ARTICLE IN PRESS

Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144

www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

Financial evaluation of renewable energy technologies for irrigation

water pumping in India
Pallav Purohit
Research Programme on International Climate Policy, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI), Neuer Jungfernstieg 21,
20354 Hamburg, Germany
Received 25 April 2006; accepted 15 November 2006
Available online 2 January 2007

Abstract

An attempt to develop a simple framework for financial evaluation of renewable energy technologies (RETs) such as photovoltaic (PV)
pump, windmill pump, biogas and producer gas-driven dual fuel engine pumps for irrigation water pumping has been made. The unit
cost of water and unit cost of useful energy delivered by the RETs have been estimated. The monetary benefits that accrued to the end-
user have been quantified in terms of the amount of diesel or electricity saved. Financial figures of merit for the investments made in the
RETs have been estimated. The effect of fuel price escalation on these measures of financial performance has also been evaluated along
with the estimation of the break-even prices of fuels likely to be substituted by RETs. Results of some exemplifying calculations are
presented and briefly discussed.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Renewable energy technologies; Financial figures of merit; Irrigation water pumping

1. Introduction operation in the agriculture sector in the year 2003 (ICG,

Groundwater is a major source for irrigation and
drinking water supply in India. The present contribution
of groundwater to irrigation is about 50% in terms of area
whereas 80% of the rural domestic water supply is met
with groundwater (GOI, 2003). At present, the level of
groundwater exploitation is about 30% of the existing
potential. In rural India, most of the groundwater used for
domestic consumption is lifted by human power. For
irrigation purposes, however, only 40% of the water is
lifted by traditional means (i. e. human/animal power) and
the rest is lifted by diesel and electric pumpsets. Irrigation
water pumping is the second most important direct
commercial energy end use in Indian agriculture after land
preparation (TERI, 2002). Diesel and electricity are
commonly used for meeting irrigation energy demand in
the country. There were reportedly more than 15 million
electricity driven pumps and 6 million diesel pumps in
Tel.: +49 40340576 65; fax: +49 40340576 76.
E-mail addresses: pallav1976@yahoo.co.in, purohit@hwwi.org
(P. Purohit).
2003). For better exploitation of the groundwater potential
to meet the increasing irrigation water demand more and
more wells would be dug and energized thus increasing the
demand of electricity. On the other hand, diesel is expected
to become increasingly expensive and scarce.
There exists substantial potential of using renewable
sources of energy for irrigation water pumping in India
(UNDP, 1987; Kandpal and Garg, 2003; MNES, 2006).
Renewable energy options for water pumping include solar
PV pumps, windmill pumps and dual-fuel engine pumps
with biogas/producer gas as a partial substitute for diesel.
The PV water pumping systems are expected to offer an
appropriate solution for supplying water to meet drinking
and irrigation requirement in remote regions. Efforts are
being made in India as well as throughout the world, to
irrigate crops by PV pumps (Derrick, 1994; Hammad,
1995; Suehrcke et al., 1997; Kou et al., 1998; Arab et al.,
1999; Hamidat, 1999; MNES, 2006; Manolakos et al.,
2004). In the year 1994, the Ministry of Non-Conventional
Energy Sources (MNES), Government of India had
envisaged an ambitious program for the installation of
50,000 PV water-pumping systems over a period of 5 years

