Small Hydropower & Micro Hydropower

The following two charts show the “Small & Micro Hydropower Newsletter” Community as of May 6 2009 and March 17 2009. Our Small & Micro Hydropower Demographic population has changed only slightly since we started collecting data. Note the charts are normalized to the total responding population which represents about 50% of our overall membership. I think you can see we are still a diverse Hydropower group that share a common interest in Small & Micro Hydropower generating systems.

Notice that Small & Micro Hydro Interest have swapped places from what we showed in our original Hydropower Community update newsletter.  Small Hydro vs. Micro Hydro Interest percentages are within a few points of each other and I suspect there is no significant difference in the voting here. It sounds like we are right on with the Newsletter target.  Thanks to those who filled out the survey.  You can see our original demographic results by visiting: Original Small & Micro Hydro Community Survey.

SmallHydro.com Hydropower Community Stats - May 6 2009

The following data shows the Small & Micro Hydroelectric Community as of a little over a month ago. Only subtle changes within about 1-3% experimental error.

Some of you have correctly mentioned that there are significant differences in Small & Micro Hydropower systems with regard to physical plant size and capital $ investments, ROI, regulations, etc.

While this general observation is true the actual fluid mechanics and electrical physics involved are mostly the same, so we will continue to address both populations here and in the newsletter. As we encounter major differences we will try and point them out so you can be aware. If you see Small or Micro Hydro issues that I forgot to point out please share them with your comments on that SmallHydro.com Blog post. The other Small Hydro Community plots are over on the www.DoradoVista.com site.

To update your Small & Micro Hydropower Survey see the following link: Update My Hydropower Interest Survey Instructions.

SmallHydro.com Hydropower Community Stats - March 17 2009

Bookmark this...

Hide Sites

Lou,

Q: Lou asked me to visit a few river saving Web sites.  Interesting stuff.  After looking over the subject covered and the evidence, as it was presented, I put together the following response. [In fairness to Lou I have edited the post a bit]

A: You really should investigate in-stream hydro or run-of-river hydroelectric designs further.  It’s a good design that incorporates river eco-balance too.  Europeans are very much in favor of this technology.  There is a 100 year history of Hydropower with both successes and failures to learn from.

By pressing the ‘not in my back yard’ case for Small & Micro hydro we easily create a no win ecologic and bad economic ROI situation. There is much to be lost ecologically by considering rivers as strictly off limits. Instead we should press for making responsible use economical and requiring governments to assist in the process instead of planting a multitude of conflicting regulations in the path to success.

The reality is that all the lost hydropower will be replaced with nuclear power, oil, gas and coal in nations that have that capacity.  Those aren’t a good eco-energy-option in the long 300+ year term.  These river use or restriction choices have potentially detrimental outcomes that go way beyond a simple local model to predict.  These impacts affect economies and food supplies that must in turn depend on low cost local energy.

Unfortunately in the rush to paint Dams and Hydro as evil we left out Instream run-of-river Hydro systems which provide a much better eco balance than any other renewable energy source. Including solar which has large power fluctuations, chemicals & energy to produce, also takes huge land areas,  wind which has large power fluctuations, bird & bat strikes, causes new vibrations and flashing blade visual psychological impacts on people living nearby,  etc.

There’s no such thing as a free lunch, nor a free energy. Every act has consequences.

Sincerely,
Jess

Bookmark this...

Hide Sites

Hi there,

I have only subscribed yesterday to the Small & Micro Hydropower Newsletter and I really need your help,we are based in South Africa and we started refurbishing a Francis turbine and will commission it early may 2009.  Our hydropower company is in Africa.

Q: Currently we are busy proposing for a new site with a 80m head and would like to install a Pelton turbine I need some info regarding the hydropower foundation setup.
Please can you give me some guidelines I will be very thankful.

Hope to hear from you soon

Mark

———————-

Dear Mark,

We’re glad to have you join us!

A: May I suggest the first thing you need to establish for Pelton wheel hydropower design infrastructure is the same as your need for good turbine and penstock choice. Basically you need to know your static head pressure (80m) AND flow rate (m^3/s) The penstock and turbine are chosen to gain the best fit for efficiency of the available flow regime, but there is a dynamic force caveat.

Penstock length and diameter and geometry (turns & angles of turns) will determine the maximum dynamic flow forces at your thrust blocks or pipe anchor points. Every change in angle and every flow rate change will generate thrust forces, From Newton’s first law of motion. Your infrastructure & power-house design must exceed these forces by a wide margin or there will be BIG problems.

One more non-linear issue is that you must keep the linear flow rate below 5ft/s or 1.5m/s to avoid the effect of catastrophic water hammer. Remember, you are moving a freight train’s weight of water in the penstock there’s a lot of energy stored in the water’s momentum (Momentum=M x V.) The kinetic energy is (E = 1/2 m x v^2.)

If the jet(s) of a Pelton turbine gets plugged by debris the flow can stop abruptly causing a huge energy or pressure pulse to form(a.k.a. water hammer.)  This in turn will lead to huge forces on the thrust blocks and penstock walls (including the turbine mount & thrust structure) but every bit of the penstock structure will be exposed to huge pressure waves traveling back and forth at the speed of sound in water (pressure reflections).

It is not unusual for steel pipe to rupture or collapse depending on the magnitude and sign of this pressure/vacuum wave. All of these design issues are pretty much the same as large scale water conveyance pipelines in any system. For example eg. sewer or domestic supply.

So, start with your flow needs and penstock design to determine each thrust block’s forces and the terminal powerhouse (turbine foundation) forces. Make sure you consider maximum flow & catastrophic pulse generation. Then engineer each concrete and steel anchor to exceed these by a good margin. A good pipeline designer should be able to do these calculations and design this aspect of your system.

Note: All DoradoVista Small& Micro Hydropower site recommendations are not meant to replace a good design or design engineer, they are for informational and technical seeding of ideas only. You must get a locally qualified engineer to evaluate all aspects of your hydro system design including all of our recommendations for your project. Hydro system safety and economics design issues are both involved here even at 80 m of head.

That discussion on good penstock and turbine foundation design is just for starters –

Here’s a link to some more Hydropower books from Amazon.com that we’re collecting on various Hydro topics. It’s from our Small & Micro Hydro Reader’s corner.

The inexpensive CD’s on that web page (from the DOE on hydro) may likely give more detail on your topic question.

Sincerely,
Jess
DoradoVista, Inc.

Bookmark this...

Hide Sites