http://www.esha.be/fileadmin/esha_files/documents/SHERPA/COUNTRY_OVERVIEW_EU-27 by Info Esha

SHERPA (Small Hydropower Energy Efficiency Campaign Action) Status of SHP policy framework and market development in EU-27 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

SHERPA (Small Hydropower Energy Efficiency Campaign Action) Strategic Study for the Development of Small Hydro Power (SHP) in the European Union

___________________________________________________________________________ ESHA â&#x20AC;&#x201C; European Small Hydropower Association Renewable Energy House Rue d'Arlon 63-65, 1040 Brussels - Belgium Telephone: +32 2 546.19.45 Fax: +32 2 546.19.47 E-mail Secretariat: info@esha.be

This Report has been prepared on behalf of the European Small Hydropower Association by:

Lithuanian Hydropower Association

Address line 1: Universiteto 10, Water Management Faculty, LZUU, KaunasAkademija, LT-53361, LITHUANIA Petras Punys

punys@hidro.lzuu.lt

SERO - Sveriges Energiföreningars RiksOrganisation (Swedish for Renewable Energy Association)

SERO, Box 57, S-731 22 KÖPING, SWEDEN Telephone: +46 (0)221 824 22 E-mail: info@sero.se Christer Söderberg Tomas Söderlund Annicka Wänn

soderberg.sero@telia.com tomas@tsem.se annicka.wann@gmail.com

For further information please contact:

ESHA – European Small Hydropower Association Renewable Energy House Rue d'Arlon 63-65, 1040 Brussels - Belgium Telephone: 32 2 546.19.45 Fax: 32 2 546.19.47 E-mail Secretariat: info@esha.be

Page 2 of 258

The following report is a compilation of material collected throughout the two years of project work for SHERPA on each country in the EU and a few selected neighbouring countries. The text has been divided into four sections, EU-15, EU-12, Candidate Countries and Associated Countries. Please note that Malta and Cyprus have not been included in this report because the hydropower sector is almost non-existent. For easier reading each country also has the same overall format: 1 Country 1.1 Geography and Water Resources 1.2 Current Energy Sector 1.3 Renewable Energy Sources 1.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies 1.3.2 RES Targets 1.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix 1.4 Current SHP Data and Potentials 1.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts 1.4.2 Potentials 1.5 SHP General Policy Framework 1.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy 1.5.2 Impact of EU Directives 1.6 SHP Sector Development 1.6.1 Economic Issues 1.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry 1.6.3 Technological Advancements 1.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance 1.6.7 Barriers for SHP Development The authors have been thorough in collecting data from designated experts for each country, previous reports, EuroStat database as well as internet sources as to obtain information that is as homogenized as possible between the countries. This of course to better be able to compare data that can be found in the Executive Summary.

Page 3 of 258

EU-15.................................................................................................................................. 5 1 Austria......................................................................................................................... 6 2 Belgium..................................................................................................................... 13 3 Denmark.................................................................................................................... 19 4 Finland ...................................................................................................................... 24 5 France........................................................................................................................ 32 6 Germany.................................................................................................................... 38 7 Greece ....................................................................................................................... 46 8 Ireland ....................................................................................................................... 52 9 Italy ........................................................................................................................... 58 10 Luxembourg.......................................................................................................... 67 11 Netherlands ........................................................................................................... 72 12 Portugal ................................................................................................................. 78 13 Spain ..................................................................................................................... 84 14 Sweden.................................................................................................................. 93 15 United Kingdom.................................................................................................. 105 EU-12.............................................................................................................................. 113 16 Bulgaria............................................................................................................... 114 17 The Czech Republic ............................................................................................ 123 18 Estonia................................................................................................................. 132 19 Hungary............................................................................................................... 140 20 Latvia .................................................................................................................. 148 21 Lithuania ............................................................................................................. 157 22 Poland ................................................................................................................. 166 23 Romania .............................................................................................................. 177 24 Slovakia............................................................................................................... 185 25 Slovenia............................................................................................................... 193 Candidate Countries........................................................................................................ 201 26 Croatia................................................................................................................. 202 27 Macedonia........................................................................................................... 209 28 Turkey................................................................................................................. 215 Associated Countries ...................................................................................................... 221 29 Bosnia and Herzegovina ..................................................................................... 222 30 Montenegro ......................................................................................................... 227 31 Norway................................................................................................................ 231 32 Switzerland ......................................................................................................... 238 References....................................................................................................................... 246

Page 4 of 258

EU-15

Page 5 of 258

1 Austria

Area: 83 858 km2 Population: 8.3 million

1.1 Geography and Water Resources Most of western and central Austria is mountainous, with the east being hillier. A series of passes and valleys permits travel within the country and has made Austria an important bridge between various sections of Europe. The topographic regions are the Alps, constituting 62.8% of Austria's land area; the Alpine and Carpathian foothills (11.3%); the Pannonian lowlands of the east (11.3%); the granite and gneiss highlands of the Bohemian Massif (10.1%); and the Vienna Basin (4.4%). Austria’s highest point is the Grossglockner, 3797m in the Alps. The Danube (Donau) River located in northeastern Austria, is the chief waterway, and several important streams—the Inn, Enns, Drava (Drau), and Mur—are tributaries to it. Many Alpine lakes and most of the Neusiedler See (the lowest point in Austria, 115m), and part of Lake Constance (Bodensee) are also included within Austria. Rainfall ranges from more than 1020mm annually in the western mountains to less than 660mm in the driest region, near Vienna. The total mean precipitation volume is 99.8km2, of which 56.2km2 is runoff. Austria is highly suited for hydropower. The total water storage volume of all dams is 1.8km2. Nine provincial governments are in charge of water resource management sections. The authorities supply drinking water to 65% of the population.

1.2 Current Energy Sector The total electricity production in 2006 was 63503GWh. The electricity mix is fairly divers with Hydropower (58.3%) being the most important, but also gas (19.9%) and coal (13.1%) have a significant share. The last few percent of the electricity is generated from other renewables (2.8%), biogenes (1.8%), combustibles (0.9%) and others (0.6%) Per capita electricity consumption was 8.1200kWh/year in 2007.

Page 6 of 258

1.3 Renewable Energy Sources 1.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies The Green Electricity Act (currently in force) Stipulates feed in tariffs for SHP electricity. The tariff level depends on the facility capacity and distinguishes between “old plants” (built before 2003), new plants and renovated plants (with an increase of the average annual production by 50% or by 15%). The current (2008) feed in tariffs are not favourable and do not correspond to the real market conditions. They cannot be considered as support anymore! The actual production prices are by now much higher and the actual market price is also higher than the feed in tariffs. The New Green Electricity Act Has set a national target of 15% of the electricity delivered to the end consumer has to be derived from biomass, biogas, wind, solar, small hydro (<10MW), middle hydro (10MW20MW) and waste lye. For hydropower this means a target of new installed capacity of 700MW (3500GWh) of which 350MW (1750GWh) are to be from SHP. The new Green Electricity Act stipulates a direct investment support for SHP plants (new plants and renovation projects) and a mandatory contraction to market prices (calculation of those is fixed by law) for ALL SHP plants (also those built under the former legal framework conditions).

1.3.2 RES Targets • •

RES-E: 78.1% by 2010 (national target) RES: 34% by 2020 (national target)

1.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 1-1 Development of renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat and Expert

Page 7 of 258

Table 1-1Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

843

1547

1205

1190

1062

1099

GWh/ Year

4401

4259

4632

2681

3792

3593

3731

10.1

9.7

11.1

7.6

9.6

9.1

8.9

7249

7253

6571

6923

6980

7169

6904

GWh/ Year

37439

37574

35299

30197

32631

32282

33347

85.9

86.0

84.5

86.0

82.7

81.6

79.5

8889

8950

9038

9616

9879

10210

10137

43695

41787

35093

39449

39538

41940

GWh/ 43578 Year Source: EuroStat and Expert

1.4 SHP Current Data and Potentials 1.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 1-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Total number n/a n/a 2085 n/a 2322 of SHP Capacity 843 843 1547 1205 1190 MW Generation 4401 4259 4632 2681 3792 GWh + forecasted additional capacity and generation Source: EuroStat and Expert

Forecast 2010 2020

2005

2006

2421

2485

n/a

1062

1099

+350

+400

3593

3731

+1750

+2000

1.4.2 Potentials The potentials for hydropower in Austria according to research commissioned by the Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour (VEÖ) - Austrian association of electricity companies and Small Hydro Power Austria have been calculated as the following: • 18 TWh technical – economic total hydro energy potential (large + small scale hydropower). • 13 TWh technical - economic total hydro energy potential by having regard to ecological sensible areas. • 7 TWh feasible until 2020 • 2 TWh feasible until 2020 in the field of small scale hydropower

Page 8 of 258

Table 1-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a n/a constraints) A Technically feasible 5000 n/a B Economically feasible n/a n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 3700 n/a environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 275 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Note: estimations made by this study

Capacity MW n/a 1000 n/a 740

933

1.5 SHP General Policy Framework 1.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 1-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, power SHP Legal conditions for SHP production /concession definition <10MW

Earlier the concessions given were infinite, but now it is normally around 30 years.

The investor needs to own the water right but not own the land at the waterfall.

Fees for the use of water There is no fee for the use of water

However, he/she needs to have a contract with the landowner to construct and operate the power plant.

Page 9 of 258

Table 1-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans n/a The licensing is governed by the Nature Law There is no fee for use of the grid for SHPPs and the Water Management Law. below 1 MW. Above 1 MW there is a fee. Licenses are issued by the regional governments (there are 9 in Austria) The length depends on the requirements on the projects. Some are additional requirements coming up during the process. Time span for getting a license is 1-5 years. Table 1-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism

Structure of Selling Electricity

The New Green Electricity Act: The maximal investment support depends on the plant capacity: • SHP plants with a capacity of 500 kW: maximal investment support of 30% of the investment costs or maximum of EUR 1500,- by kW • SHP plants with a capacity of 2000kW: maximal investment support of 20% of the investment costs or maximum of EUR 1000,- by kW • SHP plants with a capacity of 10000 kW: maximal investment support of 10% of the investment costs or maximum of EUR 400,- by kW The maximal investment support of SHP plants with a capacity between 500 kW and 2000 kW or between 2000 kW and 10000 kW is calculated by linear interpolation.

2 €cents/kWh (subsidies) + 2.2 €cents/kWh (market price)

1.5.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) The entire extension of the impacts of WFD is not assessable yet. It is believed that there will be a high impact on new and existing SHP plants and already changes can be seen in the permission procedures in so far that the realisations for new projects have become more difficult. Currently several national frameworks for the implementation of the WFD on national level are being designed and discussed. Such topics are river basin management, programmes of measures, etc. 2001/77/EC This EU directive has formally been taken in consideration by the national Green Electricity Act. Energy Package 2020 The Energy Package 2020 will have positive effects on hydropower since targets will be mandatory. The stipulated Austrian targets are seemingly ambitious but realistic. SHP will play an important role in Austria in fulfilling these targets.

Page 10 of 258

1.6 SHP Sector Development 1.6.1 Economic Issues Table 1-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

≤500 kW 501kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤500 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head 5500 3500 3000 8 – 20.7 (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m) Note: these numbers are estimates. The cost of production includes capital costs.

501kW –1MW 1MW - 10MW

20.7 – 26.9

26.9 – 30.9

1.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry There are several SHP turbine manufaturers in Austria. To name a few: Kössler, Vatech, Gugler GmbH and Andritz.

1.6.3 Technological Advancements ECO FLOW turbine As a result of the WFD the ECO FLOW turbine was developed to allow the use of residual flow for power production. If sized properly, this turbine can even use the stormwater overflow to produce electricity, which normally would run off unused. – produced by Turbine specialist Kössler, developed in collaboration with Graz University of Technology

1.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance Table 1-8 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 5 5 3 5 1

Page 11 of 258

Table 1-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden rivers for Environmental Impact Residual flow (RF) hydropower Assessment (EIA) construction* There is no general plan or For SHPPs below 15 MW there is There is no general requirement for a residual law listing forbidden rivers. normally not a requirement to flow. According to the Water Management conduct an EIA. Above 15 MW it Law of 1990 there shall be an individual A project can be rejected for exploitation due to is. judgment on the need for an amount of environmental reasons, but residual flow. it is judged for each individual case. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 1-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1=very negative, 5=very positive) 1 4 3 2 5

1.6.5 Barriers for SHP Development Administrative barriers but also environmental ones due to the WFD implementation are the main obstacles for project development in Austria. It is much simpler to get permits for upgrading or refurbishment than for new SHP. A clear statement on that problem by the commission is

urgently needed to continue even a slow and very environmentally sound SHP exploitation in the future. The WFD has caused an increased residual flow which in turn causes a substantial drop in the energy output, which not only puts financial burdens on plant operators but also decreases the proportion of renewable energies. This makes it even harder to fulfill the set targets.

Page 12 of 258

2 Belgium

Area: 30 528km2 Population: 10.5 million

2.1 Geography and Water Resources Extending about 16–48km inland, the coastal region consists of sand dunes, flat pasture land and polders (land reclaimed from the sea and protected by dikes). This are attains a maximum of 15m above sea level. Connecting to this region is a gentle rolling central plain stretching eastward. Altitudes here reach 60 to 80m. Extensive networks of canals and waterways irrigate the fertile valleys in this region. Finally to the southeast is the Ardennes, a heavily wooded plateau, which continues into France. It has an average altitude of about 460m reaching a maximum of 694m at the Signal de Botrange, the country's highest point. The climate varies depending on location. The coastal region with a mild and humid climate, to the high southeast hot summers alternate with cold winters. Temperatures range between 3°C and 18°C. Except for in the highlands, rainfall is seldom heavy. Average annual precipitation is between 700mm and 1000mm. Main rivers are the Schelde (Scheldt, Escaut) and the Meuse (Maas), both of which rise in France, flow through Belgium, pass through the Netherlands, and empty into the North Sea. Water management is carried out independently by the countries two regions Flanders and Wallonia. Regional agencies are responsible for the management of surface water.

2.2 Current Energy Sector The Belgian electricity consumption in 2005 was 88 200 GWh, of which the industry was the biggest consumer, 49 per cent. The main sources of electricity generation are: nuclear power 54 per cent and conventional thermal power, 42.5 per cent. Hydropower represents 1.6 per cent. Belgium is a net importer of electricity. The economically feasible hydropower potential is 400 GWh but very little of this is planned to be exploited. There are several pump storage hydropower plants in Belgium. There are two SHP associations in Belgium. One is the Flamish organisation called ODEVlaanderen and the other is the Walloon organisation called EDORA

Page 13 of 258

2.3 Renewable Energy Sources 2.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies Since October 1, 2002, the market of electricity is free in Wallonia: that means that the price of sold kWh is fixed by negotiation between the producer and the supplier. 1. At the same time, a new mechanism of support for the production of electricity from renewable source came into force, the “green certificates” (GC). They are delivered to the producers of electricity from renewable sources in proportion to their production and the savings in CO2, after approval of their installation(s). The value of the certificate is close but lower than the penalty inflicted to the suppliers of electricity which does not fullfill their quota. Those must consequently acquire “green certificates”. This penalty is fixed at 100 € per “green certificate” missing. These certificates can be: • negotiated between producers and suppliers of electricity (independently of the physical market). The suppliers have to fullfill a quota quarterly and are subjected to a 100€ penalty for each GC missing. • exchanged at the CWaPE for a guaranteed price (65/GC). 2. There are also investment aids, in application of the EC regulation: financial aid up to 40% of the overcost.

2.3.2 RES Targets • •

RES-E: 6% by 2010 RES: 13% by 2020

2.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 2-1 Development of renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

Page 14 of 258

Table 2-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

GWh/ Year

255

242

198

147

185

166

209

18.0

15.7

12.5

8.8

9.4

6.3

6.0

GWh/ Year

205

199

162

100

125

114

150

14.5

12.9

10.2

6.0

6.3

4.3

300

328

484

474

521

774

877

1415

1546

1586

1674

1975

2622

3499

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

2.4 SHP Current Data and Potentials 2.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 2-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

2002

2003

Total number n/a n/a n/a n/a of SHP Capacity 60 60 60 59 MW Generation 255 242 198 147 GWh *the number of plants increase by 2 to 3 per year Source: Euro Stat and Expert, forecast: BlueAge

2010

Forecast 2015

2020

112

n/a

166

209

248

520

n/a

2004

2005

2006

n/a

60 185

Page 15 of 258

2.4.2 Potentials Table 2-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a n/a constraints) A Technically feasible n/a n/a B Economically feasible n/a n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 156 n/a environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 36 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Source: BlueAge

Capacity MW n/a n/a n/a 26

2.5 SHP General Policy Framework 2.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 2-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, Legal conditions for SHP power production SHP definition /concession There is no SHP n/a Depending on the status definition. of the waterway: Renewable is Navigable – concession <20MW Not navigable – permit(s) An EIA is requested from 10 MW upwards.

Fees for the use of water Navigable waterways: fee/kwh

Table 2-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for regional or Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the grid local/regional SHP exploitation spatial plans No Navigable waterway: public tender There are no expenses for grid injection but expenses for the Not navigable: usual permit counting and the purchase of electricity even of minor procedure amounts. These grid expenses are almost contractual considering very small consumption and can be significant for small power stations (+ 600€/an of expenses). There is a new regulation in preparation that involves a price for the injection of electricity (2008).

Page 16 of 258

Table 2-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Green Certificate The tariffs (including electricity and green certificate prices) are negotiated between 90€ and 130€/MWh according to market price fluctuations.

Structure of Selling Electricity n/a

Investment support mechanism up to 5 to 25 %

2.5.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Possibly negative (not been implemented yet) 2001/77/EC positive Energy Package 2020 positive

2.6 SHP Sector Development 2.6.1 Economic Issues Table 2-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m)

2500-8000

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW 1800-2500

1000

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW 6-8

2.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry The turbine manufacturers in Belgium are Rutten, JLA&Co, Piron and Muyle. There are also Tractebel, Merytherm, A+I and Muyle for other equipment, construction and consultancy for SHP projects.

2.6.3 Technological Advancements n/a

2.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance The attitude towards SHP is globally a positive one.

Page 17 of 258

Table 2-8 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive)

n/a 4

n/a 4 3 (navigation)

Table 2-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* No Minor (only for >10MW) Regulation is in process *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 2-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1=very negative, 5=very positive) 3 4 4 2 3

2.6.5 Barriers for SHP Development Environmental and Administrative barriers (complexity)

Page 18 of 258

3 Denmark

Area: 43 094km2 Population: 5.4 million

3.1 Geography and Water Resources All of Denmark proper consists of a glacial deposit over a chalk base, except for the extreme southeast of the island of Bornholm which is rocky. The surface includes small hills, moors, ridges, hilly islands and raised sea bottoms. To the west coast the land consists of downs and marshes. There are many small rivers and inland seas. The average altitude is about 30m with the highest point being Yding Skovhoj in southeastern Jutland with only 173m. Denmark has a temperate climate. The mildness in weather is largely due to the generally westerly winds and the fact that the country is virtually encircled by water. Sudden changes in wind direction cause considerable day-to-day temperature changes. Annual precipitation is 712mm with rain falling fairly evenly throughout the year. Denmark has no major rivers, Guden책en is the largest stream. Consequently, the water sector is only of marginal importance to the energy sector. The countries hydropower potential is negligible.

3.2 Current Energy Sector Denmark has substantial resources of gas and oil in the North Sea, a well established windpower sector but very little hydropower. The total installed capacity of plants of all types is 12 745 MW. The total primary energy consumption in 2007 was 854 080 TJ from the following sources: coal (23 per cent), oil (40 per cent) natural gas (20 per cent) and renewables (17 per cent). In 2007 the national electricity consumption was 34 109 GWh. Under normal conditions Denmark is an electricity exporting country. Around 50 per cent of the power plants are owned by cooperatives and local people. The Danish Energy Agency is the national energy and power authority

Page 19 of 258

3.3 Renewable Energy Sources 3.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies RES-E has a strong support, especially wind and biogas, which are the main sources to fulfil the Danish RES and RES-E targets. Feed-in tariffs is the main tool to increase renewables.

3.3.2 RES Targets • •

RES-E: 29% by 2010 RES: 30% by 2020

3.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 3-1 Development of renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

Page 20 of 258

Table 3-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

GWh/ Year

0.5

0.4

0.7

0.2

0.3

0.2

3183

2932

3380

3784

3987

4098

3961

6127

6837

7430

8731

10172

10620

10057

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

3.4 SHP Current Data and Potentials 3.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 3-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

Total number 38 38 of SHP Capacity 10 11 MW Generation 29 28 GWh Source EuroStat and Expert

2010

Forecast 2015

2020

n/a

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

3.4.2 Potentials There is no potential for new SHP or potential for refurbishing/upgrading SHP in operation.

3.5 SHP General Policy Framework 3.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 3-3 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession n/a Almost impossible to get a license for a n/a new SHP plant

Fees for the use of water no

Page 21 of 258

Table 3-4 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans No In practice impossible to get a license No fees to use grid Table 3-5 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism

Feed-in tariff

Structure of Selling Electricity

n/a

3.5.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Negative impact on SHP 2001/77/EC No impact on SHP Energy Package 2020 No sign of impact on SHP yet

3.6 SHP Sector Development 3.6.1 Economic Issues n/a

3.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry There are no turbine manufacturers in Denmark

3.6.3 Technological Advancements n/a

3.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance Table 3-6 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 5 2 4 3

Page 22 of 258

Table 3-7 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* No n/ap Yes, individual judgment *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 3-8 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 3 2 3 2 n/ap

3.6.5 Barriers for SHP Development There is no SHP potential

Page 23 of 258

4 Finland

Area: 338 000 km2 Population: 5.2 million

4.1 Geography and Water Resources Coastal plain with a severely indented coastline dominate southern and western Finland. Thousands of small islands stretch out to Åland Ilands. The central region is an extensive lake plateau with a majority of the countries 60 000 lakes. To the north Finland is a densely forested upland. Highest elevations are in the border areas with Norway. Northwest of Enontekiö rises the mountain Haltia with an altitude of 1328m above sea level. The climate is influenced but the Gulf Stream and prevailing wind patterns giving Finland a comparatively mild climate for the high altitude. Temperatures range between 14°C to +18°C. Average precipitation (including rain and snow) ranges from 430mm in the north to 710mm in the south. Snow cover lasts from about 90 days in the Åland Islands to 250 days in Enontekiö. The total mean annual precipitation volume is 220km3, of which 100km3 is runoff. The national water authority is the Ministry of Environment. There are 13 regional Environmental Centres. The total water storage capacity of all of Finland’s dams is 19km3.

4.2 Background In 2007 electricity production amounted to 77 800GWh. Electricity consumption in the same year was 90 000GWh. The difference was imported from neighbouring countries. Combined heat and power production is the most significant source for electricity production. It accounted for 34% of the electricity produced. The other major source for electricity production comes from nuclear with a share of 29%. Condensate is also an important source for electricity accounting for 19%. Hydropower is also significant and accounts for 18% of the electricity production. Amongst the renewables hydropower had a proportion 59 per cent in 2007. Of the electricity produced with renewable energy sources, black liquor from the forest industry accounted for 24 per cent and other wood fuels for 14 per cent. Wind power and other renewable energy sources generated 2 per cent of the renewable electricity. Wind power is definitely being promoted in Finland with good subsidies to show.

Page 24 of 258

4.3 Renewable Energy Sources 4.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies n/a

4.3.2 RES Targets • •

RES-E: 31.5% by 2010 (national target) RES: 38% by 2020 (national target)

4.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E

Figure 4-1 Development of renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat Table 4-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

357

342

341

324

317

GWh/ Year

1612

1412

1070

971

1562

1102

910

7.0

6.5

5.2

5.0

6.1

4.7

4.0

2407

2471

2490

2509

2729

2795

12840

11906

9553

8485

13303

12633

10403

55.6

54.9

46.4

43.8

51.8

53.6

46.2

4220

4568

4610

4721

4784

4841

4883

21688

20582

19386

25700

23565

22512

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 23089 Year Source: EuroStat and Expert

Page 25 of 258

4.4 SHP Current Data and Potentials 4.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 4-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

Forecast 2015

2020

Total number 159 158 158 157 156 n.a 152 160 200 400*) of SHP Capacity 357 342 342 341 341 324 317 360 420 490 MW Generation **) **) **) 1612 1412 1070 971 1562 1102 910 GWh 1360 1589 1852 In addition to the environmental â&#x20AC;&#x153;ANTI SMALL HYDRO attitude the current governmental available investment aid of 20% does not attract investment for small hydro. The given estimates are valid only if the government decides to apply feed-in tariffs of significant value and considers several Small Hydro size parameters. *) includes many small sites currently out of operation, mills and regulating weirs. **) note that the forecasts uses normalized energy production (factor MW GWh =3.78) Source: Finnish Energy Industries Association

4.4.2 Potentials Table 4-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Capacity Potential (not yet MW GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 9660 100 1034 constraints) A Technically feasible 6500 67 950 B Economically feasible 4189 43 855 C Economically feasible potential taking 1200 12 238 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 213 50 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E .Note: The Law No 27/3D-13 has listed in addition to economically highly feasible sites also many minor rapids not feasible for development. It has been assumed that only 40% of the Small hydro protected potential would be feasible for development. This percentage is significantly higher for the Large Hydro sector!

Page 26 of 258

4.5 SHP General Policy Framework 4.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 4-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, power SHP Legal conditions for SHP production /concession definition Small hydro: 1-10MW Mini hydro: <1MW However, most owners do not consider plants >4MW to be small hydro.

In a lot of cases licences originate back to the Swedish or later Russian reign thus being hundreds of years old. Recently environmental centres have started to evaluate such licenses to see whether they fulfil the current conditions on site. Especially the dam causing environmental damages are being checked. It is common that older dams have been rebuilt, closing the watercourse completely and thus preventing migration of fish etc. The water law has a paragraph dealing with “long term situation”, meaning that non licensed dams that have been built a long time ago and operated for a reasonable long period of time (between 50 years and 100 years) has equal rights as those with license. However, the judgement of the term, “reasonable period of time” lies with the environmental centres and their decision is almost always anti renewal of the licenses. The owner of such an old license has only the possibility to proceed up to the highest court, which in many cases has been on the side of the owner.

The Finnish water law does not enforce renewing existing environmental licenses, as long as refurbishment and maintenance does not change the existing license. Naturally may also be important to do watercourse improvements, which will need a renewing of the license. In such cases a new environmental license has to be applied for and all new environmental demands will be added to the former license. In most of the cases the benefits of the licence-renewal will be smaller than costs for the environmental demands. Thus hydropower owners will opt to refurbish at a lower level and utilized hydropower potential will be lower than technically possible as a result. A consequence is that environmental demands such as fish passages will not be built. At current legislation there is no way to enforce new environmental concepts to an existing and valid license!

Fees for the use of water n/a

Table 4-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans It is believed that there are only very few The right to deliver electricity from SHP to the n/a applications for licences at present. national grid has been ensured by law. Directives Unfortunately there is no accurate number. for a grid operation cost based on billing recommendations have been forwarded by the energy marketing authority to all national grid companies.

Page 27 of 258

Table 4-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Support of SHP has been applied to the SHP mini sector. Support is granted in the range of 15%-25% of the investment, based on the planned investment of the application, not on the original investment. Costs for design, licensing acquisition of ownership etc. are not included in the term investment. Also demands set by others than energy authorities, such as water authorities or museum officials are accounted as energy investment. One main task of the investment support is to improve technologies, not energy production.

Structure of Selling Electricity n/a

4.5.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) The ongoing implementations of the WFD in Finland, is partly formed by the legislation on Water Protection. One part under this legislation is called Controlling Water Pollution and Hydrological Engineering which is designed to prevent pollution of water bodies. This legislation is also covered in the broader environmental protection act that came into force in 2000. The WFD has had negative impact on the possibility to construct new SHP plants in Finland. Especially at small sites the need to prepare demanding environmental assessments may raise the preliminary costs to a level which add complexity to the national licensing procedure. This will scare off investors from new SHP-sites. 2001/77/EC The directive has only had very little effect on the development of SHP in Finland. The only impact has been that officials started to consider the hydropower potentials and commissioned reports and evaluations from all the renewable energy sources including SHP. Already in 2001 it had become clear that the governmental support system is not sufficient to make SHP development feasible and new investment attractive. It seems as though Finland is promoting other renewables such as wind and bio energy but is discriminating against SHP. Energy Package 2020 Not much can be said on this except that SHP owners expect this proposal to have a positive effect on SHP development. More concrete information will be available during autumn 2008 when the Finnish Parliament will take up energy discussions again.

Page 28 of 258

4.6 SHP Sector Development 4.6.1 Economic Issues There is practically no information available in Finland on investment costs of new small hydro plants. There are plans to start with a cost evaluation project on refurbishing and re-construction work of the Finnish Small hydro sector. Many of the older plants are near to 100 years old and significant investment will become necessary in the near future. Costs will certainly be rather site dependent and costs for refurbishment of dams and their gates, including automation will be important. Currently the cost structure published in many European publications is used and the time of publication has been taken into account by using construction and machinery indexes of the Finnish statistical office. Finland can contribute cost information after the planned project on Finland’s Small Hydro Cost Evaluation has been conducted (June 2009) It is known for certain that a huge impact on the costs of the dam deals with flood discharges and the power plant deals with discharges and mean flow. The lake content has strong soothing effects on flood discharge versus mean discharge. In small run-off areas without significant lakes flood discharge can reach a size of more than 100 times mean discharge, while in areas with lake coverage of 20% this factor is only 4 times as large! Dam Safety classification is another subject, which might add costs. If a dam may cause significant property loss or environmental damage, if it were to break, the dam is classified as high hazard potential dam and its design flood has to be higher than a return period of 5000 years. The main number of small hydro plants (Mini-hydro<1MW) in Finland have heads smaller than 5m and the cost impacts are most significant when heads drop below 5m and the plant size is small (less than 300 kW).The larger sector of Finland’s small hydro 1-10 MW have heads ranging commonly between 5 and 10 meters. Heads higher than 10 meters are very rare in Finland. Table 4-7 Investment and power production costs

< 2m Low Head (≤5m)

Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

≤100 kW 5400-10000

≤100 kW n/a

3800 -8000

101kW - 1MW 1MW – 2MW 5400 - 3000 3000 - 2450 3800 - 2100

2100 - 1750

n/a

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW n/a n/a n/a

Page 29 of 258

n/a

4.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry The main domestic civil contractor for dams and hydropower projects is RakennusLemmink채inen Oy.

4.6.3 Technological Advancements n/a

4.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance Unfortunately there seems to be a negative view on SHP development in Finland at the moment coming from the environmental groups. These groups are pushing hard for the Water Framework Directive thus pushing aside the directive 2001/77/EC promoting electricity from ALL renewable sources. Although the Government seems to have understood the importance of hydropower in terms of its balancing power on the grid there still is not enough support for SHP to attract investors. There also seems to be a lack of public education on energy and where it originates from. Table 4-8 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) Other kinds of resistance*

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 5 3 5 4-5 fish migration enforcement Attitude: We do not need power plants, our electricity comes from the plug!

* Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Table 4-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden rivers for hydropower Environmental Impact Residual flow (RF) construction* Assessment (EIA) There is no residual flow With the rise of the environmental movement in The new environmental license procedure is rather clear and defined in Finland yet. the 1980s a protection law called rapids follows the Water Law which SHP, with exception of protection law was set up. The environmental has been updated with chapters those larger than 5MW, has concern was that new hydropower plants would very small possibilities to be built at sites considered important for from the Environmental Law. protection. Several rivers were completely Modern environmental regulate flow. This is protected. It was decided that the ownership of considerations have to be because SHP is mostly applied. With SHP projects situated in rapids and the the non-constructed rapids in the protected area would be taken over by the state with owners environmental impact common head is 3m thus assessments are commonly not only using what is coming receiving compensation. upstream. demanded. Plants in operation and even out of operation and mills were considered exclusively from the rapid protection and remained in private ownership. At the time of compensating non-

Page 30 of 258

constructed rapids many of the owners of existing plants and mills would have voluntarily sold their rights to the government but this was rejected due to saving reasons! Now 20 years later the environmentalists and fishery-officials want to get rid of all small hydro plants IN ALL RIVER REACHES, but this time without compensation to the owners. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

As mentioned already the environmentalists are against SHP development and would rather see them removed and the natural watercourses restored. Politicians still see the value of hydropower but would need to strengthen subsidies for SHP and also make it easier to apply for licenses. The general public is silent paying the increasing electricity bills and will complain later if the security of electricity supply is lacking. Table 4-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 4 2 2 5 No experience

4.6.5 Barriers for SHP Development Small hydropower development has been staggering in Finland mainly due to economic and water licence constraints. There does not seem to exist sufficient information on costs, certified by application and final reports to the investment support granting authority. Development of the larger SHP sector (1MW-10MW) has recently had a revival with several projects under construction or in the licensing renewing procedure. Unfortunately the mini hydropower (<1MW) sector has been related to refurbishments and automations over the last decade.

Page 31 of 258

5 France

Area: 549 000 km2 Population: 61.2 million

5.1 Geography and Water Resources Topographically France is one of the most varied countries in Europe. Elevations range from sea level to the highest peak of the continent, Mont Blanc (4,807 m), on the border with Italy. Much of the country is ringed with mountains; with the Ardennes Plateau in the northeast, which extends into Belgium and Luxembourg; the Vosges to the east, the high Alps, and the Jura Mountains; along the Spanish border are the Pyrenees, much like the Alps in ruggedness and height. The Paris Basin, the core of France, connects in the southwest with the lowland of Aquitaine. Low hills cover much of Brittany and Normandy. The upland of the Massif Central, topped by extinct volcanoes, constitutes the south-central area. Within France three types of climates may be found; oceanic, continental and Mediterranean. In the west is an oceanic climate with small temperature ranges and ample rainfall. The continental climate is to be found in the central and eastern parts of France has much greater ranges of temperature with warm summers and cold winters that may bring snow. Rainfall is again ample in this area. Mediterranean climate is found in the south, except in the mountainous southwest, characterized by hot summers, cool winters and limited rainfall. Annual precipitation ranges from 680mm in the central and southern France to 1000mm around Paris at Bordeaux. In the northern coastal and the mountainous areas precipitation can reach more than 1120mm. There are four main river systems: The valley of the Rh么ne (813km), with that of its tributary the Sa么ne (480 km/298 mi), reaches from the Paris Basin and eastern France to the Mediterranean; the Seine (776km), draining into the English Channel; the Loire (1020km), which flows through central France to the Atlantic; and the Garonne (575km), which flows across southern France to the Atlantic The Ministries of Industry and Environment are in charge of the water resources in France. There are about 572 dams in operation, including dams which are higher than 20m. The storage capacity of all dams is around 7 500 000 000m3. (7,5 billion cubic m)

Page 32 of 258

5.2 Current Energy Sector The Directory for Energy and Mineral Resources (DIREM) is responsible for energy supply and security of supply while the Directory for Energy Demand and Energy Markets is responsible energy demand including marketing renewable energy and energy efficiency. The electricity generation in 2006 was 548.8TWh of which hydropower represented 60.9TWh. Nuclear power is the biggest electricity generation source, 428TWh in 2006. The technically and economically feasible potential of hydropower in France is 72TWh. The Strategy and General Affairs unit is responsible for policy co-ordination and international strategy. The French electricity market is now completely open, since 2007. There are two associations taking care of the SHP interest in France, France Hydro and EAF, Energie Autonom Fancais

5.3 Renewable Energy Sources 5.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies n/a

5.3.2 RES Targets â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

RES-E: 21 % by 2010 RES: 23 % by 2020

5.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 5-1 Development of renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006

Page 33 of 258

Table 5-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

1833

2221

2313

1981

2384

2419

2473

GWh/ Year

6723

6887

6751

6381

6710

5899

6383

9.5

8.7

10.3

9.9

10.3

10.2

10.1

18988

19000

19059

18888

18756

18770

GWh/ Year

60415

67747

53847

52779

53109

45851

49448

85.7

86.0

82.2

81.9

81.1

79.2

78.5

21499

21923

22125

38813

22129

22540

23327

70463

78797

65479

64441

65448

57909

62999

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

5.4 SHP Current Data and Potentials 5.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 5-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Forecast 2015

2010 Total number n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1717 n/a n/a of SHP Capacity 1833 2221 2313 1981 2384 2419 2473 n/a 3573 MW Generation 6723 6887 6751 6381 6710 5899 6383 n/a 9083 GWh Source: Statistics from EuroStat, Forecast from APPI, Number of plants from H&D WorldAtlas

2020 n/a n/a n/a

Page 34 of 258

5.4.2 Potentials Table 5-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a n/a constraints) A Technically feasible 4000 n/a B Economically feasible 3000 n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 3000 n/a environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 1595* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Source: Expert *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW n/a 1000 750 750

618*

5.5 SHP General Policy Framework 5.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 5-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession Three deLaw of July 10, 1976 Length of licence finitions: Law of July 12, 1983 normally 30-40 years 4.5 MW, Water Law of January 3, 1992 10 MW, Electricity Law of 2000 12 MW

Fees for the use of water

Yes. The system is very complicated

Table 5-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans n/a 2 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 3 years Developer pays for connection, no fees for using grid Table 5-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed in tariff plus premium for smaller schemes

Structure of Selling Electricity n/a

Page 35 of 258

For new plants the feed-in tariff is 6.07 c€ per kWh plus a premium of 2.5-0.5 c€ per kWh for plants below 1 MW. For existing plants: 5.49-6.1 c€ per kWh plus a premium of 1.52 - 0 for plants below 1 MW. There is also a winter premium for regularity in production. More information on http//www.cler.org/info/spip.php?article 3281

5.5.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) negative 2001/77/EC Positive but very little impact so far Energy Package 2020 Should be positive but this remains to be seen

5.6 SHP Sector Development 5.6.1 Economic Issues Contrary to other countries France has reported higher production costs for plants with higher heads Table 5-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

4000

3500

3000

0.8 – 1.0

0.7 – 0.8

0.5 – 0.6

n/a

3250

2500

n/a

0.9 – 1.1

1.0 – 1.3

n/a

2500

1850

n/a

1.3 – 1.6

1.5 – 1.8

5.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry Table 5-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP Equipment/construction/consulting n/a

Turbines Other mechan. Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

Mecamidi, Thee, Bouvier, MJ2 Several Several Several Several Several

Page 36 of 258

5.6.3 Technological Advancements n/a

5.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance Table 5-9 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 2 Fishery 4 Water regulation 3 Environmental legislation 5 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 5 Other kinds of resistance* 4 * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Table 5-10 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* Several, decided by Normally 10 per cent of inter-annual mean “Conseil Superieur An Environment Impact Assessment is flow. de la Peche” needed to get a license For sites with inter-annual mean flow of more than 80m3/s it is reduced to 5 per cent and also for some other cases. This rule is applicable to new projects, for existing plants at renewal or 1 January 2014 at the latest. *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 5-11 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGO’s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 1 3 3 2 4

5.6.5 Barriers for SHP Development n/a

Page 37 of 258

6 Germany

Area: 356 854 km2 Population: 82.6 million

6.1 Geography and Water Resources Precipitation ranges between 600mm up to 2000mm. The latter being in the far south where there exist groups of plateaus and low mountains averaging 460m in altitude with the Black Forest and Odenwald Mountains as the exceptions. The highest peak called the Feldberg has an altitude of 1,493m. These gradually merge with the highest walls of the Bavarian Alps ranging between 2,440m and 2,740, which form the boundary between Germany, Switzerland, and Austria; the Zugspitze (2,962 m/9,718 ft), on the Austrian border, is the highest point in Germany. More commonly throughout Germany would be a precipitation of about 600mm to 1000mm. In the northeast the wide German lowlands is characterized by sandy North Sea shores, heath and moor, with highest altitudes of about 300m. This landscape rises slowly to the central Germany uplands where low, eroded mountains of 1,070â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1,520m extend from the Rhine to the former border of East Germany. A wide rift valley and a narrow gorge carved by the Rhine River are situated in the West. Germany has only one major lake, which is known in English as Lake Constance (Bodensee, 305km2) and is shared with Switzerland and Austria. All the rivers in Germany run off into the North Sea except in the extreme south. The western area is dominated by the Rhine and its two main tributaries, the Mosel and the Main. Farther to the east are the Ems, the Weser, the Elbe, and the Oder, which have estuaries that are important for the ports located there. In the South, the Danube flows from west to east. As a result of privatization, deregulation and strong competition the water market in Germany is still experiencing major changes. There are about 311 large dams in operation today with a total water storage capacity of about 3.9km3.

