of Energy in Ethiopia. The use of renewable source is the
most valuable solution to reduce the environmental problems associated with
unprocessed bio-mass based energy generation and achieves clean and sustainable energy
development. Hydro, wind, biomass, solar and geothermal energy are among the most
important renewable sources for energy generation (Ferreira et al, 2016). The sustainable
development of hydropower is becoming increasingly important in legislative agenda of
the country. The overall objective of the National Hydropower policy is to enhance
efficient and sustainable development of the water resources and meet the national energy
demands as well as supply for external markets to earn foreign exchange (Nikolaisen,
2015).

Apart from major rivers which would be dependable potential sources for large and
medium scale hydroelectric power generation, Ethiopia is blessed with plenty of small
rivers which have the capacity to generate micro hydropower. At most use of water
resources should be ensured to realize the overall economic development of the country.
The economic development of most developing countries such as Ethiopia is by far
determined by the management and use of rural natural resources. Among rural natural
resources, water plays the majority of roles as it is directly or indirectly related to life.
Unfortunately, a lot of our water resources remain idle may be because of backwardness
or negligence. On the other hand, some downstream countries have been using effectively
the water flowing from Ethiopia together with millions of tons of soil and minerals
carried along. Although it seems simple or the effect being unconsidered, the country is
losing innumerable amount of wealth. The result is remaining with very poor people
requesting for help every year (Keneni, 2007).
3
Exploitation of small streams found distributed in rural areas for electrification is
believed to reduce the destruction of forests and other natural resources to some extent
because they may replace the use of fuel wood for energy. The use of electricity for
various purposes can be extended to rural areas of the country by exploiting the small
streams. Rural electrification has so many advantages, some of which are: raising income
level of rural population, reduction of firewood consumption and consequently
decreasing deforestation and soil degradation, promotion of local industry and facilitation
of job opportunity for rural residents, and mitigation of population drift towards urban
areas. Besides, development of potential for tourism may be enhanced. To realize these
potential benefits, Small River catchments found scattered in the vast rural areas of our
country should be exploited (Keneni, 2007).

To realize these potential benefits, Small River catchments found scattered in the vast
rural areas of our country should be exploited. As will be dealt with later, in most cases,
micro hydropower has a capacity up to 100 kW in Ethiopia (Ethiopian Energy Agency
defines micro hydropower as having a capacity up to 500kW).
Thus, a small river with only 0.5 m3/s discharge and having 40 m drop, taking overall
efficiency η as 51%, for instance, can produce;
P = 9.8·η·Q·H = 9.8*0.51*0.5*40 = 100KW power
Although some of them may be intermittent and dry during dry seasons, a lot of rivers of
this capacity and above can be found idle in the country as a whole and the area under
consideration in particular which would have been potential sources for hydro power and
other related purposes (Keneni, 2007).

Therefore, this study identifies the hydropower potential of the Fetam River watershed,
selecting, categorizing, ranking and mapping the potential sites according to the
established criteria.

4
1.2. Problem of Statement
. A country should have up-to-date and accurate information about the natural resources.
Such information is required for the management and the better utilization of the
resources. Out of the various natural resources available, water resource is the most
important one. The hydropower is a key to sustainable development and also its
contribution for alleviation of poverty is greater. But there is a lack of reliable and
accurate information about the hydropower potential in the Fetam river watershed. The
fundamental information regarding the magnitude and distribution of the potential in the
watershed helps in planning, formulating policies and strategies for the development of
run of river hydropower.

The Rural Area population is characterized by scattered settlement pattern, & far away
from the main grid, which leads for high expense of transmission line, this makes
difficult for the inter connected system to electrify this rural village.
As a result, the majority of the population in the rural area has to rely on biomass-based
energy system, which has resulted in massive deforestation and soil erosion in the region.
Moreover, in Fetam sub catchment Considerable amounts of effort and time are now
exerted for the collection of fuels which divert productive human capital from agriculture
and other income generating activities.
But in this watershed, there are perennial rivers, which Run of River hydropower
potential not assessed. Having these facts in mind the potential for hydropower for this
watershed is going to be assessed & the use of biomass energy sources reduced by
substituting renewable energy system.. One of the solutions for this problem is to identify
micro to small scale hydropower potential in the rural areas and develop them to the
energy source of rural areas.
1.3 Objectives of the study

1.3.1 General Objective

The general objective of the study is to identify micro to small hydro power potential in
Fetam river watershed.

5
1.3.2 Specific Objectives
 To assess suitable hydropower potential sites in Fetam watershed.
 To estimate of hydropower potential energy output of alternative feasible sites for
rural energy resource.
 To prioritize hydropower potential sites for micro to small scale hydropower
development in the watershed.
 To develop hydropower potential suitability map for fetam river
1.4. Research Questions
To achieve the mentioned objectives, this thesis will be analyzing the following research
questions:
1 What is a small hydropower potential?
2. What is the actual state of theoretical hydro potential in Fetam River watershed and
how they are distributed?
3, How the potential sites were being ranked for implementation?
1.5 Scope of the Study
This study does not deal with detail and deep investigation of hydropower development.
It is limited to assessment of micro to small hydropower potential of the watershed, not
with the higher capacities.so that further study and detail investigation and project
implementation is possible. In the selection of hydropower sites selection of materials
used of like DEM (resolution 30m*30m) rather than using less resolution and the gauge
station of the flow in the catchment area was only two so that, under such limitations it
was difficult for data checking and consistency and selecting and identifying suitable
hydraulic structures.

6
1.6 Significance of the Study
The significance of this study was to provide piece of information on potential
sites for small scale hydropower of Fetam rivers for national and regional policy
makers and water resources implementing agency, private company, government
organization and non-governmental organization and community of the study area
and use of the resource properly on available potential of Small hydro power and
available demands. The concerned body especially, Ethiopian Electric Power
Corporation (EEPCo) plans to cover most cities and towns as well as rural
villages that are adjacent to the national grid and at the same time which have
relatively good accessibility in the futures. This was by the use of the
interconnected grid system. On the other hand, the need for energy of other much
rural residents was also increasing from time to time. The present study may also
serve as a guide to develop and extend similar type of hydrologic study for other
regions in the country, which will help in the speedy development of small
hydropower sector. It will be used as input for advanced scientific research works.
The model has been formalized in ArcGIS model builder for evaluating the
general suitability of hydropower potential map, Therefore the procedure is
repeatable and can be reapplied with or without adjustments to the same or
different parameter.

7
2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. General Description of Hydropower

Hydropower engineering refers to the technology involved in converting the pressure
energy and kinetic energy of water into more easily used electric energy. The prime
mover in the case of hydropower is a water wheel or hydraulic turbine which transforms
the energy of the water into mechanical energy. Until the mid-1970s, the pattern of hydro
development was to develop bigger and bigger units because smaller hydro plants were
not competitive with fossil fuel power plants (Warnick et al, 1984).

2.3. Present and Future Development of Hydropower

The existing development of hydropower has resulted from a fairly uniform rate of
increase in competition with other modes of electrical energy production. Until the mid-
1970s, the pattern of hydro development was to develop bigger and bigger units because
smaller hydro plants were not competitive with fossil fuel power plants. Recently, with
rising costs of fossil fuels, the economic feasibility of small-scale hydro has changed.
During the period from 1940 to 1970, small units were actually forced out of production
because of the high cost of operation and the ready availability of electrical energy from
large steam power plants and large high-capacity Hydro plants. That situation having
changed, small-scale hydropower development is becoming an attractive energy
production alternative (Warnick, 1984).

2.3.1. Small hydro power project classification

Hydro power projects are generally categorized in two segments i.e. small and large
hydro. Different countries are following different norms keeping the upper limit of small
hydro ranging from 5 to 50 MW (Dudhani et al, 2006). Though different countries have
different criteria to classify hydro power plants, general classification of hydro power
plants is as follows.

8
2.3.2. Classification based on the Mode of power capacity
In Canada" small" can refer to upper limit capacities
of between 20 and 25 MW, in the United States "small" can mean 30 MW. However, a
value of up to 10 MW total capacities is becoming generally accepted. Small hydro can
be further subdivided in to small, mini and micro hydropower plant (Hudson et al, 2016).
Table 1: classification of hydropower plant based on power capacity

2.3.3. Mode of head concentration

The objective of a hydropower scheme is to convert the potential energy of a mass of
water, flowing in a stream with a certain fall to the turbine (termed the "head"), into
electric energy at the lower end of the scheme, where the powerhouse is located (celso et
al, 2004). The power output from the scheme is proportional to the flow and to the head.
Schemes are generally classified according to the “Head”:
1. High head: 100m and above
2. Medium head: 30 -100 m
3. Low head: 2 -30 m

2.3.4. Mode of discharge regulation

Hydropower plants are often classified in three main categories according to operation
and type of flow. Run-of-river , storage and pumped storage hydro power plants (HPPs)
all vary from the very small to the very large scale, depending on the hydrology and
topography of the watershed. In addition, there is a fourth category called in-stream
technology, which is a young and less-developed technology (Kumar et al, 2011).

9
2.3.5. Run-of-River
A „RoR‟ hydropower plant draws the energy for electricity production mainly from the
available firm flow of the river. Such a hydropower plant may include some short-term
storage (hourly, daily), allowing for some adaptations to the demand profile, but the
generation profile will to varying degrees be dictated by local river flow conditions. As a
result, generation depends on precipitation and runoff and may have substantial daily,
monthly or seasonal variations.

2.3.6. Storage Hydropower

Hydropower projects with a reservoir are also called storage hydropower since they store
water for later consumption. The reservoir reduces the dependence on the variability of
inflow. The generating stations are located at the dam toe or further downstream,
connected to the reservoir through tunnels or pipelines. The design of the HPP and type
of reservoir that can be built is very much dependent on opportunities offered by the
topography (Kumar et al, 2011).

2.3.7. Pumped storage

Powerhouse Tailrace Penstock Pumped storage plants are not energy sources, but are
instead storage devices. In such a system, water is pumped from a lower reservoir into an
upper reservoir usually during off-peak hours, while flow is reversed to generate
electricity during the daily peak load period or at other times of need.

2.4. Flow Duration Curve (FDC)

FDC is a cumulative frequency curve that shows the percent of time that flow in a stream
is likely to equal or exceed some specified value of interest. it can be used to show the
percentage of time the river flow can be expected to exceed a design flow of some
specified value or to show the discharge of a stream that occurs or is exceeded some
percent of the time. FDC can be developed using average stream flow data. Hydropower
design and hydro potential calculation require stream flow data which can be obtained
from the flow duration curve. The shape of FDC is significant in evaluating the stream
and basin characteristics. The slope of the curve at upper end shows the type of flood

10
regime the basin is likely to have, whereas the slope of the lower end of the curve
indicates the ability of basin to sustain low flows during dry seasons.

2.5 Hydropower Potential Calculation

Hydropower potential is a function of head drop and discharge at certain flow
exceedance. The theoretical ROR hydropower potential is calculated by using equation
(Maidment, 1993).
P = ρ*g*Q*H………………………………………………………………… (1)
Where, P = Power generated in Watt (W)
ρ = Mass density of water(kg/m3)
g = Acceleration due to gravity (m/s2) Q = Discharge (m3/s) H = Gross head drop (m)
• If there are numbers of sub-basins in a given basin, the total power of the basin can
be calculated by summing the potential of all sub-basins.
𝑛
P= ∑i ρ∗ g∗ Q∗H……………………………………………………………… (2)
𝑖=1 Where, i = Sub-basin number = 1.............n = Number of sub-basins. The mass
density of water is taken as 1000 kg/m3 and acceleration due to gravity as 9.81
m/s2. The gross head is the elevation difference between headrace and tailrace. By
estimating the head drop, H and discharge, Q of any basin, the theoretical hydro
potential can be calculated.

2.6. Micro and Small hydropower –an important rural energy source
In new and renewable energy sources, micro hydropower is mature in technology. Long
ago, human beings learnt how to make use of water for power and even now in some
countries like Ethiopia, primitive hydraulic devices can be found. Nowadays, MHP is
being developed, with the application of new technology and design to shorten its
construction period and the initial cost being reduced by full use of local people and
materials as well as a series of preferential policies from government. Even some
countries that stopped the development of small-scale hydropower schemes for many
years have decided to develop them again on account of the saving of oil and
environment considerations, etc. (Keneni, 2007).

11
 The main advantages of MHP and SHP are:
1. Its suitability for decentralized development, fully using local materials and
appropriate technology with the participation of local people;
2. Its mature technology and small investment risk;
3. Its low operating costs, easy maintenance, and reliable water supply;
4. Little environmental impact during construction, with some positive impact on
the environment;
5. The obvious social benefit to a developing local economy and improvements in
the material and spiritual life of local residents.
Hence, it is pointed out in a United Nations report that, as a clean and renewable energy,
small scale hydropower or MHP ought to be developed as a priority for its maximum
economic benefits as well as its multi-purposes, such as irrigation, water supply, fish-
breading and ecological effects (www.microhydropower.net/intro.htm/).

2.7. Components of micro and small hydropower

Micro-hydro systems have the following components:
1. A water turbine that converts the energy of flowing or falling water into mechanical
energy that drives a generator, which generates electrical power -this is the heart of a
micro-hydropower system
2. A control mechanism to provide stable electrical power
3. Electrical transmission lines to deliver the power to its destination
Depending on the site, the following may be needed to develop a micro and small
hydropower System:
1. An intake or weir to divert stream flow from the water course
2. A canal/pipeline to carry the water flow to the fore bay from the intake
3. A fore bay tank and trash rack to filter debris and prevent it from being drawn into the
turbine at the penstock pipe intake.
4. A silting basin to settle the sediments carried with the flow.

2.8. Small hydropower as a choice

Amongst the renewable energy technologies, small hydro-power is one of the most

12
attractive and probably the oldest environmentally friendly energy technology. Small
hydro potential is available on small rivers, canal head sand canal drops. Of all the non-
conventional renewable energy sources, small hydropower represents the highest density
resource and stands in first place in the generation of electricity from renewable sources
throughout the world (Dudhani et al, 2006). Hydropower plants are of three types (Okot,
2013).
Impoundment: this is a large hydropower system which uses a dam to store river water in
reservoir. Water stored in the reservoir is then used to generate electricity.
Diversion: a diversion facility channels a portion of a river through a canal or penstock.
This system may not require the use of a dam.
Run-of-river: the system uses water within the natural flow range and it requires little or
no impoundment. Small-scale hydro is mainly „run-of-river‟, so it involves construction
of a quite small dam or barrage, usually just a weir, and generally little or no water is
stored.
A small-scale hydropower facility generates power through the kinetic energy of moving
water as it passes through a turbine. Most small-scale hydropower facilities are „run-of-
river,‟ meaning that the natural flow of the river is maintained, and that a dam-made
reservoir is not created in order to generate power. Without a permanent dam to block
river flow, nor a large reservoir to flood arable land and disrupt river temperature and
composition levels, many of the negative impact of rivers in effects of traditional
hydropower are avoided with a small-scale hydropower plant (Kosnik, 2010).
SHP projects can be installed in rivers, small streams, dams and canals with negligible
apparent environmental effects. In order to minimize the environmental effects and
maximize water conservation, prominence has been given to the development and
integration of SHP projects into river systems during last few years (Nautiyal et al, 2011).
Small hydropower is a key element for sustainable development due to the following
reasons :( Nautiyal et al, 2011).

