The potential of hydropower generation in Jordan

Energy Policy 1994 22 (6) 523-530

The potential of hydropower generation in Jordan Micro-hydropower analysis M. Hammad, R. Aburas and B. Abuzahra

This study was conducted by collecting information about all known water flows in Jordan, including seasonal flows. The information included the monthly mean rate of flow (m3/s) for a period of 20 years, topographical maps showing the falls in the flow paths, and the population of the communities close to the paths. From the promising sites, the best six (with the highest potential) were selected for this study. Histograms, flow duration and power duration curves were constructed for each site. Sites' power generation potential were compared with their power demand from the nearest community. An economic study followed to find the minimum costs per kilowatt hour for a feasible project, and to list costs for each site. A cost-benefit analysis was also conducted. Keywords: Hydropower; Jordan; Potential

H y d r o p o w e r is considered one of the oldest harnessed methods of solar energy utilization. As a renewable source of energy it was utilized to generate energy as early as the G r e e k era. Until recently concentration was focused on large-scale hydro, but the last three decades have witnessed a shift of interest in favour of small-scale hydropower plants, where small scale is defined as up to 10 MW. Recent surveys have revealed that there are more than 5000 sites in the USA with such potential. 1 Interest has been shown in Australia 2 and New Zealand. 3 In Pakistan 4 90 micro-plants of total capacity of 1 M W have been installed, and all of them are in operation at present. M. Hammad is with the Faculty of Engineering, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; R. Aburas and B. Abuzahra are with Jordan Electricity Authority, Amman, Jordan.

0301-4215/94/06 0523-08 © 1994 Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd

H y d r o p o w e r plants of any size can be connected to the power grid, so they all require the highest engineering standards. However, micro-hydropower plants can be simplified in order to reduce costs, especially if they are to serve isolated communities and remote villages. Pelton wheels, Francis turbines and propeller turbines are the commonly used types. 5 The units are classified as micro, mini or small according to whether the output power is less than 100 kW, less than 1 MW or less than 10 MW respectively ( U N I P E D E classification). To reduce the costs, a simple design using a standard 'squirrel cage' induction motor as a generator and a centrifugal pump as a turbine can be adopted in favourable circumstances. Costly civil engineering works can be avoided by adoption of run of the river schemes. 6 In Jordan small hydro power has not received much attention. Previous studies concentrated on two projects, neither of which was executed; the Mediterranean-Dead Sea canal 7 and the Red SeaDead Sea canal. 8 Both projects are large and have therefore been excluded from this study. This study dealt with all water flows in the country. Some are seasonal flows but others are all year flows. Nearby communities' demands for power were considered. Six sites which were highly rated on the basis of their potential were selected for this work. These included the Maeen Falls, the Samra waste water treatment station outflow, the Mokheiba Dam site, the Zarqa River falls, the Moqarem Dam site and the Adasia Falls. All locations are shown in Figure 1.

Research method A research team from the University of Jordan (U J) and the Jordan Electricity Authority (JEA) was set up for this purpose. To obtain relevant data, three sources of information were investigated: 523

Hydropower generation in Jordan:

M. Hammad et al

i~Lebanon

~

: : ~ ~

]~.~

L.

Syria Tiberius

d ~

:'~'

[~/

/,

(

Adasiya

~lo~/ eMokheiba~ ] Z. River

~' ', ~/ , | / Moqarin Jerusalemz~i

,;

j

/

AI-Risheh

• Samra •Amman

~:~ Dead Saudi Arabia

Jordan

DA q a b a

0

50

100

150

I I

I

I

I

miles 0

2'5

km of

Aq a b a

s'o

7'5

Figure 1. M a i n sites located on the map of Jordan.