6.2 Current Energy Sector Germany has a total net electricity production of 596 000GWh. The energy mix is fairly divers with 36% oil, 24.1% solid fuels (12.9% coal + 11.2% lignite), 22.7% natural gas, 12.5% nuclear, 4.6% renewables and 0.1% others. Although Germany is the second largest producer of coal in the EU natural gas is slowly replacing the use of solid fuels. With the Law on the Orderly Termination of the Use of Nuclear Energy for the Commercial Production of Electricity that came in force on April 26, 2002 new atomic

Page 38 of 258

plants are not to be built and the ones in existence have an operating lifetime limited to 32 years. This means that by 2023 the last of the existing 17 nuclear power plants will be switched off leaving a gap in the energy supply. With the help of the Renewable Energy Law (revised 2004) the gap caused by the reduction of power from nuclear power will be replaced by renewables. The aim is that by 2010 the overall electricity production from renewables will have reached 12.5% and by 2020 at least 20%. Domestic production already accounts for 10% renewables of which wind power accounts for 42.6%. Germany is in fact one of the leading countries when it comes to wind power with one third of the world’s turbines and half of the wind power plants located in Germany.

6.3 Renewable Energy Sources Renewable energy sources are the key components to decreasing fossil fuel dependency in Germany. Great investments will be made in the sectors of biomass, wind power, solar energy and fuel cells. In 2005 the electricity production from renewables contributing were 42.6% wind power, 34.6% hydro power, 7.6% biogenic solid fuels, 5.1% biogas, 3.5% biogas, 3.3% biogenic shares of waste, 1.6% photovoltaic, 1.4 sewage gas, 0.2% biogenic liquid fuels and 0.0003% from geothermal. To reach the targets of 12.5% by 2010 biomass being the “all round“ is to account for a large portion of this renewable energy source increase. The estimate is that biomass will produce 10% of the total electricity needs and 20% of the supplied heat. Wind being the largest of the renewables in Germany at this time will also continue to increase with large investments in off shore plants. In 2005 about 18000MW wind power was installed and it is envisaged that by 2030 the installed capacity will reach 25000MW. The solar industry is also booming with the market growing by 20% each year. With latest developments the figure of 1.6% is set to rise. Fuel cells are also making advancements but will not be ready for commercial use until the earliest 2020.

6.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies The Renewable Energy Law (revised 2004) lays down minimum remuneration for electricity from renewable. The law also aims at increasing electricity production from renewables by at least 12.5% by 2010 and at least 20% by 2020. The law lays down a minimum payment of 9.5 €cents per kWh for electricity produced by biomass for a period of 20 years.

6.3.2 RES Targets • •

RES-E: 12.5% by 2010 (national target) RES: 20% by 2020 (national target)

Page 39 of 258

6.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 6-1 Development of renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat Table 6-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

1421

1527

1544

1564

1714

GWh/ Year

7999

7634

8594

7967

8378

7959

7996

19.7

19.5

18.3

16.4

14.3

12.5

11.0

2907

3410

2423

2429

16926

14517

14530

11297

12698

11622

11935

41.8

37.1

31.0

23.3

21.7

18.3

16.4

12367

15112

18625

20936

23878

27417

31468

39157

46856

48523

58538

63522

72812

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 40512 Year Source: EuroStat and Expert

Page 40 of 258

6.4 SHP Current Data and Potentials 6.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 6-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

Total number n/a n/a Of SHP Capacity 1421 1421 MW Generation 7999 7634 GWh * BlueAge Source: EuroStat and Expert

Forecast 2010 2015

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

8000

n/a

1527

1544

1564

1714

1795*

n/a

8594

7967

8378

7959

7996

9379*

n/a

2020

6.4.2 Potentials Table 6-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Capacity Potential (not yet MW GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 30000 100 n/a constraints) A Technically feasible 8000 27 n/a B Economically feasible n/a n/a n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 2000 6 350 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 500 100 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *The figures are from an expertise assessment made for the committee of scientists that supports the federal government in environmental matters..

Page 41 of 258

6.5 SHP General Policy Framework 6.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 6-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <5 MW Many old SHP plants have life long None. authorizations that are transferable in case of refurbishment as long as the head and discharge are not changed. A new license is to be considered for reactivation of abandoned sites or if any change of hydraulic conditions takes place. The licenses are given for at most 20 years and then have to be renewed. In other cases those new licences are given with risk of permanent cancellation.

Fees for the use of water None.

Table 6-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans n/a Support by federal law (feed in tariffs) is only Preference for renewable energy due to federal law (Erneuerbare Energien Gesetz) is given. given at a site where a dam or weir already exists. In such case one may apply for a building Connection to the nearest point at the grid is to and operating licence which will be granted for be paid by the entrepreneur. Use of grid is free. maximum 30 years. Licensing processes can last for 1 to 2 years Table 6-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanisms and Structure for Sale to Grid Germany uses feed in tariffs as support mechanism. With prices for sale to the grid (â&#x201A;Źcents/kWh) according to capacity: 7.67 (< 500 kW) 6.65 (500 kW - 5 MW)

The revised Renewable Energy Sources Act (RESA) ties the hydropower feed-in rates to prove that the use of hydropower either achieves good ecological surface water status or substantially improves it.

6.5.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) The WFD is currently under discussion in Germany including interested parties and representatives from SHP. In some places the directive has been implemented with no consideration for SHP resulting in prohibition on SHP in those areas. Representatives for SHP however believe that new development of SHP will not undermine the purpose Page 42 of 258

of WFD which is “good ecological status for surface water”. Rather the WFD should be considered an opportunity for the SHP sector to show what developments have been made within SHP with respect to integration into the ecosystem of the rivers with minimum environmental impact. Unfortunately the Umweltbundesamt (environmental legal office) has a strong position and do not see it in this way. They would rather see SHP disappear completely. There is an official campaign for dam removal. Many weirs have been removed in an initiative paid by the state government. If a SHP plant has not been in operation for more than 2 year a regulation allows for the removal of these dams and weirs. Main fears amoung SHP supporters that are connected to the EU WFD are: • • • • •

that the SHP plants that do not have fish by-pass systems will have to complement the existing plant with such, that there will higher residual flows no new hydroelectric sites complications in authorisation issuing increase in operation costs

2001/77/EC The Erneubare-Energi-Gesetz (EEG) translated to English as the Renewable Energy Law has been accepted by the German Parliament on the 6th of June 2008 and will clear the way for further growth within the renewable energy sector. This law will be valid from 1st of January 2009. Under the EEG new compensation scheme will be given to electricity production from wind, hydro, solar, bio and geothermal energy. Through the EEG growth will be obtained in the renewables sector. This in turn will give the consumer an alternative to expensive electricity production from fossil fuels as well as import independency. The difference between electricity price and compensation will be placed on the consumer. However this increase is calculated by the Bundesverbandes Erneubare Energie (BEE) to be at the most 0.7cent per kWh and will as soon as 2012 already begin to decrease again. This in turn means that the average household will pay a maximum of 2 euro more per month for the promotion of renewables. The new compensation scheme for hydro power under the EEG will be the following: • For environmentally refurbished hydro power plants o 11.67 cent/kWh for SHP < 500 kW o 8.65 cents/kWh for SHP <5 MW o For power plants > 5MW only a small raise in compensation • For newly built hydro power plants o 12.67 cents/kWh for SHP <500 kW o 8.65 cents/kWh for SHP < 2 MW o 7.65 cents/kWh for SHP < 5 MW Energy Package 2020 n/a

Page 43 of 258

6.6 SHP Sector Development 6.6.1 Economic Issues Table 6-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW)

Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

≤100 kW

101kW 1MW

Up to €12000

Up to €7000

5000 – 7000

1.3

1.1 – 1.3

0.7 - 1

Up to €12000

Up to €7000

5000 – 7000

1.3

1.1 – 1.3

0.7 - 1

1MW - 10MW

≤100 kW

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

6.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry There are about 10 SHP turbine manufacturers in Germany.

6.6.3 Technological Advancements Technological advances consist of an intelligent redesign of runner blades both on Francis and Kaplan turbines have been made resulting in an efficiency increase. For small heads (<3m) an easy mountable turbine set on existing weirs is in prototype phase. This equipment can be standardised thus making it cost efficient. There are also several small companies with fairly high expertise that are offering total refurbishment of rundown or abandoned SHP plants.

6.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance Table 6-8 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 5 2 5 2

Page 44 of 258

Table 6-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* There are no There is a demand on a pre judgment The RF averages at 1/3 of the mean flow. known rivers of the environmental impact of SHP The losses caused by the RF in schemes exempted from projects. Unfortunately no detailed integrated in the dams or at the base of hydropower information is available due to few dams is between 3% and 5%. In development. licensing processes at the moment. Diversion schemes the losses range between 7,5% to 15%. An acceptable loss percentage would be 3%. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 6-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 5 3 3 3 1

6.6.5 Barriers for SHP Development The WFD is a major barrier for SHP development since it has been implemented without special consideration towards SHP. There is an official campaign for the removal of dams.

Page 45 of 258

7 Greece

Area: 131 957 km2 Population: 11.1 million

7.1 Geography and Water Resources About four-fifths of Greece is mountainous, including most of the islands. The range of Pindus being the most important runs down the centre of the peninsula from north to south at about 2650m in average elevation. Mt. Olympus (Ólimbos; 2917m) is the highest peak. Greece has four recognizable geographic regions. The Pindus range divides northern Greece into, mountainous and isolated Epirus (Ipiros) in the west and the dry plains and lesser mountain ranges of the east. Central Greece is the southeastern finger of the mainland that cradled the city-states of ancient Greece. In the south, Greece consists of the mountainous, four-fingered Peloponnesus (Pelopónnisos), separated from the mainland by the Gulf of Corinth (Korinthiakós Kólpos). Islands of the Aegean comprise the numerous Cyclades (Kikládes); the Dodecanese (Dhodhekánisos), including Rhodes (Ródhos); and the two large islands of Crete (Kríti) and Euboea (Évvoia). The rivers in Greece are not navigable. Most dry up in the summer and become rushing mountain torrents in the spring. Southern Greece and on the islands have a Mediterranean climate, with hot, dry summers and cool, wet winters. In the northern mountain regions winters are severe. The summer heat is moderated by mountain and sea breezes. Precipitation ranges from 1210mm in the north and in the mountains to between 380mm and 810mm in the south. The total mean annual precipitation volume is 37 km3. The total storage capacity of all reservoirs is 12.5 km3, of which hydropower dams 7.3 km3. The Ministry of Planning, Environment and Public Works is responsible for the county´s water resources.

7.2 Current Energy Sector The electricity system is based on fossil fuels with hydropower as the main renewable source (5.4 per cent). The total electricity consumption is 62 411 GWh (2007)

Page 46 of 258

7.3 Renewable Energy Sources 7.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies Feed-in tariffs and investment support with up to 40 percent of investment.

7.3.2 RES Targets • •

RES-E by 2010: 20,1 % of gross energy consumption RES by 2020: 18%

7.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E

Figure 7-1 Development of renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat Table 7-1Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

116

GWh/ Year

166

135

150

245

303

324

388

4.0

4.6

4.2

5.1

2317

2311

2318

2319

3527

1962

2650

4521

4369

4693

5477

85.1

66.9

74.1

76.7

73.8

73.3

71.3

2635

2670

2689

2774

2895

2923

3213

2932

3577

5892

5917

6406

7679

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 4145 Year Source: EuroStat and Expert

Page 47 of 258

7.4 SHP Current Data and Potentials 7.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 7-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

Total number n/a n/a of SHP Capacity 56 60 MW Generation 166 135 GWh Source: EuroStat and Expert

Forecast 2010 2015

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

116

364

n/a

150

245

303

324

388

1 090

n/a

2020

7.4.2 Potentials Table 7-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet % GWh/year developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a n/a constraints) A Technically feasible 4000 n/a B Economically feasible 2000 n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 600 n/a environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 5 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Source: Blue Age

Capacity MW n/a n/a n/a 100

Page 48 of 258

7.5 SHP General Policy Framework 7.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 7-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession 15 MW Licenses given by REAE, REegulatory n/a Energy Authority

Fees for the use of water n/a

Table 7-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans n/a n/a Yes

Table 7-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed-in tariff. 75,82 € inland, 87,42 € island, €/MWh

Other support systems Investment support, 40 percent of investment

7.5.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Negative influence 2001/77/EC Positive influence Energy Package 2020 Positive influence

Page 49 of 258

7.6 SHP Sector Development 7.6.1 Economic Issues Table 7-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

n/a

1 500

n/a

7.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry Table 7-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines Other mechan. Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

No METKA, ROKAS No No Several Several

7.6.3 Technological Advancements n/a

7.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance Table 7-9 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 2 Fishery 3 Water regulation 3 Environmental legislation 4 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 3 Other kinds of resistance* 5 (NATURA 2000 areas) * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Page 50 of 258

Table 7-10 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* Yes

Yes

*Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 7-11 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 3 3-4 5 3 5

7.6.5 Barriers for SHP Development n/a

Page 51 of 258

8 Ireland

Area: 70283km2 Population: 4.2 million

8.1 Geography and Water Resources Ireland is a limestone plateau rimmed by coastal highlands of varying geological structure. The central plain is characterized by many lakes, bogs, and scattered low ridges, rising at about 90m above sea level. Principal mountain ranges include the Wicklow Mountains in the east and Macgillycuddy's Reeks in the southwest. The highest peaks are Carrantuohill (1041 m) and Mt. Brandon (953 m), near Killarney, and Lugnaquillia (926 m) situated 64km south of Dublin. The coastline, 1448km long, is heavily indented along the south and west coasts where the ranges of Donegal, Mayo, and Munster end in bold headlands and rocky islands, forming long, narrow fjordlike inlets. On the southern coast, drowned river channels have created deep natural harbors. The most important river is the Shannon, which rises in the mountains along the Ulster border and drains the central plain as it flows 370 km to the Atlantic, into which it empties through a wide estuary nearly 110 km long. Other important rivers are the Boyne, Suir, Liffey, Slaney, Barrow, Blackwater, Lee, and Nore.

Due to prevailing west and southwest winds the climate in Ireland is equable. Temperatures range between 4째C and 16째C. Average precipitation ranges from less than 760mm near Dublin to more than 2540mm in the mountainous regions. The total average precipitation volume is 81km3/year with 45km3/year being runoff. The total storage capacity of all dams is about 1km3

8.2 Current Energy Sector There is no national authority in charge of energy. Energy policy is in general regulated by the Department of Communication, Marine and Natural Resources. The national authority for electricity is the Electricity Supply Board (ESB). About 40% of the electricity market is now liberalized.

Page 52 of 258

Irelands energy mix consists of mostly fossil fuels with electricity production dominated by coal (29%), gas (37%) and oil (21%). Other sources include peat (9%), hydropower (2%) and others (2%). Approximately 75% of electricity is generated using imported fuels. The total demand of electricity in 2006 was 27833GWh. It is expected that this demand will increase by 3.8%/year over the next 10 years.

8.3 Renewable Energy Sources 8.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies n/a

8.3.2 RES Targets â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

RES-E: 13.2% by 2010 RES: 16% by 2020

8.3.3 SHP Status within RES-E

Figure 8-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

Page 53 of 258

Table 8-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

GWh/ Year

123

100

103

120

10.4

9.1

4.0

7.3

7.2

5.5

4.8

199

222

206

202

196

723

503

857

515

530

529

618

61.0

49.0

62.0

45.3

38.0

28.2

25.0

364

386

446

504

633

744

1005

1186

1027

1382

1138

1394

1874

2476

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

8.4 SHP Current Data and Potentials 8.4.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 8-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

123

100

103

120

n/a

2020

Page 54 of 258

8.4.2 Potentials Table 8-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 450 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 185 41 B Economically feasible 150 33 C Economically feasible potential taking 100* 22 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 20 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Source: Expert *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW 96 50 40 30*

8.5 SHP General Policy Framework 8.5.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 8-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession Planning Development Act 2000. No fee. 10 MW Planning permission with EIA Infinite license

Fees for the use of water No fee

Table 8-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans n/a Time 3 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 9 months No cost Table 8-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed in tariff 68 â&#x201A;Ź per MWh

Structure of Selling Electricity n/a

Page 55 of 258

8.5.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Presently no impact. Risk for higher RF ( Residual Flow) 2001/77/EC No influence so far Energy Package 2020 Will have positive influence

8.6 SHP Sector Development 8.6.1 Economic Issues Table 8-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

5 000

5 000-2 500

2 500-1 600

6.34

6.3 - 2.3

2.3 - 1.4

n/a

90 % of above

n/a

5.7 – 2.1

2.1 – 1.1

n/a

80 % of above

n/a

5.07 – 0.97

1.85 – 0.87

8.6.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry n/a

8.6.3 Technological Advancements n/a

8.6.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance Table 8-8 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 2 Fishery 5 Water regulation 2 Environmental legislation 3 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 1 Other kinds of resistance* 2 * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Page 56 of 258

Table 8-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* n/a n/a n/a *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 8-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 3 4 3 3 2

8.6.5 Barriers for SHP Development n/a

Page 57 of 258

9 Italy

Area: 301 263 km2 Population: 57.3 million

9.1 Geography and Water Resources Italy has a very varied topography giving it a diverse climate. In the north one can find the frigid alpine region and in the south a semitropical climate. Overall Italy is characterised by the Mediterranean climate with hot dry summers and cool rainy winters, in the Alps of course snowy winters. This gives Italy a range in precipitation as well. Thus, in the lowest mean annual rainfall is at 380mm in southern Sicily and the highest mean annual rainfall is about 1520mm in the north-east province Udine. The precipitation range results in an average annual precipitation of about 1000mm and a total mean annual precipitation volume of 300 km3, of which 110km3 is runoff. Italy would be considered to have an abundance of water. Thanks to the alpine region natural storage capacity is provided by glaciers and lakes, giving northern Italy the enjoyment of regular and abundant per-capita endowment. Runoff is well distributed throughout the year. Not so in central and southern Italy where availability is much lower and where shares between 60% and 90% of the runoff is concentrated in winter and spring.

9.2 Current Energy Sector The total electricity production in 2007 was 313 888GWh. The sources of electricity were natural gas (50.3%), coal (14.1), oil (11.1%) hydropower (13.7%), wind and solar (2.8%) and other fuels (8%). Stimulated by the EU directive 92/96 a competitive electricity market is being established while deregulation of the energy sector continues. ENEL, the major electric company, produces about half of the net electricity production in Italy. Between 85% and 90% of the generation capacity is privately owned (ENEL is considered as a private company).

9.3 Renewable Energy Sources 9.3.1 RES-E Supporting Policies To promote renewable energy sources in a country it is important that there is a support from the governement in form of laws, regulations and policies. Below is a list of the

Page 58 of 258

most important supporting policies from the Italien government in promoting renewable energy sources. Regio Decreto 1775/1933 – General law about water and electric plants Legge 959/1953 – Regulations that modify the general law about water and electric plants (1775/1933) Legge 925/1980 – New regulations about fees related to hydropower Legge 9/91 Regulations for the implementation of the new National Energy Plan: institutional framework, hydropower plants and power lines, fossil fuels and geothermal energy, self-production and fiscal regulations. Legge 10/91 – Regulations for the implementation of the new National Energy Plan, about rational use of energy, energy saving and development of renewable energy sources. Legge 36/94 – Regulation about water resources Decreto Legislativo 79/99 - Implementation of European Directive 96/92/CE: common regulations for the internal electric energy market. White Paper for the developing of renewable energy sources (April 1999) Decreto Legislativo 387/03 – Implementation of RES-E Directive 2001/77/EC Legge 239/04 – Reorganization of the electric sector and delegation to the Government for resettling the regulations in the energy sector. Delibera AEEG 34/2005 - Tariffs and purchase conditions for electricity generated form renewable energy sources. Decreto Ministeriale 24/10/05 – Updating of the directives about RES energy incentives Decreto Legislativo 152/06 – Environmental regulations Legge Finanziaria 2008 (Law 244/2007) – acts on administrative procedures, grid connections, burden sharing and support system for renewable energy sources.

9.3.2 RES Targets There is one directive and one proposed directive that dictate targets for RES and RES-E for each Member States. The directive 2001/77/EC has set targets for RES-E for 2010 and the proposed directive Energy and Climate Package 2020 has set targets for RES for 2020. For Italy the targets are as follows: • •

RES-E: 25% by 2010 RES:17% by 2020

It may turn out to be difficult for Italy to reach their target of 25% by 2010 since in the year 2006 the percentage of electricity from renewable sources came to 14.5%.

9.4 SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix The RES-E market status for Italy between year 2000 and 2006 can be found in Figure 9-1. As can be seen the most important contribution to the overall RES-E market comes from hydropower. Although the other renewables are not as far developed yet one can see a steady increase in all of their contributions.

Page 59 of 258

Figure 9-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

As can be seen in Table 9-1 the capacity of both small and large hydropower plants increase steadily from year 2000 to 2006. However, the total generated electricity does not change remarkably and even decreases in some years. This is most likely caused by drought in these years. Hydropower is absolutely dependent on the amount of precipitation in any given year. Without enough water it doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t matter how much capacity is increased. Table 9-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2197

2233

2291

2330

2364

2405

2468

GWh/ Year

9239

9396

9594

7187

8859

7616

7875

17.7

17.0

19.4

15.3

16.0

15.3

15.1

11621

11223

14530

11820

14691

14920

14944

36088

38154

31472

29483

33885

28451

29119

69.1

63.5

62.8

61.1

57.2

55.9

14557

14740

18209

15670

19471

20923

22941

55197

49524

46949

55417

49751

52092

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 52204 Year Source: EuroStat and Expert

Page 60 of 258

9.5 SHP Current Data and Potentials 9.5.1 Current Status and Forecasts Table 9-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number Of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

1666

1633

1681

1705

1727

1762

1799

n/a

2197

2233

2291

2330

2364

2405

2468

3000*

n/a

4200*

9239

9396

9594

7187

8859

7616

7875

n/a

12430

2020

9.5.2 Potentials The only public document containing such information on Italyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s potentials for SHP is the BlueAge project from 1999-2000. Here it is found that the potential for new SHP without constraints is 1400MW and the potential for upgrading, refurbishing and restart of old SHP is 700MW. This gives an increase in capacity totalling 2100MW. However, constraints have to be taken into account and it is estimated that of the new SHP 62% of the potential would be lost giving only an increase of capacity of 500MW. Of the old SHP that could be upgraded, refurbished and restarted it is estimated that 80% would be lost due to constraints giving an increase of only 140MW capacity. This leaves Italy with only a feasible potential of 640MW increase for SHP. Table 9-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 5040 100 constraints) A Technically feasible n/a n/a B Economically feasible n/a n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 1850 38 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 500 10 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Source: Blue Age

Capacity MW 1400 n/a n/a 500

140

Page 61 of 258

9.6 SHP General Policy Framework 9.6.1 Legal Conditions and Support Policy Table 9-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <3 MW The concept of concession was There are differences introduced by law 1775. The concession between the regulation of for hydropower use lasts a maximum of big and small water 30 years, but recently authorities tend to rights, that are allow shorter concessions as well. If the respectively the ones with owner of a small concession asks for a a nominal capacity of renewal the authority can refuse if there is >3MW and <3MW. Big a public interest against it. Otherwise if concessions are granted the concessionary renounces the water by the regional authorities use right, this goes back to the state. and an EIA is required Although the plant remains property of whereas the small the owner the public authority becomes concessions are granted the new owner of all the civil structure in by the provincial and on the river bed and banks. They authorities (no EIA either decide to manage them or require required) of the old concessionary to remove them and restore the natural river conditions. The license for the use of water isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t generally integrated with the authorization procedure to set up and run the plant and institutions are still discussing about the possibility to integrate them. .

Fees for the use of water The concessionaries have two annual fees. One annual fee is to the province and municipalities located on the river between the intake and the tail race (for 2006 it was 4.91â&#x201A;Ź/kW) and the other fee is to the Bacino Imbrifero Montano, a consortium of the municipalities which are included in the catchment area (for 2006 it was 19.62 â&#x201A;Ź/kW). This fee is usually only for mountain areas above 500m over sea level

Page 62 of 258

Table 9-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use local/regional exploitation of the grid spatial plans n/a

With reference to concessions, it generally takes 4-8 years, but it is not unusual to hear about developers who have waited more than 10 years. Big concessions require an EIA and costs about 90’000€ whereas a small concession (only very small plants) do not need an EIA and this costs 30’000€. The other application form is the “single permit”, a one stop shop for RES developers. This procedure should last 180 days, which is the expected time to make an EIA. Unfortunately these terms are seldom respected and it takes 1-2 years for a permit without an EIA. The cost for this “single permit” is 40’000€. If an EIA is required the process takes 1-3 years and the permit costs 100’000€. A rough estimate of the amount of applications in process today lies between 400-500.

Table 9-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Green Certificate: All new hydropower plants and refurbished/repowered plants qualified as Renewable Energy Plants (IAFR) can receive a number of Green Certificates in proportion to their energy production (1 GC for each MWh). This incentive regime, that started in 1999 and was recently reformed in 2008, lasts from 12 to 15 years, depending on the law frame of the period in which any plant was commissioned (i.e., plants that was commissioned in 2008 have right to 15 years, whereas plants that started their production in 2006 have right to 12 years of GC).

Distribution System Operators must connect to the grid all the plants that ask for it. Producers have to pay to Transmission System Operators a fee for the use of the grid of 0,0256 cent€/kWh. Priority in dispatching: according to Legislative Decree 79/99 the Authority for Electricity and Gas must ensure the priority use by the grid operators of the electricity generated from renewable source and from cogeneration with respect to the electricity generated from nonrenewable sources

Structure of Selling Electricity Producers sell their energy to the grid system operator: plants below 1 MW capacity have right to a guarantee minimum tariff (136€/MWh for the first 250MWh, 104€/MWh between the 251stMWh to the 500thMWh, 84€/MWh between the 501st and the 1000MWh, and 78€/MWh between 1001st and 2000thMWh of production). Plants that are above 1 MW capacity but below 10 MW, sell their energy at the hourly zonal price, whereas plants above 10 MW sell their energy at market prices. Starting from the 1st January 2008 hydropower plants with P<1MW can choose, instead of Green Certificates, a “comprehensive feed-in tariff” (electricity price + incentive) which for the first 3 years (2008-2010) has been set to 22 €cent/kWh.

9.6.2 Impact of EU Directives Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Italy adopted a law about the protection of water resources in 1999 (Legislative Decree 152/99) one year before the WFD was approved. Some parts of the two separate laws were similar although important parts were missing. Thus, in January 2006 Italy was convicted by the European Court. Since then the WFD has been fully implemented in the national law. Although Italy strictly follows all the laws on water protection there are yet no guidelines from the Ministry of Environment on how to implement the WFD on regional levels. At the moment the main measures affecting both new and existing

Page 63 of 258

hydropower plants is the release of residual flow. Some fears connected with the WFD are that there will be higher residual flow, no new hydroelectric sites and an increase in operation costs. 2001/77/EC This directive has been integrated into the national legislation with the Legislative Decree 387/2003. This decree produced positive effects for the hydropower sector mainly in the areas of electricity prices and conditions for accessing the grid. However, the simplified authorisation procedure introduced for renewables is still far from being implemented in the sector of hydropower plants which is still undergoing a 2 step process of concessions and authorisations. Energy Package 2020 Since the new targets for 2020 are no longer indications but rather mandatory the hydropower sector in Italy hopes that this new proposal can only be positive for hydropower. In the coming months each region has to set its own targets in relation to the Italian national target meaning that a thorough analysis will be necessary. This will be a good opportunity to more clearly understand the present situation and also what future the hydropower sector has in Italy since there are several issues such as modifications in rainfall distribution, difficulties with authorisation, reserved flow, etc that are actually hindering the development of hydropower today.

9.7 SHP Sector Development 9.7.1 Economic Issues The investment costs for a new plant ranges between 4120€ and 2150€ depending on the size of the plant and the head it uses. The production cost ranges between 10.5 €cent/kWh and 17,4€cent/kWh. These figures are from a study carried out on a small sample of plants, which means that they unfortunately may not be representative of the whole sector. The production costs have been defined as operation cost and administrative costs plus the capital cost. Table 9-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

n/a

4 120

4 500

n/a

17.4

10.6

n/a

2150

n/a

10.5

Page 64 of 258

9.7.2 SHP Manufacturing Industry Being one of the largest hydropower countries in the EU, Italy also has a large market for equipment for SHP. The different companies listed below in Table 9-8 not only have market shares in Italy, and the EU but also throughout Europe and the world. Table 9-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines Other mechan. Equipment

Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

n/a Cover, Vatech, Voith Siemens, Troyer Turbiner, Zeco, Orengine, Tamanini Gates: Baruzzi, Bianco, Promont, API, Zeco, Cesari, ATB, Calzoni, Camu Speed Increasers: Pomini, Costa Masnaga Trash cleaning machines: API, Promont, Bianco, Cesari, Zeco, Baruzzi Valves: Sava, Lencini, camu, Baruzzi Marelli, Ansaldo ENCO, Bridi Marina, Troyer, STE, Elettromeccanica Adriatica, Sasso, Cover, VA-TECH, ABB, Siemens PAC Studio Frosio, STE, Hydrodata, Eusebio energia, ELC, Adiletta, Hydrowatt, Eletromeccanica Adriatica, EVA, Sistemi di energia

9.7.3 Technological Advancements A few of the technological advancements in Italy include plastic penstocks, oil free bearings, screw turbines, permanent magnetic generators, electronic control facilities and inflatable gates. Improvements for the environment consist of multipurpose schemes such as plants on irrigation channels. Other advancements are fish passes and fish friendly turbines, biodegradable oils and application of residual flow. There is a growing attention towards hydropower plant construction in order to limit its visual impact and improve its environmental integration.

9.7.4 Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance The environmental resistance towards SHP development varies in both arguments of impact as well as the severity of that impact. Below in Table 9-9 are a few of the different forms of resistance can be seen as well as their degree of significance.

Table 9-9 Resistances to SHP development

Page 65 of 258

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 2 Fishery 4 Water regulation 4 Environmental legislation 4 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 2 Other kinds of resistance* 3 * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Table 9-10 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* n/a The nation law Decreto Legislativo The regulation of residual flow is for the region in which the plant is located to decide 152/06 gives directions on when an EIA needs to be completed: upon. There is no single criterion. Not all - complete EIA for all hydropower plants regions have regulated RF. The deadline to with capacity >30MW decide upon such matters is the 31st of December 2008. However, a frequently used - do a screening to see if an EIA is method of regulation of RF is long term necessary for any hydropower plant average flow. Since the regulation of RF is >100kW still ongoing only predictions of losses have - do a screening to see if an EIA is been made by universities, local authorities necessary for any hydropower plant with and private producers. Losses have been a diversion flow rate >200 liters/second estimated to be between 6% and 25%. An acceptable loss would be 7%. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 9-11 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 2 3 4 3 4

9.7.5 Barriers for SHP Development One barrier is administrative even though there does exist a one-stop shop in Italy. The process to receive a licence for a SHP project is still longer than is necessary.

Page 66 of 258

10 Luxembourg

Area: 2586 km2 Population: 0.5 million

10.1

Geography and Water Resources

Two distinct geographic regions divide the country: the rugged uplands (Oesling) of the Ardennes in the north, where the average elevation is 450m with the highest point, being the Buurgplaatz with 559m; and the fertile southern lowlands, called Bon Pays (Good Land), with an average altitude of 250m. Most of Luxembourg is crisscrossed by deep valleys, with most rivers draining eastward into the Sûre, which in turn flows into the Moselle on the eastern border. The northern region, comprising one-third of the country, is forested and has poor soil. Luxembourg's climate is temperate and mild, with temperatures ranging between 0°C and 17°C. The average precipitation is 755mm annually with a total mean annual precipitation volume of 1.95km2. The water recourses are property of the Government. Deregulation of the water service is not envisaged.

10.2

Current Energy Sector

The total electricity production in 2006 was 3527,6 GWh, where the main sources of electricity were approximately 92% natural gas, 3.1% hydropower and 4.9 % other renewables. The total electricity demand in the same year was 6718 GWh making imported electricity very important for Luxembourg.

10.3

Renewable Energy Sources

10.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

10.3.2

RES Targets

• •

RES-E: 5.7% by 2010 (national target) RES: 11% by 2020 (national target)

Luxembourg takes the view that the target of 5.7% RES-E by 2010 can only be achieved if total energy consumption in 2010 does not exceed that of 1997 and if wind-generated electricity can be multiplied by a factor of 15. Page 67 of 258

10.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 10-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat Table 10-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

GWh/ Year

120

133

113

100

111

58.5

60.7

56.5

45.6

41.0

38.1

39.6

113

114

115

205

219

200

169

244

236

280

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

Page 68 of 258

10.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

10.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

Table 10-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000 Total number 24 of SHP Capacity 39 MW Generation 120 GWh Source: EuroStat

10.4.2

Forecast 2010 2015

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

133

113

100

111

n/a

2020

Potentials

There is a gross total of 175GWh/year of potential for large and small hydropower development in Luxembourg. Of these about 140 GWh/year is technically feasible and 137 GWh/ year would be economically feasible. Of this 90GWh/year is the economically feasible potential of small hydropower. Table 10-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet developed) GWh/year % Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a constraints) A Technically feasible n/a B Economically feasible 90 C Economically feasible potential taking 67* environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints for 27* refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Source: H&D World Atlas

Capacity MW n/a

n/a

n/a n/a

n/a

20*

10*

Page 69 of 258

10.5

SHP General Policy Framework

10.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Table 10-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession n/a n/a n/a

Fees for the use of water n/a

Table 10-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans n/a n/a 3.1 â&#x201A;Źcent/kWh (electricity price) + 2.5 â&#x201A;Źcent/kWh (premium only for plants under 3MW) Table 10-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed in tariffs. Premium is guaranteed for 10 years

10.5.2

Structure of Selling Electricity

n/a

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) n/a 2001/77/EC n/a Energy Package 2020 n/a

10.6

SHP Sector Development

10.6.1

Economic Issues

n/a

10.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

n/a

10.6.3

Technological Advancements

n/a

Page 70 of 258

10.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Table 10-7 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* n/a EIA is required for all new projects n/a before a licence is granted. *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

There are relatively few dams and hydro plants in Luxembourg but they are generally accepted by the public as providing “green” and environmentally safe energy. Efforts are made for public awareness in so far through school curriculum and special exhibitions, in for example museums of natural history. Children as well as the public are in this way educated on the use of hydropower as well as aspects of providing clean drinking water.