0301-4215/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.11.013
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144
(MNES, 1994). However, till December 2005, only 7002
PV systems for water pumping were reportedly installed
(MNES, 2006). In the year 2004–05, the subsidy on PV
Pump has been reduced by MNES from Rs. 110/Wp
(during 2003–04) to Rs. 100/Wp on pumps being promoted
through State Nodal Agencies (SNAs).
Attempts to harness wind energy for water pumping in
the country have been made since early 1980s (Mani and
Mooly, 1983; Ackermann and Söder, 2002). The windmill-
based water-pumping program was re-launched in the
country in December 1993 with the modification of
APOLY-12-PU-500 shallow well windmill pumps. Under
the new program, few other suitable wind pumps including
the deep well gear type windmill pumps have also been
supported. The MNES provides a capital subsidy in the
range of Rs. 20,000–45,000 for the direct drive windmill
and Rs. 30,000 for a geared drive windmill. However, till
December 2005 only 1082 windmill pumps have reportedly
been installed after the re-launch of the program (MNES,
2006). It may be noted that the total number of windmill
pumps reportedly installed for water pumping is far below
their estimated potential of 0.4 million (UNDP, 1987;
MNES, 2006).
The financial viability of renewable energy based vis-à-vis
conventional options for water pumping could be one of the
main barriers against their large-scale adoption. In this
study an attempt to develop a simple framework for techno-
economic evaluation of RETs for irrigation water pumping
has been made. The paper is set out as follows. Section 2
provides framework for the estimation of the annual useful
energy and annual amount of water delivered by different
pumping options along with the estimation of the unit cost
of useful energy and unit cost of water delivered by these
systems. The framework to estimate the monetary benefits
accrued to the end user by the use of renewable energy
technologies is presented in Section 3. The financial figures
of merit and break-even prices of the fuel(s) substituted by
the renewable energy technologies are given in Sections 4
and 5 respectively. The key assumptions and input para-
meters and results of this study are discussed in Sections 6.
Section 7 summarizes the findings of the study.
2. Analysis
2.1. Annual useful energy and annual water output
The annual useful energy delivered by a PV water
pumping system depends upon the capacity of the PV
system, the average solar radiation availability and the
overall efficiency of the PV water-pumping system. Thus,
the annual useful energy, AUEpv, (in MJ) delivered by a PV
system can be estimated as (Purohit and Kandpal, 2005a)
AUE pv ¼ ð3:6  8760ÞCUF pv Ppv Zp;pv , (1)
where Ppv represents the capacity of PV system, CUFpv the
capacity utilization factor and Zp,pv the overall efficiency of
PV pump.
3135
PV modules are rated in peak Watts (Wp). This is the
maximum power output from the module at a cell
temperature of 25 1C and a solar irradiance of 1 kW/m2.
The actual power obtained from the system in the field is
generally less than the rated power because (i) the efficiency
of a solar cell decreases as its temperature increases and
cells in the field may often operate at temperatures higher
than 25 1C in tropical areas, (ii) the solar irradiance is
usually less than 1 kW/m2, (iii) imperfect matching of the
load may cause the module to operate at a voltage and
current that gives a power output less than the maximum,
(iv) the pumping system may not be operational at times
when irrigation is not required, and (vi) downtime required
for repair and maintenance etc. In fact the average output
over the daylight hours may be much less than the rated
output (even in a location with high average daily solar
irradiation) thus resulting in a low-capacity utilization of
the PV pump.
The annual useful energy delivered by a water-pumping
windmill depends upon the design parameters of the
windmill (swept area of rotor, coefficient of performance
of the wind rotor, etc.) and location-specific parameters
such as air density, wind speed etc. (Gupta, 1986; Muljadi
et al., 1996; Badran, 2003). In view of the cubic dependence
of the useful energy output of the windmill on the wind
speed from cut-in wind speed to the rated wind speed and
the fact that it is usually kept constant from rated wind
speed to the cut-out wind speed (Leuven, 1984), the annual
useful energy, AUEwind, (in MJ) delivered by a windmill
pump may be estimated as (Purohit and Kandpal, 2004)
 "Z vr
Zp;wind gC p ra Ak k
AUE wind ¼ 15:77 ðvðkþ2Þ eðv=cÞ dv
ck vci
Z vco 
k
þ v3r vk eðv=cÞ dv , ð2Þ
vr
where Zp,wind represents the efficiency of pump used with
the wind rotor, g the mechanical availability factor of the
windmill pump accounting for downtime during main-
tenance etc., Cp the coefficient of performance of the wind
rotor, ra the density of air, A the swept area of rotor, k the
shape parameter, c the scale parameter, v the wind speed,
vci the cut-in wind speed, vco the cut-out wind speed, and vr
the rated wind speed of the windmill.
The annual useful energy, AUEbp, (in MJ) delivered by
biogas-driven dual fuel engine pump can be expressed as
(Purohit and Kandpal, 2007)
AUE bp ¼ ð0:746  3:6Þ8760CUF bp Pbp ð1  mÞZp;dep , (3)
where CUFbp 1 represents the capacity utilization factor of
the system (it is the fraction of time, the system operates in
a year), Pbp the capacity of the biogas-driven dual fuel
1
The capacity utilization factor, CUFbp, of biogas driven dual fuel
engine pump can be estimated as CUF bp ¼ ½ðV Zbp Þ=ð24Pbp Sd;bp ð1  mÞÞ
where V represents the capacity of biogas plant, Zbp the annual average
biogas production efficiency and Sd,bp the specific biogas consumption in a
biogas driven dual-fuel engine.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
3136 P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144