Proper utilization of water resources: various streams and rivers can safely provide
energy to run a small hydroelectric plant. No big water storage is required in such
projects which prevents resettlement and rehabilitation of the population. Small
13
hydropower is a renewable source of energy: small hydropower meets the definition of
renewable because it uses the energy of flowing water repeatedly and generates
electricity without fear of depletion also. Small hydro is a cost effective and sustainable
source of energy: simple and less expensive construction work and inexpensive
equipment are required to establish and operate small hydro-power projects. The cost of
electricity generation is inflation free. Also, the gestation period is short and the schemes
give financial returns quickly.
Small hydro aids in conserving scarce fossils fuels: no fossil fuels or other petroleum
products are required in small hydroelectric projects. SHP replaces the fossil – fired
generation of electricity. Low polluting: SHP projects are known for low carbon energy
production. Several authors have evaluated Small hydropower (SHP) projects as
candidates for the reduction in GHG emissions. Renewable energy technologies, which
include SHP, contribute to global sustainability through GHG mitigation, and these
technologies lead to building capacity and infrastructure sites. The development of small
hydro has low effect on the environment. In small hydro, no big storage is formed and
rehabilitation of population is not required as in case of large hydropower projects.
Development of rural and remote areas: In remote and hilly areas, sources for
development of Small Hydro Power Plants are found in abundance. Small hydro
development provides electricity, transportation, communication links and economy to
such rural areas.
Other uses: small hydropower also gives additional benefit as along with power
generation such as irrigation, water supply, flood prevention, fisheries and tourism.

2.9. Selection of Site for a hydro-electric power plant

While selecting a suitable site, if a good system of natural storage lakes at high altitudes
and with large catchment areas can be located; the plant will be comparatively
economical. Anyhow the essential characteristics of a good site are: large catchment
areas, high average rainfall and a favorable place for constructing the storage or reservoir.
For this purpose, the geological, geographical and meteorological conditions of a site
need careful investigation. The following factors should be given careful consideration
while selecting a site for a hydro-electric power plant: Water available, water-Storage,
14
head of Water, distance from load center and access to Site (Raja et al, 2006).

2.10. Methodology for hydropower potential estimation

The estimation of hydropower potential requires the estimation of head drop H and river
discharge Q. Different methodologies have been developed to estimate the head drop and
discharge. Head drop can be calculated manually from the topographic map or
automatically along the river system from Digital Elevation Model (DEM) using GIS
software. Estimation of discharge is a little more difficult because the river flow depends
upon the number of processes taking place in the catchment. The main processes are
surface runoff from precipitation, ground water flow, snow and glacial melt and
evapotranspiration. Generally, discharge observations are done only at a few locations in
the river catchment and therefore, the observed discharge data are not available at the
location of interest. Therefore, the discharge estimation is required upstream and
downstream of the observed point as the river flow changes with every new tributary.
Discharge estimation is also required for an ungagged river basin. Some of the
methodologies used to estimate the river discharge are: linear regression method,
drainage area ratio method and hydrological simulation.

Regression equations have been used to estimate the discharge at gauged and ungagged
sites in many countries. In this method, several parameters such as drainage area, land
use, climate variables, geomorphology etc. are used as the independent variables to
develop the regression equation of stream flow for the given catchment (Vogel et al,
1999).

Drainage area ratio method is a widely used technique in many cases where limited
stream flow recorded data are available. This method is easy to use, requires little data,
does not require any development, and many times, is the only method available because
regional statistics or precipitation-runoff models have not been developed (Emerson et al,
2005). However, this method is valid where the watersheds are of similar size, land use,
soil type and rainfall have similar pattern. This method is the most appropriate for use
when the ungagged site lies on the same stream as a gauging station and the accuracy
15
depends on the closeness of two sites (gauged and ungagged), similarities in drainage
area, and other physical and climatic characteristics of the basin (Flynn, 2003). Discharge
is estimated by drainage area weighting using equation (3),
Q ungagged=(𝑨𝒚/𝑨𝒙) *Q gauged) -------------------3
Were,
Q ungagged = Estimated discharge for at ungagged location
Q gauged = Flow for at gauged location
Ay = Drainage area at ungagged location
Ax = Drainage area at gauged location

2.11. GIS and Multi criteria analysis tool for site suitability
Selection of an appropriate site is a critical decision that could significantly affect the
profit and loss of the project under investigation. A number of tools have been used to
select proper sites for capital improvement facilities. Geographic Information Systems
and Multi Criteria Evaluation techniques (MCE) are the two common tools employed to
solve these problems. Although these tools have played an important role in solving site
selection problems, each tool has its own limitations and could not be used alone to reach
an optimum solution. GIS, which deals mainly with physical suitability analysis, has very
limited capability of incorporating the decision maker‟s preferences into the problem-
solving process. MCE, which deals mainly with analyzing decision problems and
evaluating the alternatives based on a decision maker‟s values and preferences, the
capability of handling spatial data (e.g., buffering and overlay) that are crucial to spatial
analysis. The need for combining the strengths of these two techniques has prompted
researchers to seek integration of GIS and MCE. This poses the challenge of integrating
these decision support tools. Such integration was achieved through loose and tight
coupling techniques. However, these techniques suffer many drawbacks and limitations.
Thorough discussion of these techniques and their limitations can be found elsewhere
(Eldrandaly, 2010).

16
2.12. GIS in hydropower potential estimation
The estimation of hydropower potential requires the estimation of head drop H and river
discharge Q. Head drop can be calculated manually from the topographic map or
automatically along the river system from Digital Elevation Model (DEM) using GIS
software. Estimation of discharge is a little more difficult because the river flow depends
upon the number of processes taking place in the catchment. The main processes are
surface runoff from precipitation, ground water flow, snow and glacial melt and
evapotranspiration. Generally, discharge observations are done only at a few locations in
the river catchment and therefore, the observed discharge data are not available at the
location of interest. Therefore, the discharge estimation is required upstream and
downstream of the observed point as the river flow changes Furthermore, the assessment
based on the location specific recorded data does not cover the entire potential basin, thus
leaving the more potential sites at other locations. The collection of observed data from a
large number of gauging stations is costly as well. With the advent of modern
computation tools such as GIS, remote sensing (RS) and hydrological models, the
aforementioned constraints have been addressed comprehensively. The realistic
representation of: (i) terrain, (ii) complex hydrological phenomena and (iii) varying
climate are now possible through the spatial tools and modeling techniques. GIS is a
computerized data management system that is used to digitally represent, store,
manipulate, analyze and manage all types of spatial or geographical data.RS is the
acquisition of information about an object or phenomenon without making physical
contact with the object. GIS is also used to locate and select the potential hydropower
sites. GIS was used to identify quickly the potential sites for micro and macro
hydropower sites in South Africa (Ballance et al, 2000). However, some of the limitations
of GIS-based hydrological models are the requirement of the enormous amount of data,
expensive GIS software and resolution of temporal data. The simulated results from the
GIS-based hydrological model can be used for the water resource planning where the
observed data are not available or insufficient.

17
3. MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY

3.1. Description of the study area

Fetam watershed is one of the major sub-basins of the south Blue Nile. The catchment is
located between 10o 20‟51.43‟‟N and 11o 01‟23.4‟‟N latitude and 37o52‟02.02‟‟E and
36o55‟2.56‟‟E longitude in the south Blue Nile Basin. Fetam River drain from the high
Mountainous area of Enjibara and Sekela at an approximately 2938 meter above sea
level to Wenberma Woreda an approximately 780 meter above sea level . Fetam River is
one of the tributary rivers of Abay basin which flows into Blue Nile River. The river
flows from Sekele woreda Ambisiwara kebele for a length of 109 km until it reaches
Blue Nile River at Wenberma woreda Koli Kebele. And it has a total drainage area of
111786 ha (1117.86 k.m2) drained by Fetam Rivers, is found both Awi Zone Banja,
Enjibara, Guagusa shikudad woredas and West Gojjam zone Sekella, Bure Zuria, Bure
Ketema ,Womberima Woredas in Amhara National Regional State, at 432 Km North of
Addis Ababa.

18
Figure 1 : Location of Fetam watershed

3.2. Topography
The watershed consists of flat and undulating topographies which vary from 780 m asl up
to 2938 m above sea level. 70% of area has a gentle slope (less than 10%) in the plain
region , and higher slope (above 25%) at Enjibara Mountain and outlet of the watershed
towards blue Nile river .

19
Figure 2 : Topography of Fetam Watershed

20
Figure3: Slope map of Fetam Watershed

3.3. Climate

3.3.1. Rainfall
The annual Rainfall is relatively higher in the watershed ranging between 1149 mm up to
2661 mm; the southern east part having lower rainfall, 1149-1363.3 mm/yr, and the
mountainous areas northern east part having higher rainfall, greater than 2483 mm/yr.
Based on the rainfall pattern, the year is divided into two seasons: a rainy season mainly
centered on the months of June to September, and a dry season from November to April.
October and may are an intermediate season where minor rains often occur. Of the total
annual rainfall, 70% to 90% occurs in the June to September rainy season. The mean
annual rainfall of the area is 1851mm though there is spatial variation with in the area.

21
Figure 4: Rainfall distributions in Fetam watershed using IDW

3.3.2 Temperature
The monthly temperature at Shindi is in the range 9.1𝑜 𝑐 to 29.9𝑜 𝑐. The monthly mean
maximum temperature varies from 23.8𝑜 𝑐 in July to 31.1𝑜 𝑐 in March and the monthly
mean minimum temperature varies from 9.9𝑜 𝑐 in January and December to 14.2𝑜 𝑐 in
May. The highest mean temperatures were always in March or April.

3.4. Administrative Structure of the Watershed

3.4.1 Administrative Woreda in the Watershed

Fetam watershed is located in Seven weredas, Banja, Enjibara Town Administration and
Guagusa Shikudad which are under the administration of Awi Zone and Sekela, Bure
zuria ,Bure Town Administration and Wonberma which are under the administration of
West Gojam Zone of Amhara Regional State.

22
Figure 5: Weredas found in Fetam watershed

3.4.2. Small town in the watershed

Around Fetam watershed there are Small Town like Enjibara, Tilili,Kessa,
Derowuha,Surba,Ambisi,Ambut,Shakua,Bure,Shindi,Bolede,Burafer,Markuma,Woinma,
Woinmajunction,Gomer,Kuch, Birsheleko and other small Community for accessing
electricity from Runoff River Hydropower potentials .The location of small Town show
below map.

23
Figure6 : Location of small Town and Community in the watershed

3.5. Data availability and analysis

3.5.1. Data availabillity

Availability of data is a necessary and crucial condition for any research work. Without
adequate data and information, it is impossible to get reliable result. Assessment of the
small-scale hydropower requires various geographic and discharge data; the first step
involves data collection and processing. Stream flow data, Rainfall data, Digital
Elevation Model (DEM), small town shape file and road shape file digitized from Google
Earth are among the collected spatial data. All of these and other related primary and
secondary data were necessary for the study, processing and analysis will be dealt with in
the following sections.

24
3.5.2. Digital elevation model
DEM is widely used in many applications such as geomorphology and landscape studies,
archeology, forestry and wildlife management, geological and hydrological modeling,
GIS, climate impact studies and educational programs. There are two publicly available
DEM dataset: SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission) and ASTER GDEM
(Advanced Space borne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer Global-DEM).
ASTER GDEM has 30m resolution compared to 90 m resolution in SRTM DEM
(Tachikawa 2011) and is better for mountainous terrain than SRTM. So that, the Fetam
watershed is delineated using ASTER DEM and used for further analysis.

3.5.3. Fetam watershed and Stream link by using model builder

Model is nothing but, collection of more than a sequence of tools and data chained
together; the output of one tool is fed to the input of another. Fetam watershed was
delineated using the "Hydrology" tool within the Spatial Analyst tools in Arc Toolbox by
using model builder. Stream network can be defined from DEM using the output from
Flow Accumulation function. In this study of the maximum flow accumulation was used
to define the stream, which is 20000 cell (18sqkm) by iteration used as a threshold value
to define the stream in the watershed. The output of the flow direction calculation
together with the direct runoff dataset serve as input data for the calculation of the flow
accumulation of ArcGIS. This function delineates stream networks in elevation models.
The tool calculates the accumulated flow as the accumulated weight of all cells “flowing”
into each raster cell. Cells with high flow accumulation values represent sinks in the
watershed; cells with low accumulation values represent highest elevation in the
watershed. When threshold value becomes smaller in number perennial as well as no
perennial streams was defined through the watershed. Selecting the hydropower site on
non-perennial streams require the construction of dam for long term storage. But in this
study micro to small hydropower potential was identified. This much potential more of
the time addressed with the help of runoff river type of hydropower plant, which is
constructed on Perennial River to get power throughout the year. So the threshold value
must amply the streams which flow throughout the year

25
Figure 7: Fetam Watershed Stream Link, Gauging Station and Outlet

3.5.4. Metrological data

Most of the meteorological stations for which data would be collect located inside the
watershed and some ware located around it. Taking into account the length of record,
continuity of data, concurrent period of observation and the distribution of stations in the
sub-basin, ten meteorological stations and two hydrologic stations are used for this study.
The relevant data in the research area is precipitation in the form of rainfall. Monthly
precipitation data of 10 stations namely Enjibara, Kessa,Tilili, Gundil,Sekela, Bure,
Sebader, Shindi, Layber, and Wegeded have been collected from the National
Meteorological services Agency of Ethiopia from Bahir Dar branch. The rainfall data
obtained from such nearest station to the Fetam catchment should be taken in to
consideration to develop Rainfall grid map of the catchment. The respective distance of

26
these rainfalls gauging station with respect to the respective base station was obtained by
using GIS from Rain gauge stations map. There is a break of data for a short period of
time or even for a particular month. Missing rainfall data with in such gauging stations
have been calculated and even also their consistency and homogeneity was also checked.
The selected meteorological stations are also presented in the following table. Source:
Information collected from Metrological Agency Bahir Dar Branch. Mean monthly

rainfall of each stations were attached in Appendix A Table1.

Figure 8: Location of selected Rain gauge station

From the above stations Gundil, Kessa,Tilili,Shindi,Sebader and Wegedad were located
within the watershed, the other stations located around the watershed. The estimator
stations for the base stations were selected based on their relative distance from the base
stations.

27
3.5.5. Estimating missing Precipitation Data
Measured precipitation data are important to many problems in hydrologic analysis and
design. The record at many rain gauge stations may consist of short breaks due to several
reasons such as absence of the observer, instrumental failures etc. it is better to estimate
these missing records and fill the gaps rather than to leave them. This applies especially
when data is processed with automatic equipment like an electronic computer (Reddy,
2005)
A number of methods have been proposed for estimating missing rainfall data. The
Arithmetic Mean Method is the simplest method. The normal-ratio method is based on
the weights on the mean annual rainfall at each gage and Distance power method is based
on the weights on distance of each estimator station from base station.
In this study the mean monthly rainfall values have been determined and the missing
monthly rainfall data have been filled using Simple Arithmetic mean and Normal Ratio
method.

3.5.5.1 Arithmetic mean method

If the normal annual precipitations at the adjacent stations are within 10% of the normal
rainfall of the station under consideration, then the missing rainfall data may be estimated
as a simple arithmetic average of the rainfalls at the adjacent gauges. Thus, if the missing
precipitation at station X is P𝑥and P1,P2,………,Pn are the rainfalls at the n surrounding
stations.(Reddy 2005)
𝐏𝒙= 𝑛 4.1

Usually the data from three surrounding gauges will give good results.

4.5.5.2 Normal - ratio method

If the normal annual rainfalls at the surrounding gauging stations differ from the normal
annual rainfall of the station in question by more than 10%, the normal ratio method is
preferred. In this method, the rainfall values at the surrounding stations are weighted by
the ratio of the normal annual rainfalls. The general formula for computing 𝑥 is:

𝐏𝐱= ∗ ∗ ∗ 4.2

28
Where: Nx is the normal annual rainfall at station X and N1,N2,……,Nm, are the normal
annual rainfalls at the m surrounding stations respectively. A minimum of three
surrounding stations are generally used in the normal ratio method (Reddy, 2005) .