10.6.5

Barriers for SHP Development

Very little hydro potential making it difficult to push for further investments and support

Page 71 of 258

11 Netherlands

Area: 37 290 km2 Population: 16.4 million

11.1

Geography and Water Resources

The country has three natural topographical divisions: the dunes, the polders (low-lying land reclaimed from the sea and from lakes and protected by dikes), and the higher eastern region. About 27% of the country lies below sea level. A long range of sand dunes on the western coast protects the low alluvial land to the east from the high tides of the North Sea. The highest point is the Vaalserberg, situated in the extreme south, is 321m above sea level; the lowest point, 7m below sea level, is Prins Alexanderpolder, situated northeast of Rotterdam. Many dikes have been constructed along the lower Rhine and Meuse (Maas) rivers, as well as on a portion of the North Sea coast and along nearly the whole of the coast of the former Zuider Zee, formally known as Ijsselmeer. There are many canals in the country, most of which have numerous locks. There are 11 embankment dams in the Netherlands, mainly built for flood protection. A maritime climate exists, with cool summers and mild winters. The temperature ranges between 2°C and 19°C. Average annual rainfall is about 765mm. The Rijkswaterstaat Centre for Water Management is responsible for the country´s water resources.

11.2

Current Energy Sector

The Netherlands is not suited for hydropower because of it´s topography. The country´s energy consumption is mainly based on fossil fuels. The only important renewable energy source to be developed is wind energy. The country is heavily dependent on import of electricity. The electricity market is fully liberalized.

11.3

Renewable Energy Sources

The Netherlands is applying a feed-in support system

11.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

11.3.2

RES Targets

•

RES-E: 9.0 % of gross electricity consumption 2010

Page 72 of 258

â&#x20AC;˘

RES: 14 % of gross energy consumption 2020

11.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 11-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat Table 11-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

GWh/ Year

2.4

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

0.08

0.07

0.06

0.05

0.04

142

117

108

106

3.4

2.6

2.1

1.3

1.4

1.2

1.3

918

1061

1367

1527

1998

2084

2375

4233.5

4417.3

5186.2

5365.1

6674.2

7471.2

7855.2

Page 73 of 258

11.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

11.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

Table 11-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

11.4.2

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

2.4

n/a

3.5

3.3

3.2

3.1

3.2

3.5

n/a

2020

Potentials

Table 11-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 4000 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 250 6 B Economically feasible 140 3.5 C Economically feasible potential taking 30 0.7 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 0 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Source: expert

Capacity MW 1500 100 50 12

Page 74 of 258

11.5

SHP General Policy Framework

11.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Table 11-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession 15 MW Permits required for: Concession required from Construction “Rijkswaterstaat” or Environmental Impacts “waterschap”. Both are Watermanagement Governmental organizations responsible for water quality/quantity/ safety

Fees for the use of water None

Table 11-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans n/a n/a n/a Table 11-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed- in tariff: 50-60 €/MWh plus support 97€ for new schemes and refurbished schemes between 2002-2006. (support during 10 yrs) After 2006 no financial support for new SHP’s

11.5.2

Structure of Selling Electricity n/a

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Not known, expected to be negative 2001/77/EC No influence Energy Package 2020 No influence, SHP is not recognized as an important source for Renewable Energy

11.6

SHP Sector Development

11.6.1

Economic Issues

Medium and high head are not applicable in Netherlands.

Page 75 of 258

Table 11-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m)

11.6.2

6000

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW 4500

3000

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW 12

SHP Manufacturing Industry

Table 11-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines Other mechan. Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

11.6.3

n/a No turbine manufacturers Yes Yes No Yes No

Technological Advancements

There is no hydropower technical development in the Netherlands In 2009/2010 experiments on fish guidance systems

11.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Table 11-9 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 1 Fishery 5 Water regulation 3 Environmental legislation 5 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 1 Other kinds of resistance* 5 * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Table 11-10 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* No new river n/ap n/ap damming allowed *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

Page 76 of 258

Table 11-11 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

11.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 3 2 2 2 2

Barriers for SHP Development

No new river damming allowed

Page 77 of 258

12 Portugal

Area: 92 072km2 Population: 10.4million

12.1

Geography and Water Resources

The north of Portugal is distinguished by largely lowland or land of medium altitude. The distribution of highlands is unequal north and south of the Tagus (Tejo) River. The uplands of Beira, traversed by the Tagus on its way to the sea, contain Portugal's highest peak, Estrêla (1,991 m). To the west lies the low coast of the Beira Littoral. The Tagus and Sado basins lie adjacent to the hilly area of Estremadura and rise to the hills of Alentejo on the east. The lowland of lower Alentejo is limited by the hills of Algarve to the south. North of the Tagus, the land rises steeply toward the hills of Sintra, beyond which is a low coast of dunes interrupted by the marshes of Aveiro. Beyond the mouth of the Douro River, the coast is steep all the way to the Spanish frontier and the mouth of the Minho River. The larger rivers, the Minho, the Douro, the Tagus, and the Guadiana, all rise in Spain. The Douro has the longest course in Portugal (322 km). In the north is an oceanic climate with cool summers and rainy winters (average precipitation of 1250–1500 mm) and occasional snowfall. Central Portugal has hot summers and cool, rainy winters, with 500–750mm average annual precipitation. In the south the climate is very dry, with rainfall not exceeding 500mm along the coast. The total volume of the mean annual precipitation is about 80km3, of which about 57km3 is runoff. There are 9 major watercourses. The Instituto da Agua (INAG) is responsible for national water resources. The Comissões de Coordenacâo (Coordination Comission) on the other hand is in charge of water regionally

12.2

Current Energy Sector

Electricity production in 2006 was 49041GWh. The energy mix in Portugal is divided into four fairly even sections; coal (31.7%), hydro (23%), natural gas (22%), special status producers including biomass, wind and small hydro (19.7%), with one exception being heavy fuel oil (3.6%). Since September 2006 the electricity market has been deregulated creating open competition. Furthermore, the Spanish and Portuguese Governments have signed a treaty agreeing to establish an Iberian Electricity Market, with one spot market pole in Madrid (OMEL) and a future market pole in Lisbon (OMIP). The two countries want to continue

Page 78 of 258

strengthening cross border interconnections and harmonize the laws and procedures of the electricity sector.

12.3

Renewable Energy Sources

12.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Currently only the fed in system is in place.

12.3.2 â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

RES Targets

RES-E: 39% by 2010 (national target) RES-E: 60% by 2020 (national target)

12.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 12-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

Page 79 of 258

Table 12-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

307

317

344

330

335

340

GWh/ Year

878

982

917

1026

716

395

1048

6.7

6.1

9.2

5.7

4.7

6.4

3622

3646

3977

4146

4157

10445

13052

6883

14561

9118

4236

10408

79.6

81.6

68.9

81.1

72.7

50.1

63.2

4297

4367

5486

4557

5171

5921

6576

15996

9994

17953

12543

8455

16469

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 13125 Year Source: EuroStat and Expert

12.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

12.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

Table 12-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

Total number 58 61 of SHP Capacity 296 310 MW Generation 602 671 GWh Source: EuroStat and Expert

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

330

335

340

707

1026

716

395

1048

Forecast 2010 2015 68 400 1200

2020

105

500

600

1500

1800

Page 80 of 258

12.4.2

Potentials

Table 12-3 Small hydropower potential Capacity Generation Potential (not yet MW developed) GWh/year % Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 3100 100 1200 constraints) A Technically feasible 2520 81 900 B Economically feasible 2100 68 700 C Economically feasible potential taking 943* 30 330* environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints for 57* 20* refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *Taking into the consequences of the order of the Ministries of Environment and Agriculture (of 16 January 2003 No 27/3D-13) related to the list of forbidden rivers for damming or hydropower development.

12.5

SHP General Policy Framework

12.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Table 12-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <10 MW There is no oneâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;stop shop for SHP There is a fee for issuing developers. The licence depends on the the licenses for water use General Direction of Energy, for the that depends on the value connecting point, and on the regional of the investments. This agencies for the environmental issues. fee averages about This last process is currently under 1200â&#x201A;Ź/MW. change.

Fees for the use of water A fee is to be implemented for the use of water with respect to the annual volume of the water that is used. The fee is not set yet but is guesses are that it will be around 0.5% of the gross income of the SHP plant.

Page 81 of 258

Table 12-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans No The process to get a new license is extremely No cost for the use of the grid. complicated. The minimum amount of days for completion is 10days and the maximum should be three years. However, there are SHP plants that have been in the licensing process for about 20 years now. The licence lasts up till 35 years. Table 12-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism None

12.5.2

Structure of Selling Electricity Three components: (avoid costs) + (power capacity) + (environmental benefit) This corresponds around : 41% + 5% + 54% on a tariff of about 85 €/MWh

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) There is no information yet on what impact this directive will have on the SHP sector 2001/77/EC n/a Energy Package 2020 n/a

12.6

SHP Sector Development

12.6.1

Economic Issues

Table 12-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

12.6.2

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW – 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

1800 - 2500 n/a

1800 - 2500

0.6 n/a

1800 - 2500

0.55 0.50

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There are no turbine manufacturers.

Page 82 of 258

12.6.3

Technological Advancements

No technological advancements have taken place in SHP in Portugal over the past 5 years. Also no research and development programs have recently taken place

12.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Table 12-8 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 4 5 5 5 5

Table 12-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden rivers for Environmental Impact Residual flow (RF) hydropower Assessment (EIA) construction* The criteria for RF vary each In theory there are no Environmental impact assessments are obligatory for hydro projects that have month averaging 10% to 30% of forbidden rivers for hydro power construction at least one of the following minimum the monthly flow. The percentage however the characteristics: that is deemed reasonable by SHP representatives is 5%. environmental bodies in • Installed capacity of 20MW Portugal tend to not let • Dam height of 15m the licence process pass • Reservoir capacity of on these rivers. 100 000m3 • A reservoir area of 50 000m2 • Dam crest length of 500m *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 12-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGO’s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

12.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 2 3 4 3 4

Barriers for SHP Development

Only circa 30MW of installed SHP capacity have been put in operation since 1996/7 because of the very slow licensing process, around 9 to 12 years. This is especially due to environmental reasons. The process seems never ending because authorities keep requesting more studies and imposing more obligations, many of which are incompatible with SHP projects

Page 83 of 258

13 Spain

Area: 504 782 km2 Population: 45.2 million

13.1

Geography and Water Resources

Spain is second highest in Europe after Switzerland in terms of height above sea level. It has several major mountain ranges and its relief is characterized by the Castilian Plateau which is divided in two by the Central Mountain Range. Spain also has great differences in rainfall that range from heavy rainfalls in the north that receive more than 2000 mm/year to an extremely dry zone in the southeast that receive less than 200 mm/year. The average annual precipitation is 670mm with a total mean annual precipitation volume of 331km3. However, this too greatly varies from year to year and prolonged periods of drought which can last up four consecutive years. The most important rivers are the Miflo, Douro, Tagus, Guadiana and Guadalquivir that flow into the Atlantic and the Ebro, jucar and Segura that flow into the Mediterranean. Spain has 1188 large dams in operation with a total storage volume of all dams is 55km2. There are 11 new high dams of 60m or higher currently under construction. The Ministerio de Medio Ambiente (Ministry of the Environment) is in charge of water resources. As part of the organisation there are also basin authorities for each major river basin.

13.2

Current Energy Sector

The gross electricity production in Spain 2006 was 303007GWh. Spain has a divers energy mix with coal (25.3%), natural gas (24.5), oil (3.6%), nuclear (18.6%), wind (9.1%), hydropower including pumped storage (8.6%) and others (10%). The energy sector has been privatized thus all power plants are privately owned. Spain intends to increase its wind power capacity. The goal is to reach a production of 21 538 GWh/year by 2010.

13.3

Renewable Energy Sources

13.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

The Spanish Renewable Energy Act (Real Decreto 436-2004) obliges operators to buy the electricity generated from renewable sources.

Page 84 of 258

Legislative Royal Decree 1302/1986 and Royal Decree 1131/1988 concerning environmental impact assessments (EIA). The new Renewable Energy Plan (Plan, de Energias Renovables, PER) approved on August 26, 2005 supersedes the Renewable Energy Promotion Plan which dates back to 1999. The new Plan aims to make it possible to achieve the target of 12% of primary energy being met from renewable sources by 2010. To do so it sets more ambitious objectives in those areas that have been developing successfully and establishes new measures to support technologies that have not yet managed to take off. The PER 2005-2010 sets a target for 2010 of installed SHP of 2.199 MW. This target means an increase of 450 MW of installed SHP during the period 2005-2010. For 2005, the increase was around 70 MW.

Royal Decree 916/1985 of 25th May – amended by the Royal Decree 242/1988 – settles shorter procedure to obtain licences (concessions and authorisations) for installing, refurbishing or upgrading small hydropower resources (nominal potential of less than 5000 KVA).

13.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 29.4% by 2010 (national target) RES-E: 20% by 2020 (national target)

Expected delay in reaching Total RES-E targets

13.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 13-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

Page 85 of 258

Table 13-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

1567

1618

1652

1704

1749

1788

1819

GWh/ Year

4436

4914

4028

5407

5040

3977

4006

13.5

9.8

12.6

10.5

10.8

8.9

7.7

11150

11126

11053

11084

11148

21929

36113

16184

30540

22150

16113

21556

66.6

72.3

50.7

59.3

47.7

36.2

41.6

15297

16300

18048

19622

21900

23501

25638

49981

31916

51537

46472

44453

51757

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 32931 Year Source: EuroStat and Expert

13.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

13.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

Table 13-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

Total number n/a n/a of SHP Capacity 1567 1618 MW Generation 4436 4914 GWh Source: EuroStat and Expert

Forecast 2010 2015

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

1081

1102

1119

n/a

1652

1704

1749

1788

1819

2199

n/a

4028

5407

5040

3977

4006

6692

n/a

2020

Page 86 of 258

13.4.2

Potentials

Table 13-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet developed) GWh/year % Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a constraints) A Technically feasible 7500 B Economically feasible n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 3224 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints for 350 refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E Source: World Atlas and Blue Age.

Capacity MW n/a

n/a

n/a n/a

1875 n/a

n/a

1000

100

13.5

SHP General Policy Framework

13.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Table 13-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures SHP definition

Legal conditions for SHP

â&#x2030;¤ 10 MW

There is no one-stop shop for SHP project developers. Generally speaking, several authorisations are needed from several different administrations (Environmental Authority, Energy Authority and Water Authority). Additionally, the other series of Organisms or Institutions (at local or regional level) have to inform favourably in order to be able to start a project.

Plants with installed capacity between 10 and 50 MW are not considered SHP but still have the same legal frame as SHP plants. The difference is that the tariff decreases with increasing power capacity.

Licence for water use, power production /concession The timeframe for the authorisation procedure is absolutely undefined. There are projects that have been approved in a four year frame and others that are still waiting to be approved 15 years.

After the end of the licence, the exploitation rights are transferred back to the State. Afterwards, the State can start an auction procedure and the previous concessionaire can renew the licens.

Page 87 of 258

Fees for the use of water n/a

Table 13-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for SHP exploitation local/regional spatial plans An officially There are no real “fast track” procedures (as requires de RESapproved e Directive), especially for smaller projects. The Royal Decree master plan 916/1985 is supposed to shorten procedure to obtain licences exists for SHP (concessions and development. authorisations) but has in practice made the licensing process Plan de more comlicated. Energías Renovables The main bottlenecks to obtaining the necessary permits to build 2005-2010 and operate a SHP plant are the Water Authorities. (Renewable Electric installations often overlap those regarding water Energies Plan) consessions, connection to the grid and environmental is now being assessments leading to real confusion of procedures. studied in order to update Co -ordination between different administrative authorities is it, possibly to not working successfully in regards to deadlines, reception and year 2020. treatment of applications for authorisations. Administration tends to not respect time limits for responses. Developers have to undergo successive public consultations on the same project.

Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the grid Authorisation procedures for the assignment of the connection point to the distribution or transmission grid are a permanent source of confusion and conflict.

For the overall authorisation procedure the average lead-time is up to 6 years. Most hydropower projects are almost rejected. The authorisations needed are the hydraulic concession or permit (Concesión hidroelectrica), the Environmental permit (Compatibilidad ambiental) and the energy authorisation. Getting all these permits should not last more than a year and a half, but as experience shows with the licence for water use the procedure

Page 88 of 258

Table 13-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism RES producers may choose between a fixed feed-in tariff or a premium price on top of the market price. In addition investment support is provided. Tariffs are specified for plants ≤ 50MW. Tariffs and premium levels for each RES-E technology are calculated as a percentage of a standard figure, the “Tarifa Media de Referencia” (TMR) (medium electrical reference tariff), which is determined annually in the Real Decreto.

Structure of Selling Electricity 6.49 €cent/kWh = 3.54 €cent/kWh (pool price) + 2.95 €cent/kWh (premium)

There are two ways of selling kWh produced in Spain: • Regulated tariff: it is a percentage on the Reference Average Tariff (RAT) that depends on the age of the installation. The first 25 years this percentage is 90% and afterwards it is 80%. For 2007, the RAT is 7,6588 €cents/kWh. Over this price it is also applied a complement called “Complement for the reactive energy”. • Market tariff: To the daily price a complement (subsidy) is added which is the 40% of the RAT. Additionally another incentive is added which accounts the 10% of the RAT. Some installations can as well benefit from a complement based on the power guarantee established by the market. Low-interest loans that cover up to 80% of the reference costs are available.

13.5.2

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) n/a 2001/77/EC n/a Energy Package 2020 n/a

13.6

SHP Sector Development

13.6.1

Economic Issues

n/a

13.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There is a large market for all of the listed companies below within the EU, within Europe and outside of Europe

Page 89 of 258

Table 13-7 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines

Other mechan. Equipment

Generators

Electrical and control equipment

Civil works contractors

Consulting services

13.6.3

n/a Alstom Power, BALIÑO, CIAGAR, Ebro-Cantábrica de Energías Renovables, ECOGAL, Gaelic Solar, IBERICA DE GESTION INDUSTRIAL, INGEHYDRO, SERVO SHIP, TALLERES MERCIER Alstom Power, CIAGAR, Ebro-Cantábrica de Energías Renovables, ACHESA, ECOGAL, GLUAL, IBERICA DE GESTION INDUSTRIAL, INGEHYDRO, INGETEAM, Safeline, SERVO SHIP ABB MOTORES, ABB T&D Systems, ALCONZA BERANGO, Alstom Power, ATMEL EFANSA, ECOGAL, Gaelica Solar, INDAR, INGEHYDRO, INGELECTRIC-TEAM, INGETEAM, Max Carcas, SIEMSA NORTE ABB T&D Systems, Ebro-Cantábrica de Energías Renovables, ECOGAL, ESKOOP, SDAD COOPERATIVA, GENELEK SISTEMAS, INDAR; INGEHYDRO; INGETEAM, Max Carcas, MECANICA DE LA PEÑA, Pine Equipos Eléctricos, Russula, Safeline, SIEMSA NORTE ABB T&D Systems, Alstom Power, ANTONIO CASADO Y CIA, CIAGAR, Ehiso Energia, ELECNOR, Gaelica Solar, INGEHYDRO, MECANICA DE LA PEÑA, SIEMSA NORTE ABB T&D Systems, ACOTEC-CASTILLA, Alstom Power, ANTONIO CASADO Y CIA, ATMEL EFANSA, Ebro-Cantábrica de Energías Renovables, ECOGAL, Ehiso Energia, ELECNOR, Equipos Industriales Thomas, ESKOOP SDAD COOPERATIVA, Gaelica Solar, GLUAL Madrid, INGEHYDRO, INGELECTRIC-TEAM, INGENIERIA DE SISTEMAS ENERGETICOS SOSTENIBLES, Invarig Ingeniería, MECANICA DE LA PEÑA, Pine Equipos Eléctricos, Russula, SERVO SHIP, SIEMSA NORTE, SULZER ESPAÑA, TALLERES MERCIER, VA TECH ESCHER WYSS

Technological Advancements

There have been no new techniques implemented in Spain in the last five years since hydropower is considered to be a mature technology. According to IDEA (Institute for the Diversification and Saving of Energy), the latest developments are based in updating the existing big turbine designs for SHP and the implementation of telemanagement.

Page 90 of 258

According to the IDEA, future research and development lies within standardisation of equipments, the design of SHP by CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics), the utilisation of new materials and the design of micro-turbines for small heads. All these aspects will take into account the environmental demands, which will force the investors to promote environmentally friendly projects. This will also affect the civil works contractors that will have to invest in R&D for new materials and construction techniques that will favour the use of prefabricated parts that will be more compatible with the environment.

13.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Table 13-8 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 4 Fishery 4 Water regulation 5 Environmental legislation 3 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 2 * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Table 13-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* n/a To comply with EEC Directive The decree 1/2001 for the implementation of 85/337/EEC, the Government has the WFD, states that reserved flow should be adopted national regulations set by the basin authority based on scientific concerning EIA. EIA’s are required studies for each segment of the rivers. for large dams, in addition, 14 However, currently only the Basque Basin regions have more specific authority, has established its method of legislation for EIA’s which include calculation. The rest of basin authorities have small hydro projects as well. calculated the reserved flow without any scientific method or criteria *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 13-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGO’s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 2 3 2 1 4

Page 91 of 258

13.6.5

Barriers for SHP Development

No new developments are being carried out. The main reason, argued by the authorisation bodies, is that there are no connection networks.

Page 92 of 258

14 Sweden

Area: 449 964km2 Population: 9.1million During the last Ice Age, a thick layer of ice covered much of Sweden. By 6,000 BC, when that ice finally retreated (or melted) it left in it’s wake a deepcoastline (in the south) with many islands, and innumerable lakes, rivers and streams spread across the entire country. In the north (above the Arctic Circle) Sweden is rugged with snow-covered mountains and thick forests, while central Sweden is dominated by lower mountains in the west that give way to heavily forested hills and ridges, dozens and dozens of rivers and an estimated 101,000 lakes. In the south, large lakes (some linked by canals) and widely cultivated plains stretch across the land. Sweden's border with Norway is covered by the Scandinavian Mountains. These are relatively low-level mountains, as Sweden's highest point, Kebnekaise, stands at just 2111 meters. Sweden's coastal areas include several small islands and reefs, especially in the east. Gotland and Oland in the Baltic Sea are Sweden's largest islands. Significant lakes include Vanern, Vattern and Malaren, and with few exceptions, the balance of Sweden’s lakes is on the small side. Sweden's largest rivers of Angerman, Gota, Indal, Lule, Dal, Pite, Skellefte, Torne, Kalix and Ume.

14.1

Geography and Water Resources

Sweden has good natural resources for hydropower production. The country is long stretched, 1.600km from south to north, which means big climate differences. Northern Sweden is mountainous and precipitation is higher in this region, which in combination with the cold winters, sometimes gives severe spring flood problems. To mitigate these effects many regulated reservoirs have been constructed in northern Sweden. In southern parts of the country the rivers are smaller and the heads lower, consequently there are less large hydropower plants. Precipitation is falling all year, however the most during summer and autumn. Since most low pressure moves into the country from west or southwest the most rainfall in the West. In the mountains near the border with Norway appears locally 1.500 – 2.000mm per year. In South-west of Sweden the country's most wet areas can be found with 1.000 – 1.200mm per year as normal precipitation. Compared to the measured annual rainfall in

Page 93 of 258

general at 500 - 800mm. Least precipitation falls on the small islands along the Baltic Sea, and in confined valleys in the mountain regions with around 400mm per year. In winter, most precipitation falls as snow, except along the southern coast of Sweden where rainfall dominates. Snow cover is present, however, even here for periods while northern Sweden and especially the mountains have been covered by snow during an average of 6 - 8 months of the year. In the mountains the snow usually depth are around two meters during the late winter or early spring.

14.2

Current Energy Sector

The era of hydropower using turbines started in Sweden around 1840 and the first commercial electricity production using hydropower is dated back to 1882. The real development of hydropower started around 1900 with the invention of three-phase electricity and in the 1950’s there was around 4.500 plants in operation. At that time large-scale hydro started to develop faster and the older and smaller plants were in need of refurbishment and modernization. This situation in combination with the electricity grid covering larger areas of Sweden made it more doubtful to try to keep smaller and older plants alive. A rapid phasing out of small hydropower plants started in the mid 1950’s and this went on until the oil crisis during the 1970:s, when Sweden realized it could not be so dependent on imported energy and the number of SHP plants started slowly to increase. The electricity demand in 2006 was 146,400 GWh. The electricity production the same year 140,300 GWh was of which nuclear 46 %, hydro 44 %, CHP 6.7 %, fossil 2.6 % and wind 0.7 %. The import that year was 6.100 GWh. Responsible for the electricity system in Sweden is the Department of Enterprise and the Energy Agency Association. In Sweden the interest of SHP is taken care of by the Swedish Association for Renewable Energy (SERO).

14.3

Renewable Energy Sources

14.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

The support for RES-E comes from the electricity certificate system that was introduced on 1 May 2003. It is used together with quota obligation for the electricity suppliers.

14.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 60 % (52 %) by 2010. See below. RES: 49 % by 2020

RES-E Sweden has assigned an indicative target of 60 % of gross electricity use by 2010 under the terms of the RES-E directive. This includes the country’s large-scale hydropower. In an attached note to the table of indicative targets in the directive, Sweden has noted that Page 94 of 258

the base year hydropower production should be calculated on the basis of a normal year’s production. If the base year is adjusted in accordance with this principle, the note indicates that 52 % would be a more realistic target for Sweden. On the basis of the magnitude of future quotas, together with the Swedish Energy Agency’s targets forecast for electricity use, it is felt that Sweden will almost reach this target. (The calculation indicates a figure of 51 %). Over the last five years the average electricity production from renewable sources has been about 49.5 %. With normal conditions it would be very difficult reaching 60 % by 2010.

14.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 14-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

The data of SHP in Sweden varies due to what sources are used. Three different sources have been compared in this study. Statistical Sweden (SCB), which also reports to Eurostat, Swedish Energy Agency’s included in the yearly reporting of the Green certificate system and the non-official database of SERO (Swedish Renewable Energy Association). SCB reports less plants, capacity and electricity generation than Swedish Energy Agency. This is likely due to that SHPP owners with capacity less than 0.1 MW are not obliged to report to SCB, but have to and do most likely report to the authorities for compensation for green certificates (in this text also called electricity certificates). Owners of SHPPs with capacity higher than 0.1 MW are obliged to report to SCB. When reporting to the authorities for compensation for Green certificates there is also of economical interest for the plant owner to ensure the reporting is received and registered correctly. The database of SERO aims to cover all SHPPs and can be assumed to be the most comprehensive. Therefore SEROs database has been used in this study for SHP.

Page 95 of 258

Table 14-1 Number of hydropower plants in Sweden year 2006 according to different sources. Year 2006 Equal to or Equal to or Equal to or More than less than less than less than 10 MW 1.0 MW 1.5 MW 10 MW 455 718 206 SCB (Statistic Sweden’s) Swedish Energy Agency

913

SERO (Swedish Renewable Energy Association)

1027

1176*

1692

1869

* SBC's figure for Hydropower plants 1-10 MW. Table 14-2 Installed capacity of hydropower in Sweden year 2006 according to different sources Year 2006 [MW] Equal to or Equal to or Equal to or More than less than less than less than 10 MW 1.0 MW 1.5 MW 10 MW 138 760 15327 Eurostat (Energy - Yearly statistics 2006) Swedish Energy Agency

246

SERO (Swedish Renewable Energy Association)

540*

1006**

451

1171

* Including all hydropower plants that received Green certificates. ** Eurostat's figure for Hydropower plants 1-10 MW. Table 14-3 Electricity generation from hydropower in Sweden year 2006 according to different sources Year 2006 [GWh/yr] Equal to or Equal to or Equal to or More than less than less than less than 10 MW 1.0 MW 1.5 MW 10 MW 490 2928 58303 Eurostat (Energy – Yearly statistics 2006) Swedish Energy Agency SERO (Swedish Renewable Energy Association)

889

2019*

3817**

1714

4457

* Including all hydropower plants that received Green certificates. ** Eurostat’s figure for Hydropower plants 1-10 MW.

Table 14-4 is based on SEROs figure for year 2008. Thereafter the years 2000 – 2006 has been estimated.

Page 96 of 258

Table 14-4 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

1100

1120

1130

1140

1150

1160

1171

GWh/ Year

5251

5406

4642

3754

4169

5177

4457

6.2

6.4

6.2

6.0

6.2

6.1

15587

15468

15251

15153

15479

15397

15327

74404

75338

63204

50343

56613

69318

58303

88.2

88.5

86.8

83.4

81.4

82.8

80.2

18303

18751

18407

18360

18711

19654

20629

84318

85107

72781

60344

69551

83670

72716

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

14.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

14.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

Below in Table 14-5 is shown the evolution and a forecast year 2010 for SHP. There will be some restrictions for SHPPs to obtain Green certificates from year 2013. Some of these changes are under discussion and how they will be interpreted will be presented by the Swedish Energy Agency in April 2009. Therefore no forecast has been made for year 2015 or 2020 Table 14-5 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Forecast 2010 2015

2020

Total number 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1869 1900 n.a. n.a. of SHP Capacity 1110 1120 1130 1140 1150 1160 1171 1200 n.a. n.a. MW Generation 5251 5406 4642 3754 4169 5177 4457 5000 n.a. n.a. GWh Source SEROs database. By using year 2006 as reference year the previous years as well as forecast have been estimated by this study .

Page 97 of 258

14.4.2

Potentials

Sweden has a fifth position in energy production in SHP in Europe having Italy, France, Germany and Spain ahead. As in many European countries large hydro is considered almost fully developed, but there is still a potential for developing small hydro in Sweden. According to a report (Vattenkraften i Sverige 2002) the potential (not yet developed) for both SHP and large hydropower with economical and environmental constraints is 5,000 GWh annually. According to this study the Swedish potential is for SHP is about 2,700 GWh in upgrading existing plants and constructing new plants taking into account economical and environmental constraints. Table 14-6 Small hydropower potential Generation Capacity Potential (not yet MW developed) GWh/year % Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 10000 100 n/a constraints) A Technically feasible 6500 65 n/a B Economically feasible 4500 45 n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 1500 15 375 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints for 1200 300 refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E The annual energy potentially available in the country if all natural flows were turbined down to sea level or to the water level of the border of the country with 100% efficiency.

14.5

SHP General Policy Framework

14.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Table 14-7 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession Equal to Licenses are given by environmental The producers have to be or less courts for infinite, but conditions can be the owner of the water than revised after 20 years. right. 1.5 MW

Fees for the use of water None.

Page 98 of 258

Table 14-8 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans Not available Licenses are given by the Swedish The electricity grid company must approve Environmental Court (Miljodomstolen) connection of a SHPP to the grid, even if the according to the Environmental Law electrical installation is within the own building. (Miljobalken), which contains the regulation for It is motivated not least of safety reason; at work building and operation of hydropower plants. on the grid electricity network company must SHP plants out of operation and having an old surely to shut down all production. Another permit, do not normally need a new licence if important aspect is that the electricity grid they have been out of operation a limited time company has so-called “strict liability” for the (normally 25-35 years) and if the capacity is not grid and therefore must be able to verify the increased at refurbishment. technical design of the connection. On the other side needed the “serious reasons” to grid owner The application for a licence needs to contain a to be able to refuse on 'reasonable terms' connect description of the project, an economic a plant that is technically sound. Such a refusal calculation and an EIA. If this work is ordered may be appealed to the Energy Market from an external expert the cost is 10,000 – Inspectorate. 25,000 € depending of the complexity of the project. The cost of the court itself is normally Electricity network company has the right to 2,500 – 5,000 € but the applicant has to pay the charge a one-time fee, equivalent to the cost of cost of evaluations asked by certain opposing connecting the plant. When the plant is in interests as well as state authorities like the operation, the electricity grid company the right Fishery Authority. The cost for this can vary to levy annual expenses of measurement, between 5,000 and 50,000 €, sometimes even calculation and reporting of the electricity more. The time to get a licence from the date the supplied to the grid. application is given to the court is normally between 2 and 7 years, sometimes even more. The licensing procedure depends on several things. Lack of capacity at the Court, many questions on the project that request further investigations. Finally the regional authorities may judge differently although the law is the same.

Page 99 of 258

Table 14-9 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism The electricity certificate system was introduced on 1 May 2003. In June 2006 the Swedish Parliament adopted a series of amendments to the electricity certificate system aimed at making it more efficient and sustainable (2005/06:154, 2005/06:NU17, 2005/06:361). The amendments to the system entered into force on 1 January 2007 and mean that: • the system is extended until 2030 • there is a new target of 17 TWh by 2016 • there is a time limit for the issuing of electricity certificates which channels aid to new investments. There are special restriction for small-scale hydroelectricity The right to be allocated electricity certificates will not apply after the end of 2012 for electricity produced by a hydroelectric plant with an installed capacity equal to or less than 1.5 MW. If the plant has started its production after 30 April 2003 but before 1 January 2007, the right to be allocated electricity certificates will apply until the end of 2012. Legislation on the special restriction for small scale hydroelectricity was proposed in 2006. Electricity from the following energy sources entitles its producers to certificates: • Wind power • Solar energy • Wave energy • Geothermal energy • Biofuels, as defined in the Ordinance (2003:120) Concerning • Electricity Certificates Peat, when burnt in CHP plants • Hydro power o small scale hydro power which, at the end of April 2003, had a maximum installed capacity of 1.5 MW per production unit, o new plants, o resumed operation from plants that had been closed, o increased production capacity from existing plants, o plants that can no longer operate in an economically viable manner due to decisions by the authorities, or to extensive rebuilding. Green certificates combined with a requirement on electricity users to purchase certificates corresponding to a certain proportion of their electricity use. Quota obligation Electricity suppliers (i.e. network companies distributing electricity to end users) are required to purchase electricity certificates corresponding to a certain proportion of the electricity that they sell, known as their quota obligation. In order to fulfill their obligations, the suppliers are required to submit an annual return to the Swedish Energy Agency with details of the amount of electricity that they have invoiced to their customers during the previous year, together with certificates corresponding to a certain proportion (quota) of their sales. These returns are required by not later than 1st March each year. In addition to electricity supply companies, the quota obligation applies also to electricity intensive companies and to electricity users who have used electricity that they have themselves produced, imported or purchased on the Nordic power exchange.

Page 100 of 258

14.5.2

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) It is already now clear that the Water Frameworks Directive (WFD) will affect the SHP in Sweden in some way. But more precise how it should be interpretative is under discussion. When WFD was adopted in year 2000 a new water management was implemented. Sweden is now divided into five districts and a county administration in each district has been appointed to the Water Authority. During the autumn of 2008 there is an ongoing nationally work to agree on the Guide to heavily modified water bodies (HMWB) and exemptions, and to agree on how to design a programme for measure. Steps to follow are: December 2008 the water delegations will take a decision on the proposals for action and management plan that will be out for consultation in the spring of 2009. In December 2009, the delegations for water will take decisions on action plans and management. The interaction and dialogue with stakeholders affected by water management is central to the Water Authority. A likely outcome of the work with WFD is that Water bodies that are heavily modified by human activity are to meet less stringent environmental objectivities than those for natural waters. HMWB shall achieve a “good potential” corresponding to the best possible state,

given that it still is being affected by human activity. Most water bodies in association of hydropower facilities have been designated as preliminary HMWB and must therefore achieve a good ecological potential (GEP). However, designation as HMWB does not relieve the waters from measures to improve the environmental quality. Achieving GEP will require substantial measures for most water bodies. Examples of possible measures in regulated waters are: • Increasing the minimum flow in old, partly dry waterways. • Decreasing the water level variations in the reservoir. • Reintroducing the spring flood in regulated rivers. • Longitudinal and lateral continuity / connectivity of water bodies. • There will most likely be increased difficulties for approval of new hydropower plants. Related to WFD there is some research regarding hydropower in Sweden. One of theme is a programme that aims to develop the basis for socially and economically feasible environmental measures in hydropower (www.vattenkraftmiljo.nu). Another one is Rolfsan, a project that was launched to retrieve migratory fish to the water system. It is financed by the County Administrative Board of Vastergotland, the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation that contributes with money from eco-labelled electricity and the SHP plant owners that contributes with water for residual flow. (www.rolfsan.se)

Page 101 of 258

2001/77/EC As a part of the electricity certificate system Sweden has as national targets for renewable electricity generation to increase the annual electricity production from renewable energy sources by 17,000 GWh to 2016 compared with 2002 levels (6,500 GWh), i.e. for a total of 23,500 GWh. Energy Package 2020 Sweden has not divided its RES-E targets into differentiated levels to accomplish for each renewable energy source. Setting targets for 2020 for how much SHP will contribute is an ongoing assessment.

14.6

SHP Sector Development

14.6.1

Economic Issues

Table 14-10 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

14.6.2

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW – 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

n/a

3,500

3,120

n/a

2.5

2.0

n/a

2,150

n/a

2.2

n/a

SHP Manufacturing Industry

The Swedish manufacturing industry has been very successful with the first commercial turbines manufactured in 1845 and with well-known manufacturers as KMW, NOHAB, Finshyttan and ASEA with products spread all over the world. Since the Swedish, and also European market, decreased many of these manufacturers have either merged or went out of business. Today the majority of manufacturers are acting in the small hydro sector, but they are not as many as they were 20 years ago.

Page 102 of 258

Table 14-11 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines

Other mechan. Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment

Civil works contractors Consulting services

14.6.3

n/a Cargo & Kraft Turbin Sverige AB, Cornelis Mekaniska AB, Turbin och regulatorservice (TURAB), Waplans Mekaniska Verkstad AB, VA Tech Hydro AS, WEAB Vattenturbin Cornelis Mekaniska AB, Edman & Sjöberg Gruppen, Mobin Hydraulic BEVI, EVS i Borlänge AB ABB Generation, BEVI Service AB, Blaxmo Kraft AB, IETV Elektroteknik AB, Ingenjörsfirman Myrén & Co AB, Quest AB, Tyratronic Automation AB, VG Power AB Skanska, NCC and PEAB. ELTEL Networks Konsult AB, Evald Holmén Consulting, Kraftprojektering i Falun AB, SWECO, Terra Limno Gruppen AB, VEGAB vattenenergi AB

Technological Advancements

As well as in other EU countries there is a development of SHP in Sweden. To be mentioned here are IT related tools with decrease the costs and is becoming more and more common and bars made of extruded aluminium for the intake that provides better corrosion properties, low resistance of flow and good ability to clean.