• the Jordan Water Authority (JWA) computer runs for the flows in the gauging stations for the 20 years; • Jordan topographical and geographical maps (from the department of geography in the University of Jordan); and • site visits conducted by the team. The computer runs of the JWA were in two parts: a monthly mean, yearly mean, and yearly total values of the flow of about twenty sites; and the daily mean

discharge, the monthly mean, the annual mean and the annual total values of flow for the chosen six main sites. Tables were in cubic metres per second measured at the relevant gauging stations. The gauging was recorded for the years from 1964 to the year of 1984. Table 1 shows the selected sites with the monthly mean discharge values in cubic metres per second. The topographical and geographical maps of Jordan 9 were consulted to identify the usable heads, which should be more than three metres, and to

Table 1. Monthly average flow (ma/s) for the sites. January February March April May June July August September October November December

524

Maeen 0.535 0.617 0.557 0.549 0.52 0.563 0.520 0.589 0.579 0.470 0.569 0.537

Samra 1.067 1.107 1.007 1.028 0.989 0.969 0.792 0.996 0.981 0.975 0.984 0.037

Mokheiba 0.392 0.297 0.439 0.423 0.443 0.571 0.652 0.558 0.636 0.657 0.670 0.435

Zarqa River 3.81 3.86 1.82 1.46 0.72 0.62 0.15 0.15 0.64 1.33 2.26 2.62

Moqarin 8.33 11.33 12.89 8.44 5.11 5.00 5.00 4.89 4.89 5.33 6.00 7.33

Adasia 12.78 24.00 19.78 6.00 2.67 2.44 2.56 2.56 2.44 2.44 4.00 7.00

Energy Policy 1994 Volume 22 Number 6

Hydropower generation in Jordan: M. Hammad et al Table 2. Usable heads for the selected sites (m). Height (m)

Maeen 20

Saturn 20

Mokheiba 20

Zarqa River 25

Moqarin 25

Adasia 20

Moqarin (103) 1.2 1.6 1.86 1.21 0.74 0.72 0.72 0.70 0.70 0.77 0.86 1.05 22.13 20.7

Adasia (103) 1.42 2.64 2,2 0,664 0.29 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.45 0.78 9.8 8.0

Table 3. Monthly average energy potential from each site (MWh).

January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Harnessable

Maeen (103) 0.06 0.069 0.062 0.061 0.058 0.063 0.058 0.066 0.065 0.053 0.064 0.06 0.74 0.74

Samra (103) 0.11 0.12 0,10 0.11 0.11 0.101 0.08 0.10 0.101 0.104 0.105 0.103 1.025 1.025

Mokheiba

Zarqa River

45.5 34.5 50.9 49.1 51.4 66.2 75.8 64.9 73.8 76.2 77.7 50.4 717.1 717.1

552.7 559.9 264.0 211.8 104.4 89.9 21.7 21.7 92.8 192.2 327.8 380.0 2629.7 2080.7

identify the closest energy demand centres, either local communities or tourism complexes. Table 2 shows the usable head in metres for the selected sites. Site visits were made to most of the sites, with long visits planned for selected ones. These helped in clarifying some points such as the suitability of the sites for plant construction, head assessment and estimation of the local power demand. JEA standards of the year 2000 for expected demand of 1317 kWh/ person/year was adopted in this estimation.~° Table 3 shows the yearly power demand for each local area's nearest community.

Data analysis Three illustration graphs were established for each site: the year round histograms, the flow duration curve and the power duration curve. The power duration curves show the expected year round power supply curves; comparing the power supply with the power demand shown in Table 4 gives the conclusions achieved. The power P (W) was calculated using the common equation, (1)

P = "qggHQ

where P is the water density (kg/m3), g is the gravity

acceleration (Ill]S2), H is the available head (m), Q is the discharge flow (m3/s) and ~1 is the overall efficiency (which consists mainly of the turbine efficiency and the generator efficiency). For the purpose of this study the water density (9) was taken as 1000 kg/m 3 and the overall efficiency was conservatively assumed to have an average value of 0.8. Accordingly Equation (1) will be in the form,

P = 7.84 H Q

kW

(2)

Table 3 shows the monthly estimated power that could be generated by installing a hydropower unit at each site. This energy was calculated using Equation (2). The monthly average value of the discharge (Q), and the duration of the generation were extracted from Table 5 and power duration curves. The values shown in Table 3 cannot be assumed to

Table 5. Expected capacities and working times percentages. Site 1 Maeen 2 Samra 3 Mokheiba 4 Zarqa River 5 Moqarin 6 Adasia

