Advertisement

Journal of Mountain Science

, Volume 12, Issue 5, pp 1315–1333 | Cite as

Sustainability assessment and ranking of run of the river (RoR) hydropower projects using analytical hierarchy process (AHP): A study from Western Himalayan region of India

  • Deepak KumarEmail author
  • Surjit Singh Katoch
Article

Abstract

In the present scenario, tapping the unutilised hydropower potential is one of the highest priorities in developing countries of the world. Special emphasis is being imparted to run of the river (RoR) mode of power generation. However, the governments are now facing the dilemma whether to promote small hydropower projects (SHPs) or encourage large hydropower projects (LHPs). RoR large hydropower projects result into large scale cutting of mountains for constructing tunnels and access roads, generation of huge quantity of muck and large scale impact on flora and fauna due to diversion of rivers/streams. On the other hand, though SHPs are claimed to be greener and more sustainable by a section of researchers and energy planners but, they will be required to be set up in large number to generate equivalent amount of electricity. The aim of this study is to rank the most sustainable installed capacity range of RoR hydropower projects. To achieve this aim, the study proposes the use of quite popular multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method of Operation Research named Analytical Hierarchy Process. A case study has been presented from Himachal Pradesh, a hydro rich state located in the western Himalayan region. As per sustainability assessment carried out in this study, hydropower projects in the capacity range 1 to 5 MW have been ranked to be the most sustainable.