engine pump, and Zp,dep the overall efficiency of duel fuel 3. Valuation of benefits
engine pump. While operating in dual fuel mode there is
some derating of the engine capacity. As a result, the The monetary benefits associated with RETs for irriga-
amount of water discharged by a biogas-driven dual fuel tion water pumping depend upon the monetary worth of
engine pump would be slightly less than the diesel engine fuel(s) saved. A renewable energy-based water-pumping
pumpset operating in diesel alone mode for the same values system usually replaces either diesel or electricity. The
of total head, friction losses etc. Therefore, a derating monetary worth of fuel(s) saved can be estimated as a
factor, m, has been introduced in Eq. (3). product of annual fuel savings and the market price of the
The annual useful energy, AUEbg, (in MJ) delivered by fuel saved.
producer gas-driven dual fuel engine pump can be The monetary worth of diesel saved, MWds by a
estimated as (Kandpal et al., 2003) renewable energy system can be estimated by using the
following expression:
AUE bg ¼ ð0:746  3:6Þ8760CUF bg Pbg ð1  mÞZp;dep , (4) " #
AUE
where CUFbg represents the capacity utilization factor of MW ds ¼ p , (9)
CV d Zp;dep d
the system and Pbg the capacity of the producer gas-driven
dual fuel engine pump. where CVd represents the calorific value of diesel, and pd
The annual useful energy, AUEemp, (in MJ) delivered by the market price of diesel. The term inside the bracket on
electric motor pump can be determined as the right-hand side represents the annual amount of diesel
AUE emp ¼ ð0:746  3:6Þ8760CUF emp Pemp Zp;emp , (5) saved (Ads) by a renewable energy system.
Similarly, the monetary worth of electricity saved,
where CUFemp represents the capacity utilization factor of MWes, by a renewable energy system can be determined as
the system, Pemp the capacity of the electric motor pump, " #
and Zp,emp the overall efficiency of electric motor pump. AUE
MW es ¼ p, (10)
The annual useful energy, AUEdep, (in MJ) delivered by 3:6Zp;emp e
diesel engine pump can be expressed as
where pe represents the market price of electricity. Once
AUE dep ¼ ð0:746  3:6Þ8760CUF dep Pdep Zp;dep , (6) again, the term inside the bracket on the right-hand side
represents the annual amount of electricity saved (Aes) by a
where CUFdep represents the capacity utilization factor of renewable energy system.
the system and Pdep the capacity of the diesel engine pump.
In each case, the corresponding value of annual water
output can be determined by dividing the annual useful 4. Present value of net benefits of an investment in the RETs
energy by rgh where r represents the density of water, g the for irrigation water pumping
acceleration due to gravity and h the total effective head.
In case of diesel replacement the present value of net
benefits (NPVd) of an investment in the renewable energy
2.2. Unit cost of useful energy and unit cost of water technology (i.e. PV pump, windmill pump, biogas/produ-
cer gas-driven dual fuel engine pump) for irrigation water
The unit cost of useful energy, UUE, can be determined pumping can be expressed as
as the ratio of the total annual cost (sum of the annualized    
ð1 þ dÞt  1
capital cost and annual operation, repair and maintenance NPV d ¼ ðMW ds  C i Þ  C 0 . (11)
dð1 þ dÞt
cost) of the water-pumping system to the total annual
useful energy, AUE, delivered by the system. Mathemati- Similarly, in the case of substitution of grid electricity the
cally, present value of net benefits (NPVe) can be written as
   
