Presentation on theme: "European Hydropower Summit 27th & 28th February 2012 - Bucharest 1 DI Martina Prechtl Small Hydropower Austria."— Presentation transcript:
European Hydropower Summit 27th & 28th February 2012 - Bucharest 1 DI Martina Prechtl Small Hydropower Austria
SHP in Austria About 2.600 SHP installations in Austria (grid connected) Production of about 5,6 TWh per year Corresponds to 9 % of Austrian electricity consumption respectively consumption of 1.6 mill. households 4.1 mill. to CO 2 - reduction 2
…there is still potential 3 Potential SHP - 2020 additional production in TWh Revitalisation0,5 - 1 New installations1 - 1,5 Total1,5 - 2,5
… in numbers of new installations 4 engine-power class (kW)average power (kW)number of stationsproduction in kWh 0 - 20060140 40.320.000,00 200 - 1000500100 240.000.000,00 1000 - 3000180060 518.400.000,00 3000 - 5000350020 336.000.000,00 5000 - 10000700015 504.000.000,00 Total335 1.638.720.000,00
Licencing procedure 5 Permit according to Water Law Up to 500 kW district administrative authorities, above province administration authority. Permit according to Electricity Law Needed for plants with an installed capacity of 30 kW and more Permit according to Nature Conservation Law, Building Legislation Responsible authority: district administration (nature conservation), mayor resp. municipality (Building Law).
Support programs for SHP in Austria Environmental fund: Subsidies for investments in the fulfilment of WFD requirements at existing plants (e.g. fish pass – not for losses due to residual flow!). Up to 30% of investment costs for SHP plus additional subsidies from the province (varies from 10 to 25% of investment costs) Green electricity act – investment subsidies, with revision of the act in 2011 the possibility for small plants (below 2 MW) to choose between direct investment subsidies and feed-in tariff) From 10% to 30% of investment costs resp. max. EUR 400,- to 1.500 / kW – height of tariffs not fixed yet Several specific programs from in the provinces – direct investment subsidies or consultancy programs. 6
Areas of conflicting interests 7 Nature conservation RES directive and national energy strategies – need for green electricity Climate protection WF directive – prodection of river ecology Security of energy supply AIM: Augmentation of HP electricity whilst respecting the aims of WFD - keeping „good ecological status“ SHP and good ecological status is compatible!
WFD and RES directive compatible? 8 WFD Aim is „good status“ of water bodies – obligatory improvement and prohibited deterioration - fish passes - residual flow - a.s.o. Existing plants have to adapt to the new regulation – intervention in existing rights!
Consequences for SHP 9 New installations: Partly difficult and long lasting licencing procedures Higher investment and planning costs Existing installations: Interference in existing rights Additional investments Production losses due to additional residual flow Changes in plant economy
WFD and RES directive compatible? 10 RES directive: 20 % Renewable Energy for EU 34 % REN in Austria Under consideration of: Available potential Cost development HP in Austria a very important energy source!!
To combine WFD and RES directive we need … In terms of climate protection and REN development: No exaggeration in implementation measures Implementation with sense of proportion Sensitive approach with respect to existing rights No discrimination of small facilities – also they deliver an appreciable share of electricity Because: HP as CO 2 free and decentralised electricity production is very important for our future energy supply Many positive examples demonstrate the compatibility of WFD and RESD goals! 11
06.05.2015Folie15 Needs for a positive SHP development Efficient Licencing procedures - support for applicants Licencing procedures have to be: fast Simplified procedures for revitalisation projects No overloading demanded studies, expertise – cost intensive No overlapping Transparency and comparability of decisions Planning security, authority as a service point
06.05.2015Folie16 Needs for positive SHP development Adequate support mechanisms (for technical and ecological measures) Support mechanism have to: Stimulate modernisation, innovation and the usage of potential Show continuity (stable, long ranging) WFD implementation has to be supported Stabel financing conditions for sector More green electricity from SHP
06.05.2015Folie17 Needs for positive SHP development Sense of proportion with WFD implementation Additional energy production due to modernisation must not be totally consumed by over boarding ecological burden Standards for residual flow and fish passes must not be overshooting (what is really needed for „good ecological status“?) Overshooting standards lead to: Resistance against modernisation projects – no innovation Delayed exploitation of revitalisation potential Unjustified limitation of new exploitation potential Compromises of economic viability due to high investments and losses Balanced implementation of WFD leads to: More SHP green electricity & attention for river ecology
06.05.2015Folie18 Needs for positive development Strengthening competences and building up advice services Comprehensive information and advice for SHP sector (legal, technical, ecological, economical) – example advise service in several Austrian provinces building up of planning- und advise competence Frictionless project handling under new framework conditions No „project frustration“
Good practice example in Austria Revitalisation campaign (esp. Upper Austria, Lower Austria, Tirol) Revitalisation - Consulting for operators (subsidies by the regional government) & Investment subsidies Aims: increase of energy production on existing sites ecological adaption measures new facilities on appropriate sites (technical and ecological) Results: Longest experience with this program in Upper Austria with the result of: additional electricity production of about 80 GWh 260 modernized or new plants Average production increase 40% Investment of 45 Mio. EUR Ecological improvements
Example of revitalisation 1: Magerlmühle Before Revitalisation At the river Großen Mühl - since 1922 HP utilisation to run a leather fabric Francis-turbine vertical with cogwheel and belt transmission Maximum throughput: Q = 5,5 m 3 /s Head: H = 2,6 m Turbine output: 110 kW electric power: 95 kW annual production: 450.000 kWh no fish pass 300 m diversion without residual flow
Example of revitalisation 1: Magerlmühle Revitalisation 2004 Kaplan turbine vertical double regulated Maximum throughput : Q = 6 m 3 /s Head: H = 2,5 m Turbine output : 135 kW electric power : 120 kW Annual production: 750.000 kWh Further operation of old plant with an annual production of 350.000 kWh => total production per year: 1.100.000 + new fish pass + 650.000 kWh (= + 140 % production)
Thank you for your attention www.kleinwasserkraft.at 22