3.5.5.3 Distance power method

The rainfall at a station is estimated as a weighted average of the observed rainfall at the
neighboring stations. The weights are equal to the reciprocal of the distance or some
power of the reciprocal of the distance of the estimator stations from the estimated
stations. Let Di be the distance of the estimator station from the estimated station. If the
weights are an inverse square of distance, the estimated rainfall at station A is:

PA = -------------------- 4.3

Note that the weights go on reducing with distance and approach zero at large distances.
A major shortcoming of this method is that the orographic features and spatial
distribution of the variables are not considered. The extra information, if stations are
close to each other, is not properly used. The distance of each estimator station from the
estimated station whose data is to be estimated is computed with the help of the
coordinates using the formula:
Di2 =[(𝐱−𝐱𝐢) +(𝐲−𝐲𝐢) ] ------------- 4.4

3.5.6. Consistency analysis

A consistent record is one where the characteristics of the record have not changed with
time. Adjusting for gauge consistency involves the estimation of an effect rather than a
missing value. An inconsistent record may result from any one of a number of events;
specifically, adjustment may be necessary due to changes in observation procedures,
changes in exposure of the gauge, changes in land use that make it impractical to
maintain the gauge at the old location.
The checking for inconsistency of the record is done by the double-mass curve technique.
This technique is based on the principle that when each recorded data comes from the
parent population they are consistent. The double mass curve technique is used to adjust
precipitation records to take account of non-representative factors such as change in
location or exposure of rain gauge. The accumulated totals of the gauge in question are
29
compared with the corresponding totals for a representative group of nearby gauge. In
hydrologic studies, the use of the accumulations of three measured variables plotted as a double-
mass curve may give indefinite results because we may be unable to say which of the variables
caused a break in slope. The pattern, which is composed of the average of many records,
is less affected by an inconsistency in the record of any one station. After constructing the
double mass curve, it was found that there is inconsistency occurred in Tilili Station .it
should be corrected by
Pcx = 𝑥∗ 4.5

Where: 𝑐𝑥= corrected precipitation at any time period T1at station x

𝑥= original recorded precipitation at time period T1at station x
𝑀𝑐= Corrected slope of the double mass curve
𝑀𝑎= Original slope of the double mass curve
After constructing the double mass curve, there is no inconsistency observed for all
stations except tilili Rainfall station. The Double Mass Curve for Enjibara (Tilili,Kessa
and Gundil as Base station),Tilili (Sekela,kessa and Gundil as a Base station) and
Shindi(Sebader, Bure and Wegedad are base station), which are the nearest Rain gauge
station for Fetam Watershed, were shown below. The double Mass Curves for the rest of
stations were plotted in appendix B .

Double mass curve for Enjibara Station

25000.00
ComulativeAnnual Rain fall for

R² = 0.9927
20000.00

15000.00
Enjibara

10000.00 Double mass curve for Enjibara

Station
5000.00

0.00
0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00 20000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall Base Station(mm)

30
Figure 9: Double Mass Curv for Enjibara Station

Double mass curve for Tilili Station"

R² = 0.9905
Comulative Annual Rain fall for Tilili

25000.00

20000.00
Station in mm

15000.00

10000.00 Double mass curve for Tilili

Station"
5000.00

0.00
0.00 10000.00 20000.00 30000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall base station in mm

Figure 10: Double Mass Curve for Tilili Station

Double mass curve for Shindi Station

20000.00
Comulative Rain fall in mm for

R² = 0.9896
15000.00
Shindy station

10000.00
Double mass curve for Shindi
5000.00 Station

0.00
0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00 20000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall Base Station in mm

Figure 11: Double Mass Curve for Shindi Station

3.5.7. Homogeneity checking for rainfall station

Checking homogeneity of group stations is essential. The homogeneity of the selected
base gauging stations average monthly rainfall records were made to be non-dimensional
using equation.

31
 ′= ∗ 4.6
Where: - ′- Non - dimensional value of rainfall for month i
l - Over years - averaged monthly rainfall at the station l
s - The over year - averaged yearly rainfall of the station

Homogeneity Test
25.00
Nondimentionalized Rainfall

20.00 Shindi
15.00 Layber
10.00 Wegeded
5.00 Bure

0.00
0 2 4 6 month 8 10 12 14

Figure 12: Homogeneity Test for Shindi‟s Base Station

25.00 Homogeneity Test

Nondimentionalized Rainfall

20.00

15.00 Tilili
10.00 Enjibara
Kessa
5.00
Gundil
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
month

Figure 13: Homogeneity Test for Enjibara‟s Base Station

32
 25
Homogeneity Test

Nondimentionalized Rainfall
20

15 Gundil
Tilili
10
Sekela
5
Kessa
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
month

Figure 14: Homogeneity Test for Tilili‟s Base Station

As shown in the above figure there is homogeneous nature between the base station of
Enjibara,Tilili and Shindi.The Homogeneity natures of the other stations are attached in
appendixB2 .

3.5.8. Stream flow data

It is one of the most important and predominant data for hydropower potential analysis.
Stream flow records are among the most valuable of all hydrologic data because they
represent an integration of all hydrologic factors. Furthermore, the flow of streams is a
sensitive indicator of climatic variations, because runoff is the residual of precipitation
after the demands for evapotranspiration are satisfied. With evapotranspiration losses
fairly constant from year to year in a given area, variations in annual runoff are much
greater in percentage than variations in annual precipitation. Fetam Watershed daily
stream flow data for the two gauging stations in Fetam catchment were collected from the
Abay Basin Authority. Hydrological data were the leading data set in the research work.
Majority of the Fetam watershed (73.33%) is controlled by the gauging stations while the
remaining small portion of the area 26.67%) remains without gauged. Upper Fetam
gauging station near Tilili for 24 years river flow data from this data 74 datas (25.694%)
missed and Lower Fetam near Kuch 18 years river flow data was used from this data 25
datas (11.574%) missed . To fill missed data a Regression equation method was used.
The filled stream flow data of Fetam watershed was attached in appendix C.

33
4.5.8.1. Stream flow data outlier test
An outlier is an observation that deviates significantly from the bulk of the data, which
may be due to errors in data collection, or recording, or due to natural causes. The
presence of outliers in the data causes difficulties when fitting a distribution to the data.
Low and high outliers are both possible and have different effects on the analysis. While
low outliers are more common than high outliers in flood records from arid regions, tests
should be made for both. The procedure depends on the station skew. If station skews are
less than -0.4, check for low outliers first. If station skew is greater than +0.4, check for
high outliers first. If the skew is between -0.4 and +0.4, a check for both high and low
outliers should be made simultaneously. If low outliers are identified, then they are
censored (for example, deleted from the flood record) and the moments recomputed.
When high outliers are identified, the moments must be recomputed using the historic-
peak adjustment; this requires historic flood information. If historic information is not
available, then the high outlier must be retained in the record (David, 1998). The Grubbs
and Beck (1972) test (G-B) was used to detect outliers. According to Borislava et al,
(2014) G-B test is best for outlier detections of hydrologic data. In this test, the quantities
higher limit (XH) and lower limit (XL) are calculated by using Equations 4-7 and 4.8.
XH = exp (Xmean+ KNS) 4.7
XL = exp (Xmean - KNS) 4.8
Where Xmean and S are the mean and standard deviation of the natural logarithms of the
sample, respectively, and KN is the G-B statistic (equation 4.9) tabulated for various
sample sizes and significance levels by Grubbs and Beck (1972). At the 10% significance
level, the following approximation proposed by (Pilon et al, 1985) is used, where N is the
sample size.
KN = -3.62201 + 6.28446N1/4 – 2.49835N ½ + 0.491436N3/4 – 0.037911N 4.9
Sample values greater than XH are considered to be high outliers, while those less than XL
is considered to be low outliers.

34
So from Tilili gauge station 1year stream flow data was lower outlier. The figurative
number was listed in appendix a table 2.

4.5.8.2. Checking consistence and homogeneity of stream flow data

The stream flow data inconsistencies result from a change in the amount of systematic
error associated with the recording of the data, such as those with changes in
instrumentation placement. While non-homogeneity defined as a change in the statistics
of the data set which are caused by natural or man-made changes like change in land use,
deforestation, water use, climate change etc. Therefore, before the data was used as an
input for any types of process, its consistency and homogeneity must be checked. To
detect the presence of inconsistencies or non – homogeneities in Fetam river flow data,
split record tests on Variances and Means are applied (from the total order of 24 yearly
upper Fetam observational data, in one group 12 number of data set and in the next group
12 number of data set and from the total order of 18 yearly Lower Fetam observational
data, in one group 9 number of data set and in the next group 9 number of data set were
prepared for checking stability of variance and mean). Among different test types, simple
but efficient procedures for screening the data in annual time series are selected. These
are F-test for stability of Variances, t-test for stability of Mean and Spearman`s rank
correlation test for indicating absence of trends.
a. Graphical representation of gauged stream flow data
Trend of time series analysis is widely used to forecast logistics, production or other
business process. Usually you want to understand if there is a trend or seasonality in the
time series. This could support forecasting and planning. However, there are different
approaches to understanding trend. While trend often refers to historical changes of data
and to verify the trend of the time series of yearly upper and lower Fetam stream flow
data plotted as shown below.

35
 Uper Fetam Time series Yearly flow
12

10
Annual av.flow(m3/s)

0
1985 1990 1995
Years 2000

Figure 15: Verification of time series upper Fetam stream flow data in different years

Lower Fetam time series yearly flow

30
Annual av. flow(m3/s)

25
20
15
10
5
0
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
years

Figure 16: Verification of time series Lower Fetam near Galibed stream flow data in
different years
The upper and lower Fetam the original flow data yielded average annual flow values,
which were tested for trend. Time series of average annual flow conveys information on
some extent only. The time series of the yearly river flow data does not show any
discontinuities.

b. Spearman`s rank-correlation coefficient method

The Spearman`s Rank-correlation coefficient, Rsp is expressed as:
36
 ∗∑
5 .1
∗

Where n is the total number of data, D is difference, and i is the chronological order
number. The difference between rankings is computed as:
Di =Kx – Ky 5.2
Where Kx, is the rank of the variable, x, which is the chronological order number of the
observations. The series of observations, y, is transformed to its rank equivalent, Ky, by
assigning the chronological order number of an observation in the original series to the
corresponding order number in the ranked series, y.

tt 𝑝∗( ) 5.3

Where has Student‟s t-distribution with v = n-2 degrees of freedom. Student‟s t-

distribution is symmetrical around t = O. Appendix D contains a table 4 of the percentile
points of the t-distribution for a significance level of 5 per cent (two-tailed). At a
significance level of 5 percent (two-tailed), the time series has no trend if:
t {𝒗, .𝟓%} < tt < t{𝒗,𝟗𝟕.𝟓% } 5.4
The table which show the computation procedure of Spearman`s Rank-correlation
coefficient Method for checking the trend of long term upper and lower Fetam Stream
flow data was attached in appendix D.
The table of percentile points for the t-distribution (upper Fetam near Tilili ) table 3 and
(Lower Fetam near Galibed) table 4 gives the critical Values at the 5-percent level of
significance for 24 - 2 = 22and18-2=16 degrees of freedom respectively as:
Table 2: Uper Fetam stream flow percentile points for t-distribution

t{(v,2.5%)} tt t {(v,97.5%)}
-2.06 0.298 2.06

Table 3: Lower Fetam stream flow percentile points for t-distribution

t{(v,2.5%)} tt t {(v,97.5%)}
-2.1 0.203 2.1

37
When checking the above two table result against the permissible Range in Equation 5.1,
the condition is satisfied. Thus, the time series doesn't have trend. Therefore, it is possible
to use the stream flow data for further analysis.

4.5.8.3. Checking the stability of mean and variance

a) Checking the stability of variance using F-test
The Fisher distribution, F-test is the statistical test which is analyzed the ratio of the
Variance of two split, non-over lapping, and sub-sets of the time series. In order to carry
over the F-test, the River flow time series are grouped (split) in to two non-over lapping
sub-sets (i.e upper Fetam . 1 - 12 and 13- 24 and Lower Fetam.1-9 and 10-18).
The fisher distribution test statistically expressed as:

5.5

Where S2 is variance and its convenient formula for computing the sample Standard
deviation, S is expressed as follow: -

Where, X i is the observation, n is the total number of data in the sample, and X mean is
the mean of the data. The null hypothesis for the test, Ho: S12 = S22 is the equality of the
variance; the alternate hypothesis is H1: S12< > S22.
The variance of the time series is stable, and one can use the sample standard deviation, s,
as an estimate of the population standard deviation if;

Where V1 = n1-1, is the number of degree of freedom for the nominator.

V2 = n2-1, is the number of degree of freedom for the denominator. n1 and n2 are the
number of data in each sub-set. One should therefore enter Tables properly, usually by
taking v1 horizontally and v2 vertically. (See Appendix D table 5 for a table of the F-
distribution F {V1, V2, P} for the 5-per-cent level of significance (two- tailed).

38
b) Checking the Stability of mean by using t-test
In order to compute the t-test for the Mean stability, the same sub-sets from F-test (for
stability of variance test) are used. A suitable statistic for testing the null hypothesis,

5.6
Where, n is the number of observation in subset, x is the mean of the subset and s is the
variance.
The Mean of the time series is considered stable if:
t {v,2.5%} < tt < t{v,97.5%}
The computation of stability of Variance, Ft and stability of Mean, tt, by using the same
two sub-sets of Fetam River Mean yearly stream flow data is attached in appendix E.
Fisher test Computation with referring tables of appendix D table 5 and table5
Table 4: Uper Fetam stream flow percentile points for F-test and T test

F(t) F{(V1,V2,97.5%)} t tt t{v,97.5%}

F{(v1,v2,2.5%)} {v,2.5%}
0.305 1.6069 3.28 -2.06 -0.9594 2.06

Table 5: Lower Fetam stream flow percentile points for F-test and T test
F{(v1,v2,2.5%)} F(t) F{(V1,V2,97.5%)} t tt t{v,97.5%}
{v,2.5%}
0.248 1.3133 4.03 -2.1 0.5547 2.1

Upper and Lower Fetam stream flow analysis result of variance stability and Mean
stability analysis shows that, Ft and tt values are being within the permissible stable
range. So that the variance and mean of the time series stream flow data of Fetam river
watershed have been stable at 5% significance level. Based on the consistency and

39
homogeneity analysis were performed in the above two table, the data has been
consistence and homogeneous So that, it is possible to utilize stream flow data for further
studies of hydropower potential assessment on Fetam River watershed.

3.5.9. Stream flow data analysis

3.5.9.1. Transfer data to runoff factor estimator sites

Majority of the Fetam watershed (73.33%) is controlled by the gauging stations while the
remaining small portion of the area 26.67%) remains without gauged. usually it is not
common for these gauges to be located precisely at rivers confluence and site of interest.
Stream flow can be calculated for different time periods in gauged station and in order to
extend the data from gauged to ungagged scheme areas in upstream or downstream of
those stations, proportional relationships of discharge to change drainage area and mean
annual values of precipitation of ungagged to gagged area is used in the following
equation (Adimasu ,2000).

𝑛 𝑎 𝑖 ( ∗ 𝑎 ) -- 5.7

Where, Asite=Drainage area of selected site

A gauge=Drainage area of gauged site
Q ungagged Site=Discharge at selected Site (m3/s)
Q gauge=Discharge at gauge site
n=Varies between 0.6 – 1.2
The stream flow data of Fetam river at gauged station transferred to the ungagged
(Runoff Factor and Parametric duration curve estimator sites) was done by area ratio
method. Runoff factor estimator Site & gauge station are also used as parametric duration
curve estimator sites. Estimator sites for development of representative Runoff factor and
parametric duration curve equation was selected based on the criteria of area ratio method
and have relatively the same land use, soil type, main stream slope, topography,
morphology and Drainage area and even also projected along the same stream line.
Northern parts of the watershed have high runoff factor and the south of the watershed

40
relatively low runoff factor. Most of suitable sites found at the middle part of Fetam
watershed. Location of gauged and runoff factor estimator sites attached appendix E1.