C 0 ððdð1 þ dÞt Þ=ðð1 þ dÞt  1ÞÞ þ C i ð1 þ dÞt  1
UUE ¼ , (7) NPV e ¼ ðMW es  C i Þ  Co . (12)
AUE dð1 þ dÞt

where C0 represents the capital cost of system, Ci the The salvage value of the renewable energy systems has
annual repair and maintenance cost, d the discount rate been assumed to be negligibly small in Eqs. (11) and (12).
and t the useful lifetime of the water-pumping system. In case the prices of diesel and electricity are expected to
Similarly, the unit cost of water, UCW, can be escalate at uniform annual rates (in fractions) xd and xe,
determined as the ratio of the total annual cost of the respectively, Eqs. (11) and (12) are modified as
system to the annual amount of water pumped by the   t 
0 ðMW ds Þ 1 þ xd
system. NPV d ¼ 1
ðxd  dÞ 1þd
    
C 0 ððdð1 þ dÞt Þ=ðð1 þ dÞt  1ÞÞ þ C i ð1 þ dÞt  1
UCW ¼ . (8) C i  C0 , ð13Þ
ðAUE=rghÞ dð1 þ dÞt
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144 3137

  t 
0 ðMW es Þ 1 þ xe pumping have been considered. Among all the water
NPV e ¼ 1 pumping options an important distinctive feature of the
ðxe  dÞ 1þd
   PV-pumping systems is the possibility of designing
ð1 þ dÞt  1
C i  C0 . ð14Þ modular systems closely matching the hydraulic energy
dð1 þ dÞt
demand (which is not usually possible with other options
Eqs. (11)–(14) were also used for estimating the value of being considered in this study).
the internal rate of return (IRR) on the investment for the The potential of using biogas-driven dual fuel engines for
respective cases. water pumping depend upon the potential of installing
community biogas plants that essentially depend on the
5. Break-even analysis bovine ownership pattern of the households in the country.
Purohit et al. (2002a) reported that households having less
It is normally expected that a renewable energy system than four bovines cannot install family size biogas plants.
for irrigation water pumping shall be financially more There may be a possibility that households owning 1–3
attractive with an increase in the prices of diesel and bovines may contribute dung for operation of community
electricity. It may, therefore, be useful to estimate the type biogas plants for supplying biogas to a dual fuel
break-even prices of diesel and electricity beyond which a engine pump for irrigation water pumping (besides other
renewable energy system would be financially viable to the end uses). As per the 1991 census data on the livestock
user. holding and its distribution in different states of India,
The following expressions have been obtained for the number of households owning 1–3 bovines have been
break-even prices of diesel (pd,b in Rs/l) and electricity (pe,b estimated (CMIE, 1993). With an average value of 10.88 kg
in Rs/kWh): of dung availability per bovine and 75% dung collection
    efficiency the theoretical potential number of community
1 dð1 þ dÞt biogas plants of 20 m3 has been estimated to be 0.4 million.
pd;b ¼ C0 þ C i , (15)
Ads ð1 þ dÞt  1 However, the index of community participation (ICP)2 will
    further reduce the theoretical potential number of com-
1 dð1 þ dÞt munity biogas plants.
pe;b ¼ C0 þ C i . (16)
Aes ð1 þ dÞt  1 Table 1 presents the technical details of different
With fuel price escalation the expressions obtained for prevailing designs of windmill pumps in India (EIL, 2003;
the break-even prices of diesel and electricity are Purohit and Kandpal, 2004). Table 2 presents the capital
  cost of different water pumping options during the year
1 xd  d 2005–06 as indicated by several manufacturers. The values
pd;b ¼
Ads fð1 þ xd Þ=ð1 þ dÞgt  1 of different input parameters used in the financial evalua-
  