Keywords

Sustainability Run of the river Hydropower project Analytical Hierarchy Process Himalaya 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abbasi SA, Abbasi N (2000) The likely adverse environmental impacts of renewable energy sources. Applied Energy 65: 121–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbasi T, Abbasi SA (2011) Small hydro and the environmental implications of its extensive utilization. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15: 2134–2143. DOI: 10.1016/ j.rser.2010.11.050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Afgan NH, Carvalho MG, Hovanov NV (2000) Energy system assessment with sustainability indicators. Energy Policy 28: 603–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aras H, Erdoğmuş S, Koç E (2004) Multi-criteria selection for a wind observation station location using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Renewable Energy 29: 1383–1392. DOI: 10.1016/ j.renene.2003.12.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bakis R, Demirbas A (2004) Sustainable development of small hydropower plants. Energy Sources 26 (12): 1105–1118. DOI: 10.1080/00908310390265932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bakken TH, Aase AG, Hagen D, et al. (2014) Demonstrating a new framework for the comparison of environmental impacts from small-and large-scale hydropower and wind power projects. Journal of Environmental Management 140: 93–101. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.01.050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bakken TH, Sundt H, Ruud A, Harby A (2012) Development of small versus large hydropower in Norway–comparison of environmental impacts. Energy Procedia 20: 185–199. DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2012.03.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beck MW, Claassen AH, Hundt PJ (2012) Environmental and livelihood impacts of dams: common lessons across development gradients that challenge sustainability. International Journal of River Basin Management 10 (1): 73–92. DOI: 10.1080/15715124.2012.656133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bódis K, Monforti F, Szabó S (2014) Could Europe have more mini hydro sites? A suitability analysis based on continentally harmonized geographical and hydrological data. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 37: 794–808. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burton J, Hubacek K (2007) Is small beautiful? A multicriteria assessment of small-scale energy technology applications in local government. Energy Policy 35 (12): 6402–6412. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.08.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. CEA (Central Electricity Authority), Ministry of Power (MoP), Govt. of India, (2015) Status of hydro electric potential development (in terms of installed capacity–above 25 MW), as on 31.01.2015. Available online at: http://www.cea.nic.in/reports/hydro/he_potentialstatus_region.pdf (Accessed on 22 March 2015)Google Scholar
  12. Cowan K, Daim T, Anderson T (2010) Exploring the impact of technology development and adoption for sustainable hydroelectric power and storage technologies in the Pacific Northwest United States. Energy 35: 4771–4779. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2010.09.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Diduck AP, Pratap D, Sinclair AJ, Deanea S (2013) Perceptions of impacts, public participation, and learning in the planning, assessment and mitigation of two hydroelectric projects in Uttarakhand, India. Land Use Policy 33: 170–182. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DoEHP (Directorate of Energy, Himachal Pradesh) (2015) Status of hydro potential in Himachal Pradesh. Available online at: http://admis.hp.nic.in/doe/DOEAuth/welcome.aspx (Accessed on 4 April 2015)Google Scholar
  15. DoEHP (Directorate of Energy, Himachal Pradesh) (2015a) List of projects with details. Available online at: http://admis.hp.nic.in/doe/DOEAuth/welcome.aspx (Accessed on 2 April 2015).Google Scholar
  16. DOEST (Department of Environment, Science and Technology), Govt. of Himachal Pradesh, India (2013) Environment Master Plan of Himachal Pradesh. Executive summary.Google Scholar
  17. Dombi M, Kuti I, Balogh P (2014) Sustainability assessment of renewable power and heat generation technologies. Energy Policy 67: 264–271. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.12.032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dutta S, Ramanathan AL, Linda A (2012) Glacier fluctuation using satellite data in Beas Basin, 1972-2006, Himachal Pradesh, India. Journal of Earth System Science 121 (5): 1105–1112. DOI: 10.1007/s12040-012-0219-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Egre D, Milewski JC (2002) The diversity of hydropower projects. Energy Policy 30: 1225–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Erees, S, Kuruoglu E, Morai N (2013) An application of Analytical Hierarchy Process for simulation software selection in education area. Frontiers in Science 3 (2): 66–70. DOI: 10.5923/j.fs.20130302.03Google Scholar
  21. Erlewein A (2013) Disappearing rivers — the limits of environmental assessment for hydropower in India. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 43: 135–143. DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2013.07.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Evans A, Strezov V, Evans TJ (2009) Assessment of sustainability indicators for renewable energy technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13: 1082–1088. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2008.03.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goodland R (1994) Environmental sustainability and the power sector. Impact Assessment 12 (4): 409–470. DOI: 10.1080/07349165.1994.9725877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Himurja (Himachal Pradesh Energy Development Agency) (2014) List of projects allotted (526 Projects up to 5.00 MW capacity being developed under private sector participation). Available online at: http://himurja.nic.in/mousigned.html (Accessed on 2 May 2015)Google Scholar
  25. Huang IB, Keisler J, Linkov I (2011) Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: ten years of applications and trends. Science of the Total Environment 409: 3578–3594. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.06.022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. IEA (International Energy Agency) Technical Report (May 2000). Survey of the environmental and social impacts and the effectiveness of mitigation measure in hydropower development, vol. 1. IEA ETSAP (International Energy Agency; Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme) Technology Brief E12 -May 2010.Google Scholar
  27. IHA (International Hydropower Association) (2014) Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol, London, UK. Available online at: http://www.hydrosustainability.org/ (Accessed on 24 March 2015)Google Scholar
  28. IR (N (International River Network and 12 other organisations) (2003) Twelve reasons to exclude large hydro from renewables initiatives.Google Scholar
  29. Kaunda CS, Kimambo CZ, Nielsen TK (2012) Hydropower in the context of sustainable energy supply: a review of technologies and challenges. International Scholarly Research Network (ISRN) Renewable Energy, vol. 2012, Article ID730631: 1–15. DOI: 10.5402/2012/730631Google Scholar
  30. Kaygusuz K (2002) Sustainable development of hydroelectric power. Energy Sources 24 (9): 803–815. DOI: 10.1080/00908310290086725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaygusuz K (2009) The role of hydropower for sustainable energy development. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 4 (4): 365–376. DOI: 10.1080/15567240701756889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kibler KM, Tullos DT (2013) Cumulative biophysical impact of small and large hydropower development in Nu River, China. Water Resources Research 49: 3104–3118. DOI: 10.1002/wrcr.20243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Klimpt JE, Rivero C, Puranen H, Koch F (2002) Recommendations for sustainable hydroelectric development. Energy Policy 30: 1305–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kosnik L (2008) The potential of water power in the fight against global warming in the US. Energy Policy 36: 3262–3265. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.05.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kumar A, Schei T, Ahenkorah A, et al. (2011) Hydropower. In IPCC Special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation [Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, et al. (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  36. Law KMY (2010) Factors affecting sustainability development: high-tech manufacturing firms in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Management Review 15 (4): 619–633.Google Scholar