Number of turbines 1 1 1 2 2 2

Capacity (MW) 0.092 0.16 0.099 0.71 2.4 4.0

Percentage of working time 100 100 100 50 84 50

Table 4. Local demand for power (MWh/year). Community Population Demand (MWlVy)

Maeen Maeen village 2000 2634

Energy Policy 1994 Volume 22 Number 6

Samra Hashimia 3000 3951

Mokheiba North Shuna 3000 3951

Zarqa River Om EI-Romman 1000 1317

Moqarin Mashari 1500 1975

Adasia Adasia village 1500 1975

525

Hydropower generation in Jordan: M. Hamrnad et al

0.7 0.6 \\N

~0.5 m

0.4

~: 0 . 3 O

,'7 0.2 0.1 0.0

~\• • \x ~\x ~\•

\\\ \\\ \\\ \\\

~\x ~\•

X\\ \\\

~NX k\~

\\\ \\\

~x•

\\\

~\x ~\x

XNX ~xx

Oct

~\\

x\"

\X\

**\x ~\x

\\x

Nov Dec Jan

~xx •xx

~N\

•\x •xx

,,,,'~,

Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Figure 2. Average monthly flows of Maen.

be reliable or firm, given the high fluctuation in the discharge quantities, as shown in Table 1.

Discussion The data acquired by the study team is illustrated in Tables 1, 2 and 4. Table 3 is included to show monthly average energy that might be generated from a hydraulic turbine unit. A sequential analysis of hydropower systems, which is more complicated, more detailed and may use computer ready algorithms, can be u s e d . 1~ However, due to the fact that the study is dealing with small size and run of the river schemes, a simple PC program (using Basic language) was built and used in the analysis. Future actual values may deviate considerably because of the high variability in the weather from year to year. Simple comparison of the energy demand of local communities with the energy that could be harnessed shows all year shortage in supply at two sites, and part of the year shortages in the others. Priority should be given to important demand such as that from medical centres and schools. Fuel saving purposes also can be achieved where grid connection is possible; such a facility is available at Maeen, Samra, Mokheiba and Adasia.

The data used to construct three methods of analysis are shown in Figures 2 to 13. Figure 2 represents an approximate constant flow for Maeen (underground spring water). The approximate constant rate of flow exhibited by Figure 3 is the exit flow of the Samra waste water treatment station. Figure 4 shows the monthly average flow rate of the irrigation dam of Mokheiba. Figures 5-7 represent normal seasonal flow sites, which normally have high flow in winter and diminishing flow in summer. Six flow and power duration curves are given in Figures 8 to 13. The first three curves in Figures 8 to 10 (for Maeen, Samra and Mokheiba) show constant capacity for the whole duration, and constant power, except for small drops. This means that the turbine can work continuously all year round. The other three curves, shown in Figures 11 to 13 (for Moqarin, Zarqa River and Adasia) are seasonal flows, and the drop in capacity ranges from a value of less than 40% to Moqarin and to less than 10% for both Zarqa River and Adasia. Conventional Francis and propeller turbines can operate efficiently over a range of flows from 40% up to 105% of the design capacity. ~2 This allows for installation of one such turbine of 0.95 MW maximum output in Maeen, Samra and Mokheiba. These will work continuously all year round. Moqarin can has two equal capacity turbines, and this

1.2 1.0 \\

\\'~

~" o.8

m ~

0.6

o

0.4

LL

\\\

kNN

K\N

~\,

• x • x -~

NNM NNNI

\\ \X

• \•

r~xM

\\

""

k",'~

,~

0.2

,\\ 0.0 Oct

Nov

Dec Jan

Feb Mar Apr May 3un

Jul

\\x

Aug Sep

Figure 3. Average monthly flows of Samra.

526

Energy Policy 1994 Volume 22 Number 6

Hydropower generation in Jordan. M. Hammad et al 0.7 0.6

~'0.5 ~I: 0 . 4 ~: 0 . 3 0

u_ 0.2

0.1 0.0

\\N \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\

x\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ N\\ N\\

xxx \x\ \\\ \\\ \xx xxx \\\ xxx xxx xx\

NN\ NN\ \\\ \x\ ~\\ ~\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\

\\\

NN\

Oct Nov Dec Jan

Feb Mar Apr May

un

Jol

Aug

Sep

Figure 4. Average monthly flows of Mokheiba.