ð1 þ dÞt  1 tion of RETs for irrigation water pumping are given in
 C0 þ Ci , ð17Þ
dð1 þ dÞt Tables 3 and 4 (EIL, 2003; Kandpal and Garg, 2003;
  Purohit et al., 2002a, b, 2006; Purohit, 2004; Purohit and
1 xe  d Kandpal, 2004, 2005a, b, 2007; Purohit and Michaelowa,
pe;b ¼
Aes fð1 þ xe Þ=ð1 þ dÞgt  1 2006).
   Sufficient solar radiation is necessary for all devices
ð1 þ dÞt  1
 C0 þ Ci , ð18Þ based on solar energy. It is recommended that for installing
dð1 þ dÞt
PV pumps, the average daily solar radiation in the least
respectively. sunny month should be greater than 4 kWh/m2/day on a
horizontal surface (ESCAP, 1991). Ideally, detailed solar
6. Results and discussion radiation data for each location should be used in
evaluating the output delivered by a PV pump. Since most
For exemplifying the use of the framework developed in parts of the country receive annual mean daily solar
this study, calculations for commonly available capacities radiation in the range 5-7 kWh/m2/day (Mani and Rangar-
of renewable energy systems for irrigation water pumping ajan, 1982) a value of 5.5 kWh/m2/day has been taken. The
have been made and the results are briefly summarized in output of PV pump is quite sensitive to the capacity
this section. The validity of the data and the conclusions utilization of the system which essentially depends on
derived from the results of sample calculations are, number of sunny days and duration of sunlight in a day.
however, limited by the information available in the Most of the locations in India have more than 300 sunny
literature and of that provided by the manufacturers. In
the Indian market, the energy technologies for irrigation 2
water pumping are available only in certain sizes and it is a The index of community participation would also take into account the
propensity of the individuals to invest in a community biogas plant based
common practice to slightly oversize the conventional water pumping system. For example, with 10% ICP around 40,000
pumps. Therefore, in this study the commonly available community biogas plants with a rated capacity of 20 m3 could be installed
sizes of different energy technologies for irrigation water in the country.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
3138 P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144

Table 1
Design features of windmill pumps

Windmill Manufacturer Rotor Number of Solid rotor Wind speed (m/s)

design diameter (m)/ blades area (m2)
type
Cut-in Rated Cut-out

GM-II Rural Engineering School, 3.0/(Geared) 18 4.55 2.22 3.33 13.89

Bhavnagar
SICO The Scientific Instrument Company 3.0/(Geared) 18 5.17 2.22 5.00 23.89
Limited, Allahabad
AV-45 Auroville Centre for Scientific 4.5/(Direct) 18 7.63 1.80 2.80 10.00
Research (Aureka), Tamil Nadu
AV-45 Auroville Centre for Scientific 5.7/(Direct) 24 10.70 1.50 3.00 10.00
Research (Aureka), Tamil Nadu

APOLY- Institute of Engineering and Rural 5.0/(Direct) 12 6.19 2.50 5.00 10.00
12-PU-500 Technology, Allahabad

Table 2 been taken at 0.25 (Tripathi et al., 1999; Kandpal and

Capital cost of various water pumping options Garg, 2003).
Energy technology/system Capacity Unit Capital costa The annual repair and maintenance cost of the PV
(Rs.) pumps considered in this study has been estimated at Rs.
1500 (Purohit and Kandpal, 2005a). The annual repair and
1. PV pumps maintenance cost of windmill pump has been taken to be
Surface 900 DC 145,000
1800 DC 295,000
2% of the cost of windmill pump which consists the
Submersible 1200 AC 297,500 charges of regular service of the windmill, painting of the
1680 AC 380,200 windmill to reduce the corrosion (once in 6 years), and the
1800 AC 422,000 cost of replacement of pump valves and pump washers
2. Biogas-driven dual fuel engine pump (once in 3 years) etc. Similarly, the repair and maintenance
Cost of biogas plant and 5 hp 15 m3 116,000 cost of biomass gasifier is assumed to be 5% of the cost of
dual fuel engine pump gasifier mainly used in periodical replacement of combus-
20 m3 141,000 tion cone, air nozzle and grate (Tripathi et al., 1999). For
25 m3 154,000
the diesel engine pumpset, no major repair/replacement is
3. Producer gas-driven dual fuel engine pump required except overhauling of the engine (after 5000 h of
Cost of biomass gasifier 5 hp 50,000 operation) besides cost of lubricants. The maximum annual
10 hp 70,000
repair and replacement cost has been taken as 10% of the
4. Windmill pumps capital cost of the diesel engine pumpset (Ravindranath
AV-55 5.7b m 110,000 and Hall, 1995). In India, a major fraction of the net sown
AV-45 4.5b m 84,000
GM-II 3.0b m 74,000
area of different states has a maximum head of 10 m (FAI,
SICO 3.0b m 113,000 2000; CGWB, 2001; MOA, 2002). Moreover, the applica-
APOLY-12-PU-500 5.0b m 45,000 tion of PV surface pump in DC mode is limited to 10 m of
5. Electric motor pumps
total effective head (ESCAP, 1991), the comparison has
Surface 5 hp 24,000 been carried out to a total effective head of 10 m.
10 hp 36,000 The annual useful energy delivered by several RETs for
Submersible 5 hp 30,000 irrigation water pumping is presented in Table 5 3 using the
10 hp 42,000 framework presented in Section 2. The estimates for annual
6. Diesel engine pumps water output of several RETs at a total effective head of
Surface 5 hp 32,000 10 m are also presented in the same table. The unit cost of
Submersible 10 hp 42,000 useful energy and unit cost of water delivered by several
a
1 US$ ¼ Rs. 44.61 on 2 April 2006. RETs is presented in Table 6. From Table 6 it may be
b
Diameter of the rotor. noted that the unit cost of water delivered by RETs varies