14.6.4

Environmental Integration

The environmental resistance towards SHP development varies in both arguments of impact as well as the severity of that impact. Below are a few of the different forms of resistance can be seen as well as their degree of significance. Table 14-12 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 3 Fishery 5 Water regulation 2 Environmental legislation 4 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 2 Other kinds of resistance* 2 * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Page 103 of 258

Table 14-13 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* Vindelalven, EIA is always requested for new SHP Often 5 % for new SHP and re-licensing. Pite alv, and in some special cases for refurbish Kalix alv and existing SHP. Torne alv. Water protected and preserved as a common natural resource according to law. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. There are of course those who support SHP and those who resist them at all cost. Below gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Sweden. Table 14-14 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

14.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 5 2 2 4 Not applicable

Barriers for SHP Development

Licensing procedure The licensing procedure is by the Swedish producers and manufactures seen as an obstacle. They claim it is difficult to understand and foresee the result when starting a project. This together with long processes makes the projects very risky and expensive. Support systems The market based support system, Green certificates, encourages the most economical solutions, but do not take care of the investment risk.

Page 104 of 258

15 United Kingdom

Area: 243 300 km2 Population: 60.5 million

15.1

Geography and Water Resources

England is divided into the hill regions of the north, west, and southwest and the rolling downs and low plains of the east and southeast. In the extreme north on Scottish border are the Cheviot Hills. The Pennine Range runs from the Scottish border to Derbyshire in central England. The rest of the countryside consists mainly of rich agricultural lands, occasional moors, and plains. Little of the south and east rises to higher than 300m.The highest point in England is Scafell Pike (978m) in the northwest. Important rivers is the Severn (340km), flowing from the central highlands to the sea in the west and the Thames (320 km) in the southeast. Other rivers include the Humber, the Tees, the Tyne, and the Tweed in the east, the Avon and Exe in the south, and the Mersey in the west. Scotland has three distinct topographical regions: the Northern Highlands, the central lowlands and the Southern Uplands. The Highlands occupy most of northern half of the country, containing the highest point in the British Isles, Ben Nevis (1,343 m). The Lowlands rise to an average height of 150m containing Scotlandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest lake Loch Lomond. In the South the Uplands, rise to their peak at Merrick (843 m) with moorland cut by many valleys and rivers. Wales is largely mountainous, with much of the land suitable only for pasture. The Cambrian Mountains occupy almost the entire area and include Wales's highest point, Mt. Snowdon (1086 m). Narrow coastal plains exist in the south and west and small lowland areas in the north, including the valley of the Dee. Northern Ireland consists mainly of low-lying plateaus and hills, generally about 150 to 180m high. The Mourne Mountains in the southeast include Slieve Donard (852m), the highest point in Northern Ireland. In a central depression lies Lough Neagh, the largest lake in the United Kingdom. The coastline of the United Kingdom is long heavily indented with towering cliffs and headlands and numerous bays and inlets, among them the deep and narrow lochs and the wide firths of Scotland.

Page 105 of 258

The United Kingdom generally has a temperate climate due to the North Atlantic Drift, a continuation of the Gulf Stream, and by southwest winds. Precipitation, averaging more than 1000mm throughout the United Kingdom, is heaviest on the western and northern heights (over 3800mm), lowest along the eastern and southeastern coasts. Rainfall is distributed fairly evenly throughout the year.

15.2

Current Energy Sector

The UK electricity industry has been entirely competitive since 1999 and the UK market was one of the first in Europe to liberalize. New British Electricity Trading and Transmission Arrangements (Betta) were introduced in 2005. BETTA created a common set of trading rules and a unified transmission network with a single system operator across England, Wales and Scotland. The total installed capacity of powerplants of all types is 81 738 MW. Sources of national electricity production in 2006 were: gas (39 per cent), coal (33,5 per cent), nuclear (19,5 per cent), oil (1 per cent) hydro (1 per cent), other fuels including renewables(4 per cent). 2 per cent of the electricity was imported. The total Electricity demand in 2006 was 345 243 GWh. The National Grid Company operates the high voltage transmission system linking generators to distributors and some customers The total hydropower potential in UK has not recently been evaluated, but Scotland has in 2008 issued a report showing an potential of 657 MW and another one for England and Wales is expected to be issued in mid 2009. It has been estimated that there is an additional of 4,2 GW of conventional hydropower (excluding pump storage). There are 517 large dams in operation. The UK Government recognizes the need to tackle climate change by reducing CO2 emissions both within the UK and abroad and to ensure secure, clean and affordable energy as the country becomes increasingly dependent on imported fuel. The White Paper on energy was published on May 23, 2007, and sets out the Governments domestic and international energy strategy responding to the changing circumstances and addresses the long-term energy challenge being faced and setting out the UK´s four energy goals: • to put the country on a path to cutting the CO2 emissions by 60 per cent about 2050, with a real progress by 2020. • to maintain the reliability of energy supplies • to promote competitive markets in the UK and beyond • to ensure that every home is adequately and affordably heated There are about 200 small hydropower plants below 10 MW in operation plus an estimated further 200 very small plants. The interest of SHP is taken care of by the British Hydropower Association, BHA.

Page 106 of 258

15.3

Renewable Energy Sources

15.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

The present UK support system is a quota system called the Renewable Obligation, RO, using certificates, ROC´s, to fulfil the quota. The system obliges the suppliers to source an annually increasing percentage of electricity from renewable sources. The obligation increases until 2015, when the renewable electricity will be 15.4%. The system encompasses all renewable electricity sources, although large hydropower plants commissioned before 1 April 2002 are excluded. The Government is planning to alter the scheme to provide differentiated levels of support to different technologies. There is a second support system called the Climate Change Levy, however not giving as much support as the ROC´s. A new support system is soon being launched called the Community Sustainable Energy Programme (CSEP), an open grant programme run by BRE. The program will provide £8 million to community-based organisations for the installation of microgeneration technologies, such as solar panels, wind turbines and energy efficiency measures.1

15.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 10% by 2010 RES: 15% by 2020

15.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 15-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

http://www.communitysustainable.org.uk/

Page 107 of 258

Table 15-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

189

194

119

143

158

153

GWh/ Year

214

210

203

143

282

443

477

2.1

1.7

1.3

1.9

2.5

1419

1440

1396

1367

1356

1343

1369

4872

3845

4585

3085

4561

4478

4128

47.2

38.2

39.3

27.5

31.1

25.6

22.0

2819

2884

3010

3290

3610

4674

5154

10328

10077

11673

11208

14660

17479

18783

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

15.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

15.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

There are almost 200 hydro-electric plants in UK - most in Scotland, but quite a lot in Wales also. Besides that there are around 200 very small (microhydro) powerplants in UK. Table 15-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh Source:

15.4.2

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

400

n/a

189

194

119

143

158

153

n/a

214

210

203

143

282

443

477

n/a

2020

Potentials

Most of the UK SHP generation and potential is located to Scotland because of t itÂ´s mountainous structure, but also Wales has a substantial production and potential.

Page 108 of 258

Table 15-3 Small hydropower potential Capacity Generation Potential (not yet MW GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a n/a n/a constraints) A Technically feasible n/a n/a n/a B Economically feasible 3400 n/a 820 C Economically feasible potential taking 2550 n/a 615 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 119 38 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E The potentials are based on the Scottish FREDS study from August 26, 2008, with an increase of 25 per cent for England, Wales and Northern Ireland, which has been considered realistic by this study. A potential study for England and Wales is expected to be ready by mid 2009.

15.5

SHP General Policy Framework

15.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Table 15-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <5MW The developer has to apply to several There is a license for use instances and will need several licenses to of water in hydropower plants be able to start developing a site. A. Water impoundment licence B. Water abstaction licence C. Land drainage consent The different licenses have differnt expiring dates, from 10 to 20 years, some are infinite. There is an EIA needed under certain circumstances, Normally schemes with a cpacity below 500 kW do not need an EIA

Fees for the use of water

There are no fees for use of water in a hydropower plant if the plant has a capacity less than 5 MW.

Page 109 of 258

Table 15-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans The time to get a licence is: The developer has to pay the connection to the Water impoundment: usually 2-4 months grid. There is also a fee for use of the grid as an Water abstraction: usually 2-4 months annual cost around 9€ per MW. Land drainage consent approved in certain areas, usually 1-2 months. For schemes below 1 MW there is normally a simplified procedure which is handled by local planning authorities. Table 15-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Renewable Obligation Certificates, ROC´s. Levy Exemption Certificates, LEC´s

15.5.2

Structure of Selling Electricity n/a

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Very negative for SHP 2001/77/EC Positive Energy Package 2020 Expected to be positive for SHP

15.6

SHP Sector Development

15.6.1

Economic Issues

Table 15-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

≤100 kW 101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW Medium Head 6000 4000 2200 15 (5m-15m) Figures are for Scotland but estimated to be the same for the rest of UK.

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW 10,5

Page 110 of 258

15.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

Table 15-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines Other mechan. Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

15.6.3

Gilkes, NTH Several Several Several Several several

Technological Advancements

n/a

15.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Table 15-9 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 4 2 3 3 (navigation)

Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Table 15-10 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* No

Only at certain circumstances, normally not for schemes below 500 kW

From case to case

*Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 15-11 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 3 5 4 2 5

Page 111 of 258

15.6.5

Barriers for SHP Development

The economy for developing SHP in UK is presently acceptable and is not a barrier, unless plants with very low heads and very small plants are considered and the requirement of return is reasonable. However, the complexity and uncertainty of the licensing procedure, the short duration of licenses are making the longsighted (investment duration more than 25 years) investor doubtful. Also resistance from leisure fisherman makes an investor reluctant to invest in SHP.

Page 112 of 258

EU-12

Page 113 of 258

16 Bulgaria

Area: 110 630 km2 Population: 7.3 million.

16.1

Geography and Water Resources

The state of Bulgaria forms part of the Balkans in south-eastern Europe. The relief of Bulgaria is varied. In the relatively small territory of the country there are extensive lowlands, plains, hills, low and high mountains, many valleys and deep gorges. More than two-thirds of the country is plains, plateaus, or hilly land at an altitude less than 600m. The average altitude in Bulgaria is 470m. Average annual precipitation in Bulgaria is about 630 mm, of which 19 km3 is runoff. Higher elevations, which receive the most rainfall in the country, may average over 2540mm per year. In the spring, 70% of the total water flow is available and in the summer only 7%. Bulgaria has a dense network of about 540 rivers, but with the notable exception of the Danube, most have short lengths and low water-levels. Most rivers flow through mountainous areas; fewer in the Danubian Plain, Upper Thracian Plain and especially Dobrudzha. Two catchment basins exist: the Black Sea (57% of the territory and 42% of the rivers) and the Aegean Sea (43% of the territory and 58% of the rivers) basins. More than 100 SHP plants are operating in the country (2007). Their number can be tripled if all economically feasible SHP potential will be harnessed. So far close to two third of this potential has been developed so far.

16.2

Current Energy Sector

Bulgaria is heavily dependent on energy as it imports more than 70% of its primary energy sources. It has no domestic oil resources and only small proven reserves of gas. The sources of electricity production in 2007 were: fossil fuel- based 48%, nuclear 44% and hydro 8%. Electricity demand is expected to increase by 3% during the next 10 years. There is National Union of Independent Energy Producers â&#x20AC;&#x153;ECOENERGYâ&#x20AC;? in which SHP interests are presented. The President is Stojan Dimitrov Tencev. http://www.ecoenergy-bg.org.

Page 114 of 258

16.3

Renewable Energy Sources

16.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

To promote renewable energy sources in a country it is important that there is a support from the government in form of laws, regulations and policies. The main pieces of legislation are: Energy Act (2003), Energy Efficiency Act (2004), Ordinance on Setting and Applying Prices and Rates of Electricity (2002), and Regulation for Certification of the Origin of Electric Power Generated by Renewable and/or Combined Generation Sources, Issuance of Green Certificates and Trading (2005). According to the Energy Act electricity suppliers are obliged to purchase all renewable electricity from generators with production up to 10 MW. Below is specific legislation dealing with SHP sector: Water Law (Bulgarian Parliament, 1999); Environmental Protection Law (Bulgarian Parliament, 2002); Building Law (Bulgarian Parliament, 2001).

16.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 11 % by 2010. Fulfillment for 2006 – 9% RES: Bulgaria has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 16% by 2020.

16.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in Bulgaria is totally dominated by large and small hydropower (Figure 16-1). There is very little electricity production from wind and other new renewable energy sources.

Electricity generation GWh/year

5000 Wind 4000

SHP Large hydro

3000 2000 1000 0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 16-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

Page 115 of 258

The share of generated electricity of small hydropower has been constant over 2000 to 2006 years (Table 16-1). Table 16-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

MW GWh/ Year

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

225

255

430

280

353

488

511

699

688

810

16.1

16.2

1759

2242

1457

1840

2541

2657

3638

3550

n/a

83.9

83.8

n/a

1984

n/a

1737

2193

3029

3168

4337

4238

% MW GWh/ Year % MW GWh/ Year

Source: Eurostat and SHERPA expert estimates for 2010 RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix is dominated exclusively by hydropower and amounts to about 7% (average 2004-2006 periods). Small hydro contribution amounts to around 1.43 % of this total gross electricity generation mix.

16.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

16.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Bulgaria are shown in Table 16-2. SHP has followed a constant upward trend over the reference period and the SHP sector will continue to grow in the future. Table 16-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Forecast 2010 2015

2020

102

128

250

305

149

150

156

166

175

184

196

255

310

330

n/a

523

560

588

627

810

990

1050

Page 116 of 258

More than a half of all SHP plants in Bulgaria can be regarded as old ones, exceeding 4060 years. Most SHP plants, according to their generating capacity, are privately owned at 95 %. The percentage of SHP plants according to their gross head is as follows: Low head (up to 5m) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 18% and Medium head (5-15m) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 18%. High head (more than 15m) SHP plants are mostly exploited (64%) in Bulgaria.

16.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Bulgaria is 1 527 GWh/year (Table 16-3). The economically feasible potential is 1 070GWh/year. More than a half of economically feasible potential is developed so far. Table 16-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 1527 100 constraints) A Technically feasible n/a n/a B Economically feasible 1070 70 C Economically feasible potential taking 1000* 66* environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 158* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimations made by this study

Capacity MW 477 n/a 300 290*

56*

16.5

SHP General Policy Framework

16.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Page 117 of 258

Table 16-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures SHP definition <10 MW

Legal conditions for SHP The main stages of implementation of a SHP project are as follows: 1. Pre-investment project 1.1. Acceptance from the municipality expert council 1.2. Coordination from the Chief municipality architect 1.3. Environmental Impact Assessment EIA 2. Project visa – Chief Architect of the municipality 3. Working /technical/ project - Adoption through the attitudes of the territory structure expert council 4. Building permission – issued in a 7 day term after adoption of the technical project 5. Building and installing 6 .Study of conditions and the way of connection to the electric grid – local branch Electric Distribution Company 7.Contract for the connection to the electric grid.

Licence for water use, power production /concession Concession for water objects usage and the connected with them water systems and installations, which are public property, is given for building of new hydro energy systems and installations. In the case of SHP water use permit is issued. Time steps to get concession are clearly defined in Water Act.

Fees for the use of water There are annual fees paid by SHP producer.

Table 16-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans There are a few SHP master plans for river basins (e.g., Struma and Iskra Rivers). There is an intention to develop local spatial plans to guide the development of SHP project in suitable areas

1.Water /water object/ use permission . Basin Directorate Director if absent any grounds for rejection 157 days for issuance. 2. Issuance of a license for production of electricity – The State Energy Regulatory Commission /SERC/ issues or denies license in a three months term after submission of written application that initiates the procedure. In cases where the Commission denies the application, the applicant may submit a new request for issuance of a license not earlier than 3 months following the decision for refusal. To renew license water user submits an application for the extension of the term at least one year before the expiration of the term of the water use permit to the Regional Inspectorate of Environment and Water. License for production of electricity lasts up to 35 years.

The costs of connecting the power plant to the respective network up to the property boundary of the electrical equipments shall be covered by the producer (Energy Law, Art. 160, 2) The project and building of the connection installations are executed by and at the expense of the electric energy company till the SHP property border. The connection to the grid is regulated by “Regulation for the connection with the transmission and distribution electricity networks of the producers and consumers”. SHP operators are given access to the grid at reasonable prices and the rules of grid access are transparent and non-discriminatory.

Page 118 of 258

A feed-in tariff system is in place for Bulgaria (Table 16-6). According to the opinion of SHP producers, the price of selling electricity is high enough (4.5 €cents/kWh) to attract private investment and it secures investors confidence. Table 16-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism

According to the Energy Act electricity suppliers are obliged to purchase all renewable electricity from generators with production up to 10 MW. Mandatory purchase of electricity for preferential prices will be applied until the planned system of issuing and trading Green Certificates comes into force. It is likely that implementation will begin soon and a guarantee of 10 years will be provided.

16.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E The National Power Company buys electricity from SHP producers at 45 €/MWh (2003-2006). Power purchase price is higher for wind energy - 60€/MWh but lower for other RES-E (30 €/MWh). Loans with favorable interest rates are available for SHP building.

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) There is an opinion that SHP development and the WFD requirements can be reconciled in the country. SHP producers believe that their plants in operation and new developments in the country will not undermine the achievement of WFD objectives (“good ecological status for surface waters”). 2001/77/EC National authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has not broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (% in 2010). However some estimates can be given. Total installed capacity of SHP plants should reach 255 MW with power generation of 810 GWh/year. Large hydro capacity is likely to increase up to 2985 MW from the current 2333MW. Energy Package 2020 n/a

16.6

SHP Sector Development

16.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between 1000 € and 1500 € depending on the size of the plant and the head it uses (Table 16-7). The production cost ranges between 0.4 €cent/kWh and 0.8 €cent/kWh.

Page 119 of 258

Table 16-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

16.6.2

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

n/a

1500

1400

1200

1100

1000

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

0.4 to 0.8

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There are 2 turbine manufacturers producing small and large Francis (0.1 to 216 MW), and Pelton (0.1 to 80 MW) turbines mainly satisfying the needs of local market. There are also some export opportunities to Norway and outside Europe (Table 16-8 and Table 16-9). Table 16-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines Other mechanical Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

Vaptsarov JSC, Pleven; Energoremont JSC, Plovdiv Vaptsarov JSC, Pleven; Energoremont JSC, Plovdiv Vaptsarov JSC, Pleven; Troyan No

Balkanstroy JSC; Alpine Bulgaria JSC, Sofia; Stanilov LTD, Sofia Energoproekt-Hydropower LTD, Sofia

Table 16-9 Market for SHP industry

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines Other mechanical equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

16.6.3

Europe (excluding the EU)

Outside Europe

X X X

X X

Technological Advancements

The most recent trend is to build hydropower plants in the river course and to use inflatable rubber spillways.

16.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Bulgaria is the country where resistances to SHP development almost do not exist (Table 16-10). Page 120 of 258

Table 16-10 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 1 2 1 1

There are no rivers exempt from damming in Bulgaria and residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as moderate for SHP producers (Table 16-11). Table 16-11 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* None. EIA must be carried out for all Compensation flow is set as a fraction of the long-term average flow or alternatively hydropower projects and for reservoirs which volume exceed 106 m3. EIA is average minimum flow. demanded in SHP licensing process. The losses in SHP electricity production resulting from maintaining RF are significant in diversion schemes (up to 10%). Reasonable losses should be less than 5 to 7%. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 16-12 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Bulgaria, which can be described as a positive, with the exception position of NGOs. Table 16-12 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

16.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 2 3 4 4 4

Barriers for SHP Development

Financial barriers. High loan interest rates and the lack of long-terms loans are the main barriers to SHP implementation. Regulatory and administrative. It is difficult to obtain water permit for utilisation of water from hydropower cascades. It is equally difficult to obtain water permit for water that is

Page 121 of 258

supplied to multipurpose consumers. Another important barrier is the complexity of obtaining permits. Social barriers and acceptance. There is a lack of co-operation between the authorities: the Ministry of Water and Environment and the Municipalities. Other barriers are the appeal procedure and the lengthy procedure for giving the right to use the land for hydropower plant site. This involves change of the type of land use. Grid barriers. In case of weak grid there is a loss of reactive power.

Page 122 of 258

17 The Czech Republic

Area: 78 864 km2 Population: 10.3 million

17.1

Geography and Water Resources

The Czech Republic is a landlocked country in Central Europe. The country has a temperate continental climate with relatively hot summers and cold, cloudy winters, usually with snow. Most rain falls during the summer. The average precipitation is 680 mm. Total annual runoff is 12.8 km3. The Czech landscape is quite varied. Bohemia to the west consists of a basin drained by Labe and the Vltava (or Moldau) rivers, and surrounded by mostly low mountains of the Sudetes. The highest point in the country - 1602m is located here. Moravia, the eastern part of the country, is also quite hilly. It is drained mainly by the Morava River, but it also contains the source of the Odra River. Water from the landlocked Czech Republic flows to three different seas: the North Sea, Baltic Sea and Black Sea. A very impressive SHP plants number â&#x20AC;&#x201C; close to 1400 is in operation (2007). About two third of economically feasible potential has been exploited so far. More than 100 extra SHP plants are foreseen to construct by 2020.

17.2

Current Energy Sector

The Czech Republic has a good supply of cheap coal and lignite based energy. The main sources of national electricity production in 2005 were: thermal (65.7%), hydro (3%) and nuclear (31.2%). The estimated rate of increase in electricity demand over the next 5 years is 2 %. There is a national association representing the interests of SHP sector called the Union of Entrepreneurs for Utilisation of Energy Resources with approx. 700 members. Its activities are to support the interests of renewable energy producers, mainly from the SHP sector. Web: www.spvez.cz.

Page 123 of 258

17.3

Renewable Energy Sources

17.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

17.3.2

RES Targets

The State Energy Policy sets a very ambitious RES-E growth targets up to 17% (including large hydro) of total consumption in 2030. • •

RES-E: 8 % by 2010. Fulfillment for 2006 – 5 % RES: The Czech Republic has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 13% by 2020.

17.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in the Czech Republic is currently contributed by 3 large renewable energy sources: large and small hydropower, and other renewables (mostly wood and biogas (Figure 17-1).

Electricity generation GWh/year

4000 Others Wind 3000

SHP Large hydro

2000

1000

0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 17-1 Development of renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

Page 124 of 258

In 2006 small and large hydro share represented 28% and 46%, respectively of total RESE production (Table 17-1). Table 17-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RESE

Unit

2000

142

160

238

251

277

275

300

GWh/ Year

503

691

749

660

903

1071

964

970

22.1

26.9

25.1

35.1

33.0

34.3

27.7

810

840

762

753

743

753

1255

1363

1743

723

1116

1309

1586

55.0

53.0

58.3

38.5

40.7

42.0

45.6

952

1000

1741

2241

2633

2740

3119

3477

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

2001

2002

2003

2004

GWh/ 2280 2572 2990 1880 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimates for 2010.

2005

2006

2010

RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix accounts for 4% (average 20042006 period). Small hydro contributes around 1.1% and large hydro about 1.6% of the total gross electricity generation in the Czech Republic.

17.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

17.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in the Czech Republic are shown in Table 17-2. SHP has followed a constant upward trend over the reference period and the SHP sector will continue to grow moderately in the future. Table 17-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Forecast 2010 2015

2020

1244

1273

1302

1330

1352

1372

1389

1440

1480

1520

269

271

273

275

279

283

287

300

315

330

508

516

750

660

903

1070

964

970

1080

1260

The majority of SHP plants (around 60%) are relatively old in the Czech Republic, generally built 40-60 years ago and only one quarter of SHP plants can be considered as Page 125 of 258

recently built (0-19 years). Around 60% of all SHP generating capacity (MW) are privately owned. Low head power plants followed by medium head are prevailing in the Czech Republic: Low head (up to 5 m) – 50%; Medium head (5-15 m) – 35% and High head (more than 15 m) – 15%.

17.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential is 13 100 GWh/year. The technically and economically feasible potential is 1500 and 1300 GWh/year, respectively. Around 70% of economically feasible potential is developed so far. Table 17-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 13100 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 1500 12 B Economically feasible 1300 10 C Economically feasible potential taking 1300 10 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 350 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E .

Capacity MW n/a 500 400 387

17.5

SHP General Policy Framework

17.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Page 126 of 258

Table 17-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <10 MW There is no one-stop for SHP project Administrative fees for developers. Planning permits are granted water use are about 200€, by the Construction Authority, length of authorization Water Authority and Ministry of procedure takes from 8 to Environment.. Water right procedure is 24 months. long and complicated with requirements Energy Regulation of environmentalists, fishermen and Authority is responsible question of residual flow etc. for granting a license for power generation for a period of time up to 25 years that can be extended.

Fees for the use of water No such fees have been imposed so far.

Table 17-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans There is Two basic authorization are needed: Cost for the connection to the grid: according to officially Water right permission and Energy license from a public notice 51/2006 – distribution grid high approved Energy Regulatory Office voltage standard – 2560€/MW, nonstandard – master plan for 6000€/MW, low voltage – 20€. SHP operators SHP are given access to the grid at reasonable prices. development. They are not responsible for covering the costs of extensions and of strengthening the grid. On the whole, the rules of grid access are transparent but complicated.

Renewable electricity producer can choose between two types of support: a) Feed-in tariff or b) Green bonus (premium). The prices are high enough to attract private investment and they secure investors confidence. Table 17-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism

Feed-in tariff has been in place since 2002. The feed-in tariff is guaranteed for 15 years whilst the green bonus is paid on top of the market price for electricity. The new feed-in tariff and green bonus schemes apply only to renewable plants put into operation after 1 Jan 2006. Existing plants are still subject to the previous feed-in tariff levels. The Energy Regulatory Office (ERO) determines the purchase price for the subsequent year in advance. Prices for RES-E are adjusted annually according to the inflation

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E SHP produced power purchase price= Fixed price + “Green bonus“ (premium); Fixed price:69.6 to 104 €/MWh. Two rate tariff: 50 to152 €/MWh. “Green bonus”: 21 to 56 €/MWh For wind energy : fixed price - 85 €/MWh., premium - 70 €/MWh

Page 127 of 258

17.5.2

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) There is an opinion that hydropower schemes and the WFD requirements can be reconciled. SHP producers believe that their plants in operation and new developments in the country will not undermine the achievement of WFD objectives (“good ecological status for surface waters”). However they fear that inconsistent implementation of the WFD would result in higher rates of residual flow, multiplication of fish by pass-systems and increase in operating costs. 2001/77/EC National authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has not broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (% in 2010). However there is in place long term planning for RES-E development. Table 17-7 indicates SHP and other RES development progress up to 2030 planned by official authorities. Table 17-7 SHP and total RES-E production Unit 2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

SHP

GWh/ Year

520

800

10502

1050

Total RES-E (including large hydro)

GWh/ Year

1710

4160

8170

9840

11580

14200

15060

Source: The State Energy Concept approved by the Czech government on 10th March 2004 (resolution No 211).

It shows that after 2010 there will not be any further SHP development. However expert’s estimates regarding forecasted production for 2010, 2015 and 2020 are different (Table 17-2). Energy Package 2020 n/a

17.6

SHP Sector Development

17.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between 1000 € and 6000 € depending on the size of the plant and the head it uses.

2030

The official estimates are much more optimistic (see Table 17-1 and Table 17-2).

Page 128 of 258

Table 17-8 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

17.6.2

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

6000

6000 to 4000

4000 to 2000

n/a

6000 to 3000

4000 to 1000

n/a

1000

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW

1.0

SHP Manufacturing Industry

Water and energy industries and service capabilities related to SHP are highly developed in the Czech Republic. There are 6 main turbine manufactures (Blansko Engineering a.s, MAVEL a.s., HYDROHROM s.ro. etc.) producing Kaplan, Francis, Pelton and other types of turbines. They have extensive markets in the European countries and outside it – Asia and America (Table 17-9 and Table 17-10). Table 17-9 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines

Other mechanical equipment (as gates, penstocks, gearboxes) Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

n/a ČKD Blansko – Holding, a.s; ČKD Blansko Engineering, a.s; MAVEL, a.s; HYDROHROM, s.r.o; Strojírny Brno, a.s; Ziromont, s.r.o. MVE Technika,s.r.o; MAVE Brno,s.r.o. SIEMENS – Drásov; TES Vsetín; EXMONT Brno ELZACO, s.r.o; ELPAK, s.r.o; MVE technika, s.r.o. Ingstav Brno,a.s;Vodohospodářské stavby Brno, a.s; Ekostavby Brno,a.s. POYRY Environment,a.s; HYDROPOL Project Management; HYDROKA

Table 17-10 Market for SHP industry

Equipment/construction/consulting

Europe (excluding the EU)

Outside Europe

Turbines Other mechanical equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

X X X X X X

X X X X X

Page 129 of 258

17.6.3

Technological Advancements

Three new plants with patented two blades turbine for extremely low heads are in operation from 2006 (vortex turbine). Very often application of straight flow turbines, PIT or Bulb with 3-blades runner are used.

17.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

SHP plants environmental integration is gaining importance in the country. Fish by-pass systems are ever more widely implemented. Water and biodegradable oil are ever more often applied as a lubricant in the turbine guide bearings. The Czech Republic is the country where resistances to SHP development result mainly from fish protection (Table 17-11). Table 17-11 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 1 4 3 3 2

There are no rivers exempt from damming in the Czech Republic and residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as excessive for SHP producers. Table 17-12 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden rivers for Environmental Impact Residual flow (RF) hydropower Assessment (EIA) construction* None. Except conventional EIA is required for water use When setting RF flow minimum mean flow protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature licensing for all new dams, and hydro-biological parameters are taken into reservations or protected reservoirs and hydropower account. areas with overall restricted plants. The losses in SHP electricity production economic regime. There is no resulting from maintaining RF are in the official launched campaign of range of 10% to 35%(in diversion schemes). dam removing. Reasonable losses should be at 5%. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 17-13 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in the Czech Republic, which can be described as a positive.

Page 130 of 258

Table 17-13 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

17.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 3 4 4 3 4

Barriers for SHP Development

Regulatory and administrative barriers. Water right procedures are very lengthy and complicated. Grid barriers. Very long administrative procedures are needed to complete before grid connection. Recommendations for avoiding barriers. Improve better conditions for water rights procedure and reconsider unreasonable environmental requirements.

Page 131 of 258

18 Estonia

Area: 45 215 km2 Population: 1.3 million.

18.1

Geography and Water Resources

Although Estonia has numerous rivers, it is a relatively flat country and does not have significant hydroelectric potential. The average elevation is only about 50 m above sea level. The three longest rivers in the country are the Vohandu which flows eastward through southeastern Estonia, the Parnu, which flows southwest through western Estonia, and the Poltsamaa, which flows southward through central Estonia. The Narva River â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the largest, transboundary watercourse forms eastern border with Russia. The mean annual precipitation varies from 510 mm on the coast to almost 750 mm in the uplands in south-eastern part of Estonia. All runoff is generated within Estonian territory and the mean specific runoff is 8.2 l/s per km2. The total average runoff from the territory of Estonia is 11.72 km3, in very dry years 5.84 km3. More than 40 SHP plants with total installed capacity of 6 MW are currently operating in the country (in 2007). Their number and total capacity can be at least tripled if the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economical feasible potential is properly harnessed.

18.2

Current Energy Sector

Almost all electricity production is derived from thermal sources using local oil shale (99%); about 5% is produced using imported fuels. Historically, renewables in the electricity sector have hardly been exploited except for minor installations in the fields of biomass and small scale hydropower. Per capita electricity consumption is 4 500 kWh/year (in 2005).

18.3

Renewable Energy Sources

18.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Relevant legislation for SHP sector includes: Water act (1994), Building Act (2002), Nature Conservation Act (2004), Planning Act (2002), Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Management System Act (2005), Electricity Market Act (2004), Electrical Safety Act (2002), Grid Code (2003), List of biotopes and spawning places of salmon, sea and river trout and grayling (2004).

Page 132 of 258

The Electricity Market Act was amended in 2004 (entered into force in January 2005) and obligates the grid operator, the state-owned Eesti Energia Ltd, to purchase RES-E in an amount that “does not exceed the network losses during the trading period”.

18.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 5.1 % by 2010. RES: Estonia has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 25% by 2020.

18.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

The share of RES-E in total consumption is insignificant, because of the huge and cheap supply of electricity from oil shale. RES- E production in Estonia is currently contributed by 2 main renewable energy sources - small hydropower and wind energy (Figure 18-1). Other renewables (mostly wood and biogas) are close of the same order as small hydropower. In the last years increase in wind energy is impressive. Large hydropower is not developed in the country due to political reasons to full utilization of the resources of the trans-boundary river Narva River (actually a part solely used by Russia).

140 Electricity generation GWh/year

Others 120 100

Wind SHP

80 60 40 20 0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 18-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

The share of generated electricity of small hydropower has been more or less regular over 2000 to 2006 years (26 to 42% of total RES generation). Despite this small hydro contribution is expected to decrease towards 2010 (Table 18-1).

Page 133 of 258

Table 18-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

GWh/ Year

27.8

38.9

20.7

38.2

42.3

38.6

26.4

7.9

210

390

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 5 7 6 13 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimates for 2010

RES-E share in the gross electricity mix is insignificant â&#x20AC;&#x201C; some 1% (average 2004-2006 period). Small hydro contributes around 0.2 % of total electricity generation in Estonia.

18.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

18.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Estonia are shown in Table 18-2. SHP has followed a constant upward trend over the reference period and the SHP sector will continue to grow in the future. Table 18-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number Of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

4.7

5.4

5.8

2020

The bulk of SHP plants in Estonia have been constructed in the last few years (some 2/3 of them less than 20 years old). Around 93% of all generating capacity of SHP plants is in private hands. Low head hydropower plants are the most common in Estonia. According to the gross head of SHP plants their percentage is as follows: Low head (up to 5 m) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 80%; Medium

Page 134 of 258

head (5-15 m) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 20%. There are no high head (more than 15 m) hydro schemes in the country.

18.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Estonia is 1 200 GWh/year. The technically and economically feasible potential is 210 and 120 GWh/year, respectively. Only a quarter of economically feasible potential has been developed so far. Table 18-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 1200 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 210 18 B Economically feasible 120 10 C Economically feasible potential taking 95 8 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 11 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E

Capacity MW 300 n/a 30 24

18.5

SHP General Policy Framework

18.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Small-scale hydro plants are defined as those of less than 1 MW capacities in Estonia (Table 18-4).

Page 135 of 258

Table 18-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, power SHP Legal conditions for SHP production /concession definition <1 MW

There is no one-stop shop for SHP project developers. Very few projects have been granted by Estonian Technology Agency (ESTAG). All procedures take 1 to 2 years and cost some €5000 to 7000 plus access charge which depend on lenth of the connection line and capacity of the plant. Approval rates for getting permissions for SHP are in range €130 to €1500 depending on complexity of the work.

A permit for the special use of water is necessary. It is issued by the environmental authority of the location of the special use of water. There are no fees for the permit, but an applicant must cover costs of the Environmental Impact Assessment (about 4000 6000 €) as well as the costs for communication with the environmental authority.

Fees for the use of water No fees are charged for SHP

Table 18-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans There is no such a The following authorizations must be Connection cost is charged according to SHP site. Connection to the grid is regulated by the master plan. obtained: However SHP projects 1) Permit for the special use of water; Grid Code. are integrated into local 2) License for the construction; 3) The rules of grid access are transparent and nonand regional spatial Permit for use of construction works; 4) discriminatory. There are no charges for the use of the grid. plans in order to guide Technical prerequisites; 5) Inspection their development in before commissioning; 6) Assessment suitable areas and attestation of conformity; 7) Market license; 8) Accession agreement with network utility; 9) Power purchase agreement.

Renewable electricity, including small hydropower, is purchased for a guaranteed fixed price (Table 18-6). This is seen by SHP producers as moderate (7.3 €cents/kWh). Table 18-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Single feed-in tariffs paid for all RES for 7-12 years, but not beyond 2015. The Electricity Market Act (2004) obliges the grid operator (Eesti Energia Ltd) to purchase RES-E. In 2001 there was also an attempt to issue green energy certificates for producers and consumers (voluntary mechanism)

Comments regarding SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E For SHP single tariff of 73.4 €/MWh is applied. There is no differentiation among RES-E technologies. The prices are high enough to attract private investment and they secure investors confidence.

Page 136 of 258

18.5.2

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) The implementation of the WFD is seen as a big concern for SHP developers and producers in Estonia. Once the WFD entered into force the environment authorities under a slogan “protect river ecosystems and its surroundings from damming” have introduced the lists of forbidden rivers where no hydropower development can be carried out or even investigated (so called “no go areas”). 2001/77/EC National authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has not broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (% in 2010) which is set to 5.1 % of total consumption. During this period SHP contributed insignificantly – 4 to 5 % to this target or 0.2 to 0.3 % in absolute values. Energy Package 2020 n/a

18.6

SHP Sector Development

18.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between € 1000 and € 4000 depending on the site conditions, installed power and head, and type of turbine equipment. Table 18-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

18.6.2

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW – 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

2500-4000

2000-3000

1500-2000

2000-3000

1500-2000

1000-1500

101kW - 1MW 1MW – 10MW

2.0-5.0

n/a

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There are neither turbine nor generator and other mechanical/electrical equipment manufactures in Estonia. The main domestic civil works contractors are AS MARU Ltd and FKSM Ltd. For the local market consulting services, project development is provided by MERIN AS, Estonian Waterpower Ltd and Tallinn Technical University.

18.6.3

Technological Advancements

Technological advancements concern mainly unmanned monitoring and control systems as well as some modern auxiliary devices. In 2004 river current turbines (Gorlov type) Page 137 of 258

were tested in Estonian rives, primarily in Narva river. The results were announced to be positive, but there is not any practical implementation until now.