Figure 17 : Fetam watershed of runoff factor estimator sites

3.5.10. Develop flow duration curve for gauged site

Flow duration curve is used to relate flow rate with duration. The discharge Qp or more
will be available for p percent of the time of the total data period. Thus Q min = Q100
would be that discharge available for 100 percent of the time. Perennial streams would
show a finite value for Q100, while intermittent stream would show zero ordinates
corresponding to the duration for which they are non-flowing (Dandkar and Sharma
1997). The number of monthly flow values for upper and lower Fetam stream flow data
series greater than or equal to the upper limit of specified category was calculated. This
41
value was divided by the total number of flows to find the percent of monthly flows
greater than or equal to the highest flow in that category.
The steps to draw flow duration curve from available to daily average discharge data are
listed below:
1. Transfer or input the gauge mean monthly flow measurement data in to exce1
2. Compute the total number of months in the period of record
3. Sort the data according to magnitude and assign ranks. Highlight all of the data and
select the sort command to rank data by flow from largest to smallest. Create a new
column and assign each discharge value. Use the excel auto-fill feature to generate a list
of rank numbers down to the last discharge row.
4. Compute exceeded probability (p) for flow in each line of data by using the formula
provided below. Apply the formula to all flows and calculate all the exceeded
probabilities by copying the formula down the column to the last ranked discharge row
and the percentage probability of any flow magnitude Q being equaled or exceeded is
given as
∗ 5.8

Where,
P=Probability that a given flow will be equaled or exceeded (% of time)
M=Ranked position on the listing (dimensionless)
N= Number of events for period of record (dimension less)
The graph of flow duration curve. Figure 22 and 23 shows a typical flow duration curve
for the Fetam River watershed at both gauged site.

42
 FDC of uper Fetam River Gauging Station

45.000
40.000
35.000
30.000
25.000
20.000 FDC

15.000
10.000
5.000
0.000
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
% of excedance Time

Figure 18: flow duration curve for uper Fetam River at gauge station

FDC of Lower Fetam River Gauging Station

120.000

100.000

80.000

60.000
FDC
40.000

20.000

0.000
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 100.00
% Of excedance Time

Figure 19:flow duration curve for lower Fetam River at gauge station

3.6. Methodology used in hydropower potential estimation

3.6.1. GIS Technology

New opportunities are arising for evaluation of hydropower potential since the innovative
development of remote sensing and satellite data, and their easiness of data processing
due to the progress in GIS tools. As such, GIS based applications have been widely used
43
to estimate hydropower potential in the world. GIS is a system comprising of computer
software, hardware, data and personnel to help manipulate, analyze and present
information that is tied to a spatial location;
a. Spatial location – geographic location
b. Information – visualization of data
c. System – linking software, hardware and data
d. Personnel – Users exploiting the power of GIS
A geographic information system (GIS) is designed to visualize, store and analyze the
information about the locations, topology, and attributes of spatial features. In most GIS
programs, data are stored and managed in a relational database embedded in the system.
A GIS program can perform regular database management tasks in addition to spatial
analysis hence GIS can be considered as a relational database management system with a
map interface for data presentation. GIS based hydrologic modeling is performed on raster
cells using topographical and meteorological datasets. The spatial analysis was assessed in
order to find out about suitable locations for hydropower site and to calculate runoff at
the suitable locations for an estimation of hydropower potential in the watershed. The
hydropower potential is calculated based on the accumulation of single hydropower
amounts to obtain an allover amount of theoretical hydropower potential for the specific
site. Water comes down as precipitation and runs over a certain surface until it is
accumulated in the lowest Cells of watershed. These cells are simultaneously the cells of
highest potential and the locations suitable for building hydropower plants.
To develop the power duration curve and estimate the flow in river at 30%, 50% and 90%
and other percentage of time of the discharge values are first arranged in descending
order and the highest value is ranked one.
The general methodology used in the estimation of hydro potential consists of mainly
four parts:
i) estimation of discharge along the river system and
ii) estimation of potential head drop
iii) accessibility of road
iv) accessibility to the community

44
3.6.2. Potential head drop estimation of the site
The Hydropower potential assessment requires the drop in head along the river. Focal
statistics function is applied on the digital elevation data. This is a function which
computes the necessary statistics (i.e. minimum) for the neighboring cells surrounding
each individual cell. A run-off-river plant does not require space for water storage and
500 meter horizontal distance between two plants is usually considered feasible(Khan
and Zaid 2015).In the contemporary analysis, the minimum function is applied to a
rectangle containing 18*18 cells around each cell which are used to find the minimum
cells around each raster cell (lowest neighboring cells).The minimum neighbors‟ dataset
is then subtracted from DEM(from fill sink),which is 30m*30m resolution, in order to
find out the drop elevation of each cell to its minimum neighbors. The output is the
height value “head”, which is then, used in the equation to calculate the potential energy.
The head difference between the fill sink DEM and the DEM, which contain a pixel value
of minimum elevation of neighboring particular cell within 500m increment, was
considered in this study. The head drop obtained for The head drop obtained for each
hydropower potential sites through the method of focal statistics was checked by taking
the head of Sample suitable potential sites from the Fetam Watershed by using
differential leveling survey instrument. In the GIS environment using model builder the
work flow shows in the figure bellow.

45
Figure 20:Fetam watershed head map work flow using model builder

3.6.3. Watershed GIS based raster grid value development of discharge

To predict average flows at ungagged points on Fetam river watershed. The technique
called for the development of grid based maps of elevations and average annual rainfall
and then applying various GIS Watershed functions available in the computer program
Arc Map. The end product was a grid based map of average annual flow in the streams.
Following is a detailed explanation of this process.

3.6.3.1. Development of an average rainfall grid map

The raster map of elevation with resolution of 30m by 30m digital elevation model (the
data obtained from Abay basin Authority of Bahir Dar branch) was an input for
development of an average Rainfall Grid. Rainfall grid map is the map that represents the
average annual rainfall amount falling into each grid cell. The average annual Rainfall
for 10 Rain gauge stations within and around the Fetam watershed were collected. In this
study 10 year monthly rainfall data was collected from Ethiopian Metrological Agency of
Bahir Dar branch. The Annual Average Rainfall from this point Rain gauge stations were
used to develop Rainfall Grid map of Fetam Watershed through Inverse Distance Weight
(IDW) surface interpolation method.
46
Figure 21: Fetam watershed rain fall interpolation work flow using model builder

Figure 22 : Rainfall Raster Map of Fetam Watershed

3.6.3.2. Combining Flow direction and rainfall grid accumulation

The direction of flow determines the ultimate destination of the water flowing across the
surface of the land. Flow direction for a given grid cell is assigned a value to indicate the
direction of flow and this value is determined by using the elevation values from the fill
DEM. The water flows from particular grid cell (center) to steepest neighboring cells

47
(surrounded) on the topography. Flow accumulation computes the accumulated numbers
of cells that are draining in the flow path pass through grid cell based on flow direction.
The values from flow accumulation identify the streams because the flow paths of many
points pass through the stream points. Combine the flow direction raster and the average
annual rainfall raster. The result was a raster map that shows the total amount of rainfall
accumulating in each cell each year. To accomplish this step, the "Accumulation" Spatial
Analyst function was applied. The rainfall raster map of Fetam watershed was used as the
input weight raster in the "Accumulation" function. In this manner the spatial analyst
sums up the total accumulation of rainfall traveling down gradient through the Fetam
river systems. Proper conversions factor is applied to the raster map so that the resulting
values come out in units of cubic meter per second (cms) average annual flow of Fetam
River.

Figure 23: Discharge output of each cell in Fetam watershed without loss
When developing Rainfall accumulation grid in the above Figure23, loss in the
hydrologic system was not considered. This value is sometimes referred to as the

48
Precipitation Area product as it is the product of the average annual precipitation in a
watershed times the area of the watershed.

Figure 24: Average grid Flow with considering loss.

The cell nearest the Tilili gaged site and Lower Fetam gaged site has a value
8.93327m3/s and 18.47506m3/s respectively almost the discharge of grid value the same
to gauged value. A Runoff Factor (RO) is computed for each station. This factor is the
ratio of the average annual flow at the station to the average annual rainfall accumulation.

49
Figure 25: Runoff Factor Map

This factor map was applied to the rainfall accumulation map that was developed the
average flow map for streams on the Fetam watershed. The pixel value of estimated
average annual flow at the gauge station of near Tilili and Lower Fetam watershed is
8.9313m3/s and 18.475m3/s respectively. This value is very close to the actual average
annual flow measured at the outlet site of both near Tilili and Lower Fetam watershed
8.885m3/s and 18.587m3/s Respectively.

3.6.4. Development of parametric duration equation map for key percent of Exceedance
To develop parametric duration equation for Fetam Watershed for the corresponding Key
percent of exceedance, which is used for sizing of the hydropower plant, estimator sites
should be required. This estimator sites must be selected based on discharge grid value
distribution throughout the longitudinal river reach in order to develop representative
parametric duration curve (Mehari K.2017). In this study nine (9) representative sites
selected from different discharge ranging scale including both gauged station. Most of the
parametric duration curve estimator sites all most near from the gauge station. Due to this
reason their drainage area size, main stream line slope, topographical condition the same
in some extent to that of the drainage area of gauging station. So that, use area ratio
50
method to transfer stream flow data from gauge site to those parametric duration equation
estimator sites. The long-term mean monthly flow was computed for each site. The
values of Q (the discharge q until of key percent of exceedance) vs long-term mean
monthly Flow was plotted for each exceedance value at each site. This is so called
parametric duration equation of the Fetam watershed for the corresponding key percent of
exceedance. The Q percent discharge and long-term mean monthly flow at each estimator
site was shown in table 6.
Table 6: Average annual flow with Q percent discharge

Site name Area in sqkm Qave Q90 Q50 Q30

Lower Fetam(near Kuch) 763.1 18.587 0.874 4.123 20.822
Lower Fetam estimator Site_1 758.4 18.484 0.869 4.100 20.706
Lower Fetam estimator Site_2 668.6 16.502 0.776 3.660 18.486
Lower Fetam estimator Site_3 644.8 15.972 0.751 3.543 17.893
Upper Fetam estimator site_4 504.76 12.813 0.6109 2.4667 10.586
Upper fetam (near Tilili) 217.7 8.858 0.303 2.240 12.359
Upper Fetam estimator site_1 205.9 8.424 0.286 2.669 11.691
upper Fetam estimator site_2 193.7 7.974 0.271 2.012 11.066
Uper Fetam estimatoter site_3 185.6 7.673 0.260 1.936 10.648

25.000
Flow for Key percent of

y = 0.8879x + 3.5434 "PMFDC"90

Exceedance(m3/s)

20.000
R² = 0.8634
PMFDC50
15.000
PMFDC30
10.000 y = 0.0583x - 0.1909 y = 0.1817x + 0.6446
R² = 0.9145 Linear ("PMFDC"90)
R² = 0.9924
5.000 Linear ("PMFDC"90)
0.000 Linear (PMFDC50)
0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000
Linear (PMFDC30)
Q av. flow (m3/s)

Figure 26: Parametric flow Duration equation for Fetam watershed

51
Key probabilities of exceedance (Q30 and Q50) are used most of the time to fix the size
of hydro power plant and Q90 used to fix the dependable or firm power potential of the
site. The water availability for SHP is based on 90% dependability (Nwachukwu, 2005).
The selection of such probability of Exceedance is based on economical point of view.
To develop discharge Raster map of Fetam Watershed for Q30, Q50, and Q90 the
equation y=0.8879x+3.5434, y=0.1817x+0.6446, and y=0.0583x-0.1909 respectively,
which is developed from parametric duration equation estimator sites were used.

3.7. Selection of suitable sites for run of river hydropower based on

sensitive criteria
To select hydropower feasible sites, selection criteria should be developed. In this study
hydropower power, discharge, head, distance from the road and distance from the
community were considered as selection criteria. The table shown below describes
sensitive criteria with the corresponding range of criteria‟s (Getnet, 2019)

Table 7: The criteria and limit factor to identify potential feasible sites

Criteria Range
Discharge >=0.1m 3 /s
Head >=5m
Power >=5kw
Distance from the road <2.5km
Distance from the community <8.5km
By using weighted overlay analysis of raster map of those criteria in the GIS
Environment, the hydropower potential sites which inclusive the above five criteria should
be selected. This selected suitable run of river hydropower sites was used for further analysis.

3.8. Suitability analysis of the Run of River Hydropower sites based on

GIS based multi criteria analysis (GIS-MCA)
GIS-based Multi Criteria Evaluation (GIS-MCA) can be defined as a process that
integrates and transforms geographic data (map criteria) and value judgments (decision
maker‟s preferences) to obtain overall assessment of the decision alternatives
(Malczewski, 1999). The procedural steps of the proposed GIS-based MCA approach
52
details five steps as explained below. In this study Selection of Suitable sites for
hydropower based on the given criteria were done by GIS based Multi criteria analysis
(GIS-MCA).
Even if the criterion scores have been determined on a ratio scale for all criteria, these
scores are mutually incomparable since most of the measurement units will differ from
each other. One criterion might be expressed, for instance, in kilo meter, whereas another
criterion is measured in number. To make the various criterion scores comparable it is
necessary to transform them into one common measurement unit, for example by taking
care that for each criterion the scores will get a range from 0 to 1. This kind of
transformation is called standardization. There are different kinds of standardization from
them the following method is best for pairwise comparison. Transformation of raw scores
to scores with in a range from 0 to 1 for which holds that its interval-scale properties are
further used. This type of standardization is especially appropriate in case a technique is
used to perform a pairwise comparison (analytical hierarchy process) of the criterion
scores. This kind of standardization can be written as

Standardized score i 5.8

For minimization criterion like accessibility of road and distance from small town of
sites

Standardized score i

This kind of transformation means that the worst criterion score will always be given a
standardized value of 0, whereas the best criterion score will always have a standardized
value of 1 (Voogd, 1982).
There are two types of criteria in standardization: benefit criteria and cost criteria which
are a higher criterion score implies a better score and worst score respectively.
Direct standardized score= 𝑎𝑛 𝑎 𝑖 𝑐𝑜 (Benefit criterion) and
1- 𝑎𝑛 𝑎 𝑖 𝑐𝑜 (Cost criterion)

3.8.1. The application of Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)

AHP was the most widely used MCDA method. AHP generates all criteria weighting and
alternative preference within each criterion by eliciting these values from the decision

53
maker through a series of pair wise comparisons, as opposed to utilizing numerical values
directly. Thus, a complex decision is reduced to a series of simpler ones, between pairs of
alternative values within criteria or between pairs of criteria. The decision maker's
preference is always explicit. However, the decision maker may be asked to make small
decisions. Hence, it becomes important to generate an optimized hierarchy of criteria and
alternatives, to reduce the number of pair wise decision. Criterion used in this research to
get the best suitable hydropower site from alternative are;
Discharge: one of the main key parameters to determining the potential of a river is the
stream flow or discharge.
Head: The potential energy that makes the turbine to rotate while the water strikes.
Especially in hydropower scheme development the head plays a great role in generation
of the power. Therefore, sites with high head shall be exploited.
Power: stream, power is the combination of head and discharge. The sites with the best
intersection of head and discharge are suitable site for hydropower plant development.
This criterion contains the effect of both discharge and head.
Accessibility of road: It is one of the most important criteria for project prioritization
because accessibility influences duration of study, construction period and cost of
projects.
Distance: Distance from the site to the required towns or community one of the main
factor to determine the project cost. Since the more distance consumes more time and
budget to transport construction materials and also long power transmission line.
Ranking the alternatives: Utilizing the vectors of criteria weights and the matrix of
alternative scores a global score and hence ranking for each alternative is calculated
(Jonnes, 2014). In this research ranking of alternatives of the hydropower sites using
these criteria the sites are prioritized using the equation (5.9)
R=a1X1+a2X2+a3X3+a4X4 5.9
Where a= assigned value for each criteria weight
X=the standard score attached to each criterion (0 up to 1).
R= Ranking Value (suitability index).