days in a year (Mani and Rangarajan, 1982). Therefore, the 3

For several designs of windmill pumps considered in this study, the
capacity utilization factor has been estimated at 0.2 for PV analysis has been made for the location of Indore. The location of Indore
pumps (Purohit and Kandpal, 2005a). The capacity has been selected, as it is a windy site except the coastal areas of India
utilization factor for diesel and electric motor pumps has (Mani and Mooly, 1983).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144 3139

Table 3
Technical parameters used in the financial evaluation of RET’s for irrigation water pumping

Parameter Symbol Unit Value

Amount of wet dung required to produce 1 m3 biogas dw kg 25

Annual average biogas production efficiency Zbp Fraction 0.9
Average yield of bovine dung D kg 10.88
Acceleration due to gravity g m/s2 9.81
Capacity utilization factor of diesel engine pump CUFdep Fraction 0.25
Capacity utilization factor of electric motor pump CUFemp Fraction 0.25
Capacity utilization factor of producer gas driven dual fuel engine pump CUFbg Fraction 0.25
Capacity utilization factor of PV pump CUFpv Fraction 0.20
Coefficient of performance of windmill Cp Fraction 0.25
Daily average solar radiation availability I kWh/m2 day 5.5
Density of air ra kg/m3 1.225
Density of water r kg/m3 1000
Derating factor of biogas/producer gas driven dual fuel engine pumps m Fraction 0.1
Effective head of ground water h m 10
Efficiency of pump used with windmill Zp,wind Fraction 0.80
Mechanical availability factor of windmill pump g Fraction 0.90
Overall efficiency of the pump used with the wind rotor Zp,wind Fraction 0.80
Overall efficiency of electric-motor-pump set Zp,emp Fraction 0.52
Overall efficiency of diesel-engine pump set Zp,dep Fraction 0.40
Overall efficiency of PV pump se Zp,PV Fraction 0.40
Specific diesel consumption in a diesel engine pump se Sd l/bhp-h 0.30
Specific biogas consumption in a biogas driven dual fuel engine pump se Sbp m3/bhp-h 0.425
Specific biomass consumption in a producer gas driven duel fuel engine pump Sb,bg kg/bhp-h 1.20
Specific diesel consumption in a producer gas driven dual fuel engine pump Sd,bg l/bhp-h 0.10
Useful lifetime of biogas plant tbp yr 25
Useful lifetime of biomass gasifier tbg h 10,000
Useful lifetime of diesel engine pump se tdep h 20,000
Useful lifetime of electric motor pump se temp h 20,000
Useful lifetime of PV system tpv yr 20
Useful lifetime of windmill pump twind yr 15

Table 4
Economics parameters used in the financial evaluation of RETs for irrigation water pumping