18.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

SHP plants environmental integration is gaining importance in the country. Fish by-pass systems are ever more widely implemented. Estonia is the country with heavy resistances to SHP development (Table 18-8). Table 18-8 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 1 5 4 4 2

In 2004 the Ministry of the Environment adopted a list of 112 rivers where dam construction is not allowed. (Table 18-9) Table 18-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* The list of watercourses (112 EIA is required for all Residual flow value is fixed in the water use rivers or their reaches) of hydropower projects in licensing procedure. It is set on a fraction of migrating fish preventing from flow duration curve. The losses in SHP licensing process. damming has been introduced. electricity production depending on type of It adversely affects small the scheme can reach 5% to 10%. hydropower potential. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 18-10 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Estonia, which can be described as a positive. Table 18-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 3 4 4 3 5

Page 138 of 258

18.6.5

Barriers for SHP Development

Financing: It is difficult to get long-term soft loans due to their relatively small volumes Regulatory and administrative: Shortcomings in legislation – particularly in provisions regulating the use of water in cascade of plants on the watercourse. Social barriers: Unclear proprietary relations in many cases. Political obstacles (border with Russia) in realization of the Narva river potential. Grid barriers: In some districts with weak grid certain problems with reactive power may arise. Hydro power contribution in Estonia energy balance is marginal – only 0.2-0.3 % of gross electricity production. There are no SHP databases and many data are not easy accessible. Economic issues are mostly confidential except for two biggest plants (Linnamäe 1.2 MW and Keila-Joa 0.37 MW) owned by Estonian Power Company Eesti Energia.

Page 139 of 258

19 Hungary

Area: 93 030 km2 Population: 10.1 million.

19.1

Geography and Water Resources

Hungary is a landlocked country in the Carpathian Basin of Central Europe. Slightly more than one half of Hungary's landscape consists of flat to rolling plains of the Pannonian Basin. The highest elevation above sea level on the latter is only 183 m. Transdanubia is a primarily hilly region with a terrain varied by low mountains (the highest point â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 882m). The highest mountains of the country are located in the Carpathians (1014 m). Hungary is divided in two by its main waterway, the Danube (Duna); other large rivers include the Tisza and DrĂĄva. Hungary has a continental climate, with hot summers with low overall humidity levels but frequent rain showers and frigid to cold snowy winters. The total mean annual precipitation volume is 58 km3 (approx. 600 mm), of which 6 km3 is runoff. Hydropower is not well developed in the country. Only some 5% of the technically feasible hydro capacity has been harnessed so far. There are 34 SHP plants in operation in the country.

19.2

Current Energy Sector

About 70% of the total energy demand of Hungary is covered by imports. The main sources of electricity in 2006 were: combined fuels: (61%), nuclear (37%), hydro (0.5%) and other renewables (about 4%). Electricity imports are minimal (few percents). The present utilization of RES-E in Hungary is low. Power generation of renewables is not significant it only amounts up to about 0.9% of the gross electricity mix.

19.3

Renewable Energy Sources

19.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Below is a list of the most important supporting policies from the Hungarian government in promoting renewable energy sources.

Page 140 of 258

•

Ministry of Economy and Transport Decree on the rules for electricity feed-in regulations and setting the price (56/2002); • Energy Saving and Energy Efficiency Improvement Action Programme for 20002010 (1999); • Electricity Act (2001, amended in 2005 and in 2007); • Government order 389/2007 on electricity purchase obligation of renewable sources. The main objective of Electricity Act is to create a comprehensive promotion system on the basis of a green certificate scheme.

19.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 3.6 % by 2010. Fulfillment for 2006 exceeded 3.6%. RES: Hungary has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 13% by 2020.

The main objective of the Energy Savings Strategy and Action Plan approved in 1999 in connection with renewables is to increase the consumption of renewable energy.

19.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in Hungary is currently dominated by new renewables – mainly biomass (Figure 19-1). The installed hydro power capacity has not been increased significantly in the last 30 years and further penetration of hydropower – excluding the refurbishment of old plants is unlikely due to environmental constraints. 2000 Electricity generation GWh/year

Others Wind

1500

SHP Large hydro

1000

500

0 2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 19-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

Page 141 of 258

The share of generated electricity of small and large hydro decreased over 2000 to 2006 years and it is expected to decrease further towards 2010 (2.2 and 5.7% of total RES generation, respectively). Table 19-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

2001

2002

2003

n/a

10.6

6.6

4.5

2.6

3.0

2.2

n/a

153

166

147

162

153

139

150

49.0

62.6

40.3

16.9

8.0

9.0

5.7

119

123

269

469

414

500

957

1919

1544

2630

GWh/ Year % MW GWh/ Year % MW

2004

GWh/ n/a 312 265 365 Year Source: Eurostat and SHERPA expert estimates for 2010

2005

2006

2010

RES-E share in the gross electricity mix is insignificant â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 4.1% (average 2004-2006 periods). Small hydro contributes around 0.13 % and the total hydro contribution is not significant either â&#x20AC;&#x201C; about 0.4% of total electricity generation in Hungary.

19.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

19.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Hungary are shown in Table 19-2. It has to be stressed that there have not been new developments for more than 15 years. In 2007 the 2 MW capacity power plants is expected to put on line. A slight growth of SHP power generation is likely in the future. Table 19-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

45.2

28.2

2020

Page 142 of 258

Almost all SHP plants in Hungary can be regarded as old ones (>40 to 60years). All SHP plants are privately owned (100%). Low head (up to 5 m) SHP plants are the most developed in Hungary (more than 90%).

19.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Hungary is 420 GWh/year (Table 19-3). The technically and economically feasible potential is 279 and 68 GWh/year, respectively. More than 1/3 of the economically feasible potential is developed so far. Table 19-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 420 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 279 66 B Economically feasible 68 16 C Economically feasible potential taking n/a n/a environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 12* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW 130 90 22 n/a

19.5

SHP General Policy Framework

19.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Small scale hydro plants are defined as those of less than 5MW capacity in Hungary.

Page 143 of 258

Table 19-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures SHP definition <5 MW

Legal conditions for SHP Law No III. of 1964 on â&#x20AC;&#x153;Constructionâ&#x20AC;? regulates the utilization of all type types of area stipulating a license issued by the authorities for the cases of area utilization, construction, reconstruction, extension and demolition of buildings, physical planning etc. The authorities may function within the licensing procedures as licensing authorities or special authorities. In the latter case they submit their expertise of special authority for another authority empowered to licensing. The Hungarian laws prescribe for various licensing authorities into consideration. Licensing tasks and competencies related to power plants are governed by the Act on Generation, transmission and supply of electric energy. The guaranteed feed in tariffs are implemented in the decree of the Minister of Economy. The official licenses related to the power plant issued by the Hungarian Energy Office. These licenses do not replace other necessary official licenses.

Licence for water use, power production /concession Water abstractions are authorised by Water Authority (VIZIG). They must be renewed every 2 years.

Fees for the use of water n/a

Table 19-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans Three main permissions are needed for a new The technical details of the connection are There is not regulated by the regional electricity suppliers. any master development: There is no available data about the cost for plan. Construction permission (local governmental) There is no Environmental permission (regional competent connection. intention to environmental protection inspectorate) Permission for the grid connection (regional develop local spatial plans to competent utilities) guide the For the construction and environmental development permissions, the developers need to provide of SHP project additional permissions from other authorities, in suitable like national parks (nature protection areas permission), water authority (water uses permission) etc. The whole permission process takes over 12-15 month.

Page 144 of 258

Table 19-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E

Ministry of Economy and Transport Decree on the rules for electricity feed-in regulations and setting the price (56/2002) The main objective of Electricity Act is to create a comprehensive promotion system on the basis of a green certificate scheme. According to the Act, the Government will define the start date of implementation. Until the date of the implementation of the green certificate scheme a feed-in system will operate. In 2005 a regulation with technology-specific feed-in tariffs has been adopted (Decree 78/2005). Tariffs have been changed by the electricity act of 2007. Tariffs are guaranteed for the lifetime of the RES-E plant. Prices differentiated by: a) Source; b) Technology: preference for new; c) capacity: preference for smaller; d) Load period: preference for peak

19.5.2

SHP produced power purchase average price vary between 60 (>5MW) and 100 €/MWh (<5 MW).There is also peak and off-peak prices. For wind and solar energy fixed prices are used - 100 €/MWh

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) There is no information about WFD impact on SHP sector. 2001/77/EC According to the requirement imposed on Hungary by the EU – in accordance with Directive 2001/77/EC – which was also reinforced by National Act of 2004 on accession – the ratio of electric energy produced from renewable energy sources must reach 3.6% of the electric energy use by 2010. According to expected data for the year 2005, the country reached or exceeded the requirement for the year 2010 in 2005. Energy Package 2020 n/a

19.6

SHP Sector Development

19.6.1

Economic Issues

The cost of 1 kWh electricity produced in a SHP plants is between 3.8 and 4.6 €cents. Table 19-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW n/a

101kW – 1MW 1MW - 10MW n/a

Page 145 of 258

19.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There is one turbine manufacturer (Ganz Energetics Co Ltd) producing Kaplan, Francis, Pelton and other turbines types (capacity up to 50 MW), and associated equipment. Its potential markets are Greece, Turkey, Peru, India, Romania, Italy, Canada, Iran, Puerto Rico and other countries. There are also generator and associated electrical and control equipment manufacturers having market outside Hungary.

19.6.3

Technological Advancements

There has been no SHP development for a long time, only renewal. Consequently, no new techniques have been implemented.

19.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Table 19-8 and Table 19-9 show the existing resistances to small hydropower development and other environmental restrictions in Hungary. The environmental situation and requirements can be regarded as favourable for SHP development. Table 19-8 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact)

Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

1 1 3 1 1

Table 19-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Residual flow (RF) rivers for hydropower construction* There are the rivers EIA must be carried out hydropower projects Residual flow is set as a fraction of larger than 20 MW or alternatively, for reservoirs forbidden for the long-term average flow. The damming. Their which volume exceed 106 m3. It is obligatory for losses in SHP electricity production small hydropower any hydroplant regardless its scale if this is resulting from maintaining RF are potential is relatively planned to be developed in the nature protected negligible. low. areas. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime Table 19-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Page 146 of 258

19.6.5

Barriers for SHP Development

n/a

Page 147 of 258

20 Latvia

Area: 64 600 km2 Population: 2.5 million

20.1

Geography and Water Resources

Latvia is a country in Eastern Europe in the Baltic Sea region. The Latvian climate is humid, continental and temperate owing to the maritime influence of the Baltic Sea. The total mean precipitation volume is 46 km3 of which 15.3 km3 mean annual runoff. About 98% of the country lies under 200m elevation. 17 rivers are longer than a 100 km and 50 rivers are longer than 50 km, 209 rivers are of 20 -50 km long. Four large rivers the Daugava, the Lielupe, the Gauja and the Venta - account for 88% of the total Latvian river discharge. Around 150 SHP plants under private ownership are currently operating in the country (in 2006). So far a little part of economically feasible capacity has been used (15%).

20.2

Current Energy Sector

Latvia is heavily dependent on energy as it imports about 50% of its primary energy sources. The main sources of electricity production in 2007 were: natural gas (23%), hydro (30%), wind (1%) and imports (49%). Per capita electricity consumption is about 3310 kWh/year (in 2007). More than 40% of electricity consumption is provided by large hydro power plants (only Daugava River). There is the national Small Hydropower Association (Mazas hidroenergetikas asociacija â&#x20AC;&#x201C; MHEA). Chairman â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Orvils Henins. WWW: http://mhea.lv/

20.3

Renewable Energy Sources

20.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Page 148 of 258

•

Electricity Market Law (2005) is the main law regulating the use of and support for renewable energy sources; • The Civil Law, (1937/1992); • Construction Law (1998); • Environmental Protection Law (2006); • Protection Zone Law (1997); • Water Management Law (2002); • Fishery Law (1995); • Environmental Impact Assessment Law (2006); • Law on the Conservation of Species and Biotopes (2006); • Regulations Regarding a Permit for the Use of Water Resources (2003); • Procedures for Installation and Location of Electric Power Generation Capacities if Renewable Energy (Cabinet of Ministers, 2003); • Resources are Utilised for Electric Power Generation (Cabinet of Ministers, 2002). The National Energy Programme (approved in 1997) for the period up to 2020 gives priority to the rational use of energy resources, the development of renewable energy sources, energy diversification and the restructuring of the energy sector.

20.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 49.3% by 2010. RES: Latvia has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 23% by 2020.

20.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Large-scale hydroelectric power is the dominant source of electricity overall in Latvia, providing about 50-75% of total electricity generation (Figure 20-1). Other sources of renewable electricity, including small hydropower contribute only a very small amount towards overall electricity production. Electricity generation GWh/year

4000 Others Wind 3000

SHP Large hydro

2000

1000

0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 20-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

Page 149 of 258

The share of generated electricity of small hydropower was increasing over 2000 to 2006 years and it is expected to keep this pace towards 2010 (1.9% of total RES generation). Large hydropower contribution is likely to decrease due to the growing role of new renewables (Table 20-1). Table 20-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

GWh/ Year

0.9

1.3

2.5

2.2

1.8

1.5

1.9

1504

1511

1534

2794

2796

2431

2213

3040

3263

2659

2663

99.1

98.6

98.3

96.5

96.6

96.9

97.0

71.8

1513

1523

1534

1544

1545

1546

1872

3147

3367

2741

3709

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

2001

2002

2003

2004

GWh/ 2819 2836 2474 2294 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimates for 2010

2005

2006

2010

RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix is significant â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 65% (average 2004-2006 period). Small hydropower contributes around 1.1 %, large hydro contribution is very significant - about 62 % of total electricity generation in Latvia.

20.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

20.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Latvia are shown in Table 20-2. There is a very impressive upward trend of number of SHP plants. However, the forecasted figures for 2010 and 2015 are not as remarkable as previous years. Table 20-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Forecast 2010 2015

2020

106

149

150

146

140

158

170

180

Page 150 of 258

All Latvian SHP plants are regarded as recently built (less than 20 years old). The percentage of generating capacity (MW) privately owned for SHP plants in Latvia is 93.2 %. Low head SHP schemes are prevailing in Latvia. According to the gross head of SHP plants their percentage is as follows: low head (up to 5 m) – 66%; medium head (5-15 m) – 33% and high head (more than 15 m) – <1%.

20.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Latvia is 1 160 GWh/year (Table 20-3). The technical and economically feasible potential is 730 and 400 GWh/year, respectively. A little part of the economically feasible capacity is developed so far (about 14%). Table 20-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 1160 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 730 63 B Economically feasible 400 35 C Economically feasible potential taking 334 29 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 14* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW n/a n/a 100 95

20.5

SHP General Policy Framework

20.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

SHP limit in Latvia is supposed to be at 5 MW (no clear legal statement). But SHP which installed power is less than 2 MW benefit of obligation of power purchase.

Page 151 of 258

Table 20-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <5 MW Water use licensing in There is no one–stop shop for SHP (SHP <2 Latvia is a simplified developers. The situation for SHP MW procedure. Authorisation development was favourable until 2002. benefit of can be issued within 6 It has changed dramatically when the list obligation of forbidden rivers was introduced (217 month period. The main of power issue is reserved flow. watercourses or their reaches). purchase ) A quota is needed for selling power SHP which capacity produced from SHP to state owned utility exceeds 1MW must get the licence for power LATVENERGO. This quota is to be production. The licence authorised by the Ministry of Economy. During the period of 2003-2004 there was lasts 10 years and it can be extended (at the no any quota given. moment there is no available information). The smaller hydroplants are not required to get it.

Fees for the use of water SHPs are not entitled to pay the fees for use of water.

Table 20-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans No master plan SHP which capacity exceeds 1MW must get the SHP operators are given access to the grid at for SHP licence for power production, which lasts 10 reasonable prices but the rules of grid access are development years. Almost SHP plants, except only one, do not transparent. SHP operators are not exists. not exceed this installed capacity in Latvia. responsible for covering the costs of extensions There is or strengthening the grid. The cost of 1 km intention to power transmission line amounts to €20 000 and develop local transformer close to € 5000. spatial plans to guide the development of SHP project in suitable areas.

From 1996 to 2002, Latvia experienced a significant growth in renewable energy projects as developers took advantage of the so-called double tariff, phased out on 1 January 2003. Annual production at small hydro power plants increased from 2.5 to about 50 GWh, while the output from wind power plants built during the last three years increased to about 55 GWh. The political support of RES has decreased in Latvia since January 2003. The double tariff was replaced by yearly quota system for renewable energy development. Consequently, frequent policy changes and the short duration of guaranteed feed-in tariffs resulted in high investment uncertainty.

Page 152 of 258

Table 20-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Quota obligation system (since 2002) combined with feed-in tariffs. According to the recent Rules of Cabinet of Ministers (Nr 503 of 2007) RES-E tariff increased significantly, they are related to the natural gas price and capacity of a plant.

20.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E For SHP which installed capacity less tan 2 MW and commissioned before 2004 there was 99.6 €/MWh tariff, and after 2004 – 49.8 €/MWh.. In 2008 this tariff increased again, between 85 and 115 €/MWh (for SHP <5MW). For small wind plants the tariff is similar, for large ones the price is negotiated (tender is in place).

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Once the WFD entered into force the environment authorities under a slogan “protect river ecosystems and its surroundings from damming” have introduced the lists of forbidden rivers where no hydropower development can be carried out or even investigated (so called “no go areas”). There is an opinion that SHP development and the WFD requirements can be reconciled in the country. SHP producers believe that their plants in operation and new developments in the country will not undermine the achievement of WFD objectives (“good ecological status for surface waters”). 2001/77/EC National authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has not broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (% in 2010). However there are official estimates regarding overall RES-E structure, which is as follows: Hydropower plants >5MW (currently all Daugava cascade large plants are included) – 2663 GWh/year; Small hydropower plants < 5MW – 83 GWh/ year with a total capacity of 28MW; Wind power - 404 GWh/year and 135MW; Total RES-E production -3709 GWh/year. It is highly probable that there will be delay in achieving the above targets. Energy Package 2020 n/a

20.6

SHP Sector Development

20.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between €1800and € 2000 depending on the size of the plant and the head it uses.

Page 153 of 258

Table 20-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m)

20.6.2

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW – 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

2000

n/a

1800

n/a

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW c.a 1.0

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There are 5 local turbine manufactures (including 2 Czech subsidiaries) of producing small Kaplan turbines. The primary market countries are the Czech Republic and Norway. Table 20-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines Other mechan. Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors

20.6.3

VEF – REC; HIDROVATS; MAVEL; HYDROENERGY; HYDROHROM MAVEL MAVEL; HYDROENERGY MAVEL;HYDROENERGY Owners of SHP – LATVENERGO

Technological Advancements

n/a

20.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

SHP plants environmental integration is gaining importance in the country. Fish by-pass systems are more widely implemented, turbines with minimal runner rotation are applied. Latvia is a country with heavy resistances to SHP development resulting from fish protection and environmental legislation. Table 20-9 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact)

Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

2 4 2 4 3

Page 154 of 258

There is a long list of rivers exempt from damming in Latvia which adversely affects SHP economical feasible potential to be exploited. Main purpose of this list is to protect fish and their habitat. Table 20-10 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* In 2002 Latvian Screening procedure is used for reservoir Hydrological method is used for setting Cabinet of Ministers area more than 10 ha or for reservoir residual flow. It is fixed in the water use passed a regulation length bigger than 0.5 km. The same licensing procedure. RF value is a fraction which prevents 214 valid for all hydropower projects (0.5) of the two driest summer month flow rivers or their reaches independently of their size. within long term average flow. The losses in from damming. The EIA is a very time consuming electricity production with regard to These forbidden procedure for SHP development. maintaining RF are negligible for the power rivers adversely schemes integrated in the dams (not diversion affect SHP schemes) economical potential to be exploited *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 20-11 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Latvia, which can be described as a moderate. Table 20-11 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

20.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 2 2 3 3 4

Barriers for SHP Development

Regulatory and administrative barriers: unjustifiable demands of state institutions, sometimes bureaucracy, as well as non transparent methodology of determination of electric power purchase prices. Social barriers and acceptation. In most cases - unreasonable NGOs demands with regard to fish protection. Recommendations for avoiding barriers. Improve the conditions for water rights procedure. It is necessary to elaborate a regulation issued by the Cabinet of Ministers,

Page 155 of 258

which emphasize power sector as strategically important branch of economy and revise unreasonable environmental requirements.

Page 156 of 258

21 Lithuania

Area: 65 200 km2 Population: 3.4 million.

21.1

Geography and Water Resources

Lithuania is situated along the southeastern shore of the Baltic Sea. Lithuania is flat, except for a large number of hills in the western uplands and eastern highlands no higher than 290m. The climate lies between maritime and continental, with wet, moderate winters and summers. The biggest river is the Nemunas, which catchment covers almost 74% of country‘s total area (mean annual discharge Q=650 m3/s). The second largest river is the free flowing river the Neris (Q=178 m3/s). The Baltic Sea is a drainage basin for all rivers of the country. The annual average precipitation in Lithuania is 748 mm, corresponding to a volume of 50 km3. The average annual runoff is 18.6km3 (specific runoff - 7.2 l/s per km2). About 57% of the country lies below 100 m above sea level and only 2.5% lies above 200 m. The country is divided into 8 major river basins. The number of small to medium watercourses suitable for installing SHP plants (P<10 MW) amounts to some 350. More than 80 SHP are currently in operation (2008).

21.2

Current Energy Sector

Lithuania is heavily dependent on the import of primary energy sources. For instance, for power production almost 95% of fuel is provided by Russia. The main source of electricity in Lithuania is the Ignalina nuclear power plant. Over the period since 1993 it has been generating 75-88% of the total electricity. However, under the condition of the Accession Treaty it was proposed to close down this nuclear power plant before 2010. Its closure will significantly change the situation in the Lithuanian power system. One of the main strategic priorities in the National Energy Strategy is striving to achieve a state in which renewable energy sources in the total primary energy balance would make up to 12% by 2010. The main sources of electricity production in 2006 were: conventional CHP – 16.2 %, conventional thermal (7.9%), nuclear – 69.3 %, hydro PSP – 3.2 %, large hydro – 2.7 %; small hydro – 0.45 %; wind – 0.1 %. Per capita electricity consumption in 2006 was 2477

Page 157 of 258

kWh/year. Total electricity demand is expected to increase by 3-4% per year over the next decade. The share of RES-E represented about 3.6% of gross electricity consumption in 2006. There is the Lithuanian Hydropower Association (Lietuvos hidroenergetiku asociacija) representing the interests of small hydropower http://www.hidro.lt/

21.3

Renewable Energy Sources

21.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

To promote renewable energy sources in a country it is important that there is a support from the government in form of laws, regulations and policies. Below is a list of the most important supporting policies from the Lithuanian government in promoting renewable energy sources. • National Energy Strategy (1993, 1999, 2002, 2007); • Law on Energy (1995, 2002); • Law on Electricity (2002); • Resolution on Prices for Public Service Obligations in the Power Sector (2002); • Resolution on Rules for Promotion of Purchase of Electricity Produced from RES (2001, amended 2002, 2004, 2005); • Rules on Issue of Guarantees of Origin for Electricity Produced from Renewable Energy Sources (2005); Below is specific legislation dealing with SHP sector: • Water law (1997, with further amendments) • Environmental law (1992, with further amendments) • Law on Environmental Impact (1996, with further amendments) • Law on protected areas (1993, with further amendments) • Building law (1996, with further amendments)

21.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 7.0% by 2010. Fulfillment for 2006 – 3.6%. RES: Lithuania has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 23% by 2020.

21.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in Lithuania is currently contributed by 3 main renewable energy sources: large and small hydropower, and other renewables (mostly wood and biogas). However, at this time wind energy is getting pace rapidly (Figure 21-1).

Page 158 of 258

500 Electricity generation GWh/year

Others

400

Wind SHP Large hydro

300 200 100 0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 21-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

The share of generated electricity of small hydropower is likely to keep the same percentage up to 2010. To the contrast, large hydro is expected to decrease towards 2010. Table 21-1Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

GWh/ Year

134

7.9

12.5

10.1

12.4

14.3

14.4

13.1

14.4

101

313

284

317

284

359

385

341

350

92.1

86.9

88.8

85.8

84.3

84.1

81.2

37.6

103

105

107

113

115

122

146

406

331

426

458

420

932

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 340 327 357 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimates

RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix is insignificant â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2.8% (average 2004-2006 period). Small hydro contributes around 0.5 % and the total hydro contribution is not significant either â&#x20AC;&#x201C; about 2.3% of the total electricity generation in Lithuania.

Page 159 of 258

21.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

21.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Lithuania are shown in Table 21-2. SHP has followed a constant upward trend over the reference period and the SHP sector will continue to grow in the future. Table 21-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

100

125

2020

Almost all Lithuanian SHP plants can be regarded as recent developments (younger than 20 years old). All SHP plants are in private hands (100%). Low head SHP schemes are prevailing in Lithuania. According to the gross head of SHP plants their percentage is as follows: Low head (up to 5 m) – 51%; Medium head (5-15 m) – 43% and High head (more than 15 m) – 6%.

21.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Lithuania is 2 094 GWh/year. The technically and economically feasible potential is 854 and 287 GWh/year, respectively. Around 1/4 of the economically feasible potential has been developed so far.

Page 160 of 258

Table 21-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 2094 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 854 41 B Economically feasible 287 14 C Economically feasible potential taking 203 10 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 15 for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E

Capacity MW 239 195 70 57

Potential for possible refurbished/upgraded and increased efficiency of currently operating SHP plants (additional capacity or generation) amounts to some 3 MW (10 GWh/year). Opportunities for installing SHP plants at the existing wastewater or dam infrastructure can reach 30 GWh/year.

21.5

SHP General Policy Framework

21.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Page 161 of 258

Table 21-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <10 MW Water or site rights are There is no oneâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;stop shop for SHP granted for a period of 50 developers. There is no specific to 99 years. hydropower legislation in Lithuania. The licence (permit) for Small hydro is regulated by the laws, power production must be decrees, orders published by the obtained independently Government, Ministries of Economy, from SHP size. It is Environment and Agriculture. The State authorised forever. Commission for Pricing and Control However, every 5 years it Energy (a regulatory under supervision of must be registered. President's administration) fixes the In certain cases the energy price to be paid by an utility for a permission can be granted SHP producer. for 1 year trial period. The license can be stopped or even revoked if SHP do not comply with the requirements.

Fees for the use of water According to the Government Decision (No 190 of May 13,1991), there are no charges imposed on water use for small hydropower.

Table 21-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans The master In total 10 authorisations issued by different SHP developers are responsible for covering the plan for SHP authorities are needed. It could take up to 2 costs of extensions and of strengthening the grid. development years for a developer to start building a SHP Although 40% of this costs is subsidised. (at national The technical requirements for the connection to level) is under the grid SHP plants are provided by establishment. regional/local grid authorities. The requirements There is depend on the grid particularities and the power intention to plant local conditions. There has been no develop local discriminatory policy to connect hydropower spatial plans to producer to the grid so far. The line between the guide the powerhouse and the grid has to be built at the development expense of SHP producer. A 1 km of line costs of SHP project around 25 000 Euros. The cost of transformer in suitable depends on SHP capacity. A 50 to100 kW costs areas about 8 000 Euros, 1 MW about 50 000 Euros. . There is an overall regulation dealing with the technical specifications for the connection to the grid electricity generators.

A fixed feed-in tariff is in place in the country. The prices for SHP electricity produced is relatively low (7.5 â&#x201A;Źcent/kWh) and they are not enough to attract private investment neither secure investors confidence.

Page 162 of 258

Table 21-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism

Relatively modest feed-in tariffs combined with a purchase obligation. In addition good conditions for grid connections. Price guarantee is until 31 December 2020. Closure of the Ignalina nuclear plant will strongly affect electricity prices and thus the competitive position of renewables as well as renewable support. Currently purchase prices for RES-E are under revision (2008). There are plans to move toward a green certificate system (in the period 2010- 2021).

21.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E For SHP 57.9 (€/MWh guaranteed for 10 years. Wind – 63.7, biomass – 57.9 €/MWh. The prices are relatively low to attract private investment and they do not secure investors confidence.

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Once the WFD entered into force the environment authorities under a slogan “protect river ecosystems and its surroundings from damming” have introduced the lists of forbidden rivers where no hydropower development can be carried out or even investigated (so called “no go areas”). Despite this there is opinion that SHP development and the WFD requirements can be reconciled in the country. SHP producers believe that their plants in operation and new developments in the country will not undermine the achievement of WFD objectives (“good ecological status for surface waters”). 2001/77/EC Lithuania is one of the countries where national authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (% in 2010). In addition to this the following measures are envisaged: 1) Improvement of the procedures for promotion and purchase of electricity from renewable energy sources and introduction of the green certificates or other systems beyond 2020; 2) Development of a new long-term programme for wind power use; 3) Examination of possibilities of construction of small hydropower plants complying with the environmental requirements while exploiting the potential of Neris river (second largest river in Lithuania). Energy Package 2020 n/a

21.6

SHP Sector Development

21.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between € 2000 and €2500 depending on the size of the plant and the head it uses. The production cost ranges between 2.5 €cent/kWh and 3 €cent/kWh.

Page 163 of 258

Table 21-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m)

21.6.2

n/a

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW 2 500

2 000

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW 2.5-3.0

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There is only one local turbine manufacture producing small Kaplan type turbines for the domestic market.

21.6.3

Technological Advancements

Technological advancements concern mainly unmanned monitoring and control systems which are more and more widely applied. A number of programmes regarding research and development of SHP in Lithuania were carried out in the last two decades.

21.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

SHP plants environmental integration is gaining importance in the country. 8 fish pass are currently operational at the SHP plants. At least a dozen is planed to be installed in the near future. Lithuania is the country where resistances to SHP development are serious. Table 21-8 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 1 5 4 5 1

There are a lot of rivers exempt from damming in Lithuania. Residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as acceptable for SHP producers.

Page 164 of 258

Table 21-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* There is a list of 147 Lithuania like most industrialized An officially approved residual flow (RF) rivers or their countries has a generalized EIA setting methodology exists. RF is set as a stretches which legislation aimed at all types of mean monthly (30 consecutive days) low prevents them from development projects. Depending on a flow (return period of 20 years). The losses in hydropower particular project size there are two SHP electricity production resulting from development. options: mandatory requirement or maintaining CF are negligible (diversions These forbidden screening. Hydropower is not directly schemes are rare in Lithuania). rivers adversely included in the mandatory list for the affect SHP EIA. However the screening is needed economical potential for hydropower projects larger than 100 to be exploited. kW or alternatively for reservoir volume exceeding 0.2 millions m3 *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 21-10 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Lithuania, which can be described as a positive, with the exception position of the environmental bodies. Table 21-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGO’s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

21.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 3 4 4 1 5

Barriers for SHP Development

•

Environmental constraints (a list of watercourses where damming is prohibited was introduced by the order of the Ministry of Environment and approved by the government).

•

High initial investment costs.

•

Buy-back prices are relatively low to implement new hydro projects (until now the existing dams have been used for building hydro plants).

Page 165 of 258

22 Poland

Area: 312 600 km2 Population: 38.1 million.

22.1

Geography and Water Resources

Poland’s territory extends across several geographical regions. In the northwest is the Baltic seacoast, which extends from the Bay of Pomerania to the Gulf of Gdansk. The centre and parts of the north lie within the North European Plain. South of the Northern European Lowlands lie the regions of Silesia and Masovia and farther south lies the Polish mountain region. The average elevation is only about 175 m above sea level, as compared with the overall European average of about 290 m, but elevations reach as high as 2 499 m and as low as about 2 m below sea level in the Wisła delta in the north. A marked contrast exists between the northern two-thirds of the country and the southern one-third. Poland’s climate has features of both the moderate climate of western Europe and the more severe climate of eastern Europe. The total mean annual precipitation volume is 194.3 km3, of which 50.4 km3 is runoff. Nearly all of Poland is drained into the Baltic Sea by the Wisła (Vistula) and Odra (Oder) rivers and their tributaries, which include the Bug and the Warta. At least 2000 SHP can be installed on small and medium watercourses and their tributaries. Some 700 SHP plants are currently operating in the country (in 2007).

22.2

Current Energy Sector

The energy sector in Poland is still dominated by hard coal and lignite industries, which provide most of the country’s energy needs. Coal-fired power and CHP plants dominate electricity generation in Poland. The sources of electricity in 2006 were: coal: (60%), lignite (33%), hydro (1.5%), oil (1.5%), natural gas (2.5%) and others (1.5%). About 2% of national electricity was produced using imported oil and natural gas. Per capita electricity consumption is 3587 kWh/year (2006). The estimated rate of increase in electricity demand over the next 10 years is 3 %. The share of RES-E represented about 2.6% of gross electricity consumption in 2005. There are two Hydropower Associations in the country dealing with small hydropower plants:

Page 166 of 258

1) Society for Development of Small Hydropower Plants (TRMEW, Towarzystwo Rozwoju Małych Elektrowni Wodnych) e-mail: biuro@trmew.pl, website: www.trmew.pl 2) The Polish Hydropower Plant Association (TEW, Towarzystwo Elektrowni Wodnych), e-mail: biuro@tew.pl, website: www.tew.pl.

22.3

Renewable Energy Sources

22.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

To promote renewable energy sources in a country it is important that there is a support from the governement in form of laws, regulations and policies. Below is a list of the most important supporting policies from the Polish government in promoting renewable energy sources. Law on Energy (1997, amended 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005): In the last amendment in April 2005 Tradable Certificates of Origin were introduced. Strategy for the Development of Renewable Energy Sector (2001). Obligation for Power Purchase from Renewable Sources (2000, amended 2003). Ordinance of the Minister of Finance on the Excise Tax (2002): an exemption from the excise tax on RES-E. Below is specific legislation dealing with SHP sector: Water Law (Prawo wodne) Polish Parliament Act of July 18th 2001 (with further amendments). Environmental Protection Law (Prawo ochrony środowiska ) Polish Parliament Act of April 27th, 2001 (with further amendments). Directive of the Minister of Environmental Protection, Natural Resources and Forestry of December 20th 1996 on Technical Requirements to be Met by the Water Management Facilities and Their Location. Directive of the Minister of Economy and Labour of December 20th, 2004, on Detailed Conditions of Connecting Subjects to the Electrical Grid, Grid Traffic and Operation. Directive of the Minister of Economy, Labour and Social Policy of April 28th 2003, on Detailed Principles of Certifying Qualifications Required to Run Electrical Equipment, Installations and Grids (with amendments). Directive of the Cabinet of January 18th, 2006, on Annual Fees for Using Water Covered Areas.

22.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 7.5% by 2010. Fulfillment for 2006 – 2.8%. RES: Poland has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 15% by 2020.

22.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in Poland is currently contributed by 3 large renewable energy sources: large and small hydropower, and other renewables (mostly wood and biogas). Wind energy is getting pace rapidly (Figure 22-1).

Page 167 of 258

Electricity generation GWh/year

5000 Others 4000 3000

Wind SHP Large hydro

2000 1000 0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 22-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

The share of generated electricity of small and large hydro decreased over 2000 to 2006 years and it is expected to decrease further towards 2010 (8.3 and 11.3% of total RES generation, respectively). Table 22-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

155

182

210

227

261

246

253

298

GWh/ Year

720

771

847

674

890

860

815

924

30.9

27.8

31.3

31.7

30.4

21.3

20.1

8.3

662

686

630

680

715

669

672

1386

1554

1432

998

1191

1339

1228

1250

59.6

56.1

52.9

46.9

40.6

33.2

30.3

11.3

826

890

854

949

1022

970

982

n/a

2126

2931

4029

4054

11100

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 2327 2769 2706 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimates

RES-E share in the gross electricity mix is insignificant â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2.4% (average 2004-2006 period). Small hydro contributes around 0.6 % and the total hydro contribution is not significant either â&#x20AC;&#x201C; about 1.4% of the total electricity generation in Poland.

Page 168 of 258

22.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

22.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Poland are shown in Table 22-2. SHP has followed a constant upward trend over the reference period and the SHP sector will continue to grow in the future. Table 22-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

514

572

610

634

645

659

676

720

780

820

216

225

233

244

253

263

270

305

340

375

n/a

668

801

830

801

924

1011

1098

2020

Source: Some 80% of all SHP plants are recently constructed (less than 20 years old) and some 15% of them are older than 60 years. The percentage of privately owned SHP generating capacity (MW) in Poland is about 28 % (about 500 mini and micro hydro plants). Low head schemes (up to 5 m) are most common (62%) followed by medium head (5-15 m) power plants â&#x20AC;&#x201C;some 30%. Multipurpose schemes are quite common within the public sector. New plants of above 2 MW capacity are usually located at reservoirs designed for flood control purposes.

22.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Poland is 13 400 GWh/year. The technically and economically feasible potential is 5 050 and 2 500 GWh/year, respectively. More than 1/3 of the economically feasible potential is developed so far.

Page 169 of 258

Table 22-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 13400 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 5050 38 B Economically feasible 2500 19 C Economically feasible potential taking 2410 18 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 203* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW n/a 1000 540 520

68*

22.5

SHP General Policy Framework

22.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Page 170 of 258

Table 22-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <5 MW There is no one-stop for SHP project According to the Water developers. The basic document needed Law the licence for water to develop an SHP project is the Waterabstractions can be Legal Consent. According to the new granted for a fixed period Water Law, the Consent is issued by the of time, but not shorter relevant government administration than 10 years. It can be authority based on the following obtained during 3-6 documents: 1) Water-Legal Action Plan; months. The license is 2) Non-technical description of the required for power planned activity generation in SHP plants regardless of their size. In some cases an administrative decision According to the Power or local plan of spatial development may Generation Law the be needed. The Water-Legal Action Plan licence for SHP operation is a key document which explains all is issued for a period no hydrological and legal issues, possible shorter than 10 years and environmental impact and presents no longer than 50 years. technical concept of the installation.