54
 3.9. Conceptual frame work of the overall work flow of the study using
figure
Rainfall Stream Flow Flow data
DEM(fill)
Data interpolation

Focal Flow direction Data Analysis Data Transfer to

map Area Ratio method Parametric
Statistics
Duration Curve
IDW Estimator sites.
Data Transfer to
Neighborhood
Flow Runoff Factor
function Rainfall
accumulation Estimator Sites Develop
map(area) Raster map Parametric
Duration Curve
Stream Flow at gauged and
Annual Rainfall Accumulation Estimator sites/(A*P)
Head map (m) Develop Discharge
map (A*P)
Grid Map for Key
Runoff Factor Percent of
Raster Map Exceedance

Long-term Mean Discharge map (m3/s)

Hydropower Power potential Hydropower for

Design Discharge
and Firm Discharge
Figure 27 : Conceptual Frame work

55
3.10. General work flow of the study using GIS model builder

Figure 28.General Work flow using GIS model builder

56
 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Identification of suitable sites for run of river hydropower potential

The sites which are suitable for hydropower potential development throughout the
streams within the Fetam Watershed were analyzed and suitable sites were selected based
on Raster based value of hydropower power, Head and Discharge. The sites, which are
suitable for hydropower plant development was presented in table as well as in the figure
format as follow.
Table 8: Firm Power Suitable Hydropower potential sites

Site X Y Z Head Firm power in Site Suitability

kw value
Site-1 283152 1201644 2451 8 25.389 0.413898

Site-2 283032 1200331 2436 11 34.879 0.426409

Site-3 279137 1184218 2104 27 103.389 0.422762

Site-4 281328 1181800 2055 9 43.108 0.412327

Site-5 281074 1180567 2041 7 32.997 0.403336

Site-6 280650 1180144 2029 8 37.565 0.403035

Site-7 280814 1178382 2024 5 24.277 0.403817

Site-8 280947 1175567 2003 8 40.159 0.402723

Site-9 280323 1172603 1989 14 69.946 0.433731

Site-10 281767 1158744 1962 12 103.111 0.484677

Site-11 281640 1157903 1948 12 103.552 0.473312

Site-12 279742 1152245 1621 42 377.644 0.652556

Site-13 278529 1150405 1208 28 271.292 0.482362

Site-14 277275 1149934 1145 30 297.137 0.493906

Site-15 275290 1147642 1047 32 324.001 0.444065

57
Figure 29: Suitable Sites for micro to Small scale hydropower potential in Fetam
watershed
Most of suitable Hydropower potential sites were found in the stream of Fetam
Watershed locally called Tiyatya,Chirar Galebed,Bokotabo and Tilili town
administration which is found from the main Fetam River. The minimum flow conditions
represent practical limits to generating power from an economic stand point is 0.1m3/s
( Monk.et al, 2007). In this study the flow above 0.1m3/s from a Grid based map of long
term dependable (Firm) flow of Fetam stream (Q90) was extracted for hydropower
generation to make the practical limit more acceptable. The discharge of all selected
hydropower sites from Fetam Watershed were above 0.1m3/s.
The head of those selected hydropower sites were varying in the range 5 to 50 meter.
From the total order of 15 hydropower sites 10 sites have the head which lay in the range

58
of 5 to 15meter where as the head of the remaining sites lay in the range between 15 to 50
meters. The distribution of head over the river stretch was described in table and figure
shown below.
Table 9: Range of head for hydropower potential sites
Range of Head(m) Number of Sites
5 <= H < 15 10
15 < H < 50 5

Figure 30: Range of Head drop for Hydropower Potential sites.

During identification of the site consecutive cells were occur which satisfy the given
range. In such case the cell, which have the maximum head could be selected with in
500m interval in the GIS environment. Because the variation of head within a short
distance is significantly high relative to the variation of discharge within the same
increment of reach segment. In case the production of power also increases significantly,
when selecting successive sites based on head increment rather than increment of
discharge. According to the range of site selecting criteria 35 suitable cells for
hydropower potential were occurred. But there were sites, which occur successively

59
suitability index less than 0.4. In order to maintain 500m distance between successive
suitable hydropower sites (cells), measured the distance in GIS environment between
proposed sites. By doing this the final suitable sites for hydropower potential
development reduces to 15 numbers of sites.

4.2. Power and energy determination for the identified sites

The power and energy output for selected hydropower sites in the Fetam river watershed
was basically based on the discharge raster map and head raster map.

4.2.1. Discharge Raster Map

Most of the time discharge is useful for sizing the hydropower plant. Key probabilities of
exceedance (Q30, and Q50) are used most of the time to fix the size of hydro power plant
and Q90 used to fix the dependable or firm power potential of the site. The water
availability for SHP is based on 90% dependability (Nwachukwu, 2005). The selection of
such probability of Exceedance is based on economical point of view. To develop
discharge Raster map of Fetam Watershed for Q30, Q50, and Q90 the equation
y=0.8879x+3.5434, y=0.1817x+0.6446, and y=0.0583x-0.1909 respectively, which is
developed from parametric duration equation estimator sites were used.

60
 Figure 31: Discharge Raster map for Q90

4.2.2. Head Drop Raster map

The head raster map of Fetam watershed was shown in the figure 37 below.

61
Figure 32: Raster Map of Head Drop for Fetam Watershed
The south western, central and some northeastern edge part of the Fetam watershed has
high head, which is represented by the white and grey color in the digital elevation
model. The some southeastern and some northwestern part of the watershed has flat area
and not recommended for hydropower potential development which is represented by the
black color in the digital elevation model. The percentage area coverage for the range of
Raster map of head drop for Fetam Watershed is summarized in the table below.
Table 10: Percent area coverage of Head drop distribution within 500m increment
Range of head drop(m) Percentage of area coverage
0-5 20.45
5-15 27.99
15-30 25.69
30-50 8.93
50-100 9.01
100-200 7.51
200-307 0.41

62
From the table shown above around 83.6% of the Fetam watershed have a drop of Head
in the Range between 0-50m within 500m searching radius. But only 16.93% of the
watershed have a head above 50m.This indicates that most of the topography of the
Fetam Watershed have relatively lower head.
To check the head measurement accuracy from head drop through Focal Statistics,
leveling survey readings were taken at three selected accessible sites in the site to justify
weather errors occurred or not. The difference between head drop through Focal Statistics
and leveling survey reading is taken as error of the head drop through Focal Statistics.
Then after the error magnitude between head drop through Focal Statistics and leveling
survey reading is known, head measurement gap in head drop through Focal Statistics
was lower than by this leveling survey readings value.

Differential leveling or spirit leveling is the most accurate simple direct method of
determining the difference of level between two points using an instrument known as
level with a leveling staff.
Table 11: error estimation between Measured Head drops by leveling survey and Head
Drop through Focal Statistics

Head from leveling (m) Head from Focal statistics Error ( m)

(m)
9.98 8 1.98
12.991 11 1.991
29.014 27 2.014
Average 1.995

The average total station survey measurement error value from three hydropower sites in
the study is 1.995 meter. This average error values are used to adjust or correct the
remaining the other hydropower sites head drop by adding the average error values on the
previous head values from the focal statistics reading. Therefore, the hydropower site
potential analysis estimation using focal statistics is corrected by using differential
leveling reading head values. The sample photo during field measurement was attached
appendix E3.

63
4.3. Theoretical hydropower potential of Fetam Watershed
Total theoretical power potential (in KW) of Fetam Watershed is calculated for each
percentile discharges i.e. Q30, Q50 and Q90 using the Equation. (6.1). The theoretical
power of any river or river systems are given by the aggregate of the value computed for
the individual stretches by the following equation. In this study both the theoretical as
well as the technical power potential was taken in to consideration for Fetam watershed.
Pi =Σ𝒈𝝆𝑯𝒋𝒏𝒋𝑸 𝒋 6 .1
Where; i = index for flow percentiles (30, 50 and 90)
j = index for proposed plants = 1, 2, 3 ……n
n = total number of plants
Hj = head at plant j
Qij = discharge at percentile i and plant j
Discharge and Head raster map was developed in the above Figure 36 and 37
respectively. For selected suitable hydropower sites, head and discharge value was
extracted in the GIS environment and the total power (P30, P50 and P90 (in Kw)) for all
selected sites was summarized as below.

4.3.1. Prediction of Installed Plant capacity

The installed or design capacity of the plant is determined based on maximum flow. In
this study maximum flow is taken Q30 for determining installed capacity of proposed
sites.

64
Table 12: Installed capacity at Q30 in kw

Site Q30 Head Installed Capacity in kw

Site1 11.478 8 900.776
Site2 11.473 11 1238.105
Site3 12.495 27 3309.457
Site4 13.984 9 1234.677
Site5 13.867 7 952.213
Site6 13.833 8 1085.631
Site7 14.086 5 690.924
Site8 14.341 8 1125.504
Site9 14.304 14 1964.569
Site10 19.875 12 2339.639
Site11 19.939 12 2347.235
Site12 20.513 42 8451.614
Site13 21.583 28 5928.298
Site14 21.916 30 6449.822
Site15 22.259 32 6987.483
Sum 45005.947

65
 Figure 33: Installed Power potential (P 30) in kw for Selected Hydropower Sites

From the above figure and table each suitable hydropower potential sites holds theoretical
power potential for a discharge of 30% probability of Exceedance. From the total order of
sites site-12, which is found in the Fetam Sontom holds the maximum amount of power
potential (8451.614kw).On the other hand site-7, which is found in the Denbun Gelebd
holds minimum amount of power potential (690.924kw).The other 13 hydropower sites
holds power potential between the above described maximum and minimum value. The
table shown below describes the total hydropower potential sites with the corresponding
theoretical power capacity in (kW).
Table 13: Power for Q30 and Q50 (in Kw)

Total Theoretical hydropower potential (in Kw) from 15 sites P30 P50
45,005.95 9,010.37

66
4.3.2. Mean Power of Fetam watershed (P50)
The figures below shows the grid based mean discharge and mean power of the
Watershed. The total amount of theoretical mean power obtained from the whole suitable
sites is 9010.37kw or 9.01Mw. Site-12, which found in the Fetam Sontom holds the
maximum amount of mean power (1696.4421kw). On the other hand site-7, which is
found at the Denbun Gelebd holds minimum amount of power potential (137.44 kw).The
mean power of remaining sites vary between the above described minimum and
maximum value.
Table 14፡ mean power (P50) capacity of the site in kw
Sites Q50 Head Mean power(P50) Capacity in kw
Site-1 2.268 8 178.016
Site-2 2.267 11 244.677
Site-3 2.476 27 655.920
Site-4 2.781 9 245.555
Site-5 2.757 7 189.331
Site-6 2.751 8 215.926
Site-7 2.802 5 137.441
Site-8 2.854 8 224.004
Site-9 2.847 14 390.971
Site-10 3.987 12 469.305
Site-11 4.000 12 470.833
Site-12 4.117 42 1696.442
Site-13 4.336 28 1191.112
Site-14 4.404 30 1296.195
Site-15 4.475 32 1404.642
Sum 9010.370

67
Figure 34: Mean Discharge of Fetam Watershed.

Figure 35: Grid based mean hydropower potential for Fetam watershed Suitable Sites

68
4.3.3. Prediction of dependable plant capacity
The total amount of Firm power obtained from suitable hydropower potential sites (15
sites) is 1888.446 Kw.
The spatial Distribution of hydropower potential for Suitable sites of Fetam watershed is
shown in below figure.

Figure 36: Spatial distribution of Fetam hydropower suitable sites based on their Firm
power potentials
A hydropower station generates firm power for consumer needs with a firm flow that
guarantees a consumer highly dependable electric energy supply. Accordingly, the
dependability of flow for an isolated hydropower stations must be greater than 90 percent
(Jiandong et al. 2000), however, the installed capacity of a hydropower station is always
greater than the firm power so as to utilize seasonal hydro energy when the additional
flow is needed to meet maximum power generation.

4.4. Estimated technical hydropower potential in the selected sites

From technical point of view, head losses in the water way (channel and penstock losses),
efficiency losses in the hydraulic and electrical machines are considered as infeasible.
69
Hence the technically usable hydro potential is substantially less than the theoretical
value. Because the theoretical power is never developed as there is always some head
loss associated within a hydroelectric plant known as transfer losses. These transfer
losses are existing when we divert natural stream flow in to the canal/ channel using
diversion weir and then in to the penstock conduit from the intake. These transfer losses
are when we divert natural stream flow in to the canal/channel using diversion weir and
then in to the penstock conduit from the intake. In addition to these transfer losses
hydraulic machine losses (turbine and generator losses) and transformer losses are also
necessary to determine the total system losses since the efficiency of the turbine,
generator and transformer is never being 100%. Then after determine the total system
losses, the net technical power potential was calculated theoretical hydropower with
added factor of hydropower system efficiency.
The overall efficiency, ɳ, of 75-80% is used to consider the loss of hydropower system
(Nwachukwu, 2005).In this research the overall efficiency is used the average values of
77.5%.
Then the technically available power is the multiple of ɳ with theoretical power.
Therefore, power output is obtained after all losses are considered.
Power output=0.775×power input---------------------6.2
After determine the value of ɳ, apply equation 6.2 to get the technical power for the
selected site in Fetam watershed.
Therefore, overall efficiency, ɳ=0.775, after determine the value of ɳ, apply equation
Power output=9.81× ɳ×Q×H (kW) =9.81×0.775×Q×H (kW)
Power output =7.603×Q×H (kW)

The total minimum available potential power for all sites is 1462.056 kW based on the
smallest runoff available in the stream at the duration of 90% (Q90), medium or average
potential power is 6983.037 kW gained from the 50% duration discharge (Q50), the
maximum power production of all site found to be 34879.609 kW from the 30% duration
discharge (Q30)

70
Table 15: Technically available power (kW) at selected percent of exceedance
HP Site P30 P50 P90
Site1 698.101 137.962 19.656
Site2 959.532 189.625 27.004
Site3 2564.829 508.338 80.045
Site4 956.874 190.305 33.375
Site5 737.965 146.732 25.546
Site6 841.364 167.343 29.083
Site7 535.466 106.516 18.795
Site8 872.266 173.603 31.092
Site9 1522.541 303.002 54.153
Site10 1813.221 363.711 79.830
Site11 1819.107 364.896 80.171
Site12 6550.001 1314.743 292.376k
Site13 4594.431 923.112 210.037
Site14 4998.612 1004.551 230.046
Site15 5415.299 1088.598 250.845
SUM 34879.609 6983.037 1462.056

The power sources can be also characterized by annual values of potential energy in the
Fetam River.
The annual energy output of the selected site used by these equations;
P=7.603×Q50×H×8760(kWh) -----------------------------------------------------6.3

71
Table 16: Summery of the annual energy output at selected site in Fetam watershed

HP Site Annual energy output(Gwh/Year)

P30 P50 P90
Site1 1.843 1.209 0.172

Site2 2.533 1.661 0.237

Site3 6.771 4.453 0.701

Site4 2.526 1.667 0.292

Site5 1.948 1.285 0.224

Site6 2.221 1.466 0.255

Site7 1.414 0.933 0.165

Site8 2.303 1.521 0.272

Site9 4.020 2.654 0.474

Site10 4.787 3.186 0.699

Site11 4.802 3.196 0.702

Site12 17.292 11.517 2.561

Site13 12.129 8.086 1.840

Site14 13.196 8.800 2.015

Site15 14.296 9.536 2.197

SUM 92.082 61.171 12.808

The annual energy output at each selected percentile can be calculated by the technical
power value multiplied by a number of days and hours per day (24hr) that percentile flow
is available in the year. Just take Q30 flow; it is available for only around 110 days or
2640 hours in the year.
Therefore, the maximum at Q30 is 92.082 Gwh/year and minimum Q90 is 12.808Gwh/year
energy available in Fetam River watershed from 15 selected sites.