4.0

3.5 3.0 2.5 eo

E 2.0 ~: 1.5

0

u.. 1.0

0.5 0.0

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Figure 5. Average monthly flows of Zarqa River.

14

12 ~

10

~E

8

~

6

O

E

\\\ \\\

4 2

\\\ ~x~

0

Oct Nov Dec Jan

d

Feb Mar Apt" May Jun

Jul Aug Sep

Figure 6. Average monthly flows of Moqarin.

25 \N\

20 mE

15

o

10

,\~

Oct

Nov

Dec Jan

r-~

\\X

\\\

~\"

\\\

\\\

\\\

~\',

,\,

\\'~

,\\

Feb Mar A p r

May Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Figure 7. Average monthly flows of Adasia.

Energy Policy 1994 Volume 22 Number 6

527

Hydropower generation in Jordan: M. Hammad et al 0.10 0.09

0.7 0.6

-

~ 0.5

o.08 -~E 0.4 0.3

o 0.07 o_

,-7 0.2

0.06 -

0.1 l

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0.0

% time equalled

O0

or e x c e e d e d

Figure 8. Flow duration and power duration curve of Maeen.

2.5 -

I .2

2.0 -

I .0

1.5.

m

A

0.8

.EE 0.6

1.0~ 0.4

0

0.5 F 0.0 L

0.2

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0.0 0

100

% time e q u a l l e d or e x c e e d e d

Figure 9. Flow duration and power duration curve of Samra.

1.2 0.7 1.0

~

o.8

0.6

0.6

~o5

~

0.4 O

o.

0.2

0.4 ~ O

~.

0.0

0.3

0.2 0.1 0.0

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

90

I00

% time e q u a l l e d or e x c e e d e d Figure 10. Flow duration and p o w e r duration curve of Mokheiba.

4.0 0.7 0.6

ii 0.5 ~ - ~

3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5

0.2 0.1 0.0

1.0 0.5 0.0 10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

% time equalled or e x c e e d e d

Figure 11. Flow duration and power duration curve of Z a r q a River.

528

Energy Policy 1994 Volume 22 Number 6

Hydropower generation in Jordan." M. Hammad et al 3.0r

14

-

2.5

12 10

2"° i I .5

O n

mE E

8

,T

6 4

1"0 1 0.5 0.0

A

2 0

-

A

A

I

I

I

I

I

I

l

I

l

I0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

4.0-251 % time e q u a l l e d o r e x c e e d e d

F i g u r e 12.

~"

Flow duration and power duration curve of Moqarin.

3.2

~

20

2.4

mE

15

1.6

~o 10

0.8

5 w

0.0

-

0 0

I

I

l

I

I

I

I0

20

30

40

50

60

A

A

"1

"

70

A

I

--

80

mh

I --

90

I00

% time equalled or exceeded

Figure 13. Flow duration and power duration curve of Adasia. arrangement will operate 84% of the year. A similar arrangement for Zarqaa River and Adasia will operate for only 50% of the year, with the lowest flow capacity of 19% of the largest flow. Table 5 gives a summary of results showing proposed generator outputs, capacities, percentages of working times and number of recommended turbines.

Economic analysis The highest feasible unit capital costs for each site proposed are shown in Table 6. Costs were calculated by evaluating the lifetime expected return against the lifetime expected total costs. The lifetime return were calculated for the generated power at a price of 0.036 Jordan dinars per kilowatt hour (JD/ kwh) (US$0.051/kWh), assuming 0.8 plant operation factor (POF) and a 30 year life. The capital cost of the total costs was unknown, and 2% of capital costs was assumed for annual operation, maintenance and administration costs (OM&A), with 10% as the capital recovery factor. As a result of this study the maximum capital cost of each plant that would keep the unit within a feasible range was calculated. The calculations showed that the specific total capital cost was 7687 JD/kW (US$10 982/kW) for Samra, for example. More economic analysis was based on a cost-benefit Energy Policy 1994 Volume 22 Number 6

ratio. The hydro turbines are considered fuel savers for those sites that are connected to the grid (Maeen, Samra, Mokheiba and Adasia). The benefits generated from those projects are on a par with the cost of the fuel that could be saved by the operation of hydro projects in those sites. The main assumptions used in this analysis are as follows: • • • • •

capital cost equals US$800-1000/kW installed; O&M costs are 2% of the capital cost; economic life is 30 years; interest rate is 10%; cost of fuel oil is US$80 per ton.