Fees for the use of water No such fees have been imposed so far. However, there are taxes for the flooded area.

Normally, at this stage the investor applies also for Technical Conditions for Connection to the Grid, issued by the local Power Distribution Utility. Based on the submitted documents local administration issues the Erection Consent. Local state administration is also to be officially informed about the end of the investment. The power plant can start operation after relevant license has been granted by the Energy Regulatory Office (UrzÄ&#x2026;d Regulacji Energetyki) and the local Power Distribution Utility has tested the equipment and sealed the energy counters

Page 171 of 258

Table 22-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans Not available. The costs depend essentially on the voltage at At the EIA, Water abstraction permit, Construction the grid connection point. The rules are regulated beginning of permit, Commissioning and operation permit, by the tariffs established independently by each the 90s the The licence is issued by the Energy Regulatory operator of the distribution grid and approved by SHP Master Authority. the Energy Regulatory Office. The charge for the plan for renewable energy sources is usually equal 50 % refurbishment of the realistic costs. In case of group IV and V or erection of the typical reference prices are 25 €/kW in case new hydro of an overhead transmission line and up to 30 plants was €/kW in case of a cable connection. In case of a established. connection line longer than 200 m, an additional Only a pilot charge of approximately 9 € per 1 m of SHP local transmission line is included in the full cost spatial plan calculation. was carried SHP operators are given access to the grid at out within EU reasonable prices and the rules of grid access are funded transparent and non-discriminatory. SPLASH project.

A Quota Obligation system based on Tradable Green Certificates (TGC) is in place for Poland. The price of selling electricity is high enough (~9€cents/kWh) to attract private investment, but they do not secure investors confidence. Table 22-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Quota obligation. Green power purchase obligation (1 October 2005) with targets specified until 2010. In addition renewables are exempted from the (small) excise tax. Power price is fixed each year by the Energy Regulatory Office based on the average market price in the previous year. No penalties defined and lack of target enforcement.

22.5.2

Comments regarding SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E Following the Polish Green Certificate system, the SHP owners are paid for two products: − electrical energy delivered to the grid − ownership rights to the energy origin certificates Electrical energy price is fixed each year by the Energy Regulatory Office basing on the average price on the competitive energy market in the previous year. In 2006 this price was 3 €cents/kWh. The price for the origin certificates is limited by the replacement fee value which was close to 6 €cents/kWh in the recent years. There is no differentiation among RES-E technologies. The prices are high enough to attract private investment, but they do not secure investors confidence.

Impact of EU Directives

Page 172 of 258

developments in the country will not undermine the achievement of WFD objectives (“good ecological status for surface waters”). However they fear that inconsistent implementation of the WFD would result in higher rates of residual flow, decrease in space of the bars, excluding SHP from green certificate system or even no new hydroelectric sites will be allowed. 2001/77/EC National authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has not broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (% in 2010). However some official estimates are given by the Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Poland regarding overall RES-E structure, which is as follows: current situation (2006): Hydro - 48%, Wind - 6% and Biomass - 46%. Forecast for 2010: Hydro -16%, Wind-31% and Biomass -31%. Consequently, hydro share is very likely to decrease by a factor of 3. Energy Package 2020 n/a

22.6

SHP Sector Development

22.6.1

Economic Issues

Table 22-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m)

22.6.2

n/a

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW 2 500

2 200

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW 3.0-4.0

SHP Manufacturing Industry

Poland also has a good market for equipment for SHP. The different companies listed below in Table 22-8 have not only domestic market, but also in the EU and throughout Europe and some limited in the world. The turbine manufacturing industry is dispersed and only in the initial stage of development. There are a number of small enterprises producing turbines with capacity below 100 kW and 7 turbine manufactures producing Kaplan and Francis turbines with capacity of several hundred kilowatts. Occasionally Kaplan turbines with power up to 2.5 MW are manufactured. Table 22-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines

n/a Gajek ENGINEERING, MADEX, „WTORMEX”, P.P.H.U. „FENIX”, "Wodel", ZRE Gdańsk, Małe Elektrownie Wodne

Page 173 of 258

Other mechan. Equipment

Generators

Electrical and control equipment

Civil works contractors Consulting services

Gajek ENGINEERING, TB HYDRO POZNAN, Fabryka Reduktorów i Motoreduktorów "BEFARED", Dolnośląskie Zakłady Artykułów Technicznych Nortech ALSTOM Power, Zakład Okrętowych Urządzeń Elektrycznych i Automatyki ELMOR, Zakłady Wytwórcze Maszyn Elektrycznych i Transformatorów "Emit", Fabryka Maszyn Elektrycznych Indukta, Maszyny Elektryczne Celma APS Energia, ELEKTROBUDOWA, ElektromontaŜPoznań, PHU "Gawlikowski”, ENERGOEFEKT, Gajek ENGINEERING, Institute of Power Engineering, Gdansk Division, Institute of Power Systems, JTC S.A., MAWOS, PUE ENERGOTEST - ENERGOPOMIAR HYDROBUDOWA, Skanska, INTOP, Budownictwo Hydro-Energetyka Dychów BSiPE ENERGOPROJEKT, HYDROPROJEKT, MADEX, Elektrownie Wodne Słupsk, Biuro InŜynierii Wodnej i Ochrony Środowiska M & I GAJDA, Instytut Maszyn Przepływowych PAN, Towarzystwo Rozwoju Małych Elektrowni Wodnych, TurboCare, ZRE Gdańsk, Małe Elektrownie Wodne

Table 22-9 Market for SHP industry

Equipment/construction/consulting

Turbines Other mechanical equipment Generators Consulting services

X X X

22.6.3

Europe (excluding the EU)

Outside Europe

X X

Technological Advancements

Technological advancements concern mainly unmanned monitoring and control systems as well as some modern auxiliary devices (eg. trash rack cleaning equipment) which are more and more widely applied. A large number of programmes regarding research and development of SHP in Poland were carried out in the last two decades.

22.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Page 174 of 258

Table 22-10 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 3 2 2 3

There are no rivers exempt from damming in Poland and residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as acceptable for SHP producers. Table 22-11 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* None. Except EIA is required for water use licensing for RF flow value is fixed in the water use conventional all new dams, reservoirs and hydropower licensing procedure. The losses in electricity protected areas – plants. production with regard to maintaining RF are strict nature negligible. reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime. There is no official launched campaign of dam removing. *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 22-12 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Poland, which can be described as a positive. Table 22-12 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGO’s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

22.6.5 •

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 3 4 5 4 5

Barriers for SHP Development

There exists no master-plan for hydro power development in this country. The data on suitable SHP erection sites are out of date and the potential investor has little chance to find any help at local authorities in this respect.

Page 175 of 258

•

Most of suitable sites identified in 80’ies under national programmes on renewable energy have already their owners who are not always interested in a hydropower installation.

•

Quite a number of existing potential sites are owned by the Water Management Authorities which are often reluctant to allow usage of a weir for hydropower purposes under reasonable conditions.

•

New sites emerge mainly at weirs and reservoirs erected by the Water Management Authorities for water management purposes, including flood protection. In general, they use public funds both for erection of the weir and a hydropower plant. As the funds are limited, the typical project lasts 10-15 years. There exists no practice of involving the commercial hydropower enterprises into a joint-venture project of multipurpose nature. This is a dramatic situation as profits from green certificates are high enough to support substantially the water management projects.

•

The current limit of small hydro in Poland is 5 MW. This prevents the hydro power projects between 5 and 10 MW from benefiting from friendly approach of Polish authorities to the small hydro sector

Page 176 of 258

23 Romania

Area: 238 391 km2 Population: 21.6 million.

23.1

Geography and Water Resources

Romania is a country located in South-East Central Europe, North of the Balkan Peninsula, on the Lower Danube, within and outside the Carpathian arch, bordering on the Black Sea. Almost all of the Danube Delta is located within its territory. It shares a border with Hungary and Serbia to the west, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova to the northeast, and Bulgaria to the south. Romania's terrain is distributed roughly equally between mountainous, hilly and lowland territories. Its climate is transitional between temperate and continental with four distinct seasons. The total mean annual precipitation volume is 151.8 km3 (average over 750 mm) of which 34.3 km3 is runoff. All the country territory belongs to Danube river catchment; only some small rivers are going directly into Black Sea. There are 9 drainage basins, attached to the main rivers, inside Romania. Countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hydrographic network is represented by 4864 main watercourses with total length of 78 905 km. More than 230 SHP plants are in operation in the country (2008). Their power generation represents slightly more than 20% of the economically feasible potential. Based on this figure, an assumption can be made, that extra 800 power plants might be constructed in the future.

23.2

Current Energy Sector

Romania has seen a large decrease in energy consumption after the 1989 Revolution and the closure of large inefficient enterprises. The country has a large electricity overcapacity, and the energy mix includes a significant share of large hydropower, while the remainder is constituted by fossil fuels and nuclear power. The main sources of electricity production in 2007 were: oil, gas and thermal (19%) coal (42%), nuclear (13%) and hydro (26%). It is expected that electricity demand will increase by 15% during the next decade. Large hydropower dominates totally in RES-E generation in the country. Despite the fact that other RES potential has been estimated as very promising in terms of quantity, the investment rate in the renewables sector is quite low. There is Romanian National Association of Hydropower Engineers "Aqua Nostra". Recently Small Hydropower association has been founded in Romania.

Page 177 of 258

23.3

Renewable Energy Sources

23.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Electricity Law (13 / 2007); Government decision (GD) 1535 / 2003 on approving the Strategy for using renewable energy sources; • Government decision 1892 / 2004 on establishing the promotion system for electricity produced from renewable energy sources; • Government decision 1429/2004 on approving the Regulation of certifying the electricity from RES; • Government decision 958/2005 for the amendment of GD 443/2003 and for the amendment and completion of GD 1892/2004; • Government decision no 540 /2004 regarding the approval of Regulation concerning the procedures for granting licenses and authorisations in the sector of electricity, amended by GD no. 553/2007; • Government decision no 867 /2003-Regulation for the connection of users to public electricity networks. Government Decision (GD) 1892/2004 introduced a quota system with Tradable Green Certificates (TGC) for new RES-E. The mandatory quota for electricity suppliers increases from 0.7% in 2005 to 4.3% in 2010. TGCs are issued by the TSO to electricity production from wind, solar, biomass or hydro power generated in plants with less than 10 MW capacity (new or rehabilitated since 2004). The Romanian Energy Regulatory Authority (ANRE) can adjust the annual values of the mandatory quota at the beginning of each year depending on the evolution of the domestic electricity consumption. A minimum and maximum price for the TGCs is determined annually by ANRE. The supplier who fails to fulfil his quota has to pay the maximum price.

23.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 33% by 2010. RES: Romania has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 24% by 2020.

23.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in Romania is completely dominated by large hydropower; small hydro is being as second largest contributor (Figure 22-1).

Page 178 of 258

20000 Electricity generation GWh/year

Others Wind

15000

SHP Large hydro

10000

5000

0 2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 23-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

Small and large hydropower share in RES-E generation, despite variation wet and dry year and other uncertainties, was roughly constant over 2000 to 2006 years (Table 23-1). It is foreseen that small hydropower will keep the same rate of growth; large hydropower contribution is likely to decrease by 2010.

Table 23-1Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

n/a

346

348

319

325

400

GWh/ Year

n/a

436

470

774

752

693

900

2.7

3.5

4.6

3.7

3.8

4.1

% MW

n/a

5896

5900

5959

5964

5957

n/a

GWh/ Year %

14778

14923

15610

12789

15914

19530

17662

16000

97.3

96.4

95.3

96.3

96.2

73.7

n/a

6245

6248

6278

6289

6282

n/a

16692

20288

18359

21700

n/a

GWh/ n/a 14923 16049 13271 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimates for 2010

RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix is quite significant â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 30.7% (average 2004-2006 period). Small hydropower contributes around 1.2 %, large hydro contribution is roughly 30 times more of the electricity generation in Romania.

Page 179 of 258

23.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

23.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Romania are shown in Table 23-2. SHP sector is likely to grow in the future. Table 23-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

230

233

234

244

225

226

221

280

320

350

n/a

346

348

319

325

400

420

450

n/a

436

470

774

752

693

900

1000

1100

2020

The bulk of all SHP in Romania are recently built plants, constructed 20 years ago. The largest SHP owner is state utility HIDROELECTRICA SA. Until 2002 there were no privately owned SHP plants but their privatisation has recently started. Currently some 17% of installed capacity of hydro schemes is private (2006). According to SHP plants gross head their percentage is as follows: low head (up to 5 m) – 4.5%; medium head (5-15 m) – 22.5% and high head (more than 15 m) – 73%. High head SHP plants are mostly exploited in Romania.

23.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Romania is 6 000 GWh/year (Table 23-3). The technically and economically feasible potential is 4 080 and 3 200 GWh/year, respectively. More than 20% of the economically feasible capacity is developed so far.

Page 180 of 258

Table 23-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 6000 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 4080 68 B Economically feasible 3200 53 C Economically feasible potential taking 3193 53 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 173* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW n/a 1130 900 900

81*

23.5

SHP General Policy Framework

23.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Small-scale hydro plants are defined as those of less than 10 MW capacities in Romania. Table 23-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession There is no one-stop for SHP project The National Water developers. Romanian Energy Regulatory Administration (ANAR) Authority (ANRE) is responsible for is responsible for the <10 MW concession. granting permits.

Fees for the use of water There are two types of fees: 1) abstractions of river, lake or reservoirs - €48.4 /mill. m3; 2) for hydropower: €0.54 to €0.88 per m Head/month x turbine working hours (installed capacity <4 MW and >8MW)

Table 23-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans N/a License lasts up to 25 years. The costs of connection to the grid are regulated . Romanian Energy Regulatory Authority is and established in the ANRE Order No. 15/2004 monitoring license prescriptions of SHP and it depends of the technology and the level of producers. the voltage. The cost for the use of the grid are paid only by producers with installed capacity over than 10 MW. SHP operators are given access to the grid at

Page 181 of 258

reasonable prices and the rules of grid access are transparent and non-discriminatory.

A Quota Obligation system based on Tradable Green Certificates (TGC) is in place for Romania (Table 23-6). The price of selling electricity vary between 6.3 and 8.1 €cents/kWh) and it attracts private investment and secure investors confidence. Table 23-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Quota obligation system based on Tradable Green Certificates (TGC)

23.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E Fixed RES-E quantities established by Governmental Decision from 2005 up to 2012 from 2005 up to 2012 Hydropower plants below 10MW and commissioned or modernized after 2004 are eligible for TGC. For SHP: 39.3 (Market price) +24 to 42 (TGS)=63.3 to 81.3 €/MWh For others RES-E power purchase prices are similar.

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) There is an opinion that SHP development and the WFD requirements can be reconciled in the country. SHP producers believe that their plants in operation and new developments in the country will not undermine the achievement of WFD objectives (“good ecological status for surface waters”). However they fear that inconsistent implementation of the WFD would result in higher rates of residual flow; increase in operating costs or even no new hydroelectric sites will be allowed. 2001/77/EC National authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has not broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (33% in 2010). Romania is very close to reach the RES-E indicative target (30% for 2006). Governmental Decision 1535/2003 approving the national strategy for the evaluation of renewable Energy sources set the target for SHP plants at 780 GWh/year. As it can be seen from Table 23-2 this target is almost reached as well. Energy Package 2020 n/a

23.6

SHP Sector Development

23.6.1

Economic Issues

Estimated range of investment costs for new plants amounts to €1250 /kW and average cost of producing 1kWh is about 4.0 €cent/kWh.

Page 182 of 258

23.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

Romania also has a good market for equipment for SHP. The different companies listed below in Table 23-7 and Table 23-8 have not only domestic market, but also in the EU and throughout Europe (Greece, Turkey) and the world (Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, China, Indonesia). Table 23-7 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines

Other mechan. Equipment

Generators

Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

U.C.M. Resita (www.ucmr.ro) LP Electric S.A. (www.lpelectric.ro) Hydro Engineering S.A. (www.hydrorom.com) Caromet S.A. (caromet.ro) U.C.M. Resita (www.ucmr.ro) Hydro Engineering S.A. (www.hydrorom.com) Caromet S.A. (caromet.ro) U.C.M. Resita (www.ucmr.ro) Hydro Engineering S.A. (www.hydrorom.com) Caromet S.A. (caromet.ro) Electroputere S.A. (www.electroputere.ro) Hydro Engineering S.A. (www.hydrorom.com) Control Trading (www.controltrading.ro) HIDROCONSTRUCTIA S.A. (www.hidroconstructia.com) ISPH â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Institute of Hydroelectric Studies and Design

Table 23-8 Market for SHP industry

Equipment/construction/consulting

Europe (excluding the EU)

Outside Europe

Turbines Other mechanical equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

X X X X X X

23.6.3

Technological Advancements

n/a

23.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Romania is the country where little resistances to SHP development are reported.

Page 183 of 258

Table 23-9 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 2 3 3 1

There are no rivers exempt from damming in Romania and residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as acceptable for SHP producers. Table 23-10 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* None. Except EIA is required for water use licensing for Residual flow value depends on a fraction of conventional all new hydropower plants. minimum flow (probability of exceedance protected areas . 80% or 95%). The losses in electricity production with regard to maintaining RF are negligible for schemes integrated in the dams (<5%) and more significant for diversion type of power plants (11 to15%) *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

Table 23-11 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Romania, which can be described as a positive. Table 23-11 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

23.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive 3 3 4 3 5

Barriers for SHP Development

n/a

Page 184 of 258

24 Slovakia

Area: 49 034 km2 Population: 5.4 million.

24.1

Geography and Water Resources

Slovakia is a landlocked country in Central Europe. The Slovak landscape is noted primarily for its mountainous nature, with the Carpathian Mountains extending across most of the northern half of the country. Major Slovak rivers are the Danube, the VĂĄh and the Hron. Danube River, draining into Black Sea, is the major river flowing through the southern Slovakia. Slovak rivers flow mainly to the Black and Baltic Sea watersheds. Around 14% of total flow originates in Slovak territory. The Slovak climate lies between the temperate and continental climate zones with relatively warm summers and cold, cloudy and humid winters. The total mean annual precipitation volume is 36.4 km3 (about 740 mm), of which 12.6 km3 is runoff. Near 70 SHP plants are currently operating in the country (in 2006). Their power generation represents slightly about 25% of the economically feasible potential. Based on this figure, an assumption can be made, that at least 200 additional power plants might be constructed in the future.

24.2

Current Energy Sector

The Republic of Slovakia is a net importer of energy. Energy imports to Slovakia provids approximately 90 % primary energy sources (nuclear â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 100 %, oil 99 %, natural gas 97 % and coal 80 %), mainly from Russia. Currently renewable energy represents only about 3.5% of the total primary energy consumption although its share is increasing. Hydro power, mainly large one, is the only renewable energy source with a notable share in total electricity consumption. The sources of electricity production in 2006 were: nuclear (58%), thermal (28%) and hydro (14%). Per capita electricity consumption is 5486 kWh/year (in 2006). The estimated rate of increase in electricity demand over the next 10 years is 1.6 %. There is National Association of Electricity Producers from SHP.

Page 185 of 258

24.3

Renewable Energy Sources

24.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Programme Supporting Energy Savings and Utilisation of RES (2000);

•

Act on Energy No.70/1998 (2001) (obligatory purchase);

•

Renewable Energy Concept (2003); and the Act on Energy and amending certain acts (2004).

The Act on Energy stipulates: RES-E producer has a priority in transfer, distribution and supply of electricity. Producer has a right to publish a confirmation about the source of produced electricity; confirmation will include identification of the source of produced electricity, date and place of production and in case of hydro-power plants also their capacity. In addition to the above legislation, very specific legal acts for SHP are the following: • Water Law, Slovakian Parliament Act, 2004; • Environmental Impact Assessment, Slovakian Parliament Act, 2006; • Environmental Protection Law, Slovakian Parliament, 2002; • Building Law, Slovakian Parliament, 2005;

24.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 31% by 2010. RES: Slovakia has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 14% by 2020.

24.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in Slovakia is almost completely dominated by large hydropower (Figure 24-1).

Page 186 of 258

6000 Electricity generation GWh/year

Others

5000

Wind SHP

4000

Large hydro

3000 2000 1000 0 2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 24-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

The share of generated electricity of small hydro power to RES-E mix is modest from 5.3 to 7.0% over 2003 to 2006 years (Table 24-1). Table 24-1Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

n/a

GWh/ Year

n/a

250

255

300

n/a

7.0

6.0

5.3

1685

1578

1579

1578

1588

1535

1534

GWh/ Year %

4615

4901

5239

3452

4058

4578

4335

n/a

96.5

96.7

96.1

98.1

97.5

89.9

n/a

1592

1589

1596

1609

1649

1713

3592

4135

4693

4821

GWh/ n/a 5081 5420 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimates

RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix is quite mediocre â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 14.9% (average 2004-2006 period). Small hydro contributes around 0.8 %, large hydro contribution is nearly 20 times bigger â&#x20AC;&#x201C; about 14 % of the total electricity generation in Slovakia.

Page 187 of 258

24.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

24.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Slovakia are shown in Table 24-2. There has not been any significant development of SHP plants over the reference period. Despite this SHP sector is likely to grow slightly in the future. Table 24-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Forecast 2010 2015

2020

Total n/a n/a n/a 200 200 201 202 210 220 235 number of SHP Capacity n/a n/a n/a 67 67 67 68 70 80 85 MW Generation n/a n/a n/a 250 250 250 255 260* 300* 320 GWh * According to the Slovak Ministry of Economy these figure are more optimistic - 350 and 450 GWh/year.

Around a half of the total number of SHP plants in Slovakia has been constructed in the last twenty years. Nearly a half of SHP generating capacity is in private hands. Low head (up to 5 m – 50% of the total number) power plants followed by medium head (5-15 m– 35%) are prevailing in Slovakia. High head (more than 15 m – 15%) SHP plants are relatively rare.

24.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Slovakia is unknown (Table 24-3). The technically and economically feasible potential is 1 200 and 1 000 GWh/year, respectively. Just 1/4 (or 255 GWh/year) of the economically feasible potential is developed so far.

Page 188 of 258

Table 24-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a n/a constraints) A Technically feasible 1200 n/a B Economically feasible 1000 n/a C Economically feasible potential taking 965 n/a environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 64* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW n/a n/a 270 258

17*

24.5

SHP General Policy Framework

24.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Small-scale hydro plants are defined as those of less than 10 MW capacities in Slovakia.

Table 24-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <10 MW There is no oneâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;stop shop for SHP Water abstractions are developers. authorised for a period of time up to 30 years. The The basic document needed to develop a SHP project is Water-legal Consent. licence is issued by the According to the new Water Law, the National Water Consent is issued by the relevant management Authority, government administration authority. License for SHP power Regulatory Office for Network Industries production is not time (RONI) is responsible for issuing a specified. confirmation about the source of Power production licence produced electricity based on RES; is needed for SHP>5MW.

Fees for the use of water According to the new Water Law the fees for the use of water depend on electricity production.

Page 189 of 258

Table 24-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the local/regional spatial exploitation use of the grid plans There is available SHP List of authorisation depends on specific There is neither cost for SHP master plan in the conditions of SHP site. Requested time to get connection to the grid nor for its use. country. SHP projects are the new license for SHP exploitation can go integrated into local and up to 2 years. regional special plans in Responsible institutions: Local order to guide their Environmental authority, Ministry of development I suitable Environment and Ministry of Economy areas. National Water Management Authority is monitoring license prescriptions of SHP producers

In 2005 a fixed feed-in tariff for RES-E was introduced. The prices for SHP electricity produced (between 6.8 and 7.5 €cent/kWh) are not enough to attract private investment and they do not secure investors confidence.. Table 24-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Programme supporting RES and energy efficiency, including feed-in tariffs and tax incentives is in place. Decree about fixed RES-E prices is issued by RONI annually for each one year and it is conditioned by the Guarantee of origin.

24.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E For SHP: Till 1 January 2005 - 56.8 €/MWh; After 1 January 2005: 68.7€/MWh; Upgraded SHP (<5MW): 71.6 €/MWh Wind energy : 56.8 to 74.7 €/MWh; Geothermal: 104.5€/MWh

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) There is an opinion that SHP development and the WFD requirements can be reconciled in the country. SHP producers believe that their plants in operation and new developments in the country will not undermine the achievement of WFD objectives (“good ecological status for surface waters”). However they fear that inconsistent implementation of the WFD would result in increased operating costs and decrease in space of the bars. 2001/77/EC National authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has not broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (% in 2010). According to the National Ministry of Economy, SHP generated electricity is foreseen to increase from current 250 GWh/ year (2005) to 350 and 450 GWh/year in 2010 and 2015 years, respectively. However its share to RES-E generation mix (without large hydropower) is likely to decrease from the current 96% (2005) to 28% and 20% in the above mentioned years.

Page 190 of 258

Energy Package 2020 n/a

24.6

SHP Sector Development

24.6.1

Economic Issues

Estimated range of investment costs for new plants amounts to €2000 /kW and average cost of producing 1kWh is about 0.6 to 0.8 €cent/kWh.

24.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There are no turbine manufactures for SHP in Slovakia. Manufacturers of electrical and other mechanical and control equipment (e.g. MicroStep Ltd) designed for SHP plants exist. Consulting services, project development are provided by ROTORing Ltd Kosice.

24.6.3

Technological Advancements

n/a

24.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Slovakia is the country where resistances to SHP development resulting from fish protection are heavy (Table 24-7). Table 24-7 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 1 5 3 3 1

There are no rivers exempt from damming in Slovakia and residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as acceptable for SHP producers (Table 24-8). Table 24-8 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) Forbidden rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* None. Except EIA is applicable for all hydropower Residual flow depends on river hydrological conventional projects and which reservoir volume and hydraulic parameters. The methodology protected areas – exceeds 1 million m3 is site specific. strict nature RF flow value is fixed in the water use reservations or licensing procedure. The losses in electricity protected areas with production with regard to maintaining RF are overall restricted negligible.. economic regime.

Page 191 of 258

*Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 24-9 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Slovakia, which can be described as a positive. Table 24-9 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

24.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 3 4 4 4 5

Barriers for SHP Development

n/a

Page 192 of 258

25 Slovenia

Area: 20 250 km2 Population: 2.02 million.

25.1

Geography and Water Resources

Slovenia is a country in southern Central Europe. The geographical position of Slovenia is the juncture of 4 main European geo regions: The Alps, the Panonian Basin, the Mediteranean and the Dinaric Mountains, and this are what make the territory very diverse also from a hydrological point of view. Slovenia’s average height above sea level is 557 m. The climate is sub-Mediterranean on the coast, alpine in the mountains and continental with mild to hot summers and cold winters in the plateaus and valleys to the east. The total mean annual precipitation volume is 30 km3, of which 18 km3 is runoff. Slovenia’s territory with regard river runoff formation can be divided into two major basins – the Adriatic Sea and the Black Sea. Almost all the Slovenia’s rivers have headwaters in its territory. Slovenia has the following main river basins: coastal river basin, Soca, Kolpa, Drava, Mura and Sava river basins. Hydropower supplies about 1/3 of Slovenia's electricity generating capacity. The Drava River is the major source of hydroelectric power and then follows Sava River. So far nearly 60% of small hydropower economically feasible potential has been developed. Some 500 SHP plants are currently operating in the country (in 2007).

25.2

Current Energy Sector

Slovenia is highly dependent on energy imports. The main domestic energy sources are coal, hydro power and wood-based biomass. The sources of electricity production are: conventional thermal, mostly coal and some gas (36%), hydro (about 24%) and nuclear (40%). During 2007, the electricity import was close to electricity export (some 5%). Per capita electricity consumption is 6569 kWh/year (in 2006). According to the National Energy Programme released in 2006, it was estimated that total electricity demand would increase at a rate of 2.8 % over the next 10 years. The Slovenian SHP Assoication’s name is Zveza Društev Lastnikov in Graditeljev Malih Hidroelektrarn; Zveza drustev MHE Slovenije (short) (ZDMHE) or in English, Association of Small Hydro Power Plants Societies. Page 193 of 258

25.3

Renewable Energy Sources

25.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

To promote renewable energy sources in a country it is important that there is a support from the government in form of laws, regulations and policies. Relevant legislation in Slovenia is: the Law on Energy (1999, amended 2000, 2002, 2004, 2005); Regulation on CO2 emission tax (1996, amended 2002); National Energy Programme (2006); and the Decree on Prices and Premiums for Purchase of Electricity from Qualified Producers (2004).

25.3.2 • •

RES Targets

RES-E: 33.6% by 2010. Fulfillment for 2006 – 30%. RES: Slovenia has a proposed binding RES Directive target of 25% by 2020.

25.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in Slovenia is totally dominated by large and small hydropower (Figure 25-1). 5000 Electricity generation GWh/year

Others SHP

4000

Large hydro

3000 2000 1000 0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 25-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Eurostat

The share of generated electricity of small hydropower shows a clear upward trend over 2000 to 2006 years - from 8.7 to 11.5 % of total RES-E production (Table 25-1).

Page 194 of 258

Table 25-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

127

147

156

151

143

144

180

GWh/ Year

340

371

327

266

437

383

425

540

8.7

9.6

8.6

10.4

10.7

11.5

n/a

733

759

803

831

836

866

n/a

3495

3425

2986

2690

3658

3078

3166

n/a

89.5

88.5

87.4

86.8

86.1

85.5

n/a

864

924

977

998

992

997

1030

n/a

4215

3575

3702

n/a

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 3905 3868 3415 3078 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimates for 2010

RES-E share in the gross electricity mix is significant – 26.7 % (average 2004 to 2006 period). Small hydro contribution in the gross electricity mix is one of the biggest in the EU – around 2%. Large hydro share is 10 times bigger – some 23%.

25.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

25.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Slovenia are shown in Table 25-2. There is an upward growth trend for SHP over the reference period. Table 25-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

476

477

478

n/a

127

n/a

143

144

n/a

160

180

340

371

327

266

437

383

425

n/a

480

540

2020

The bulk of Slovenia’s SHP plants are relatively recently built, less than 20 years ago. Nearly a half of SHP generating capacity (MW) is in private hands. Medium head power plants (60%) followed by high head (30%) are prevailing in Slovenia. Low head SHP plants are less common.

Page 195 of 258

25.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Slovenia is 1 400 GWh/year (Table 25-3). The technically and economically feasible potential is 1 000 and 700 GWh/year, respectively. Around 60% of economically feasible potential is developed so far. Table 25-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 1400 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 1000 71 B Economically feasible 700 50 C Economically feasible potential taking 585 42 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 104* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW 365 250 250 194

36*

25.5

SHP General Policy Framework

25.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Exploitation of small scale hydropower resources is the subject of governmental regulations and administrative procedures, which, for the time being, despite the fact there is the directive on RES-E in force to which Member State must comply. SHP limit is fixed at 10 MW in Slovenia. Table 25-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP power production Legal conditions for SHP definition /concession <10 MW There is no oneâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;stop shop for SHP Water abstractions are developers. Planning permits are granted authorised for a period of time up to 30 years. by the Ministry of the Environment, Spatial Planning and Energy (MOPE). Construction permit of the scheme is not time SHP developer are bound to fulfil their obligations based on several different specified. The concession fee is 3 % laws (acts): Energy Act, Water Act, Spatial Planning Act, Construction of of annual production. Facilities Act etc.

Fees for the use of water There are two types of fees to be paid by SHP producer: 1) Water concession fees â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 3% of T (were T is buy-back rate for 1 kWh) and 2) extra fees 0.3% of T)

Page 196 of 258

Table 25-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the local/regional spatial SHP exploitation grid plans Local spatial plans are In total 11 authorisations issued by The costs to connection to the grid are not being produced in which different authorities are needed. It transparent. takes at least 2 years for developer to They are responsible for covering the costs of SHP have to be included to apply for the commission a SHP. extensions and of strengthening the grid. concession. The rules of grid access are discriminatory and There is no intention to not transparent. develop local spatial plans to guide the development of SHP project in suitable areas

Feed-in support system combined with long-term guaranteed contracts is in place for Slovenia (Table 25-6). The price of selling electricity is high enough (8 to 9€cents/kWh) to attract private investment. Table 25-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed-in system combined with long-term guaranteed contracts, CO2 taxation and public funds for environmental investments.

25.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E Distribution grid operators are by the Energy Act obliged to buy all electricity produced in SHP (and other RES). Price for Qualified Producers is defined by the Government decree. In that case it is composed of a) Long-term expected market price and b) Premium. The price is than called "Unified annual price". This tariff system is now under revision (2008). For SHP “United annual price” is between 61.6 (young plants) and 55.4 €/MWh (old plants). Premium is between 28.2 (young plants) and 25.4 €/MWh (old plants) For other RES-E tariffs are similar.

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) SHP producers fear that inconsistent implementation of the WFD would result in much higher rates of residual flow, decrease in space of the bars, excluding SHP from green certificate system or even no new hydroelectric sites will be allowed. 2001/77/EC National authority, responsible for renewable energy deployment, has not broken down the yearly contribution of each RES-E sector according to the national indicative target (% in 2010) which is set to 33.6%. In 2006 SHP contributed nearly 10 % to this target or 3.2% in absolute values. Large hydro contribution is more significant – some 70% or 24% of this target in absolute values. Energy Package 2020 n/a

Page 197 of 258

25.6

SHP Sector Development

25.6.1

Economic Issues

Investment costs for new plants vary between 1500 and 3000€/kW. High head schemes are less expensive to develop and exploit than low head schemes. Table 25-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

25.6.2

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh) 101kW – 1MW 1MW – 10MW

3000 2500

n/a

1500

SHP Manufacturing Industry

Water and energy industries, and service capabilities related to SHP are well developed in Slovenia. There are 3 turbine manufactures producing Kaplan, Francis, Pelton and other types of turbines. They have markets in the EU, USA, Canada, Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), African and Asian countries (Table 25-8 and Table 25-9). Table 25-8 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP

Equipment/construction/consulting Turbines Other mechan. Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors

Consulting services

ANDINO HYDROPOWER ENGINEERGING d.o.o. LITOSTROJ E.I.; TURBOINSTITUT d.o.o. LITOSTROJ E.I. ANDINO HYDROPOWER ENGINEERGING d.o.o. ANDINO HYDROPOWER ENGINEERGING d.o.o. TURBOINSTITUT d.o.o; ISKRA d.d. GRADIS INŽENIRING d.d.;NIVO, gradnje in ekologija d.d.; SCT d.d.;PRIMORJE d.d. IBE d.o.o.;EKOWATT d.o.o.; HIDRO ELEKTRO BOHINJ d.o.o; ANDINO HYDROPOWER ENGINEERGING d.o.o. ANDINO HYDROPOWER ENGINEERGING d.o.o. LITOSTROJ E.I; TURBOINSTITUT d.o.o.

Page 198 of 258

Table 25-9 Market for SHP industry

Equipment/construction/consulting

Europe (excluding the EU)

Outside Europe

Turbines Other mechanical equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Consulting services

X X

25.6.3

Technological Advancements

Only electrical, control and monitoring equipment of new generation (computers, radio and telephone connection etc.) have been widely implemented during the last 10-15 years

25.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Slovenia is the country where resistances to SHP resulting from environmental requirements and intrusion of power plants into nature are considered as significant (Table 25-10 and Table 25-11). Table 25-10 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 3 3 5 1

Table 25-11 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden rivers for Environmental Impact Residual flow (RF) hydropower Assessment (EIA) construction* The rivers are categorized in An EIA must be carried out for For the moment there is no officially 4 categories. 1st and 1-2nd are reservoir plants where the approved reserved flow (RF) setting regarded as preserved (nonreservoir volume exceeds methodology. RF is set as a fraction of the regulated or used for any 10,000 m3, or for run-of-river average low flow (around 0.95). Currently economic activity) and are schemes larger than 500 kW. this methodology is under revision. If it not intended for power approved, the losses in SHP electricity production. In addition there production could reach up to 20%. are preserved territories under NATURA 2000. These forbidden rivers considerably affect SHP economical potential to be exploited. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

Page 199 of 258

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 25-12 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Slovenia which can be described as a positive, with the exception of position of the official environmental bodies and politicians. Table 25-12 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

25.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive 3 3 4 2 4

Barriers for SHP Development

SHP has experienced fast growth from 1985-1991 and even faster in years 1992-1994, due to government financial programme, by which the state offered to investors financial credits with (at that time) low interest rates. Without good inspectorate service, allowing innovators cheap approach to the investments, taking into accost also much lower environmental demands at the time, SHP hit the wall of public disagreements, started by several journalists and biologists. In the past 10 years SHP has suffered from poor public support and very arbitrary approach from state officials. It became clear that even the Minister is not immune to public opinion. The biggest flaw was when officials did not respond to applications for concessions or responded that the area is intended for preservation (not yet protected) and thus not possible for power production. In that way almost all of potential investors lost hope in their SHP. In the last few years the biggest obstacle represents local spatial plans in which SHPs have to be included in order to be able to apply for concession. Local authorities are not against SHP, but they have to give the proposal of spatial plan to the Ministry of the Environment, Spatial Planning and Energy (MOPE) for approval. It has been seen on few occasions that MOPE demanded exclusion of SHP from spatial plan in order to confirm it. A major problem lies in fact that these procedures are very hard to overcome and that technical (or legislative) aspects of MOPE's decisions are not transparent.