72
4.5. Prioritization analysis for best operating suitable hydropower site
using GIS based multi criteria analysis (GIS- MCA)
Prioritization of suitable hydropower potential sites of Fetam watershed was performed
based on the grid-based raster map of power, Discharge, head, Distance from small town
and Accessibility of Fetam watershed. The raster map for power, Discharge and head was
developed in the previous section.
The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was an effective tool in structuring and modeling
multi-objective problems and it can assist decision makers to evaluate a problem in the
form of a hierarchy of reference a series of pair wise comparison. To give the order of
prioritize best operating site from all selected hydropower sites in the Fetam watershed,
an analysis of the requirements affecting the potential site suitability were estimated
based on the judgments given numerical values for each site selected. The main reason of
prioritization for easiness of operating hydropower plant development and ranking these
sites according to comparison criteria is to facilitate a way of favorable condition for
determine the hydropower site is economically feasible for future project implementation
among all selected sites.
The ranking procedure in this study consider five main selecting criteria directly an effect
of hydropower potential selection and safety at the site of interest These selected criteria
were selected by assumed based on their importance to the suitability of hydropower
plant implementation in proposed scheme in the study area and identified criteria were
ordered based on their importance as follows.
1. Discharge: For run-of-river hydropower development, an available flow is at most
importance for site selection. The amount of water and its annual distribution affects SHP
site viability. The SHP energy output depends on annual flow distribution exists at all
days and months throughout the year. Hence, SHP without a reservoir can produce
energy only from available water and cannot compensate during dry periods. Based on
this assumption mean annual discharge value for all hydropower sites have heavy weight
comparison criterion.
2. Head: The potential energy that makes the turbine to rotate while the water strikes as
result of the head above the turbine. the head plays a great role in amplifying the power.

73
Therefore, head is taken as one of the parameters to evaluate the rank of the sites. A small
stream with larger vertical drop can supply the same amount of energy as much as larger
stream with a very slight drop. Therefore, head is taken as one of the given high weighted
comparison criterion parameters to evaluate the suitability rank of the SHP sites in the
Fetam watershed.
3. Power: The power potential result of a given hydropower plant scheme is the product
of available head and the stream flow rate value at the scheme intake. The available
power capacity is directly proportional to the available drop head. Sites with high in
stream flow and high head drop considered as good hydropower plant development site
and mean annual power result in each hydropower site was considered as weighted
comparison criterion to evaluate the suitability rank of all selected hydropower sites.
4. Road Accessibility: It is an important prioritization factor for potential hydropower
sites. It is important during the whole life cycle of power plant for construction,
installation of power plant, maintenance and dismantling at the end of hydropower
functional life. All these SHP under consideration require access using permanent or
temporary roads constructed.

Figure 37: Road map of Fetam watershed

74
5. Distance from nearby town: Distance from the site to the required towns or
community one of the main factors to determine the project cost. Since the more distance
consumes more time and budget to transport construction materials and also long power
transmission line. The distance between small towns and the selected hydropower sites in
this study were measured ArcGIS 10.1 and the length of distance from end users to the
feasible site was considered one prioritization factor to the best operating site.

Figure 38: Location of small town in and around from Fetam watershed

4.5.1 Standardization of Criteria

The output for standardization of raster maps of power, discharge, Head, distance from
small town and accessibility of road Fetam watershed were described in the figure shown
below. The standardization value ranges between 0 and 1. The higher the value of the
score, the more attractive is the criterion value. The combination of those five criteria
could be used to select the best site from the alternative sites.

75
 Table 17: Standardize to be maximize and minimize for better efficient site selection

Criteria Factor
Discharge Maximize
Head Maximize
Hydropower Maximize
Distance from the road Minimize
Distance from the small town Minimize

Table 17 shows to finding the optimum location important for decision making for the
cause of a lot of difficulties of the hydropower site.

Figure 39: Standardized hydro power of Fetam Watershed.

76
If the raster cell has maximum pixel value of power, the pixel value of standardized cell
close to 1. All suitable hydropower potential sites lay on the main Fetam River section.

Figure 40: standardized stream discharge map

Most of the sites in the downstream section of Fetam watershed have higher standardized
pixel value. On the other hand, those sites found in the upper edge of Fetam watershed
have small standardized pixel value. The upper Fetam(near Tilili) gauging station have a
pixel standardized value of 0.313020 and The lower Fetam (near Galibed) gauging
station have a pixel standardized value of 0.645434 .

77
 Figure 41: Standardized Head map of Fetam Watershed

Fetam watersheds in the upper and somewhere edge parts have a standardized pixel value
close to 0. Those watershed parts which found at the downstream section have a
standardized pixel value close to 1.

78
Figure 42: Euclidian distance from Fetam watershed small town (m)

Figure 43: Standardized Euclidian distance from small town

79
The sites closer to any one of the towns around the Fetam Watershed have a higher
standardized pixel value. On the other hand those sites not closer to any one of the small
town from the Fetam watershed have standardized pixel value close to 0.

Figure 44: Euclidian Distance from road of Fetam watershed.

80
Figure 45: Standardized Euclidian Distance from road.

The sites closer to any one of the road extend from towns around the Fetam watershed
have a higher standardized pixel value. On the other hand those upper and lower part sites
not closer to any one of the road extend from the Fetam watershed have standardized
pixel value close to 0.

4.5.2. Pair wise comparison of alternative and criteria

It refers to the process of comparing several factors or elements in pair to judge which
factor is relative significance or two factors are identically important in certain problem.
Thus, it simplifying a complex problem and facilitating the determination of reasonable
weights for multiple factors. Each element of the pairwise comparison matrix indicates
the values of the relative importance the one factor to another factor.

81
 Table 18: Pair wise Comparison of Criteria (Getnet, 2019)

Criteria POWER Discharge Head Accessibility Distance

Power 1.000 2.000 2.000 3.000 5.000
Discharge 0.500 1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000
Head 0.500 0.500 1.000 3.000 3.000
Accessibility 0.333 0.333 0.333 1.000 2.000
Distance 0.200 0.250 0.333 0.500 1.000
Total 2.533 4.083 5.667 10.500 15.000
The pair wise matrix table can be normalized by divided each column entry to the sum of
column value.

4.5.3. Normalization of matrix and weight determination

After all elements‟ values of the pair wise comparison matrix were determined, priority
matrix normalized vectors of the number of criteria were calculated from the pair wise
matrix table by dividing each column entry to the sum of column values. Each element
represents the weighting value of each criterion and the relative weight for each factor is
determined within the range from zero to one means a higher weight indicates a greater
contribution of the factor to best SHP operating site selection criteria suitability.
Table 19.Normalization and Weight Determination

Criteria POWER Discharge Head Accessibility Distance Criteria Weighted

Power 0.3947 0.4898 0.3529 0.2857 0.3333 0.3713
Discharge 0.1974 0.2449 0.3529 0.2857 0.2667 0.2695
Head 0.1974 0.1224 0.1765 0.2857 0.2000 0.1964
Accessibility 0.1316 0.0816 0.0588 0.0952 0.1333 0.1001
Distance 0.0789 0.0612 0.0588 0.0476 0.0667 0.0627

4.5.4. Evaluation of matrix consistency

The value of pair wise comparison relies on subjective judgment which might lead to
arbitrarily result with bias and hence an evaluation is needed. A numerical index called
consistency ratio (CR) is used for evaluating the consistency of pair wise comparison
matrix following the proposal in AHP (LSaaty, 2008). This index indicates the ratio of

82
 consistency index (CI) to average consistency index called random index (RI) as shown
in equation.

Where, CI=Consistency Index and RI=Random index values

To determine the consistency index value, first finding the biggest Eigen value λ max is
needed and its value is determined from the summation of multiplying the pair wise
comparison matrix with weighted value give table 21.
Table 20.Normalization and Weight sum Determination

Weighted Criteria
Criteria Power Discharge Head Accessibility Distance Sum Weighted Ratio
Power 0.3713 0.5390 0.3928 0.3004 0.3133 1.9168 0.3713 5.1623
Discharge 0.1857 0.2695 0.3928 0.3004 0.2506 1.3990 0.2695 5.1906
Head 0.1857 0.1348 0.1964 0.3004 0.1880 1.0051 0.1964 5.1178
Accessibility 0.1238 0.0898 0.0655 0.1001 0.1253 0.5045 0.1001 5.0390

Distance 0.0743 0.0674 0.0655 0.0501 0.0627 0.3198 0.0627 5.1044

𝑎𝑥 𝑛
𝑛
λ max is the Principal Eigen Value; n is the number of factors
λ max = Σ The average of ratio of weighted sum and Criteria weight table given above.
λ max = (5.1623+5.1906+5.1178+5.0390+ 5.1044)/5=5.1228
λmax =5.1228
CI = (5.1228 – 5)/5-1=0.0307
Then by taking the random index (RI) read from table given (L.Saaty, 1980) based on
number of criteria. Then the corresponding value RI for n=5 is 1.12 the table attached in
appendix F.
CR = 0.0307/1.12 CR = 0.0274< 0.10 (Acceptable)

L.Saaty suggests that Cr value is greater 0.1, it is not consistent enough and the best
thing to do is go back and revise the comparisons. Therefore, the calculated value of Cr is
with acceptable range, which leads to next step of analysis. So out of the five criterion for
83
prioritization analysis greater weight was given for power, which is 37.13%, followed by
Discharge the weight of 26.95%, the third factor is Head, which has a weight of`19.64%,
the fourth factor is road accessibility, which has a weight of 10.01% and the last one is
distance from the community, which has a weight of 6.27%.

4.5.5. Making final map using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method
The ranking method is done based on AHP pair wise comparison matrix for every pair of
ranking indexes. The weight index factor is analyzed based on weighted linear
combination analysis procedure includes standardize of each suitability and assigning the
weight index relative importance to the suitability. In this study, AHP model is
implemented within the GIS environment using map algebra operations weighting
overlay. To complete the analysis, the raster calculator was used to find the ideal
locations for hydropower development. Therefore, five criterion maps were integrated by
applying weights as criterion weights:

Watershed Final suitability map=[power]* 0.3713+ [Discharge] *0.2695+ [Head]*

0.1964+ [Accessibility to the road] * 0.1001+ [Accessibility to the community)] * 0.0627
The result of this integration shows potential sites (ranked from best to worst) that
suitable for hydropower development show billow figure 47.

84
Figure 46: Suitability of Hydropower potential sites using AHP Method
To facilitate a favorable condition for local decision makers to make a reasonable
decision as to which sites should be given the top priority for future micro /small
hydropower development project implementation, ranking of the sites was essential. The
ranking procedure takes into account the parameters which directly affect the potential of
the river sites was, head and discharge, the site condition, accessibility, i.e., distance from
access road and distance to the demand center, and the end outcome or the power energy
generated.
Average monthly Discharge was one of the main and, in fact the key parameter
determining the potential of a river is the stream flow or the discharge. Head of The
potential energy that makes the turbine to rotate while the water strikes it is as a result of
the head above the turbine. Distance from Access Road, Un less there is all weathered
road at least in the nearby surrounding, it is obviously difficult to carry out development
projects. Distance of the Sites to the Demand Center of This factor is also very influential
85
in determining the rank of a site. The effect is similar to the factor described as above.
The Generated Energy Output of The last outcome that is needed from a river site is the
energy output. The energy output is used for various purposes such as lighting, milling,
battery storage, other simple local industries, etc.
Most of suitable Hydropower potential sites were found in the stream of Fetam
Watershed locally called Tiyatya,Chirar Galebed,Bokotabo and Tilili town
administration which is found from the main Fetam River. Based on the all over analysis
of this research, sites are ranked due to their suitability in order to give prioritization for
development the hydropower scheme. Therefore, the most suitable site is site- 12; site-14
and site-10 were ranked at the first, second and third respectively. The primal focus was
given for those sites for rural electrification expansion stockholders, while the last
suitable one is site 8.
Table 21: Classification of run-off hydropower plant

HP Site Installed Capacity (MW) Class

Site-1 0.698 Mini
Site-2 0.960 Mini
Site-3 2.565 Small
Site-4 0.957 Mini
Site-5 0.738 Mini
Site-6 0.841 Mini
Site-7 0.535 Mini
Site-8 0.872 Mini
Site-9 1.523 Small
Site-10 1.813 Small
Site-11 1.819 Small
Site-12 6.550 Small
Site-13 4.594 Small
Site-14 4.999 Small
Site-15 5.415 Small

86
The hydropower sites are classified based on their installed capacity at Q30 at each
selected site in Fetam watershed. Classification based on install capacity of sites, eight
sites are small scale hydropower plant (1-15 MW) scale, while seven sites are mini
hydropower plants (100kW-1MW). Therefore, the selected sites are under the scope of
the objective (i.e. micro to small scale hydropower) are feasible sites for development run
of river hydro power production to satisfy future energy demand.
Table 22: Summarized suitability rank of suitable runoff river hydropower potential sites.
Sites X Y Z Suitability Sites Suitability Rank
weight value
Site-1 283152 1201644 2451 0.413898 10

Site-2 283032 1200331 2436 0.426409 8

Site-3 279137 1184218 2104 0.422762 9

Site-4 281328 1181800 2055 0.412327 11

Site-5 281074 1180567 2041 0.403336 13

Site-6 280650 1180144 2029 0.403035 14

Site-7 280814 1178382 2024 0.403817 12

Site-8 280947 1175567 2003 0.402723 15

Site-9 280323 1172603 1989 0.433731 7

Site-10 281767 1158744 1962 0.484677 3

Site-11 281640 1157903 1948 0.473312 5

Site-12 279742 1152245 1621 0.652556 1

Site-13 278529 1150405 1208 0.482362 4

Site-14 277275 1149934 1145 0.493906 2

Site-15 275290 1147642 1047 0.444065 6

87
 5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. CONCLUSION
The study aimed at searching some potential sites for small-scale hydropower potential by
defining intake locations based on power capacity, stream discharge and the computation of head
on Fetam River, tributary of Nile River, Ethiopia.

Fetam Watershed has a total of 15 potential sites when I can select the best suitable sites for
small scale hydropower development. The minimum head was 5m and a maximum horizontal
distance between the virtual intake and virtual powerhouse was 500m that I used.

The model has been formalized in ArcGIS model builder for evaluating the general
suitability of hydropower potential map of Fetam watershed in order to support decision
makers and energy planning stakeholders. The procedure is therefore repeatable and can
be reapplied with or without adjustments to the same or different project parameter. The
model was successfully applied to run of river hydropower potential study in Fetam
watershed. The watershed hydropower suitability map was developed using weighting
overlay raster analysis. The dimensionless value ranges from 0.002624 to 0.652556.
From 15 suitable hydropower sites, the most suitable for the technical hydropower
generation is site -12 which has 17.292GWh/y maximum energy at Q30, 11.517 GWh/y
mean energy at Q50 and 2.561 GWh/y firm energy at Q90 while least suitable is site -8
which has 2.303 GWh/y maximum energy at Q30,1.521 GWh mean energy at Q50 and
0.272 GWh/y firm energy at Q90.From 15 ROR hydropower sites, the total annual
energy outputs is 92.082 GWh/y maximum energy ,61.171 GWh/y mean energy and
12.808 GWh/y firm energy can be obtained from selected ROR hydropower in the
Fetam watershed stream for 30%,50% and 90% flow exceedance respectively.
The error head measurement using focal statistics corrected by the average total station
survey measurement value from three sample hydropower sites are 1.995 meter. So the
hydropower site head map increased by this 1.995m average elevation value. The
selected hydropower sites can produce more energy practically.
Sites also classified based on their install capacity, so there are seven mini and eight
small scale ROR hydropower sites are available in the Fetam watershed. The results of
this study will help policy makers, public authorities, and investors in the energy sector to

88
optimize the available resources in selecting the suitable sites for small hydropower
plants with high power potential.
This study can serve as the model approach for investigating the potential sites in the
Blue Nile basin. These results can serve as for engagement of public and private sector
investment.

89
5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS
This study has value in order to highlight for countries having low electrification supply
for the community especially having new developing city like Ethiopia to adopt a key
policy of government to improve the living standards of the community as well as
upgrade the development of the country as a whole. However, there are so many
challenges like low purchasing power of the rural poor people and unfavorable public
attitude towards the private sector for development and distribution of renewable energy
technologies. It is thus recommended that; to bring about meaningful change in terms of
better economic development, better access to energy has to be increased and supplied to
the rural community and has to be sustainable affordable and reliable. Micro, Mini and
small hydropower based energy supplies are the best options for the purpose and they
produce energy near the point of use; they emit no toxic pollutants or harmful greenhouse
gasses; they not require input of fuel. This study only describes one selected perennial
river to assess and rank potential hydropower sites the following points are the site-
specific recommendations based on this work:
1. This study doesn‟t deal with project implementation; it is merely limited to the
assessment of the hydropower potentiality of in the Fetam catchment. Hence the detailed
and comprehensive study followed by actual projects implementation should be carried
out.
2. The promotion of private sector‟s opportunity in this field is highly recommended in
order to gear up the implementation of power generation projects.
3. The gauging stations should be supervised and controlled regularly. The larger number
of them has remarkable gaps in record (missing data) and most places the data are not
recorded.