Table 7 shows a summary of the benefit/cost ratio of the above mentioned projects. The cost-benefit ratio for the first three projects is higher than unity, and only the fourth site project seems unfeasible.

Table 6. Highest feasible capital costs of each site.

Site Maeen Samra Mokheiba Zarqa River Moqarin Adasia

Feasible costs (JD millions)

US$ millions

0.035 1.23 0.6 0.23 0.7 1.1

0.051 1.75 0.86 0.33 1.0 1.5

529

Hydropower generation in Jordan: M. Hammad et al Table 7. Cost-benefit analysis.

Capacity (MW) Capital cost (US$1000) Annual capital cost (US$1000) O&M cost (US$1000) Total annual cost (US$1000) Generated energy (GWh/year) Fuel saved (ton/year) Cost of saved fuel (US$1000/year) Benefit cost

Maeen

Samra

Mokheiba

Adasia

0.09 78.7 8.34 1.57 9.91 0.75 218.92 17.5 1.76

0.19 141.1 15.0 2.82 17.82 1.36 395.73 31.6 1.77

0.10 85.4 9.05 1.7 10.72 0.76 205.31 16.4 1.5

3.5 3010 324.4 61.2 385.6 6.33 1834.92 146.8 0.38

Conclusion There are at least six sites in Jordan which have high potential for installation of micro-, mini- or smallhydropower generation units. Two of them, Maeen and Mukheiba, could support only a micro unit, while the Samra and Zarqa River units could have mini units, Moqarin and Adasia small units. Three sites, Maeen, Samra and Mokheiba, can potentialy work for 100% of the time at about 100% of the design capacity. A similar priority can be assigned to the Moqarin site, as it could work for 84% of the time at a range of capacity between 40% and 105% of the design capacity for each of its two proposed turbines. Lower priority should be given to the other two sites, Zarqa River and Adasia, because of working duration of only 50% of the year, at a capacity ranging from 40% to 105% of the design capacity for each turbine from the proposed two turbines for each site. The expected output power for each site was found to fall short of the site demands for Samra and Mokheiba. However, development could be valuable for use in medical centres, schools and communal facilities.

530

1D. Wilier, 'Determining feasibility of small scale hydropower', Journal of Energy Division, ASCE, Vol 907, No EY2, 1981, pp 209-217. 2Electric Council of New England, Hydrologic Analysis for Hydropower Potential, New England, 1982. 3I.T. Rays, J.M. Elder, M.K. Foster and J.I. Woodward, A Low Cost AC Generating System Suitable for Use With Small Hydro Plants, University of Auckland, Report, 1982. 4Pakistan Council of Appropriate Technology, Activities and Services for Better Living, Report, 1989. 5j.I. Woodward, Micro Hydro as a Case Study in Appropriate Technology, University of Auckland, June 1982. 60p cit, Ref 3. 7E. Salam and M. Khawas, 'The Mediterranean-Dead Sea Canal and its environmental impact', Newsletter, Water Research and Study Center, University of Jordan, 2nd issue, 1984; and Ministry of Water and Irrigation, Jordan, The Mediterranean-Dead Sea Canal, Report, 1980. 8Ministry of Water and Irrigation, Jordan, The Red Sea-Dead Sea Canal, Report, 1978. 9H. Adas, Some Aspects of the Micro and Mini Hydro Power Potential in Jordan, University of Jordan, Report, 1992. lO Jordan Electricity Authority, Annual Report, 1992. IIUS Army Corps of Engineering, Simulation of Flood Control and Conservation System, HEC-5, Computer Program 723 - X6 L2500; US Army Corps of Engineers, Reservoir Analysis for Conservation, HEC-3, Computer program, 723 - X6-L2030. 120p cit, Ref 2.

Energy Policy 1994 Volume 22 Number 6