Page 200 of 258

Candidate Countries

Page 201 of 258

26 Croatia

Area: 56 538 km2 Population: 4.4 million

26.1

Geography and Water Resources

The Republic of Croatia is a southern Central European country. Croatia have a Mediterranean climate while most inland areas experience short, cool summers and long, severe winters characteristic of continental climate. The local terrain is quite diverse given the size of the country. There are flat plains along the Hungarian border, low mountains and highlands near the Adriatic coastline and islands. The annual average precipitation in Croatia is 975 mm, with values ranging from 650 mm in eastern Slavonia to 3800 mm in the area of Gorski Kotar. The total average precipitation volume is 55 km3 of which 27 km3 is runoff. Croatiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s territory belongs to the Danube river basin (62 %), with a minor part in the Adriatic river basins (38 %). The number of small to medium watercourses (with catchment areas less than 10000 km2 and length within the country between 19 km and 143 km) amounts to some 26. Registry of SHP plants comprises 130 watercourses in Croatia. Some 67 SHP plants (P<5 MW) can be installed on these water streams. There are few locations where SHP plants with installed power of 5 to 10 MW may be constructed.

26.2

Current Energy Sector

Croatia has proven oil and natural gas reserves and minimal coal reserves. Because of its limited energy resources, Croatia is heavily dependent on imported fossil fuel. The electricity sector is run by the state-owned company Hrvatska Elektro privreda (HEP) which has absolute monopoly. Hydropower generates about 95% of the power within Croatia. In July of 2001 laws were passed to pave the way for energy sector liberalisation. The sources of national electricity production in 2007 were: hydro (36.3%) and conventional thermal (67.3%). About 35.2% of generation was from imported fuels. Per capita electricity consumption represents 4186 kW/year. During the next 10 years electricity demand is expected to increase by 3% per year.

Page 202 of 258

26.3

Renewable Energy Sources

26.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

The principal objectives of the Republic of Croatia energy policy are stated in the Energy Sector Development Strategy which was adopted by the Croatian Parliament in March 2002 for 10 years. One of the strategic objectives is striving to increase utilisation of renewable energy. Relevant legislation in Croatia is: the Energy Sector Development Strategy (1991, 2002), Programme of Implementation of the Energy Sector Development Strategy â&#x20AC;&#x201C; PROHES (1994), the National Energy Programmes designated for hydropower, wind and other RES, Law on Energy (2001), Law on Electricity Market (2001), Law on Regulation of Energy Activities (2001). Specific legislation dealing with SHP sector is: Law on Water (1992), Act on water protection (1991-1994).

26.3.2

RES Targets

â&#x20AC;˘ RES-E: 4.5% by 2010 According to the National energy programme called MAHE (2007), which defines current situation and future activities, the potential for small hydro power is 177 MW. The National wind energy programme (1997) set a target of 400 MW wind energy by 2030.

26.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

The present RES-E is exclusively based on hydro power (Figure 26-1). Electricity generation GWh/year

8000

Others Wind

6000

SHP Large hydro

4000

2000

0 2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 26-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

The share of generated electricity of small and large hydropower over 2000 to 2006 years ranged between 1.7 and 98.2% respectively (Table 26-1).

Page 203 of 258

Table 26-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

GWh/ Year

124

107

120

1.4

1.8

1.5

1.8

1.7

1.6

n/a

1750

1737

1749

1758

1771

n/a

6456

5269

4802

6832

6225

5900

n/a

98.6

98.2

98.5

98.1

98.2

n/a

1788

1775

1783

1790

1804

n/a

6961

6347

6011

n/a

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 6547 5365 4876 Year Source: Eurostat and SHERPA expert estimates for 2010

RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix is significant â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 53.2% (average 2004-2006 period). Small hydro contributes 0.9 % of the total electricity generation in Croatia.

26.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

26.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Croatia are shown in Table 26-2. There have not been SHP developments for the past years. A slight growth of SHP power generation is likely in the future. Table 26-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Total number n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a of SHP Capacity 38 38 34 32 33 MW Generation 91 96 72 124 107 GWh Source: Eurostat and SHERPA expert estimates of forecast

2006

Forecast 2010 2015

2020

120

140

180

Some 25% of all SHP plants are recently constructed (less than 20 years old) and some 40% of them are older than 60 years. The percentage of privately owned SHP generating capacity (MW) in Croatia is about 10 %. Low head schemes (up to 5 m) are most common (62%) followed by medium head (5-15 m) power plants 25% and high head (more than 15m) -13%. Page 204 of 258

26.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Croatia is 1 180 GWh/year. The technically and economically feasible potential is 568 and 475 GWh/year, respectively. Nearly a quarter of the economically feasible potential is developed so far. Table 26-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 1180 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 568 48 B Economically feasible 475 40 C Economically feasible potential taking 435 37 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 28* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW n/a 177 130 123

26.5

SHP General Policy Framework

26.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Exploitation of small scale hydropower resources is the subject of governmental regulations and administrative procedures. Table 26-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession There is no one–stop shop for SHP Annual concession fee = <5 MW developers. Ministry for urban planning, 1% of produced energy + Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and 2% of average price of Water management, Local administrative public terrain used. centres, Water Management Directorate Concession fee (paid only are responsible for granting planning once) = “more than” five permits. times of one year concession fee Water use right = 7.5% of produced kWh .

Fees for the use of water According to the Government Decision (No 190 of May 13,1991), there are no charges imposed on water use for small hydropower.

Page 205 of 258

Table 26-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans Projects are First of all a SHP plant must be included in local Connection to the grid is regulated by the act running to development plans (1 year), Location permit “Zakon o regulaciji energetskih djelatnosti“; NN collect data (Ministry of Environmental Protection, Physical 177/2004. about hydro Planning and Construction), land owner - annual fee : 0.06% of total energy production potential. approval must be obtained. - only once: 4000 € + 15 €/MW National License lasts 30 years. This costs are considered as reasonable. The program called rules of grid access are transparent and nonMAHE is discriminatory. The cost for use of the grid - 2.8 finished €/MWh (0.0028 €/kWh). (current situation and future activities plan) Table 26-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E

In 2007 the Croatian government introduced new feedin tariffs (Law 33/07). Exact prices for current and next years are possible to be established with use of predefined formulae.

26.5.2

For SHP: ~70 €/MWh. For wind energy tariff is higher. The prices are high enough to attract private investment and they secure investors confidence.

Impact of EU Directives

It is too early to judge the impact of EU directives.

26.6

SHP Sector Development

26.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between €1300 and €2500 depending on the size of the plant and the head it uses. The average production cost is about 1.5 €cent/kWh (Table 26-7). Table 26-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW) ≤100 kW Low Head (≤5m) Medium Head (5m-15m) High Head (≥15m)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW

2500

2000-2500

2000

n/a

<2000

1500

1300

n/a

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh) 101kW – 1MW 1MW - 10MW

1.5

Page 206 of 258

26.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There is only one local turbine manufacture Turboteh Karlovac producing small Kaplan and Francis type turbines for the domestic market. Končar Electrical Industries Inc is a major generator, electrical & control equipment manufacturer (approx turnover M€ 300) having market in the world; mainly the ex Yugoslav countries (B&H, Serbia), Middle East and Latin America.

26.6.3

Technological Advancements

Technological advancements concern mainly advanced monitoring and control systems.

26.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

SHP plants environmental integration is gaining importance in the country. Fish by-pass systems are ever more widely implemented although their effectiveness is often questionable. Water and biodegradable oil are ever more often applied as a lubricant in the turbine guide bearings. The biggest resistances are related to visual impact of SHP plants and environmental legislation (Table 26-8). Table 26-8 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 5 2 2 4 2

There are no rivers exempt from damming in Croatia and residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as acceptable for SHP producers (Table 26-9). Table 26-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* There are no rivers EIA is required for all types of RF flow value is a fraction of long term exempt from hydropower plants. average flow. damming. A few The losses in electricity production with dams have been regard to maintaining RF do not exceed 10%. removed in order to improve ecological status of the water streams. *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Below is an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP Page 207 of 258

development in Croatia, which can be described as a complicated on behalf of general public and politicians (Table 26-10). Table 26-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

26.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 4 2 2 3 5

Barriers for SHP Development

n/a

Page 208 of 258

27 Macedonia

Area: 25 713 km2 Population: 2.2 million

27.1

Geography and Water Resources

The Republic of Macedonia, often referred to as Macedonia, is a landlocked country on the Balkan Peninsula in southeastern Europe. Macedonia is geographically clearly defined by a central valley formed by the Vardar River and framed along its borders by mountain ranges. The terrain is mostly rugged, located between the Ĺ ar Mountains and Osogovo, which frame the valley of the Vardar River. Macedonia has transitional climate from Mediterranean to continental. Average annual precipitation varies from 1700mm in the western mountainous area to 500 mm in the eastern area. The total mean annual runoff is 7.8 km3. There is one big river (Vardar), as well as several smaller ones in addition to numerous small mountain rivers. There are several artificial lakes which are multipurpose but mostly of them are used as an accumulation for existing hydro power plants. Some 25 SHP plants are currently operating in the country (in 2006) and some 100 plants are expected be put in operation before 2015.

27.2

Current Energy Sector

The main sources of electricity production in 2007 were: coal: (80%), oil (1%) and hydro (19%). About 2% of national electricity was produced using imported oil and natural gas. Around 30% of electricity was imported (2007). Per capita electricity consumption is 4000 kWh/year. The estimated rate of increase in electricity demand over the next 10 years is up to 4 %.

27.3

Renewable Energy Sources

27.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Recent amendments to the law on water use in Macedonia have paved the way for investments in small hydro projects across the country. More than 70 SHP plants have been given concessions or are in the tendering stage (out of 400 planned plants), representing about 200 MW. To promote renewable energy sources in a country it is important that there is a support from the government in form of laws, regulations and policies. Below is a list of the most important supporting policies from the Macedonian government in promoting renewable energy sources. Page 209 of 258

• • • • • • •

Law on Energy, 2006. Law on Water, 2007. Law on Concessions, 2007. Law on Expropriation, 2005. Law on Building, 2004. Law on Environment, 2004. Decree of the Energy Regulatory commission (ERC), 2007.

27.3.2

RES Targets

n/a

27.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Hydropower completely dominates in RES-E production in Macedonia. RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix represents some 20%. Small hydro contributes around 2 % of the total electricity generation in Macedonia.

27.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

27.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Macedonia are shown in Table 27-1. There have not been SHP developments for the past years. But an impressive growth of SHP plants is likely in the future. Table 27-1 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

100

120

100

110

122

103

151

147

144

143

240

300

330

2020

More than half of all SHP plants are recently constructed (less than 20 years old) and some 1/3 of them are older than 40 years. About 90% of all generating capacity (MW) is privately owned. Exclusively high head (more than 15 m) SHP plants are in operation.

27.4.2

Potentials

The technically and economically feasible potential is 1 330 and 1 090 GWh/year, respectively (Table 27-2). A very small fraction of economically feasible potential is developed so far (13%).

Page 210 of 258

Table 27-2 Small hydropower potential Capacity Generation Potential (not yet MW GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any n/a n/a n/a constraints) A Technically feasible 1330 n/a 303 B Economically feasible 1090 n/a 258 C Economically feasible potential taking 1090 n/a n/a environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints for 36 12 refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E NB. Technically and economically feasible potential take in to account power plants which capacity is less than 5 MW.

27.5

SHP General Policy Framework

27.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Exploitation of small scale hydropower resources is the subject of governmental regulations and administrative procedure. There is no official document which defines the term â&#x20AC;&#x153;small hydropower plantâ&#x20AC;? in Macedonia. Usually the power plants with less than 5 MW installed capacity were considered as small SPP. But there is tendency to accept 10 MW limit. Table 27-3 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession n/a There is no one-stop shop for the SHPP Annual concession fee for developers. The planning permits are electricity generation granted by the Government of amounts to 2% of the Macedonia. The concessions for the water electricity production. are granted on public competition. State owned or public utilities can be granted concession for the water by direct negotiations and without public competition.

Fees for the use of water Annual concession fee is paid to the Water Fund (1 % of the electricity production)

Page 211 of 258

Table 27-4 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for SHP exploitation local/regional spatial plans SHP Master The best bidder is granted water concession, he signs plan was Concession Agreement and becomes Concessionaire and he produced in obtains Water license (180 days from announcement of 2002 granting) issued by the Ministry of Water. If land property is private then the Concessionaire may apply for expropriation according to the law in force. This procedure can be very lightly (up to 5 years). Permit for construction is needed from the Ministry of Transport and Communications. Formal approval for use of preferential tariff, power purchase agreement, energy generation license and connection to the grid are needed. An upfront concession fee to be paid within 30 days after the Water Concession Agreement is signed. If the Concessionaire does not start erection of the Plant within a year period this fee is not refunded License lasts 10 years and can be renewed.

Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the grid The costs for the connection to the grid consist of building the lines up to the connection point, and all the administrative costs associated. SHP operators are given access to the grid at reasonable prices and the rules of grid access are transparent and nondiscriminatory.

Feed-in tariff system is applied in Macedonia (Table 27-5). The prices are guaranteed for 20 years and they are high enough to attract private investment and secure investors confidence. Table 27-5 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed-in tariff

27.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E For SHP tariff level depends on power production and ranges between 45 (>8.4 GWh/year) to 12 €/MWh (<1.02 GWh/year). For other RES-E tariffs are likely to be introduced in 2007.

Impact of EU Directives

It is too early to judge the impact of EU directives

27.6

SHP Sector Development

27.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between €1200 and €3000 depending on the size of the plant and the head it uses.

27.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There is no turbine manufacturing industry in the country.

27.6.3

Technological Advancements

n/a

Page 212 of 258

27.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Macedonia is the country where the biggest resistances to SHP construction result from water, environmental regulations and competitions with other uses (Table 27-6). Table 27-6 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 1 1 4 4 4

There are no rivers exempt from damming in Macedonia and residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as acceptable for SHP producers (Table 27-7). Table 27-7 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* There is no such a EIA is required if a SHP plant is located RF flow value is a fraction of long term kind of rivers. in national park or other protected area. average flow. The losses in electricity production with regard to maintaining RF do not exceed 10%. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 27-8 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Macedonia, which, in all aspects, can be described as a positive. Table 27-8 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

27.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 3 5 5 4 5

Barriers for SHP Development

Financial barriers. The non existence of credit lines for RES-E, makes their projects less attractive. The commercial credit lines are with interest rate of 8-9%. Regulatory and administrative barriers: Non existence of one-stop-shop complicates and prolongs the procedure of obtaining all the permits and approvals.

Page 213 of 258

Social barriers and acceptance: The understanding and awareness of the costs of renewables are very low. Grid barriers: The recent tender for SHP had shown that clearer grid code is needed. Now it is under preparation and is likely to be published in June 2007.

Page 214 of 258

28 Turkey

Area: 814 578km2 Population: 73 million

28.1

Geography and Water Resources

Turkey is a transcontinental Eurasian country that stretches across the Anatolian peninsula in western Asia and Thrace (Rumelia) in the Balkan region of southeastern Europe. Turkey's varied landscapes are the product of complex earth movements that have shaped the region over thousands of years and still manifest themselves in fairly frequent earthquakes and occasional volcanic eruptions. Anatolian peninsula covers a large area of Turkey, approximately 97% of the total area. It's generally a high plateau covered with several high mountains and mountain ranges especially in the east of the country. The coastal areas of Turkey bordering the Mediterranean Sea have a temperate Mediterranean climate, with hot, dry summers and mild, wet and cold winters. Conditions can be much harsher in the more arid interior. Winters on the plateau are especially severe. Annual precipitation averages about 400 mm, with actual amounts determined by elevation. The total mean annual precipitation volume is 501 km3, of which – 190 km3 is surface runoff. Most of the rivers of Turkey flow into the seas surrounding the country. Some 80 SHP plants are currently operating in the country (in 2006). A huge untapped potential exists for SHP in Turkey. Around 3% of the economically feasible potential has been developed so far.

28.2

Current Energy Sector

Conventional thermal sources comprise the largest share of Turkey’s electricity supply, contributing 70%. Hydroelectricity generation makes up almost all of the remainder. Thermal plants represent 67%, hydro plants 32.8% and geothermal and wind plants 0.2% of the total capacity. Per capita electricity consumption is 1906 kWh/year (in 2006). The estimated rate of increase in electricity demand over the next 10 years is 7 %. Other renewable sources add very little to Turkey’s total electricity supply, contributing only about one tenth of one percent to Turkey’s electricity generation in 2004. However, renewable energy sources are not likely to contribute significantly to Turkey’s energy mix in the near term.

Page 215 of 258

There is no SHP Association, but there is the Association for Hydropower in general.

28.3

Renewable Energy Sources

28.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

28.3.2

RES Targets

Despite favorable statements from the government regarding RES, Turkey has set no targets on the proportions of RES in the energy generation mix. Despite heavy dependence on foreign import of primary fuels for heat as well as power and transportation, a plan to decrease this dependence has not been announced either.

28.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

RES-E production in Turkey is absolutely dominated by large hydropower as can be seen in Figure 28-1. Electricity generation GWh/year

50000 40000

Others Wind SHP

30000

Large hydro

20000 10000 0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Figure 28-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

The share of generated electricity of small hydropower over 2000 to 2006 years varied between 1.1 to 1.7% of the total RES generation, respectively (Table 28-2).

Page 216 of 258

Table 28-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E

Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

Unit

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2010

152

201

158

157

175

185

300

GWh/ Year

344

411

509

469

545

502

1000

1.1

1.7

1.5

1.3

1.2

1.3

1.1

n/a

11023

11472

12083

12422

12470

12731

12878

n/a

30533

23599

33174

34861

45539

39059

43742

n/a

98.4

97.7

98.1

98.4

98.7

98.6

98.7

n/a

11251

11749

12322

12660

12726

12987

13117

n/a

35410

46160

39595

44302

n/a

MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 31043 24143 33812 Year Source: EuroStat and SHERPA expert estimate

RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix is quite significant â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 26.7% (average 2004-2006 period). Small hydro contributes around 0.3 % of the total electricity generation in Turkey.

28.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

28.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Turkey are shown in Table 28-2. SHP has followed a constant upward trend over the reference period and the SHP sector will continue to grow in the future. Table 28-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000

2001

2002

2003

Total number 67 70 71 76 of SHP Capacity 152 201 158 157 MW Generation 344 411 509 469 GWh Source: Eurostat and SHERPA expert estimates.

Forecast 2010 2015

2004

2005

2006

n/a

175

185

250

300

350

545

502

750

900

1050

2020

The bulk of all SHP plants are constructed recently in Turkey, within a period of 20 years. Around 20% of generating capacity of SHP plants is in private hands.

Page 217 of 258

There is no low head (up to 5 m) SHP plants in the country. High head SHP plants (more than 15 m are mostly exploited in Turkey (some 95%).

28.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Turkey is 50 000 GWh/year (Table 28-3. The technically and economically feasible potential is very impressive 30 000 and 20 000 GWh/year, respectively. Only a small fraction (some 3%) of the economically feasible potential is developed so far. Table 28-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential 50000 for SHP without any constraints) A B C

Capacity MW 100 16500

Technically feasible Economically feasible Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints into account

30000 20000 19520

60 40 39

10000 65000 6485

Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants

350

28.5

SHP General Policy Framework

28.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

There is no official document which defines the term “small hydropower plant” in Turkey. Usually the power plants with less than 50 MW installed capacity were considered as small SPP. Table 28-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession Licences are valid for 20Licensing is granted through Electricity <50 MW 40 years, renewal is Market Regulatory Authority, Water possible. Rights are obtained through State DSĐ gives “Water Usage Hydraulic Works (DSI). Agreement” and EMRA gives license

Fees for the use of water There are fees up to 5% of investment cost. If an investor develops itself the project the fees can be much smaller

Page 218 of 258

Table 28-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans There is no When DSI gets application, Producer must obtain permission from TEDAS any master after 1 month it asks proponent to prepare (Turkish Electricity Distribution Company) The feasibility study. It takes 3-6 months. If DSĐ cost for the connection to the grid depend on the plan. approves this study, than EMRA provides capacity and varies between €12 and €270 (up to There is no intention to license. For this EIA and technical conditions of 15 and >400 kWA, respectively). develop local connection to the grid must be met. Before SHP operators are not given access to the grid at spatial plans to “Water Usage Agreement” with DSĐ.must be reasonable prices and the rules of grid access are obtained. All procedure takes around 2 years. guide the not transparent. development of SHP project in suitable areas

A feed-in tariff system is in place for Turkey (Table 28-6). The price of selling electricity is relatively low (5.5€cents/kWh) but it attracts private investment and secure investors confidence. The tariff in force is valid before 31.12.2011. Table 28-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed-in tariff (current buy-back rate is valid up to 2011)

28.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E For SHP: 55 €/MWh. The same tariff is used for other RESE

Impact of EU Directives

It is too early to judge the impact of EU directives

28.6

SHP Sector Development

28.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between €500 and €1100 and can be characterized as very low. The production cost is also very low -0.2 €cents/kWh.

28.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There are a few turbine manufacturers (for example Temsan producing turbines under Neyrpic license), manufacturers of mechanical equipment (Ciltug Machinery, Rona Machinery. Isik Machinery), plenty of electrical, control equipment, engineering consultancy companies, civil works contractors. Domestic producers of electrical equipment have market in the Europe, Middle East (Iraq, Jordan), former Soviet Union and other countries.

Page 219 of 258

28.6.3

Technological Advancements

n/a

28.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Turkey is the country where there are no resistances to SHP development, see Table 28-7. Table 28-7 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 1 1 1 1 3

There are no rivers exempt from damming in Turley and residual flow values established by environmental authorities can be considered as acceptable for SHP producers (Table 28-8). Table 28-8 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* There are no rivers EIA must be carried out for hydropower Reserved flow is set depending on flow forbidden for projects larger than 10 MW. Between 10 duration curve and hydro-biological damming. MW and 50 MW a preliminary IEA is parameters. The losses in SHP electricity required. Full EIAs are required for production resulting from maintaining CF storage facilities having reservoir surface could be estimated between 5 and 10% more than 15 km2 and reservoir volumes of more than 100 x 106 m3. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 28-9 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Turkey, which can be described as a quite positive. Table 28-9 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

28.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 3 4 5 4 5

Barriers for SHP Development

n/a Page 220 of 258

Associated Countries

Page 221 of 258

29 Bosnia and Herzegovina

Area: 51 129km2 Population: 3.9 million

29.1

Geography and Water Resources

The Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, often referred to as Bosnia and Herzegovina, is a country on the Balkan peninsula of Southern Europe. Bosnia and Herzegovina is almost landlocked, except for 26 km of the Adriatic Sea coastline. The interior of the country is mountainous in the center and south, hilly in the northwest, and flat in the northeast. It is the largest geographic region with moderate continental climate, marked by hot summers and cold, snowy winters There are seven major rivers in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Its principal rivers include the Bosna, the Sava, which flows along the northern frontier, and the Sava’s tributaries, the Una, Drina, and Vrbas. These rivers all flow north; only a few other rivers, notably the Neretva, flow toward the Adriatic Sea. The total mean annual runoff is 38 km3. Some 20 SHP plants are currently operating in the country (in 2008), 50 are under construction and 200 concessions are likely to be awarded in the coming years.

29.2

Current Energy Sector

The main sources of electricity production in 2005 were: thermal: (50%) and hydro (50%). There is an Association for production of electricity from RES, representing also SHP interests (Asocijacija proizvoñača električne energije iz obnovljivih resursa BiH (APEOR).

29.3

Renewable Energy Sources

29.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

Law on Concessions, 2002. Decision on methodology for establishment of the purchase price levels for electricity generated from renewable sources with installed capacity of up to 5 MW, 2002.

29.3.2

RES Targets

n/a

29.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Hydropower completely dominates in RES-E production in Bosnia and Herzegovina. RES-E share in the total gross electricity generation mix represents some 50%. Small hydro contributes around 1% of the total electricity generation in the country.

29.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

29.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Bosnia and Herzegovina are shown in Table 29-1. There were almost no SHP developments up to 2003. But an impressive growth of SHP plants is likely in the future. Table 29-1 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

110

175

150

220

380

119

125

500

1100

1900

2020

An absolute majority of SHP plants are recently constructed (less than 20 years old). About 50% of all generating capacity (MW) is privately owned. (2006). High head (more than 15 m) SHP plants are dominating in the country (90%).

29.4.2

Potentials

The gross theoretical small hydropower potential of Bosnia and Herzegovina is 3 500 GWh/year (Table 29-2). The technically and economically feasible potential is 2 550 and 1 330 GWh/year, respectively. A very small fraction of the economically feasible potential has been developed so far (8.9%).

Page 223 of 258

Table 29-2 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any 3500 100 constraints) A Technically feasible 2550 73 B Economically feasible 1330 38 C Economically feasible potential taking 1330 38 environmental constraints into account D Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints 30* for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants E *estimates made by this study

Capacity MW 1100 825 425 425

29.5

SHP General Policy Framework

29.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Small-scale hydro plants are defined as those of less than 5 MW capacities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Table 29-3 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession <5 MW Good legal conditions prevail in the There are two ways to get country. concession: tendering or Concessions are granted by cantons (in self initiative offer. Time Federation BiH) and in Republika Srpska for concession obtaining on governmental level. vary from 1 to 3 months.

Fees for the use of water There are fees for the use of water.

Table 29-4 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the Process to get a new license for SHP regional or grid local/regional exploitation spatial plans SHP Master License lasts 10 to 20 years and can be renewed. Connections costs are to be covered by SHP plan is producer. SHP operators are given access to the available. grid at reasonable prices and the rules of grid access are transparent and non-discriminatory.

Feed-in tariff system is applied in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Table 29-5). The prices are relatively low.

Page 224 of 258

Table 29-5 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism Feed-in tariff

29.5.2

SHP tariff system and its comparison with other RES-E For SHP: 40.6 (BiH) and 29 €/MWh ( Republika Srpska). They are likely to increase in the near future. For wind and geothermal energy the tariffs are a bit higher (~20%).

Impact of EU Directives

It is too early to make such a judgment

29.6

SHP Sector Development

29.6.1

Economic Issues

The investment costs for a new plant ranges between €1300 and €1600 depending on the size of the plant and the head it uses.

29.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There is only one turbine manufacturer (Conel Company, Tuzla) producing Pelton and Francis turbine for local market. Manufacturers of mechanical equipment are also acting in the market (Metalno, Zenica; Rudstrij, Kakanj; Hidrooprema, Sarajevo).

29.6.3

Technological Advancements

n/a

29.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Bosnia and Herzegovina is the country where resistances to SHP construction and environmental requirements are moderate (Table 29-6 and Table 29-7). Table 29-6 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 3 1 2 3

Page 225 of 258

Table 29-7 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden rivers for Environmental Impact Residual flow (RF) hydropower Assessment (EIA) construction* Canyons, waterfalls EIA is required for all hydropower RF flow value is a fraction of long term having a high attraction plants. average flow. of tourists are excluded from the use of hydropower. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

Table 29-8 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which, in all aspects, can be described as a positive. Table 29-8 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

29.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 3 4 4 4 5

Barriers for SHP Development

n/a

Page 226 of 258

30 Montenegro

Area: 13 812 km2 Population: 0.678million

30.1

Geography and Water Resources

The Republic of Montenegro, often referred to as Montenegro, is a country located in Southeastern Europe. Montenegro ranges from high peaks along its borders with Serbia and Albania, a segment of the Karst of the western Balkan Peninsula, to a narrow coastal plain. The mountains of Montenegro include some of the most rugged terrain in Europe. They average more than 2000 m in elevation and they receive some of the highest amounts of rainfall in Europe (up to 5100mm). The rivers are swift with large drops in elevation and large volumes of water resulting from the high precipitation. Montenegroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s surface runoff in the north is carried away by the Lim and Tara river systems, which enter the Danube via the Drina River. In southern Montenegro, streams flow toward the Adriatic. Much of the drainage of the karstic region is not on the surface but travels in underground channels. Montenegroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lower areas have a Mediterranean climate, with dry summers and mild, rainy winters. Temperature varies greatly with elevation. Because of a great quantity of rainfalls and their influences on the mainly limestone field, a number of very deep canyons of mountain streams and rivers, have been created, making very good conditions for building of different kinds of hydro power plants. Those very favorable natural (geographical, meteorological and climate) advantages make Montenegro very reach with available hydro potential.

30.2

Current Energy Sector

The country has abundant hydroelectric potential. Hydropower provides nearly 50% of the total electricity production in the country. Thermal power plants account for the remaining â&#x20AC;&#x201C; some 50%. Electricity dominates energy balance in Montenegro. Despite this 1/3 of its total electricity demand is imported. From the other side, in Montenegro for more that 20 years constantly is present a great deficit in electricity, as well as much faster growing of needs for electricity than growth of electricity generation. It is calculated that SHP generation can reach the share in the national electric power balance of approximately 2.5 % in 2015.

Page 227 of 258

30.3

Renewable Energy Sources

30.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Montenegro is a country in transition which passes to the market relations. Power industry is in the phase of restructuring and deregulation and privatization is under way. Therefore SHP and overall RES-E political framework currently is experiencing deep changes.

30.3.2

RES Targets

n/a

30.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Hydropower completely dominates RES-E production in Montenegro. Small hydro contribution accounts for around 0.7% of the total electricity generation in the country.

30.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

30.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

The main statistics regarding SHP number, installed capacity, SHP electricity generation during past few years in Montenegro are shown in Table 30-1. There have not been SHP developments for the past years. A slight growth of SHP plants is likely in the future. Table 30-1 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast

Total number Of SHP Capacity MW Generation GWh Source

Forecast 2010 2015

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

2020

Nearly a half of all SHP plants are recently constructed (less than 40 years old). The remaining plants can be considered as old ones. There is no low head (<5m) SHP plants. High head (more than 15 m) SHP plants are dominant in the country (5 power plants). All SHP plants are state owned. :

30.4.2

Potentials

Overall technical hydropower potential of the small hydro power plants (small HPPs) in the Republic of Montenegro (without the rivers of the Tara, the Cehotina and the Ibar) is calculated to approximately 800 -1000 GWh/year. According to studies the potential is assessed within the range of 231 MW and 644 GWh/year, in 70 locations.

Page 228 of 258

30.5

SHP General Policy Framework

30.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

SHP plants are these which installed capacity do not exceed 10 MW. Existing legislative framework related to preparation and construction of SHPs is composed of the regulations from the field of energy, urban planning and civil engineering, proprietary legal issues, water management, private investments into public sector, environmental protection and protection for the rights of business organizations. Norms contained in the mentioned regulations, with certain legislator's interventions, provide for realistic grounds to implement the projects for SHPs construction. Process for implementation of prescribed procedures is divided into 5 stages. Key actors participating in the process itself are: Government of the Republic of Montenegro, Ministry of Economy, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management, Directorate for Waters, Hydro-meteorogical Institution of Montenegro, Regulatory Energy Agency, Ministry of Environmental Protection and Urban Planning, Electric Power Company of Montenegro (EPCG) Nikšić (network operator, supplier) and authorized bodies from local governments. Feed-in tariff system is likely to be introduced. Tariffs are to be established by Regulatory agency and EPCG by 2007. For the assumed reference purchase price in the market of 3€cent/kWh, incremental costs amount to 4.6 €cent/kWh (i.e. the incentive providing minimum internal rate of return (IRR) of 8%). Price of generation of 7.6 €cent/kWh is calculated as the average price (fixed) for twenty year period (technoeconomic lifetime of the project).

30.5.2

Impact of EU Directives

It is too early to make such a judgment.

30.6

SHP Sector Development

30.6.1

Economic Issues

n/a

30.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

There is no turbine manufacturing industry in the country.

30.6.3

Technological Advancements

n/a

Page 229 of 258

30.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Montenegro is the country where the biggest resistances to SHP construction result from environmental regulations and competitions with other uses (Table 30-2). Table 30-2 Resistances to SHP development Impact Visual impact Fishery Water regulation Environmental legislation Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.)

Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) 2 2 3 4 4

The social integration of SHP is also of importance for the development of this sector. Table 30-3 gives an overview of the different interested parties and their outlook on SHP development in Montenegro, which, in all aspects, can be described as a positive. Table 30-3 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

30.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5=very positive) 4 4 3 4 4

Barriers for SHP Development

At the moment there are many such barriers: political, legal and administrative, organizational, financial and professional technical.

Page 230 of 258

31 Norway

Area: 324,220 km2 Population: 4.6 million Before the last ice age ended about 10,000 years ago, Norway was covered by a thick ice sheet. When that ice finally retreated (or melted) its movement across the land formed islands, lakes, rivers and mountains. It also etched-out deep valleys that then filled with seawater forming Norway's fjords. Norway is one of Europe's most mountainous countries, and dominated north to south by the many ranges of the Scandinavian Mountains. It's a rugged land of elevated plateaus, deep-forested valleys and a few remaining ice age glaciers, including Folgefonna, Hardangerjokulen and Jostedalsbreen the largest glacier on the continental Europe landmass. Its toothy-edged western coastline is a jagged expanse of (over 50,000) islands and dozens of long, deeply indented fjords; the most significant of which include Boknafjord, Geirangerfjord, Hardangerfjord, Moldefjord, Sognefjord, Trondheimsfjord and Vestfjord. In the far northeast above the Arctic Circle, frozen arctic tundra dominates the landscape, from Vardo, south and west. This tundra receives little precipitation and has a very short growing season, so it is generally a treeless plain of low shrubs and hearty grasses. A south central plateau slopes into the Trøndelag, a hilly and mountainous farming area with strips of fertile land on the edges of the Trondheimsfjord. Additional lowlands are found in the southeast, and along parts of the southern coastline. There are reportedly over 150,000 (counted) lakes, most quite small, with the largest being Lake Mjøsa. Significant rivers include the Glaamma, the country's longest, and the Drammenselva, Laagen (two of them) and the Tana in the far north.

31.1

Geography and Water Resources

The largest normal annual precipitation occurs in the area from the Hardanger fjord to the Møre area. These amounts are also among the highest in Europe. Brekke in Sogn og Fjordane county has an annual precipitation of 3575mm, and several other stations in this area follow close behind. However, based on measurements of annual run-off, some glaciers must have an annual precipitation of about 5000mm. Brekke has also the record for one year precipitation, with 5596mm in 1990. Øygarden (Oppland) has the lowest annual normal precipitation with 278mm. This is lower than the normal monthly precipitation for the 6 wettest months of Brekke. Other noteworthy dry places are Dividalen (Troms) 282mm, Kautokeino (Finnmark) 360mm

Page 231 of 258

and Folldal (Hedmark) 364mm. However, the lowest recorded precipitation for one year is only 118 mm, measured at Saltdal (Nordland) in 1996.

31.2

Current Energy Sector

Norway generated 121 TWh in 2006 and had the same year a net consumption of 111 TWh. Almost all the electricity generation is from hydropower (about 99 % for a normal year). The last 1 % is from CHP and a minor part from other RES-E. The interest of SHP is taken care of by the Norwegian Small Hydropower Association (SmĂĽkraftverkenes Forening).

31.3

Renewable Energy Sources

31.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

SHP up to 3 MW and upgrading of existing hydropower was proposed to be included in a support scheme for renewable electricity production, but in the overall aim there is no specific target for SHP. This scheme is at the moment postponed and the Governments of Sweden and Norway are in dialog about a common market for green certificates from renewable energy.

31.3.2 â&#x20AC;˘

RES Targets

RES-E: 90 % by 2010. Also see below.

Norwegian authorities have set a target of 30 TWh of new electricity production by 2016 over the 2001 level.

31.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 31-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: EuroStat

Page 232 of 258

Table 31-1Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

945

973

1006

1049

1113

1164

1276

GWh/ Year

4551

3944

4656

3393

4709

5880

5800

26624

26723

27097

27375

27404

134364

116473

124593

102219

104154

129915

115299

27321

27354

27494

27928

28254

28393

120757

129608

106228

109536

136680

122218

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ Year Source: EuroStat

139119

31.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

31.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

Table 31-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000 Total number n/a. of SHP Capacity 891 MW Generation 4551 GWh *Forecast from NVE

Forecast 2010* 2015

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

n/a

891

895

960

999

992

1260

1700

n/a

3944

4656

3393

4709

5880

5800

8000

n/a

2020

Page 233 of 258

31.4.2

Potentials

Table 31-3 Small hydropower potential

A B C

Potential (not yet developed) Gross theoretical (potential for SHP without any constraints) Technically feasible Economically feasible Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints into account Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants

Generation GWh/year

Capacity MW %

n/a

n/a 28900

n/a n/a

19000**

n/a

4750

1000**

n/a

250

E * Assuming the upper level for investment cost is 5 NOK/kWh. ** Not official figures. Assumed by this study

31.5

SHP General Policy Framework

31.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Table 31-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures SHP definition

Legal conditions for SHP

Micro: up to 0.1 MW Mini: 0.1-1.0 MW Small: 1.0-10.0 MW

NVE makes proposals for rules of operation, which may differ, from the applicantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; proposals. Regulated water levels in the reservoirs have to be stated. Variation on the quantity of bypass water, minimum water flow at any place in the river system in question may be stated if necessary. The rules of operation also include rules for flood operation. The main principle is, if possible, the natural flood discharges and increased flood water levels must not increase. Changes in operation, water levels and water flows must be logged for documentation and control by the authorities.

Licence for water use, power production /concession The State Company and companies owned by municipalities and counties receive their licenses for an unlimited period of time. Private companies (more than 1/3 of the shares) receive their license for maximum 60 years with reversion to the state at the end of the period. The entire power station, dams etc. must be delivered to the state in a proper condition without compensation. The conditions can be revised 30 to 50 years after the license has been granted.

Fees for the use of water No fees.

The rules of operation can also be revised 30 to 50 years after the license is granted.