90
REFERENCE
Admasu, G. (2000). Hydrology and sedimentation: some not relevant for the
development of small scale irrigation. Paper presented on seminar: Bahir Dar,
Ethiopia.

A.K. Raja, Amit P. Srivastava, Manish Dwivedi, (2006). New Age Power Plant
Engineering AnsariRoad, Daryaganj, New Delhi: new age international (p)
limited, publishers.

Ayele Nigussie ,(2010) “Development Of A Dual Mode Frequency Controller for

Standalone, Micro and Mini Hydropower Systems”, A thesis Submitted to the
Addis Ababa Institute of Technology, in partial fulfillment of the requirement for
the degree of Master of Science In Electrical Power Engineering

Accessed:March20,(2014),<http://www.eia.goov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2013).pdf .

Capik,M.,Yilmaz, A.O. and Cavusoglu, I., (2012). Hydropower for sustainable energy
development in Turkey: the small hydropower case of the Eastern Black Sea
Region.Renew Sustainable Energy Rev, 16:6160–6172.

Celso Penche, Dr. In g. Layman‟s June,( 1988) Guide book on how to develop a small
Hydrosite. A handbook prepared under contract for the Commission of the
European Communities, Directorate General for Energy by European Small
Hydropower Association (ESHA)

Dagmawi Mulugeta, (2015). Hydropower for sustainable water and energy development in
Ethiopia, Volume 1. Springer International Publishing 2015.

Dandkar M.M. and Sharma K.N. (1997), Water Power Engineering, Vikas
Publishing House Pvt Ltd, Delhi

David R. Maidment, (1998). Hand Book of Hydrology, published by McGraw-Hilli

incorporation, New York.

Dereje, June22, (2013).Ethiopia‟srenewable energy power potential and development

opportunities. Ministry of Water and Energy Abu Dhabi, UAE

Dudhani, S., A. Sinha, and S. Inamdar. (2006). Assessment of small hydropower

91
 potential using remote sensing data for sustainable development in India.Energy
policy 34 (17):3195 3205.

Eastman, J. (1999). Multi-criteria evaluation and GIS. Geographical information systems

1 (1):493-502.

Eldrandaly, K.A. E.M. S. (2010). Spatial decision making: an intelligent GIS-based

decision analysis approach. Germany.

Emerson, D. G., A. V. Vecchia, and A. L. Dahl. (2005). Evaluation of drainage-area ratio

method used to estimate stream flow for the Red River of the North Basin, North
Dakota and Minnesota.

Energy Information Administration (EIA), (2013). International Energy Outlook 2013,

DOE/EIA- 0484,pp.18.

Ferreira, J.H.I., Camacho,J.R.,Malagoli,J.A. and Junior,S.C.G., (2016).Assessment of the

potential of small hydropower development in Brazil, renewable and Sustain
energy rev. 56: 380-387.

Flynn, R. H. (2003). Development of regression equations to estimate flow durations and

low-flow-frequency statistics in New Hampshire streams: US Department of the
Interior, US Geological Survey.

Getnet W. (2019). Assessment of micro to small Hydropower Potential. n.d. “Institute

of Technology Faculty of Civil and Water Resources Engineering Hydraulics
Engineering Post Graduate Program assessment of micro to small hydropower
potential ( A Case Study on Chumago river Basin ) Bahir Dar Institute of
Technology-Bahir Dar University.”

Hudson, Jacson, Inácio Ferreira, José Roberto, Juliana Almansa, Sebastião Camargo, and
Guimarães Júnior. (2016). “Assessment of the Potential of Small Hydropower
Development in Brazil.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 56:380–87.
IEA,(2010).RenewableEnergyEssentials:Hydropower.Accessed:June10,\]2014:<www.iea
.org/publications/freepublications/publication/hydropower_essentials. pdf
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), (2007). Climate Change 2007:

92
 Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change [Metz, B.,
Davidson, O.R., Bosch, P.R., David, R.,Meyer,L.A. (eds)], Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USA, pp. 27-30.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007). Climate Change
2007:Synthesis Report Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core
Writing Team, Pachauri R.K. and Reisinger, A. (Eds.)].IPCC, Geneva,
Switzerland. pp. 26-27.
John,(2014). Assessment of a typical Small Hydropower site for rural electrification in
the western region of Ghana
Keneni Elias, (2007). Potential assessment of micro hydropower for rural electrification
in some selected sites of genale-dawa basin, Ethiopia (MSc Thesis (Unpublished),
Department Hydraulics and Hydropower Engineering, Arba Minch University.
kOkot, D. K. (2013). Review of small hydropower technology. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 26:515-520.

Kosnik, L. (2010). Potential for small scale hydropower development in the US. Energy
policy 38 (10):5512-5519.

Kumar, A., Schei, T., Ahenkorah, A., Rodriguez, R.C., Devernay, J.M., Freitas, M., Hall,
D., Killingtveit,A. and Liu, Z.,(2011). Hydropower in IPCC Special Report on
Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 43 pp.

Kusre, B. C., Baruah, D. C., Rodoliloi, P. K. & Patra, S. C. (2010), Assessment of

hydropower potential using GIS and hydrological modelling technique in Kopili
River basin in Assam (India). Applied Energy 87, 298-309.
Larentis, D. G.,Collischonn, W., Olivera, F. & Tucci, E. C. M. (2010), GIS-based
procedures for hydropower potential spotting, Energy 35, 4237-4243.
Maidment, D.R. (1993)“Handbook of Hydrology”, McGraw-Hill Inc., USA
Malczewski, J. (1999). GIS and multicriteria decision analysis: John Wiley & Sons.

93
Mehari K.(2017).G. I. S based assessment of hydropower Potential. n.d. “Institute of
Technology Faculty of Civil and Water Resources Engineering Hydraulics
Engineering Post Graduate Program GIS based assessment of hydropower
potential ( A Case Study on Gumara River Basin ) Bahir Dar Institute of
Technology-Bahir Dar University.”

Merwade, V. (2012). Watershed and stream network delineation using Arc Hydro Tools.
University of Purdue, School of Civil Engineering, Printed Lecture Note, USA.

Mubarek J,(2016).Potential Micro-Hydropower Assessment in Upper Wabi Shebele

River basin in Addis Ababa University In partial Fulfillment of the Requirement
for the Degree of Master of Science in Civil and Environmental engineering
Ministry of Water, Irrigation, & Energy of Ethiopia website viewed on april8,
2016
MWIE (Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy), (2012) . Scaling Up Renewable
Energy Program Ethiopia Investment Plan, unpublished report, Ministry of Water,
Irrigation and Energy, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 81 pp.

Narayan, P.K., Narayan, S.,Popp, S., (2010). Does electricity consumption panel Garner
cause GDP? A new global evidence. Applied Energy 87 (10), 3294-3298

Nautiyal H, Singal SK, VarunGoel, Sharma A., (2011). Small hydropower for
sustainable energy development in India. Renew Sustain Energy Rev, 15: 2021–
2027.
Nehimia S, (2005).Identification and Engineering Geological Studies of Small
Hydropower sites in Muger Jemma and Waleks Sub-basins (Central Ethiopia),
MSc Thesis (Unpublished), Department of Earth sciences, Addis Ababa
University.
Nikolaisen, Per-Ivar (2015) . "12 mega dams that changed the world (in Norwegian)" In English
Teknisk Ukeblad, 17 January 2015 Retrieved 14 February 2018.

Nwachukwu M.C (2005), Hydrological data collection and analysis for small hydropower
Development OgunOsun River Basin Development Authority Nigeria.

94
Pirlogea, C., Cicea, C., (2012). Econometric perspective of the energy consumption and
economic growth relation in European Union. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 16,5718-5726.
Raja, A.K., Amit P. Srivastava, Manish Dwivedi, (2006). New Age Power Plant
Engineering. Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi: new age international (p)
limited, publishers.
Reddy, J. R.(2005). A Text Book of Hydrology: Double Mass Curve Laxmi Publications,
India.
Rojanamon, P. T.Chaisomphob, and T. Bureekul, (2009). Application of geographical
information system to site selection of small run-of-river hydropower project by
considering engineering/economic/environmental criteria and social impact.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource
allocation: McGraw-Hill International Book Company.
Tachikawa, T., Hatol, M., Kabu, M., et al., 2011. Characteristics of ASTER GDEM
version 2. Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS).
Tong Jiandong, Zheng Naibo, Wang Zianhuan, Hai Jing and Ding Huishen (2000), Mini
Hydropower, published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Vogel, R. M., I. Wilson, and C. Daly. (1999). Regional regression models of annual
stream flow for the United States. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Engineering 125 (3):148-157.
Voogd, J. H., (1982).Multicriteria evaluation for urban and regional planning Delft:
Delftsche Uitgevers Maatschappij DOI: 10.6100/IR102252.
Warnick, Howard A. Mayo, Jr., P.E., James L. Carson and Lee H. Sheldon, P.E. (1984).
“HydropowerEngineering”,NewJersey:PrenticcHall,Inc.www.microhydropower.n
et/intrhtm/
World Nuclear Association (WNA), (2011). WNA Report: Comparison of Lifecycle
Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generation Sources. Accessed:
December15,

95
 APPENDIX
Appendix A: Mean monthly Rain Gauge Stations and out layer test stream flow
data
Table1 : Mean monthly rainfall of each station in/around the study area
Stations Gundil Bure Shendi Sekela Tilili Enjibara Layber Kessa Sebader Wegedade
Jan 17.5 9.2 21.7 3.7 10.3 8.5 1.8 14.1 2.5 1.4
Feb 13.9 7.8 11.3 9.3 6.6 19.5 4.1 7.8 10.1 2.4
Mar 30.7 39.5 21.7 40.8 63.5 44.2 28.6 32.0 17.3 17.9
Apr 66.7 49.9 86.1 56.2 91.4 63.3 36.1 100.3 62.2 52.7
May 172.7 185.9 216.2 205.3 284.7 250.9 153.6 173.5 159.4 115.2
Jun 433.9 246.1 215.6 271.7 357.3 347.0 129.4 407.5 282.8 183.3
Jul 557.7 312.5 293.9 414.4 527.4 478.2 221.6 542.9 306.4 222.0
Aug 497.8 224.8 312.2 425.1 433.0 532.3 193.3 551.0 317.1 254.8
Sep 403.6 145.6 234.8 251.5 351.7 386.2 119.8 522.1 224.4 194.5
Oct 174.1 79.5 98.2 113.6 184.7 146.4 64.6 221.1 145.1 66.6
Nov 81.1 41.6 58.1 48.2 116.3 53.7 37.5 70.6 52.5 27.6
Dec 21.3 10.7 11.0 18.2 24.4 19.6 37.3 24.0 24.8 10.7
Annual
Mean
Rainfall 2471.1 1353.1 1580.9 1858.1 2451.3 2349.6 1027.5 2666.8 1604.4 1149.0

96
 Table 2 : Upper Fetam stream flow data and Its outlier test .

Descending Logarithmic
S.No. Year Stream flow Order Rank Value/Yo/ (Yo-Ym)2 (Yo-Ym)3
1 1980 7.718 10.535 1 1.0226 0.0084399 0.0007754
2 1981 8.781 10.241 2 1.0103 0.0063307 0.0005037
3 1982 7.791 10.201 3 1.0086 0.0060634 0.0004721
4 1983 10.201 9.733 4 0.9882 0.0033026 0.0001898
5 1984 8.637 9.571 5 0.9810 0.0025214 0.0001266
6 1985 8.401 9.551 6 0.9801 0.0024305 0.0001198
7 1986 9.571 9.387 7 0.9725 0.0017450 0.0000729
8 1987 8.713 9.041 8 0.9562 0.0006489 0.0000165
9 1988 8.535 8.781 9 0.9435 0.0001630 0.0000021
10 1989 8.511 8.713 10 0.9402 0.0000883 0.0000008
11 1990 3.715 8.671 11 0.9381 0.0000537 0.0000004
12 1991 8.307 8.657 12 0.9374 0.0000436 0.0000003
13 1992 10.535 8.637 13 0.9364 0.0000317 0.0000002
14 1993 10.241 8.535 14 0.9312 0.0000002 0.0000000
15 1994 8.671 8.511 15 0.9300 0.0000006 0.0000000
16 1995 7.905 8.501 16 0.9295 0.0000017 0.0000000
17 1996 9.733 8.446 17 0.9266 0.0000170 -0.0000001
18 1997 9.551 8.413 18 0.9250 0.0000335 -0.0000002
19 1998 9.387 8.401 19 0.9243 0.0000416 -0.0000003
20 1999 8.446 8.335 20 0.9209 0.0000976 -0.0000010
21 2000 8.657 8.307 21 0.9195 0.0001278 -0.0000014
22 2001 8.335 7.905 22 0.8979 0.0010786 -0.0000354
23 2002 8.413 7.791 23 0.8916 0.0015321 -0.0000600
24 2003 8.501 7.718 24 0.8875 0.0018730 -0.0000811
25 2004 9.041 3.715 25 0.5699 0.1301941 -0.0469772
SUM 216.296 0.0000000 0.0000000
Mean 8.652
SUM 216.30 23.2690 0.1668602 -0.0448759
MEAN 8.65 0.9308 0.0064177 -0.0017260
STANDARD DEVATION 1.27 0.0834

97
Data quality Check
Number of data 25.0000
Standard deviation, 1.2745
Standard error of mean 0.2549

Relative standard 2.9463

Outlier Test

Kn 2.4854
Higher Limit ; YH= Ymean+Kn*бy 1.1380
Higher Limit ; QH 13.7402
Lower Limit ; YL= Ymean- Kn*бy 0.7235
Lower Limit ; QL 5.2908

98
Appendix B1: Consistency Analysis of Rainfall Data for Methodological stations
Figure B1: Double Mass Curve Analysis of Rain fall stations

Double mass curve Layber Rain fall station

15000
Comulative Rain fall for Bure

R² = 0.9971
10000

5000 Double mass curve Layber

in mm

Rain fall station

0
0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00 20000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall Base station in mm

Double mass curve Bure Rain fall station

15000.00
R² = 0.999
Comulative Rain fall for Bure

10000.00

5000.00 Double mass curve Bure Rain fall

in mm

station
0.00
0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00 20000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall Base station in mm

Double mass curve Sekela Rain fall station

20000
Comulative Rain fall for Bure in mm

R² = 0.9967
15000

10000
Double mass curve Sekela Rain
5000 fall station

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Comulative Annual Rain fall Base station in mm

99
 Double mass curve for Gundil Station
30000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall R² = 0.9995
for Tilili Station in mm
20000.00

10000.00 Double mass curve for

0.00
Gundil Station
0.00 5000.0010000.0015000.0020000.0025000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall base station in mm

Double mass curve for Kessa Station

30000.00 R² = 0.9997
fall for Tilili Station in mm
Comulative Annual Rain

20000.00

10000.00 Double mass curve for

0.00
Kessa Station
0.00 5000.0010000.0015000.0020000.0025000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall base station in mm

Double mass curve for Sebader Station

20000.00
R² = 0.9983
Comulative Rain fall in mm for

15000.00
Shindy station

10000.00
Double mass curve for Sebader
5000.00 Station

0.00
0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall Base Station in mm

100
 Double mass curve for Wegedad Station
15000.00 R² = 0.9949
Comulative Annual Rain fall
for Wegegad Station in mm 10000.00

5000.00 Double mass curve for

Wegedad Station
0.00
0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00 20000.00
Comulative Annual Rain fall base station in mm