Parameter Symbol Unit Value

Annual repair and maintenance cost of PV pump Ci,pv Rs. 1500

Annual repair and maintenance cost of windmill pump as a fraction of capital cost mwind Fraction 0.02
Annual repair and maintenance cost of biomass gasifier as a fraction of the capital cost wbg Fraction 0.05
Annual operation, repair and maintenance cost of biogas driven dual fuel engine pump
with the rated capacity of the biogas plant as
15 m3 Ci,bp Rs. 49,144
20 m3 Ci,bp Rs. 56,735
25 m3 Ci,bp Rs. 63,926
Annual repair and maintenance cost of diesel engine pump as a fraction of the capital cost wdep Fraction 0.1
Annual repair and maintenance cost of electric motor pump as a fraction of the capital wemp Fraction 0.1
cost
Diesel price escalation xd Fraction 0.08
Discount rate d Fraction 0.1
Electricity price escalation xe Fraction 0.08
Market price of diesel pd Rs./l 32
Market price of electricity pe Rs/kWh 4
Price of biomass feedstock pb Rs/kg 0.6
Manpower for producer gas driven dual fuel engine pump Zbg Number 2
Manpower for diesel engine pump Zdep Number 1
Manpower for producer gas driven dual fuel engine pump Zemp Number 1
Manpower cost Cl Rs/man-hour 10
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
3140 P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144

Table 5 characteristics. Among all the RETs, the biogas-driven

Annual useful energy and annual water delivered by energy technologies dual fuel engine pump remains the cost-effective alternative
Energy technology/ Capacity Unit Annual Annual
followed by subsidized PV pumps, producer gas driven
system useful water dual fuel engine pumps and windmill pumps.
energy (MJ) output (m3) Table 7 presents the effect of the rate of fuel price
escalation on the net present value of different RETs in
1. PV pumps
case of diesel replacement. It may be noted that the
Surface 900 DC 2138 21,798
1800 DC 4277 43,596 financial attractiveness of RETs for irrigation water
Submersible 1200 AC 2851 29,064 pumping improves with higher values of fuel price
1680 AC 3992 40,690 escalation rate. Table 8 present the financial figures of
1800 AC 4277 43,596 merit of RETs for irrigation water pumping in case of
2. Biogas-driven dual fuel engine pump (Capacity: 5 hp) diesel and electricity substitution, respectively. From these
Community biogas 15 m3 28,023 285,662 tables it may be noted that biogas-driven dual fuel engine
plant pumps are financially most attractive followed by APOLY-
20 m3 37,365 380,883
12-PU-500 windmill pump. However, electric motor pumps
25 m3 46,706 476,103
using grid electricity at the prevailing low unit cost of
3. Producer gas-driven dual fuel engine pump electricity are still the cheapest option for farmers.
5 hp 10,441 106,434
The break-even prices of diesel and electricity saved by
10 hp 20,882 212,868
RETs are presented in Table 9. The break-even price of
4. Windmill pumps diesel is found to be as low as Rs. 24/l for the case of
AV-55 5.7a m 873 8895
biogas-driven dual fuel engine pump and as high as Rs.
AV-45 4.5a m 660 6733
GM-II 3.0a m 415 4230 385/l for the case of GM-II windmill pump. Similarly, the
SICO 3.0a m 1050 10,702 break-even price of electricity is found to be Rs. 3/kWh for
APOLY-12PU-500 5.0a m 3305 33,688 the case of biogas-driven dual fuel engine pump and Rs.
5. Electric motor pumps 51/kWh for the case of GM-II windmill pump. It is,
Surface 5 hp 15,292 155,880 therefore, surmised that with the prevailing costs and
10 hp 30,584 311,760 performance characteristics most of the RETs (except
Submersible 5 hp 15,292 155,880 biogas-driven dual fuel engine pumps and APOLY-12-PU-
10 hp 30,584 311,760
500 windmill pump) are not financially viable to the users.
6. Diesel engine pumps However, with increase in the prices of diesel and electricity
Surface 5 hp 11,763 119,908 and/or provision of suitable incentives, the same may
Submersible 10 hp 23,526 239,815
become financially viable to the user.
a
Diameter of the rotor. The financial feasibility of a windmill pump strongly
depends on the windmill design and site characteristics. For
example, the use of Apoly-12-PU-500 windmill pump is
from Rs. 0.20 to 2.65/m3 for the values of input parameters financially more attractive among all the RETs for the
given in Tables 3 and 4. The biogas-driven dual fuel engine location of Indore; however, for the same location, AV-55
pumps are most cost effective to the user followed by the windmill pump is the least-preferred option. In case of PV
electric motor pumps at the assumed tariff of electricity pumps and producer gas-driven dual fuel engine pump two
(Table 4). PV pumps (surface), producer gas-driven dual somewhat different situations have been observed. For PV
fuel engine pumps, diesel engine pumps, and windmill pump, the capital cost is very high and the annual repair
pumps are the next four best alternatives for irrigation and maintenance cost is very low whereas in case of a
water pumping. The effect of capital subsidy on the unit producer gas-driven dual fuel engine pump, the capital cost
cost of useful energy and unit cost of water delivered by is low (as compared to the PV pump) and the annual repair
RETs is also presented in Table 6. Incidentally, for Indore, and maintenance cost along with the operational cost is
the use of APOLY-12-PU-500 windmill pump is the best very high. On the basis of the availability of biomass
alternative option among all the designs of the windmill feedstock, it is possible to use the producer gas-driven dual
pumps considered in this study. The lower annual useful fuel engine pump at higher CUF.4 Fig. 1 presents the
energy delivered by AV-55 and -45 windmill pumps at results of a sensitivity analysis undertaken to study the
Indore can be attributed to lower values of cut-in and -out effect of uncertainties associated with some of the
wind speeds of these windmills as compared to relatively important input variables on the unit cost of water
higher wind regimes prevailing at the site. For the same delivered by the producer gas driven dual fuel engine
location, the annual useful energy delivered by SICO pump. The unit cost of water is found to be quite sensitive
windmill pump is higher due to higher cut-in and -out wind
speeds for these designs. Thus prior to the installation of 4
There may be situations in which an owner of a producer gas driven
windmill pumps it is necessary to take into account the dual fuel engine pump use it at higher CUF to meet the water demand of
design features of the windmill and site-specific wind his farm (in case of large farm size) and the neighboring farm.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144 3141