Page 234 of 258

Table 31-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, Process to get a new license for SHP Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the regional or local/regional exploitation grid spatial plans Not available The competent authority shall decide whether or The network companies have to provide market not EIAs shall be required for projects. access with non-discriminatory and objective Concerned authorities are involved if necessary. tariffs and conditions. When connecting a producer to the existing Public consultations and meeting is performed. overlying network, the network company can The procedures may be rather complex, however require that the producer himself builds, projects with less average energy production maintains and covers all costs related to the necessary customer specific installations. To this than 30-40 GWh/year, may have less complex procedures without notification. adds possible investments by need for increased capacity in the network company's network. The For smaller projects without notification time for network company's rights to charge parts of the licensing process takes from one year to five these costs to the producer are regulated by the years, with two/three years on average. regulations concerning investment contribution. Input tariffs are what the power producer must pay to feed in power in a network point. Table 31-6 Support mechanisms Support Mechanism There are no support systems for the moment for SHP in Norway.

31.5.2

Structure of Selling Electricity n/a

Impact of EU Directives

Water Frameworks Directive (2000/60/EC) Constructions of new plants are not prevented by the Water Framework Directive. All new licenses and new or changed restrictions on existing plants are dealt with through the water regulation laws. The main impacts will be new or higher environmental flows and stricter regulations on the use of reservoirs. 2001/77/EC The directive has been introduced from 2001 as part of the EEA Agreement. Norway has a goal of 90 % renewable electricity by 2010. Also a special regulation on the origin guarantees (Guarantees of origin) came into effect in 2007. Energy Package 2020 With increased aims of renewable energy the Energy Package might have a positive influence on SHP. But with a possible surplus of energy the market price may be lower and less profitable to construct new schemes. With an extra value for renewable energy the total price may still be profitable. The proposed restrictions on use of guarantees of origin from existing power plants may become a downside for Norwegian SHP.

Page 235 of 258

31.6

SHP Sector Development

31.6.1

Economic Issues

Table 31-7 Investment and power production costs Estimated range of investment costs for new plants (€/kW)

Average cost of producing a unit of power generated by SHP scheme (€cents/kWh)

101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW 101kW - 1MW 1MW - 10MW ≤100 kW High Head n/a 1100 n/a 0.023 (≥15m) The average cost includes also some HP with capacity < 1 MW and is based on applied projects. In Norway there are very few SHP with head less than 15m. Production cost is based on 40 years economical lifetime and interest rate of 6.5 %.

31.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

For more information regarding manufacturing industry see http://kraftverk.net/bransje.php.

31.6.3

Technological Advancements

n/a

31.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Table 31-8 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 4 (if affected waterfall is included) 2 (if not) Fishery 2 Water regulation 3 Environmental legislation 4 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 2 Other kinds of resistance* 1 * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Table 31-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* Yes Is made by the applicant and approved The rules of operation also include rules for by competent authority. residual flows. *Except conventional protected areas – strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

Page 236 of 258

Table 31-10 Position of interested parties towards SHP development Interested parties Green movement, ecologists, local NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s General public Politicians (e.g. members of parliament) Official environmental bodies Official RES promotion institutions

31.6.5

Degree of gravity (1= very negative, 5= very positive) 4 2 1 (if < 1 MW) 3 (if < 10 MW) 3 1

Barriers for SHP Development

n/a

Page 237 of 258

32 Switzerland

Area: 41 284 km2 Population: 7.3 million

32.1

Geography and Water Resources

Three natural topographical regions divide Switzerland; the Jura Mountains in the northwest, rising between Switzerland and eastern France; the Alps in the south, covering three-fifths of the country's total area; and the central Swiss plateau, or Mittelland, consisting of fertile plains and rolling hills that run between the Jura and the Alps. The Mittelland has an average altitude of 580m and covers about 30% of Switzerland and is the heartland of Swiss farming and industry. The lowest point in Switzerland is the shore of Lake Maggiore at less than 195 m. The highest point is the Dufourspitze of Monte Rosa at 4634m. Switzerland has 1 484 lakes, about 12 900 smaller bodies of water, and many waterfalls. Lake Geneva (Léman), with an area of 581km2, is considered the largest lake in Switzerland although its southern shore is in France. Lake Neuchâtel is the largest lake within Switzerland’s borders with an area of 218km2. Switzerland also contains more than 1000 glaciers. The largest area of permanent ice is in the Valais. The central region of the Alps, around the St. Gotthard Pass, is a major watershed giving source to the Rhine, which drains into the North Sea; to the Aare, a tributary of the Rhine; to the Rhône, which flows into the Mediterranean; to the Ticino, a tributary of the Po; and to the Inn, a tributary of the Danube, which flow into the Adriatic and the Black seas. The climate varies with altitude, wind exposure, and other factors. Average precipitation ranges between 530mm in the Rhône Valley to 1700mm in Lugano. The mean annual precipitation volume is 60.1km3, with 53.5km3 being runoff. This is excluding water inflow from neighbouring countries which gives an additional 40.4km3. The total capacity of all reservoirs is 3.4km3. Switzerland’s water resources are taken care of by the Swiss Federal Office of Energy.

Page 238 of 258

32.2

Current Energy Sector

The electricity production in 2007 was 62 TWh. Per capita consumption was 7.600kWh/year. The energy sources used to produce electricity is mostly hydropower with almost 56% and 43% being nuclear power. There is very little other RES contributing to the electricity mix. Almost 6TWh electricity had to be imported in 2006 to match demand. Imported electricity comes mostly from France and Germany. Switzerland also exports electricity to Italy with 26 TWh/year which is almost the total amount of nuclear power that is generated in Switzerland in one year.

32.3

Renewable Energy Sources

32.3.1

RES-E Supporting Policies

Bundesgesetz 端ber die Stromversorgung (energy Supply Law - completely new) (Stromversorgungsgesetz, StromVG), 23. March 2007, and revised Energy Law States in article 7a that grid owners have to accept all electricity production from renewable energy sources, for Hydro Power up to 10MW (average gross power) in their grid area - at feed-in tariffs KEV (see below). Kostendeckende Einspeiseverg端tung (KEV), 1. January 2009 States different Cost Covering Feed-in tariffs for each renewable energy source. Eligible are new power plants and refurbished power plants (50 % investment of an equivalent typical new plant or 30 % increase of energy production)..

32.3.2

RES Targets

The energy law states amongst other things that the mean production of electricity from renewable energy sources will increase by at least 5400GWh until 2030 in comparison to year 2000. This includes a minimum increase of 2000GWh for the total production of hydropower in that same time span, including the compensation of production losses of 1000GWh due to increased residual flow (reserved flow) according to the River Protection Law. The main tool for promotion are the "KEV" (see above), but also voluntary efforts are necessary by consumers (purchase of green power) and utilities (refurbishing HPP larger than 10 MW). If success is not achieved, the government can prescribe quotes for renewable energy.

Page 239 of 258

32.3.3

SHP Status within RES-E Generation Mix

Figure 32-1 Development of Renewable electricity production by source from 2000 to 2006 Source: Swiss Federal Office of Energy Table 32-1 Distribution of small and large hydro compared to total RES-E Unit Small Hydropower (<10MW) % of total RES-E Large HydroPower % of total RES-E Total RES-E

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

747

755

763

771

777

794

GWh/ Year

3290

3310

3330

3350

3372

3439

9.6

9.5

9.4

9.3

9.5

9.4

10678

11145

11612

12079

12547

12538

30227

30610

30993

31376

31759

31744

88.0

87.9

88.0

87.7

87.1

n/a

34809

35275

35690

36109

36182

36441

% MW GWh/ Year % MW

GWh/ 34347 Year Source: EuroStat and Expert

Page 240 of 258

32.4

SHP Current Data and Potentials

32.4.1

Current Status and Forecasts

Table 32-2 Small hydro power (<10 MW) evolution and forecast 2000 Total number n/a of SHP Capacity 1000 MW Generation 4000 GWh Source:Expert

32.4.2

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

1009

n/a

1037

1043

n/a

700

755

763

771

777

794

1300

n/a

1500

3310

3330

3350

3372

3439

5000

n/a

5500

2020

Potentials

Table 32-3 Small hydropower potential Generation Potential (not yet GWh/year % developed) Gross theoretical (potential 9000 for SHP without any constraints) A B C

Forecast 2010 2015

2001

Capacity MW 3000

Technically feasible Economically feasible Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints into account

n/a 6000 2300

n/a 1650 650

Economically feasible potential taking environmental constraints for refurbishing/upgrading of current operating SHP and shut down plants

860*

198*

E *With production cost of <16Rp/kWh Note: four different potential calculations have been done for four different production cost; <10Rp/kWh, <12Rp/kWh, <14Rp/kWh and 16Rp/kWh. The higher the accepted production cost the more potential there is for SHP.

Page 241 of 258

32.5

SHP General Policy Framework

32.5.1

Legal Conditions and Support Policy

Table 32-4 Water/sites rights and administrative procedures Licence for water use, SHP Legal conditions for SHP power production definition /concession 10MW The hydropower plant owner receives In nearly all Cantons the concessions for both water (water right = licence for water use is concession) as well as the power plant applied for at the same (building permit). time as the licence for the hydropower plant Since Switzerland is a federation with 23 (combined respectively Cantons, there are 23 different legal basis one-step procedure). on how long the concessions should be. By Federal Law the concession period is Some few Cantons a maximum of 80 years. But for small however allow a two step hydro the concession can range anywhere procedure: first the between 30 and 80 years. A quite concession (on basis of a common amount of time for concessions pre-feasibility planning), for SHP is 60 years. and later the building permit (on basis of a The exceptions to the rule are those small feasibility planning). hydropower plants that have the so called "ehehafte" Water rights (middle age In cases of important concessions) or concessions where there project changes due to is no limit on the concession period. The objections of government can limit the period of the environmental latter. If a concession is cancelled for any organisations and other reason of public interest; full involved people and reimbursement is due. institutions, the two step procedure is more Another interesting fact is that all projects economic. (not only hydropower) that require deforestation will have to replant for each With a one step procedure surface the same amount in the region, a lot of effort can be according to the Forest Police Law which wasted on the planning of stopped deforestations in 1876, after the hydropower plant that increasing problems of flooding, may have been avoided if landslides and agricultural land losses one had applied for each caused by deforestation and erosion. licence (step) separately.

Fees for the use of water According to the Water Right Law there is a tax to be paid for the use of water to the Canton and/or the Municipality/Community in which the hydropower plant is located. This tax is at the moment 80 CHF/kW (average gross power) or 1 to 1,5rp/kWh. For plants between 1MW and 2MW there is a linear increasing scale towards the maximum that is to be paid. Plants < 1MW do not have to pay this tax. The Parliament is discussing a raise in this tax at the moment.

Page 242 of 258

Table 32-5 SHP planning, process to get new licence, technical specifications SHP master, regional or Process to get a new license for SHP exploitation local/regional spatial plans n/a According to objections, the procedure to receive the licences may take anywhere from nearly 1 year to more than 5 years. In most Cantons the person seeking the licence does the preparations of detailed building design as well as EIA (if necessary) and sends this package to the authority. The authority passes the request on to those governmental offices affected by the proposed hydropower plant. For involved neighbours and eligible national environmental organisations a public view of the project is made. These in turn can make official objections. The authority takes these requests, organises hearings and discussions as well as additional investigations and project adaptation proposals. Finally it may make compromises to the initial proposal. The licence is published, and whoever has submitted an objection can again make his objections. As next step the Cantonal government has to decide. If no solution is found the "objectors" can address there plaint to the Cantonal administration court. If even this does not work the last option is the Federal Court. Table 32-6 Support mechanisms Cost Covering Feed-in Tariffs There are several support mechanisms for SHP development in Switzerland at the moment. From the 1.1.09 the support mechanism will change from the so called 15-Rappen-rule to a Cost Covering Feed-in tariff (KEV), similar to the German solution. Those lucky enough to obtain a licence before the end of this year will be guaranteed 15rp/kWh until the year 2035. If the owner decides to do something positive for the environment beyond what is written in the laws and regulations, the additional Green Value of the power can be sold with or without any green certificate to any consumer. Certificates can be "simple" TĂ&#x153;FF or naturemade ÂŽ certificate (see www.naturemade.ch). for small hydro power, the additional income for Green Power has bee 2 to some 10 Rappen /kWh .

Connection to the grid, cost for the use of the grid The hydropower owners must pay the electricity cables from their plant to the grid. The cost for transforming the electricity to fit the grid voltage must be paid by the hydropower owner. Most power plants below 300 kW feed into the low voltage grid.

Tax Relief This is another effective support for SHP < 2MW. For those plants < 1MW the fee for use of water is not charged. For those plants between 1MW and 2MW the fee is linear up to the maximum of 80CHF/kWh.

Quotes Once these other forms of support are not sufficient anymore a third form of support will also be in place: Quotes. Switzerland will adopt the certificate trade comparable to that already existing in United Kingdom as well as in Italy etc.

With the KEV (in force after 1.1.09) in place the hydropower plant owner will not be allowed to gain anything through additional certificate selling like naturemade star. However, good tariffs be paid to the owner. This payment is between 8.5Rp/kWh and 35Rp/kWh (an online tariff calculator for a given SHP can be found at www.swissgrid.ch). The hydroplant owner must however decide whether or not he wants KEV or wants to sell his electricity on the free (green power) market. He cannot have both. This decision can be made each year.

Page 243 of 258

32.5.2

Impact of EU Directives

n/a

32.6

SHP Sector Development

32.6.1

Economic Issues

n/a

32.6.2

SHP Manufacturing Industry

Table 32-7 List of manufacturers of equipment for SHP Equipment/construction/consulting n/a

Turbines Other mechan. Equipment Generators Electrical and control equipment Civil works contractors Consulting services

32.6.3

Only VATECH Andritz, MHyLab (Fondation) and pico turbine manufacturers Water steel work manufacturers No Some few specialized enterprises and common control equipment manufacturers Many About a dozen of consultants specialised in SHP

Technological Advancements

-Permanent magnet-Generator (first commercial SHP project, ITECO). Supplier: HSI / Krebs and Aulich (Germany) - Fully siphoned Ultra Low Head Power plant without guide vanes (only stay vanes and without sluice gates (the first in Switzerland: ITECO in Perlen) Supplier: VATECH - Diagonal turbine (first large Projekt, ITECO) Supplier: Geppert, Ă&#x2013;sterreich - variable speed turbines (so far not so commercial) - Projekte des MHyLab: low head turbines - Wasserkraftschnecke (Archimedes screw turbine) - Compakt-Dotierturbin with siphon - KWO devoleped a siphoned Matrix-Turbine without any blade regulation (together with MHyLab & Groupe-E)

Page 244 of 258

- Drink water power plant Mettental: extremely great difference between head and flow (930m versus 4 - 40 l/s)

32.6.4

Environmental Integration and Social Acceptance

Table 32-8 Resistances to SHP development Degree of gravity (1= no impact, 5=severe impact) Visual impact 3 Fishery 5 Water regulation 2 Environmental legislation 4 Competition with other uses of water (irrigation, recreation ect.) 2 Other kinds of resistance* 2 * Requirements of the specific EU environmental legislation, which according to the specialists of environmental protection entirely forbids river damming: NATURA 2000, Water Framework directive and Habitat directive. Impact

Table 32-9 Effect on SHP development and operation of the forbidden rivers, EIA, residual flow Forbidden Environmental Impact Assessment Residual flow (RF) rivers for (EIA) hydropower construction* n/a Hydropower plants > 3MW have to n/a complete an EIA Hydropower plants < 3MW have to comply with ecological laws and regulations but do not have to prove these through an EIA, but with other (simpler) means. *Except conventional protected areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; strict nature reservations or protected areas with overall restricted economic regime

32.6.5

Barriers for SHP Development

Depending on the level of production cost that the nation is willing to pay for, the amount of SHP potential varies, which is directly correlated with the level of continued development.

Page 245 of 258

References List of Contacts by Country EU-15 Austria Dipl. Ing. Martina Prechtl m.prechtl@kleinwasserkraft.at +43-(0)-1-5220766-40 www.kleinwasserkraft.at Belgium NoĂŠmie Laumont 00 32 4 388 12 70 00 32 2 217 96 82 nlaumont@edora.be EDORA www.edora.be Denmark JĂśrgen Krogsgaard j.c.krogsgaard@mail.dk Finland Peter Reiter pr.water@reiter.fi +358- 40-726 7124 www.pienvesivoimayhdistys.fi/ France Geoffroy du Crest g.ducrest@ied-sa.fr +33(0) 472 59 13 20 www.iec-sa.fr Anne Penalba France Hydro anne.penalba@wanadoo.fr +331 5659 9124 Germany Gerhard Eckert eckert@renertec-gmbh.com +49 89 2866 2660

Page 246 of 258

Greece George Babalis gbabalis@gmail.com +30 210 80 35 732 Ireland Fiacc Obrolchain fiaccob@iol.ie +353 90 64 57 660 Italy Sara Gollessi gollessi@aper.it (+39) 02 - 7631 9199 www.aper.it Luxembourg N/A Netherlands Dirk Snikkers Dirk.Snikkers@nuon.com +31 20 56 27 128 Nuon Energy Sourcing Portugal Antonio Sa Da Costa sadacosta@enersis.pt +351 21 350 28 40 Spain Manuel de Delas mdelas@appa.es +34 93 241 93 63 Sweden Christer Sรถderberg, President SERO (Swedish Renewable Energy Association) E-mail: soderberg.sero@telia.com Tel.: +46 (0)706-772 690 www.sero.se Tomas Sรถderlund, TS Energi & Marknad E-mail: tomas@tsem.se Tel.: +46 (0)733-149 130 www.tsem.se

Page 247 of 258

Peter Danielsson, P&C AB E-mail: peter.danielsson.sero@kristinehamn.mail.telia.com Tel: +46 (0)550 - 137 61 United Kingdom Bill MacGregor npower renewables bill.macgregor@npower-renewables.com +44 1738 /825110 www.npower-renewables.com Drona Upadhyay It Power Drona.upadhyay@itpower.co.uk +44 117 980 94 46 www.itpower.co.uk EU-12 Bulgaria MSc. Anton Tzenkov, Lead Design Engineer Concrete Dams Unit at EnergoproektHydropower Limited, Sofia. A.Tzenkov@ep-hydro.com +359 2 8072 636 http://www.ep-hydro.com/info.php?location=12&language=en The Czech Republic Libor Šamánek, Miroslav Bartušek and Jiří Vénos. ELZACO Ltd venos.j@elzaco.cz +420 583 213 394 http://www.elzaco.cz/en Estonia Dr. Peeter Raesaar, Associated Professor Department of Electrical Power Engineering, Tallinn University of Technology peeter.raesaar@ttu.ee +372 50 21 182 http://www.ttu.ee/?lang=en Hungary N/A

Page 248 of 258

Latvia Assoc. Prof. Karlis Silke, Latvia University of Agriculture and Latvia Small Hydropower Association. karlis.silke@llu.lv www.llu.lv +371 63027644 Lithuania Mr. Algis Jonas Jakucionis, MSc (Eng.) Dainius Tirunas and MSc (Eng.) Alvydas Zibas of the Lithuanian Hydropower Association and Lithuanian University of Agriculture tirunas@gmail.com +370 612 75813 http://www.hidro.lt Poland Dr. Janusz Steller The Szewalski Institute of Fluid Flow Machinery of the Polish Academy of Sciences Head of Cavitation Lab; Vice-President of the Polish Hydropower Association Ing. StanisĹ&#x201A;aw Lewandowski, ENERGA Hydropower Division - Director on Maintenance; President of the Polish Hydropower Association +48 58 6995139 steller@imp.gda.pl www.imp.gda.pl; www.tew.pl Romania Prof. Dr. Bogdan Popa University Politehnica of Bucharest and Romanian Small Hydropower Association popab_234@yahoo.com +40 722620502 www.hydrop.pub.ro Slovakia Eng. Peter Breza, Technical Director ROTORing Ltd. breza@rotor.sk +421 918 787 437 www.rotor.sk Slovenia Marko Gospodjinacki, President. Association of Small Hydro Power Plants Societies. zdmhe@ekowatt.si +386 (0)1 565 92 10 www.zdmhe.si

Page 249 of 258

Candidate Countries Croatia Dr. Eng. Kristijan Horvat KONCAR - Electrical Engineering Institute, Inc +385 (0)1 3656 290 khorvat@koncar-institut.hr www.koncar-institut.hr Macedonia Igor Nikolov JSC ELEM - Macedonian Power Plants igor.nikolov@elem.com.mk +38923149114 www.elem.com.mk Turkey Ms. Ayla Tutus Ickale Group Company aylatutus@yahoo.com +90 312 440 10 02 Associated Countries Bosnia and Herzegovina Mr. Almir Ajanovic Intrade Energija d.o.o ajanovic@intrade.co.ba +387 33 657 205 www.intrade.co.ba/intrade-energija Montenegro Prof. Dr. Sretren Skuletic University of Montenegro, Montenegro skuletic@cg.ac.yu + 381 81 242 777

Page 250 of 258

Norway Jan Slapg책rd, Senior Engineer jsl@nve.no tel +47 22 95 95 95 Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) (Resources Section) Switzerland Hans Peter Leutwiler hpleutwiler@iteco.ch +41-(0)-44 762 18 33 www.iteco.ch

Page 251 of 258

World Wide Web Executive Summary 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/res/publications/doc/2007_02_optres_en.pdf http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ http://www.esha.be http://www.nordpool.com/Documents/Communications/Publications/Monthlyreports/2007Aug.pd f www.rolfsan.se

EU-15 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu http://europa.eu/abc/european_countries/eu_members/ http://www.esha.be/fileadmin/esha_files/documents/publications/position_papers/ESHA_contribut ionDGTREN.pdf http://www.esha.be/fileadmin/esha_files/documents/SHERPA/SHERPA_fiche_Policy_Framewor k.pdf http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Europe/index.html

Austria 1. 2. 3.

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/energy_policy/doc/factsheets/mix/mix_at_en.pdf http://www.aquamedia.at/templates/index.cfm/id/21825 http://www.aquamedia.at/templates/index.cfm/id/3682

Finland 1. 2. 1.

http://www.environment.fi/default.asp?contentid=289317&lan=EN#a1 http://www.stat.fi/til/ekul/2006/ekul_2006_2007-12-12_tau_004.xls http://www.stat.fi/til/salatuo/2007/salatuo_2007_2008-09-26_tie_001_en.html

France 1.

http://www.cler.org/info/spip.php?article3281

Germany 1.

http://www.tatsachen-ueberdeutschland.de/fileadmin/festplatte/sprachen/download/englisch/00_Energie_ENG.PDF

Italy 1. 2.

http://www.aper.it/newsite/images/stories/convegni/2007/convegnoGSE/2.%20studio%20sui%20c osti%20di%20produzione%20di%20energia.pdf http://www.fao.org/sd/climagrimed/c_1_04_04.html

Spain 1.

http://www.small-hydro.com/index.cfm?Fuseaction=countries.country&Country_ID=72

Sweden 1. 2. 3. 4.

http://epubl.ltu.se/1402-1617/2006/328/LTU-EX-06328-SE.pdf www.rolfsan.se www.sero.se www.sero-srf.se

Page 252 of 258

5. 6. 7.

www.smhi.se www.vattenkraftmiljo.nu www.worldatlas.com

United Kingdom 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

http://dartdorset.org/html/hydro.shtml http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Change_Levy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewables_Obligation http://www.ber.gov.uk/whatwedo/energy/statistics/source/renewables/page18513.html http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/energy/whitepaper/consultations/renewablesobligation/page39555.html http://www.communitysustainable.org.uk/ http://www.nfpa.co.uk/auctionprices.html http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Sustainability/Environment/RenewablObl/Pages/Renewabl Obl.aspx http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/50855/srory.htm http://www.ref.org.uk/Files/ref.red.hydro.06,08,pdf http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Business-Industry/Energy/Energy-Consents/ApplicationsDatabase http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~gph/publications/Hydro05.ROC.pdf http://www.small-hydro.com/index.cfm?Fuseaction=countries.countryCountry_ID=79

Norway 1. 2. 3.

www.met.no www.nve.no www.worldatlas.com

Switzerland 1. 2.

http://www.bfe.admin.ch/themen/00490/00491/index.html?lang=en http://www.bfe.admin.ch/themen/00490/00491/index.html?lang=en

Page 253 of 258

Literature Executive Summary 1. 2. 3. 4.

5. 6. 7.

2008 World Atlas & Industry Guide. The Intern. Journal on Hydropower & Dams. EUROSTAT. Energy - Yearly statistics 2006, ISSN 1830-7833. Laguna M., ADMINISTRATIVE BARRIERS FOR SMALL HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE, 2007, Brussels, ESHA Lithuanian Hydropower Association Small hydropower situation in the new EU Member States and Candidate countries. Thematic Network on Small Hydropower (TNSHP), 2004, ESHA. (Available from http://www.esha.be/). Optres final report, Assessment and optimisation of renewable energy support schemes in European electricity market, Intelligent Energy Europe, 2007. San Bruno G., Developing small hydro to its full economic potential: a European perspective, (2008), Belgium, ESHA Strategic Study for the development of Small Hydro Power in the European Union, Blue Energy for A Green Energy (BlueAge), 2000, ESHA. (Available from http://www.esha.be/)

EU-15 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

2008 World Atlas & Industry Guide. The Intern. Journal on Hydropower & Dams. Coenraads R et al., Country profiles, 2008, Utrecht Grid Issues for Electricity Production Based on Renewable Energy Sources in Spain, Portugal, Germany and United Kingdom, 2008, Stockholm, Edita Sverige AB Laguna M., ADMINISTRATIVE BARRIERS FOR SMALL HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE, 2007, Brussels, ESHA San Bruno G., Developing small hydro to its full economic potential: a European perspective, 2008, Belgium, ESHA San Bruno G., Developing small hydro to its full economic potential: a European perspective, 2008, Brussels, ESHA Söderberg C, Småskalig vattenkraft, Småkraftverkens riksförening, 2005.

United Kingdom 1.

Forrester N. et al., Scottish Hydropower Resource Study, 2008

EU-12 1. 2.

2008 World Atlas & Industry Guide. The Intern. Journal on Hydropower & Dams. ESHA, Lithuanian Hydropower Association Small hydropower situation in the new EU Member States and Candidate countries”. Thematic Network on Small Hydropower (TNSHP). 2004. (Available from http://www.esha.be/).

The Czech Republic 1. 2. 3. 4.

Bartusek, M. Small hydropower engineering in the Czech Republic. Proceedings of the Conference “HIDROENERGIA 2006”, ESHA, BHA, Crieff, Scotland, June 7-9, 2006, 8. (CD). Report on the fulfilment of indicative targets for production of electricity from renewable resources for 2006. September 2007. Ministry of industry and Energy Regulatory Office. Report on usage of renewable energy sources in the Czech Republic in 2006. Ministry of industry, 2007 (in Czech). Tosnar, J.& Krejci A. Innovative exploitation of hydropower potential. Proceedings of the Conference “Hydro 2000”, 2-4 October, 2000, Bern, Switzerland,, p.37-40.

Page 254 of 258

Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) 1.

2. 3.

4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9.

10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

16.

Burneikis, J., Punys, P. & Zibiene, G. Hydropower development and environmental requirements in Lithuania. Conference Proceedings "Hydropower in the New Millennium”, 20-22 June, 2001, Bergen, Norway, p.207-214. Jablonskis, J, Jarockis, A. & Punys ,P. Hydropower primary potential of Lithuanian rivers. Water management engineering 2004; 25(45)1: 88-98 (in Lithuanian). Punys, P. & Tirunas, D. Hydropower in the Baltic States // Proceedings of the International conference Hydraulic turbomachines in hydropower and other industrial applications. Hydro Forum. 7-9 December 2005, Kliczkow, Gdansk, Poland, 2006, 51-66. ISBN 83-88237-11-X; Punys, P. Rivers exempt from damming. Case study of lowlands. Proceedings of the International conference “HIDROENERGIA 2006”, ESHA, BHA, Crieff, Scotland, June 7-9, 2006, 8. (CD). Punys, P., Ruplys, B. &Vansevičius, A. Prospects for installing small hydro at existing dams in Lithuania. Proceedings of the Conference "Hydropower into the next century-III", 18-20 October, 1999, Gmunden, Austria, p.99- 107. Raesaar, P. About the use of hydropower in Estonia. Investigation and usage of renewable energy sources. The sixth conference proceedings. Tartu, Estonia, 2005, pp 10-17 (in Estonian). Raesaar, P. Resource and utilization of Estonian hydropower. Oil Shale. Tallinn: Estonian Academy Publishers 22 (2005), vol. 2 Special, pp. 233−241. Raesaar, P. Waterpower in Estonia. Energy Center TAASEN, Tallinn, 1995. 34 p. (in Estonian). Reihan,A., Loigu, E. Small hydropower in Estonia – Problems and Perspectives. European Conference on Impacts of Climate Change on Renewable Energy Sources Reykjavik, Iceland, June 5–9, 2006 Renewable energy sources in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Strategy and policy targets, current experiences and future perspectives. Riga, Latvia, Baltic Environmental Forum, 2003. Silke, K. & Strubergs, Y. Small hydropower in Latvia. Proceedings of International Conference on Small Hydro, 23 –25 May, 2001, Kaunas, Lithuania, p.1/59-1/64 (in Russian). Streimikiene, D., Burneikis, J. & Punys, P. Review of renewable energy uses in Lithuania. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 2005: 9, 29-49. The engineering solutions for fish-gates on Estonian small rivers. Estonian Science Foundation Grant. Tallinn University of Technology, manuscript, 2001, 52 p. Velner, H.A., Ericsson H.. Hydropower in Estonia, 1997, 91 p. Velner, H.A., Pärnapuu, M. & Kark T. The Fish Passes in Estonia. Environmental Impact and Water Management in a Catchment Area Perspective. Proceedings of Symposium, 24-26 September, 2001, Tallinn, Estonia, p. 165-166. Velner, H.A.. Small hydropower in Estonia. Proceedings of International Conference on Small Hydro, 23 –25 May, 2001, Kaunas, Lithuania, pp.1/37-1/40.

Poland 1.

2. 3.

4. 5.

Henke, A., Kaniecki, M. & Steller, J.: Polish experience: hydraulic machinery for revitalised and adopted hydropower installations. HIDROENERGIA 2004, International Conference and Exhibition on Small Hydropower, Falkenberg (Sweden), 17-19 June 2004, Conf. Proc. (CD ROM) Hoffmann, M. (Ed.). Małe elektrownie wodne. Poradnik, Nabba Sp. z O.O, Warszawa, 1991 (in Polish). HYDROFORUM’2005. International techno-scientific conference and workshop „Hydraulic turbomachines in hydro power and other industrial applications”, Kliczków Castle, 7-9.12.2005, Selected Conference Contributions, IMP PAN Publishers, Gdansk 2006 IV Międzynarodowa Konferencja Procesorów Energii ECO-€URO-ENERGIA. Materiały konferencyjne, Targi Bydgoskie SAWO Sp. z O.O., Bydgoszcz 2007 Kulagowski, W. Hydropower engineering in Poland – present state and development perspectives. Gospodarka wodna (Water management) 3, 2001(in Polish)

Page 255 of 258

Reymann, Z., Steller, K. & Litorowicz, J. Activities of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Institute of Fluid-Flow Machinery concerning development of small water power plants. 1989, 90/91, p.149-171. 7. Steller, J. et al. Pumps as turbines for hydraulic energy recovery in small hydropower purposes in Poland. Proceedings of the International conference “HIDROENERGIA 2008”, ESHA,SSHA, Bled, Slovenia, June 11-14, 2008, 8. (CD). 8. Steller, J. Problems of hydropower industry development. Archiwum Energetiki 2003: XXXII, 34: 35-69.(in Polish). 9. Steller, K. & Steller, J. Research and development activity on small hydropower in Poland. Energy Sources 1993;15: 37-49. 10. Tersa, A., Adamkowski, A. & Steller, J., Lewandowski S.: Wykorzystanie stopni wodnych. Część I: Czysta Energia, maj 2006, s.14-16; Część II. Czysta Energia, czerwiec 2006, s.18-19

Romania 1. 2.

5. 6.

Apostol, I. Incentives and barriers for the development of renewable energy sources. Romania: country analysis, Friends of the Earth Europe, 2007. Moclinda, A. Gheorghiescu ,P. & Bucuta, R. Hydropower generation under the new energy market conditions in Romania. Proceedings of the Conference “Hydro 2002. Development, management, performance ”, 4-7 November, 2002, Kiris, Turkey. p.767-776. Moclinda, A., Gheorghiesku, P. & Bucuta, R. Romania 2000: Searching business opportunities in the existing “unfinished” hydropower schemes. Proceedings of the Conference “Hydro 2000. Making hydro more competetive”, 2-4 October, 2000, Bern, Switzerland, p.41-50. Popa, B. Small Hydropower in figures and diagrams in Romania. Proceedings of the Conference HIDROENERGIA 2008”, ESHA, Bled, Slovenia, June 12-13, 2008, 1 (CD). Popa, B. SHP Experiences from Romania. Presentation in 1st International Conference for Small Hydropower (SHP) and Regional Development in South East European Countries. http://www.esha.be/index.php?id=86 Taiachin, A. & Ionesku, C. Small hydropower in Romania: A critical point of view. Proceedings of the conference “Hidroenergia 95”, 18-20 September, 1995, Milan, Italy. p.99-105.

Slovakia 1.

Breza, P. Realised and prepared Slovak small hydropower. Proceedings of the International Conference “Hidroenergia 99”, 11-13 October 1999, Vienna, Austria, p.8 (CD). Dubrava, R. Legislative framework for renewable energy utilization. Presentation in 1st International Conference for Small Hydropower (SHP) and Regional Development in South East European Countries. http://www.esha.be/index.php?id=86

Slovenia 1. 2.

3. 4.

Gospodjinacki ,M. Investment opportunities in EEC. Proceedings of the International conference “HIDROENERGIA 2006”, ESHA, BHA, Crieff, Scotland, June 7-9, 2006, 8. (CD). Gospodjinacki, M. Slovenian Energy Law and Impacts on SHP Development. Proceedings of the International conference “HIDROENERGIA 2008”, ESHA,SSHA, Bled, Slovenia, June 11-14, 2008, 8. (CD). Maksic, R. & Gospodinjacki, M. The programme of using renewable energy sources – I part – Hydroenergy, report No: 1486, EIMV Hajdrihova 2, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2000 (in Slovenian). Stritiha, U., Zupana, G. & Butala, V. Review of green electricity production in Slovenia. In: Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, .v. 11, Issue 9, December 2007, 2201-2208

Candidate Countries Croatia

Page 256 of 258

1. 2.

Programme of construction of SHP (Program izgradnje malih hidroelektrana (MAHE), EIPH Zagreb, 1998. Study on SPP plants typical constructions (Studija izvodljivosti tipiziranih rješenja opreme za male hidroelektrane, Končar-KET, 2006

Macedonia 1. 2. 3.

Feed-in Tariffs for Small Hydro Power Plants in Macedonia. NERA Consulting, World bank Group, 2006 Panovski, S et al., Small Hydropower Plant in Republic of Macedonia, Scientific Research Project, Ministry of Education and Science, RM, 2002. Panovski, S., Janevska, G. & Cvetanovski, R. Small hydropower plants in Republic of Macedonia- situation and possibilities. Proceeding of “HIDROENERGIA 2006”, ESHA, BHA, Crieff, Scotland, June 7-9, 2006, 8. (CD). Study about possible mini and small HPP in SR of Macedonia, Republic Committee for Energy of SR of Macedonia, 1982.

Turkey 1. 2.

3. 4.

Adiguzel, F. & Tutus, A. Small hydroelectric power plants in Turkey. Proceedings of the Conference “Hydro 2002”, 4-7 November, 2002, Kiris, Turkey. p.283-293 Balat, H. A renewable perspective for sustainable energy development in Turkey: The case of small hydropower plants Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews V. 11, Issue 9, December 2007, P.2152-2165 Kaygusuz, K. Hydropower potential in Turkey. Energy Sources. 1999; 21, 7:581 – 588. Orhon, M., Pasin, S. & Naderer R. Dam and hydropower potential in Turkey. Proceedings of the Conference “Hydropower into the next century - III”, 18-20 October, 1999, Gmunden, Austria. p.21-29.

Associated Countries Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.

Ajanovic A. Development of Small Hydro in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Presentation in 1st International Conference for Small Hydropower (SHP) and Regional Development in South East European Countries (Available from http://www.esha.be/index.php?id=86). Dzafo, H. & Fazlic, D. Effects of turbine type selection on technical and economical benefits of the new SHPP project. Proceedings of the Conference HIDROENERGIA 2008”, ESHA, Bled, Slovenia, June 12-13, 2008, 12. (CD). Male hidroelektrane. Public Enterprise “Elektroprivreda” of B&H Sarajevo, 1999.

Montenegro 1. 2. 3.

Energy Institute Hrvoje Pozar. Preparation of the small hydropower plant development strategy for Montenegro. 2006, Zagreb. Ministry of Economy. Strategy for the development of small hydro power plants. Podgorica, March 2006 Skuletic, S. & Vujovic M. Successful implementation of small hydropower in maximising the benefits of optimal multipurpose reservoir use. Proceedings of the Conference “HIDROENERGIA 2006”, Creif – Scotland, United Kingdom, 7th – 9th June 2006, p.12. Skuletic, S. Available potential and possibilities for greater use of small hydropower in Montenegro. Proceedings of the Conference “HydroVision 2006”, Paper No. 32, Session 5G2 -

Page 257 of 258

Small Hydro Success and New Technology, July 31 - August 4. 2006, Oregon Convention Center, Portland, Oregon, USA, p.14.

Switzerland 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

Bundesgesetz über die Nutzbarmachung der Wasserkräfte, 1999, Schweiz Bundesgesetz über die Stromversorgung, märz 2007, Schweiz Der Wasserzins – die wichtigste Abgabe auf der Wasserkraftnutzung in der Schweiz, 2002, Bern [Available at http://www.bfe.admin.ch/themen/00490/00491/index.html?lang=en&dossier_id=00803] Elektrowatt Ingenieurunternehmen AG et al., Möglichkeit des Ausbaus der Wasserkraftnutzung in der Schweiz Energieverordnung, 2008, Schweiz http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf86.html

Page 258 of 258