TEM/32/04.01.01/2011 HYDROPOWER - Sustainable utilization of water resources in the Republic of Karelia Karelia ENPI CBC Programme KA535 Feasibility study for small hydropower development as a mean for remote villages electrification in Republic of Karelia DRAFT intermediary report TEM/32/04.01.01/2011 2013-02-KA535 Intermediate report - DRAFT 11.06.2013 2 (37) Front page photograph of the Kumio rapid on the Voinitsa River near to Kalevala settlement, Republic of Karelia, Russian Federation. TEM/32/04.01.01/2011 2013-02-KA535 Intermediate report - DRAFT 11.06.2013 3 (37) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This project studies the situation regarding shortage of electricity supply in remote settlements in Republic of Karelia. It draws out the best practice from a long-term experience of project implementations in Finland and Russia. The project was carried out by Finnish consulting companies Insinööritoimisto Jormakka Oy, Vesirakentaja Oy and PM Technology Oy in association with Russian partners Nord Hydro JSC and ANO Energy Efficiency Centre. The grant is financed from the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument in the framework of the Karelia ENPI CBC programme 2007-2013 within its Priority Quality of life under the Call for Proposals 02.04.2012 – 27.08.2012. The programme is implemented in accordance with the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the European Community about financing and implementation of the Karelia cross-border cooperation programme. The study examined present conditions in a few pre-determined settlements in Republic of Karelia where electricity supply shortage exists. Thereafter, the situation has been evaluated in terms of possibility to develop any local sources of energy. The small hydropower resources appeared to be appropriate for the target of the project. In the course of the project, available local existing facilities were examined with and without power generating capability, evaluating their physical capacity for generation or generation expansion and/or opportunities for refurbishment of old plants, which could result in reducing energy supply shortage in the remote settlement. In addition, some new prospective sites were evaluated. Small hydropower plants (SHPP) are defined as having a capacity less than ten (10) MW. The study relied primarily on maps, hydrological and other available data as well as previously performed studies to identify initially viable sites. Two screens were arranged to determine settlements, which would be worth more detailed analysis. 1. During the first screen there has been identified few settlements, which are in sore need of electricity supply. This screen identified eight (8) remote settlements for consideration. Information was provided by the State Committee of the Republic of Karelia for Housing and Communal Services (letter # 06/03-226 as of 25.03.2013). 2. The second screen eliminated settlements that had not any appropriate hydropower site, i.e. hydraulic head of more than five (5) meters, within a radius of twenty (20) km. This assumption is based on mutual empirical assumption of Oy Vesirakentaja and russian partners that those sites, having less than five meters in head, will require physically large and thus considerably more expensive power generating equipment, and construction of a transmission line of more than twenty (20) km long will be unreasonably expensive. Additionally, the amount of population was taken into consideration; the most populated settlements were given priority, where possible blackout may have the most harm. This screen eliminated six (6) remote settlements from consideration. After these two screenings two (2) settlements were left. Those pre-selected settlements were then analyzed in more details in order to find feasible sites for hydropower development. To be able to calculate installed capacity and power output, the Flow Duration Curves were constructed using daily hydrologic records. Available hydraulic head was estimated for each potential site individually. Capital costs of hydropower developments were estimated based on recently implemented projects in Finland and in Russian Federation. Costs included development costs, construction works and costs of the machinery and transmission line. TEM/32/04.01.01/2011 2013-02-KA535 Intermediate report - DRAFT 11.06.2013 4 (37) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was implemented by the Finnish consulting company Vesirakentaja, Ltd in association with Russian generating company Nord Hydro, JSC under the partner agreement to the Insinööritoimisto Jormakka Oy, Lead Partner, which in its turn had the grant contract to the Council of Oulu Region, Joint Managing Authority (JMA), in order to determine best practice in a number of areas of water resources usage in Republic of Karelia, Russian Federation. The conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the available data, reconnaissance studies of existing conditions on the territory of Karelia. JMA, represented by Ms. Henna-Mari Laurinen, through the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument has financed the project jointly with the Russia party, particularly Nord Hydro. Russian branch of the ENPI CBC was represented by Mr. Dmitry Bazegsky. The project manager was Mr. Pekka Horttanainen from Insinööritoimisto Jormakka Oy. The study was conducted with the assistance of Mr. Ari Aalto, Mr. Aimo Lamberg and Mr. Pavel Nesterets Ms. Svetlana Chekalova hydropower experts from Oy Vesirakentaja. Russian partners, generating company Nord Hydro was supporting the study, in the persons of Mr. Vladimir Romanchuk and Ms. Tatiana Pokutnik. The Government of Republic of Karelia, in the person of Mr. Dmitry Kislov and Ms. Galina Kondrashkova, was supporting the study from the Russian side and provided necessary data for the project implementation. TEM/32/04.01.01/2011 2013-02-KA535 Intermediate report - DRAFT 11.06.2013 5 (37) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 GENERAL INFORMATION: PURPOSES AND METHODS OF STUDY. ............. 10 1.1 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.2 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 10 1.3 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.4 ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 11 1.4.1 Hydropower generating technology ................................................................................ 11 1.4.2 Initial data ...................................................................................................................... 13 1.4.3 Adjustment of hydrologic records.................................................................................... 13 1.4.4 Screening analysis .......................................................................................................... 13 1.4.5 Capital costs analysis ..................................................................................................... 14 2 STUDY OF SMALL HYDROPOWER IN REPUBLIC OF KARELIA: PRESENT AND PROSPECTIVE SITUATIONS ............................................................................................. 15 2.1 REPUBLIC OF KARELIA BRIEFLY .......................................................................................................................... 15 2.2 GENERAL ANALYSIS OF ENERGY SECTOR OF KARELIA .......................................................................................... 16 2.2.1 Present situation ............................................................................................................. 16 2.2.2 Prospective situation ....................................................................................................... 16 3 CASE STUDIES ........................................................................................................... 18 3.1 KALEVALA NATIONAL REGION OF REPUBLIC OF KARELIA .................................................................................... 18 3.1.1 Voinitsa settlement .......................................................................................................... 19 3.2 KONDOPOGA METROPOLITAN REGION OF REPUBLIC OF KARELIA ......................................................................... 20 3.2.1 Yustozero settlement ....................................................................................................... 21 3.2.2 Lindozero settlement ....................................................................................................... 22 3.3 MUEZERSKY METROPOLITAN REGION OF REPUBLIC OF KARELIA .......................................................................... 23 3.3.1 Kimovaara settlement ..................................................................................................... 24 3.3.2 Reboly settlement ............................................................................................................ 25 3.3.2.1 New SHPP Rebolskaya 1 on the Kolvas lake........................................................... 26 3.3.2.2 New SHPP Rebolskaya 2 on the Lieksanjoki (Omelianjoki) River .......................... 30 3.4 SEGEZHA METROPOLITAN REGION OF REPUBLIC OF KARELIA ..............................................................................