  37. MakeItRational AHP software (2014) Available online at: http://makeitrational.com/analytic-hierarchy-process/ahpsoftware (Accessed 4 May 2015)Google Scholar
  38. Maxim A (2014) Sustainability assessment of electricity generation technologies using weighted multi-criteria decision analysis. Science of the Total Environment 472: 282–288. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. MNRE (Ministry of New and Renewable Energy), Government of India (2015a) Hydro Power Project Classification. Available online at: http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/grid-connected/small-hydro/ (Accessed on 29 March 2015)Google Scholar
  40. MNRE (Ministry of New and Renewable Energy), Govt. of India (2015) Physical progress (achievements). Available online at: http://mnre.gov.in/mission-and-vision-2/achievements/ (Accessed on 28 February 2015)Google Scholar
  41. MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests), GoI (Government of India) (2006) Environment Impact Assessment Notification.Google Scholar
  42. Morimoto R (2013) Incorporating socio-environmental considerations into project assessment models using multicriteria analysis: A case study of Sri Lankan hydropower projects. Energy Policy 59: 643–653. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nautiyal H, Singal SK, Varun SK, Sharma A (2011) Small hydropower for sustainable energy development in India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15: 2021–2027. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2011.01.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. NCDMA (National Clean Development Authority) of India, Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF), GoI (Government of India) (2014) Approved projects. Available online at: http://cdmindia.gov.in/ (Accessed 2 May 2015)Google Scholar
  45. Onat N, Bayar H (2010) The sustainability indicators of power production systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14: 3108–3115. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2010.07.022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pohekar SD, Ramachandran M (2004) Application of multicriteria decision making to sustainable energy planning_a review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 8: 365–381. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2003.12.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Premalatha M, Abbasi T, Abbasi T, Abbasi SA (2014) A critical view on the eco-friendliness of small and large hydroelectric installations. Science of the Total Environment 481:638–643. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.11.047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Purohit P (2008) Small hydro power projects under clean development mechanism in India: a preliminary assessment. Energy Policy 36: 2000–2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.02.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ramanathan R, Ganesh LS (1995) Energy resource allocation incorporating qualitative and quantitative criteria: an integrated model using Goal Programming and AHP. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 29 (3): 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rana N, Sati SP, Sundriyal YP (2007) Socio-economic and environmental implications of the hydroelectric projects in Uttarakhand Himalaya, India. Journal of Mountain Science 4 (4): 344–353. DOI: 10.1007/s11629-007-0344-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Reddy VR, Uitto JI, Frans DR, Matin N (2006) Achieving global environmental benefits through local development of clean energy? The case of small hilly hydel in India. Energy Policy 34:4069–4080. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2005.09.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rio PD, Burguillo M (2008) Assessing the impact of renewable energy deployment on local sustainability: towards a theoretical framework. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 12: 1325–1344. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2007.03.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rosso M, Bottero M, Pomarico S, et al. (2014) Integrating multicriteria evaluation and stakeholders analysis for assessing hydropower projects. Energy Policy 67: 870–881. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.12.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15:57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Saaty TL (1994) Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. 1st ed. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.Google Scholar
  56. Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Services Sciences 1 (1): 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sarkar AU, Karagioz S (1995) Sustainable development of hydroelectric power. Energy 20 (10): 977–981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Scannapieco D, Naddeo V, Belgiorno V (2014) Sustainable power plants: A support tool for the analysis of alternatives. Land Use Policy 36: 478–484. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.09.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sharma HK, Rana PK (2014) Assessing the impact of hydroelectric project construction on the rivers of district Chamba of Himachal Pradesh in the Northwest Himalaya, India. International Research Journal of Social Sciences 3 (2): 21–25.Google Scholar
  60. Sharma S, Kuniyal JC (2013) Ambient air quality and health status during construction of hydropower projects in the hilly region of Kullu valley, Himachal Pradesh. Transactions 35 (1): 13–24.Google Scholar
  61. Sharma S, Kuniyal JC, Sharma JC (2007) Assessment of manmade and natural hazards in the surroundings of hydropower projects under construction in the Beas Valley of Northwestern Himalaya. Journal of Mountain Science 4 (3): 221–236. DOI: 10.1007/s11629-007-0221-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sovacool BK, Dhakal S, Gippner O, Bambawale MJ (2011) Halting hydro: A review of the socio-technical barriers to hydroelectric power plants in Nepal. Energy 36: 3468–3476. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2011.03.051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Spänhoff B (2014) Current status and future prospects of hydropower in Saxony (Germany) compared to trends in Germany, the European Union and the World. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 30: 518–525. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sperling EV (2012) Hydropower in Brazil: Overview of positive and negative environmental aspects. Energy Procedia 18: 110–118. DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2012.05.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Supriyasilp T, Pongput K, Boonyasirikul T (2009) Hydropower development priority using MCDM method. Energy Policy 37: 1866–1875. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.01.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Taele BM, Mokhutsoane L, Hapazari I (2012) An overview of small hydropower development in Lesotho: Challenges and prospects. Renewable Energy 44: 448–452. DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2012.01.086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Triantaphyllou E, Mann SH (1995) Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process for decision making in engineering applications: Some challenges. International Journal of Industrial Engineering: Applications and Practice 2 (1): 35–44.Google Scholar
  68. Vaidya OS, Kumar S (2006) Analytic Hierarchy Process: An overview of applications. European Journal of Operational Research 169: 1–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Varun, Bhat IK, Prakash R (2008) Life cycle analysis of run-of river small hydro power plants in India. The Open Renewable Energy Journal 1: 11–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vera I, Langlois L (2007) Energy indicators for sustainable development. Energy 32: 875–882. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2006.08.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Vucijak B, Kupusovic T, Midzic-Kurtagic S, Ceric A (2013) Applicability of multicriteria decision aid to sustainable hydropower. Applied Energy 101: 261–267. DOI: 10.1016/ j.apenergy.2012.05.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wang JJ, Jing YY, Zhang CF, Zhao JH (2009) Review on multicriteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decisionmaking. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13: 2263–2278. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2009.06.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. www.inflation.eu (2014) Yearwise average inflation in India (as per Consumer Price Index). Available online at: www.inflation.eu/inflation-rates/india/historicinflation/ cpi-inflatio-india.aspx (Accessed on 10 December 2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, CAS and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Energy and Environmental EngineeringNational Institute of TechnologyHamirpurIndia

Personalised recommendations