AppendixB2: Homogeneity test of rainfall base station

FigureB2: Homogeneity test

25.00
Homogeneity Test of Layber base staions
Non dimentionalized Rainfall

20.00

Bure
15.00
Sebader
10.00 Layber
Shindi
5.00

0.00
0 2 4 6 month 8 10 12 14

Homogeneity Test of Kessa base station

25.00
Nondimentionalized Rainfall

20.00
Enjibara
15.00
Tilili
10.00 Kessa
5.00 Sekela
0.00
0 2 4 6 month 8 10 12 14

101
 Homogeneity Test of Wegedade base station
25.00

Nondimentionalized 20.00
Rainfall Wegedad
15.00
Sebader
10.00
Shindy
5.00 Layber
0.00
0 2 4 6 month 8 10 12 14

Homogeneity Test of Gundil base station

25.00
Nondimentionalized Rainfall

20.00
Gundil
15.00
Tilili
10.00 Kessa
5.00 Enjibara

0.00
0 2 4 6 month 8 10 12 14

Homogeneity Test Sekela base station

25
Nondimentionalized Rainfall

20
Gundil
15
Tilili
10 Kessa
5 Sekela

0
0 2 4 6 month 8 10 12 14

102
 25.00
Homogeneity Test Bure base station

Non dimentionalized
20.00
Bure
15.00
Rainfall Sebader
10.00 Layber
5.00 Tilili

0.00
0 2 4 6 month 8 10 12 14

103
 Appendix C: Stream flow data of Fetam river gauge stations data outlier test.
Table 1: Fill stream flow data of upper Fetam river near Tilili gauge station.
Month
Years Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec SUM Mean
0.4
1980 47 0.301 0.257 0.319 0.458 2.208 15.974 31.936 23.721 12.225 3.564 1.201 92.611 7.718
0.3
1981 32 0.196 0.164 0.119 0.178 2.445 16.202 39.115 29.526 13.650 2.635 0.807 105.368 8.781
0.7
1982 71 0.297 0.270 0.158 0.146 0.849 11.003 23.845 31.425 17.274 6.515 0.944 93.497 7.791
0.7
1983 71 0.352 0.443 0.245 0.281 11.815 16.652 33.303 32.659 17.661 7.181 1.044 122.407 10.211
0.4
1984 94 0.352 0.390 0.307 1.067 9.764 27.585 31.617 25.938 3.999 1.332 0.804 103.649 8.637
0.4
1985 65 0.338 0.398 0.534 2.741 9.018 26.784 30.148 19.774 6.267 2.748 1.592 100.807 8.401
0.4
1986 65 0.338 0.398 0.534 2.741 14.843 27.687 32.729 23.507 7.235 2.748 1.631 114.856 9.571
0.3
1987 37 0.309 0.192 0.345 2.254 11.580 26.874 26.742 16.892 13.739 3.658 1.631 104.553 8.713
0.7
1988 17 0.451 0.311 0.290 0.897 8.148 23.684 27.811 23.390 12.079 3.485 1.153 102.415 8.535
0.7
1989 14 0.384 0.398 0.359 1.101 8.419 29.823 33.419 16.917 7.186 2.151 1.264 102.136 8.511
0.6
1990 70 0.478 0.383 0.335 0.642 0.961 10.006 15.909 7.712 5.827 1.126 0.529 44.577 3.715
0.3
1991 79 0.253 0.242 1.095 1.293 14.980 24.284 28.428 22.282 3.634 2.073 0.743 99.686 8.307
1.0
1992 20 0.727 0.598 0.563 1.204 3.545 33.238 34.905 36.975 10.835 1.715 1.094 126.418 10.535
0.8
1993 09 0.615 0.466 1.323 1.525 15.825 25.144 28.573 24.663 14.029 8.954 0.961 122.887 10.241
0.8
1994 09 0.619 0.368 0.362 0.995 9.793 24.113 39.820 21.097 3.191 1.529 1.361 104.056 8.671
1995 0.4 0.249 0.269 0.312 1.791 8.176 18.431 33.544 24.520 4.277 1.869 1.009 94.863 7.905

104
 15
0.5
1996 21 0.242 0.289 0.546 5.659 12.174 29.179 31.794 23.041 10.083 2.278 0.985 116.791 9.733
0.5
1997 00 0.279 0.326 0.581 2.240 10.174 19.437 31.299 22.976 16.980 7.454 2.369 114.615 9.551
0.5
1998 00 0.252 0.326 0.581 1.919 9.478 21.491 30.293 22.649 18.188 4.599 2.369 112.645 9.387
0.5
1999 00 0.279 0.326 0.418 1.653 9.478 19.910 27.551 20.516 13.898 4.451 2.369 101.349 8.446
0.7
2000 11 0.319 0.303 0.368 1.609 9.478 18.556 29.519 20.316 15.737 4.599 2.369 103.883 8.657
0.7
2001 11 0.288 0.303 0.353 2.230 8.978 21.491 26.131 18.467 16.382 3.428 1.252 100.014 8.335
0.7
2002 40 0.404 0.279 0.325 0.397 8.334 20.563 26.099 21.919 17.221 3.428 1.252 100.961 8.413
0.4
2003 39 0.272 0.378 0.202 0.214 7.562 28.912 27.785 28.501 5.371 1.573 0.804 102.013 8.501
0.3
2004 98 0.323 0.261 0.448 0.407 7.359 26.101 31.702 25.678 12.448 2.254 1.117 108.496 9.041

105
 Table 2: Fill stream flow data of lower Fetam river near Galibed gauge station
Month

Year
s Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec SUM Mean
1.0
1986 0.938 0.865 0.739 0.811 0.488 19.302 34.189 71.860 40.775 16.758 3.796 80 191.600 15.967
3.0
1987 0.938 0.865 0.739 0.860 3.222 30.122 46.315 58.573 37.491 33.602 7.051 97 222.875 18.573
2.6
1988 1.736 1.050 0.767 0.644 1.655 11.708 41.765 71.691 45.602 28.975 5.821 80 214.095 17.841
3.3
1989 1.932 1.319 1.214 1.482 2.601 10.801 91.222 82.885 56.154 16.256 5.141 56 274.360 22.863
1.7
1990 1.878 1.430 1.052 0.892 1.774 2.794 37.813 76.205 45.429 15.473 3.709 55 190.203 15.850
2.1
1991 1.452 1.430 1.052 0.892 1.774 2.794 37.813 76.205 42.845 17.377 4.871 94 190.698 15.892
4.2
1992 1.370 1.057 0.895 1.561 3.653 11.070 44.246 72.580 67.889 32.791 9.252 71 250.635 20.886
2.0
1993 2.077 1.692 1.227 2.405 2.580 16.249 47.575 95.638 82.482 36.254 12.839 67 303.085 25.257
2.5
1994 1.239 1.410 1.036 1.572 2.715 11.046 57.031 105.693 51.324 9.119 4.759 08 249.452 20.788
2.2
1995 1.236 1.048 1.167 1.250 1.752 11.791 57.036 79.409 59.721 7.837 3.317 45 227.809 18.984
2.1
1996 1.226 0.813 0.895 1.760 6.686 16.127 41.062 50.140 42.196 14.432 4.318 66 181.821 15.152
4.0
1997 1.213 0.823 0.865 1.760 6.686 16.127 41.062 49.911 38.064 21.919 10.677 91 193.196 16.100
2.2
1998 1.623 0.824 0.701 1.444 1.884 11.369 46.605 70.345 44.267 39.124 7.655 03 228.046 19.004
4.3
1999 1.975 1.270 0.673 0.679 4.074 25.904 42.279 60.913 38.353 57.884 10.893 09 249.207 20.767
4.1
2000 2.068 1.189 0.670 1.769 3.430 16.921 55.390 62.806 35.650 43.051 15.191 94 242.328 20.194
3.1
2001 1.984 1.188 0.692 1.052 4.155 20.991 38.652 86.696 43.740 17.711 8.042 52 228.054 19.005
2.0
2002 1.876 1.131 0.951 0.990 1.048 15.740 56.563 73.549 41.604 11.083 5.784 66 212.386 17.699
1.7
2003 1.113 0.862 1.079 0.575 0.423 3.664 31.738 54.392 55.361 12.204 3.850 95 167.057 13.921

106
 Appendix D: Checking of hydrological stream flow data
Table1:Upper Fetam stream flow spearman’s rank –correlation coefficient method
computation procedure
i=x Mean S discharge(X) Descending Kxi Kyi Di Di^2
order S.flow(y)
1 7.718 7.718 1 1.0 0.0 0.0
2 8.781 7.791 2 3.0 -1.0 1.0
3 7.791 7.905 3 15.0 -12.0 144.0
4 10.201 8.307 4 11.0 -7.0 49.0
5 8.637 8.335 5 21.0 -16.0 256.0
6 8.401 8.401 6 6.0 0.0 0.0
7 9.571 8.413 7 22.0 -15.0 225.0
8 8.713 8.446 8 19.0 -11.0 121.0
9 8.535 8.501 9 23.0 -14.0 196.0
10 8.511 8.511 10 10.0 0.0 0.0
11 8.307 8.535 11 9.0 2.0 4.0
12 10.535 8.637 12 5.0 7.0 49.0
13 10.241 8.657 13 20.0 -7.0 49.0
14 8.671 8.671 14 14.0 0.0 0.0
15 7.905 8.713 15 8.0 7.0 49.0
16 9.733 8.781 16 2.0 14.0 196.0
17 9.551 9.041 17 24.0 -7.0 49.0
18 9.387 9.387 18 18.0 0.0 0.0
19 8.446 9.551 19 17.0 2.0 4.0
20 8.657 9.571 20 7.0 13.0 169.0
21 8.335 9.733 21 16.0 5.0 25.0
22 8.413 10.201 22 4.0 18.0 324.0
23 8.501 10.241 23 13.0 10.0 100.0
24 9.041 10.535 12.0 -12.0 144.0
2154.0

Rsp = 1-((6*ΣDi^2)/(n*(n^2-1)) 0.063

0.298

107
 Table2: Lower Fetam stream flow spearman‟s rank –correlation coefficient method
computation procedure
i=x Mean S.discharge(X) Descending Kxi Kyi Di Di^2
order Sflow(y)
1 15.967 22.863 1 4.0 -3.0 9.0
2 18.573 21.257 2 8.0 -6.0 36.0
3 17.841 20.886 3 7.0 -4.0 16.0
4 22.863 20.788 4 9.0 -5.0 25.0
5 15.850 20.767 5 14.0 -9.0 81.0
6 15.892 20.194 6 15.0 -9.0 81.0
7 20.886 19.005 7 16.0 -9.0 81.0
8 21.257 18.984 8 10.0 -2.0 4.0
9 20.788 18.820 9 13.0 -4.0 16.0
10 18.984 18.573 10 2.0 8.0 64.0
11 15.152 17.841 11 2.0 9.0 81.0
12 16.100 17.699 12 17.0 -5.0 25.0
13 18.820 16.100 13 12.0 1.0 1.0
14 20.767 15.967 14 1.0 13.0 169.0
15 20.194 15.892 15 6.0 9.0 81.0
16 19.005 15.850 16 5.0 11.0 121.0
17 17.699 15.152 17 11.0 6.0 36.0
18 13.921 13.921 18 18.0 0.0 0.0
927.0

Rsp = 1-((6*ΣDi^2)/(n*(n^2-1)) 0.043

0.203

108
Table3: Upper Fetam stream flow Stability of Variance and Mean
Subset 1 subset2
I Xi Xi^2 i Xi Xi^2
1 7.718 59.563 13 10.241 104.869
2 8.781 77.099 14 8.671 75.191
3 7.791 60.706 15 7.905 62.493
4 10.201 104.060 16 9.733 94.722
5 8.637 74.592 17 9.551 91.226
6 8.401 70.570 18 9.387 88.117
7 9.571 91.610 19 8.446 71.330
8 8.713 75.912 20 8.657 74.942
9 8.535 72.839 21 8.335 69.464
10 8.511 72.443 22 8.413 70.785
11 8.307 69.002 23 8.501 72.268
12 10.535 110.983 24 9.041 81.739
Total 105.700 939.379 106.881 957.147
Number of n1 12 n2 12
observation
Mean 8.808 78.282 8.907 79.762
Variance 0.759 0.472
X1mean-X2mean -0.098
n1-1 11
n2-1 11
(n1-1)S1^2+(n2-1)S2^2/(n1+n2-2) 0.6155

(⅟n1+⅟n2) 0.1667

T -0.9594
F 1.6069

109
 Table4: Lower Fetam stream flow Stability of Variance and Mean
Subset1 subset2
I Xi Xi^2 i Xi Xi^2
1 15.967 254.938 10 18.984 360.396
2 18.573 344.939 11 15.152 229.575
3 17.841 318.310 12 16.100 259.200
4 22.863 522.734 13 18.820 354.200
5 15.850 251.230 14 20.767 431.278
6 15.892 252.541 15 20.194 407.798
7 20.886 436.234 16 19.005 361.172
8 21.257 451.864 17 17.699 313.248
9 20.788 432.126 18 13.921 193.805
Total 169.917 3264.915 160.642 2910.671
Number of n1 9 n2 9
observation
Mean 14.160 272.076 13.387 242.556
Variance 7.119 10280.938 5.421 6540.902
X1mean-X2mean 0.773
n1-1 8
n2-1 8
(n1-1)S1^2+(n2-1)S2^2/(n1+n2-2) 6.2699162
(⅟n1+⅟n2) 0.2222

T 0.5547
F 1.3133

110
Table 5: Student t-distribution

111
Table 5: PP of F, distribution for 5% level of significance

112
 Appendix E1: Summary output to fill missed stream flow regression statistics
Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.995645581

R Square 0.991310122
Adjusted R Square 0.99034458
Standard Error 0.006194511
Observations 31

ANOVA

Df SS MS F Significance
F
Regression 3 0.1181880 0.039396 1026.6 6.37E-28
69 8775
Residual 27 0.0010360 3.837E-05
43
Total 30 0.1192241
12

Coefficients Standard t Stat P- Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower Upper

Error value 95.0% 95.0%
Intercept 0.185596744 0.0086924 21.351428 1.9293 0.167761 0.2034322 0.1677612 0.203432
75 E-18 29 59
X Variable 1 0.057367201 0.0302578 1.8959442 0.0687 -0.00472 0.1194511 - 0.119451
53 1761 87 0.0047167
84
X Variable 2 0.526019901 0.0324802 16.195086 1.9842 0.459376 0.5926638 0.4593760 0.592664
17 E-15 01 01
X Variable 3 0.032885184 0.0343207 0.958171 0.3464 -0.03754 0.1033056 - 0.103306
9 785 29 0.0375352
6

113
 Appendix E2: Location of gauged and runoff factor estimator sites
Table 23.Location of gauged and runoff factor estimator sites of Fetam river watershed
Station name AV.Flow(m3/s) P*A(m3/s) area_km2 RO Factor X Y Z
Tilili Gauging 8.858 16.06 217.7 0.552 37.02 10.85 2435
Station
Tilili estimator 8.424 15.19 205.9 0.555 37.86 10.86 2445
Site_1
Tilili estimator 7.974 14.29 193.7 0.558 37.02 10.87 2456.0
Site_2
Tilili estimator 7.673 13.69 185.6 0.560 37.01 10.89 2471.0
Site_3
Lower 18.587 36.28 763.1 0.512 37.02 10.48 1958
Fetam Gauging
station
Lower Fetam 18.484 36.06 758.4 0.513 37.01 10.48 1962
estimator Site_1
Lower Fetam 16.502 31.79 668.6 0.519 37.01 10.48 1965
estimator Site_2
Lower Fetam 15.972 30.66 644.8 0.521 37.01 10.01 1968
estimator Site_3
Lower Fetam 12.813 24.00 504.76 0.534 37.007 10.55 1977
estimator Site_4
Average RO 0.536
Factor

114
Appendix E3: Sample photos during Field Measurement for computation of Head Drop
of potential Sites using differential leveling instrument.

Figure 1: photos during Field Measurement for computation of Head Drop of potential
Sites using leveling

115
Figure 2: photos during Field Measurement using GPS for iteration to determine cell
number for watershed drainage map preparation.
Appendix F: Random consistency index
Table 24: Random consistency index
N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
RI 0 0 0.6 0.9 1.12 1.2 1.3 1.41 1.45 1.49

116