Table 6
Unit cost of water and unit cost of useful energy delivered by energy technologies

Technology Capacity Unit Without capital subsidy With capital subsidy

UCW (Rs./m3) UUE (Rs./MJ) UCW (Rs./m3) UUE (Rs./MJ)

1. PV pump
PV pump (surface) 900 Wp 0.85 8.67 0.37 3.72
PV pump (surface) 1800 Wp 0.83 8.45 0.34 3.51
PV pump (submersible) 1200 Wp 1.25 12.78 0.77 7.84
PV pump (submersible) 1680 Wp 1.13 11.56 0.65 6.62
PV pump (submersible) 1800 Wp 1.17 11.94 0.69 7.00
2. Biogas driven dual fuel engine pump (Capacity: 5 hp)
Community biogas plant 15 m3 0.26 2.65 0.24 2.48
20 m3 0.23 2.37 0.22 2.24
25 m3 0.21 2.17 0.20 2.01
3. Producer gas driven dual fuel engine pump
5 hp 1.00 10.15 0.96 9.76
10 hp 0.73 7.48 0.71 7.21
4. Windmill pump
AV-55 5.7 m 1.87 19.09 1.21 12.31
AV-45 4.5 m 1.89 19.28 1.01 10.31
GM-II 3.0 m 2.65 27.01 1.72 17.51
SICO 3.0 m 1.60 16.30 1.23 12.55
APOLY-12-PU-500 5.0 m 0.20 2.06 0.12 1.27

5. Electric-motor pump set

(Surface) 5 hp 0.38 3.87 0.38a 3.87a
(Surface) 10 hp 0.30 3.08 0.30a 3.08a
(Submersible) 5 hp 0.39 3.95 0.39a 3.95a
(Submersible) 10 hp 0.31 3.12 0.31a 3.12a

6. Diesel engine pump set

Surface 5 hp 1.13 11.54 1.13a 11.54a
Submersible 10 hp 1.02 10.35 1.02a 10.35a
a
No subsidy.

Table 7
Effect of fuel price escalation on the net present value of renewable energy technologies

Technology Capacity Unit Net present value (000, Rs)

xd ¼ 0:04 xd ¼ 0:08 xd ¼ 0:12 xd ¼ 0:16 xd ¼ 0:20

1. PV pump
PV pump (surface) 900 Wp 104 84 54 6 68
PV pump (surface) 1800 Wp 200 160 99 5 144
PV pump (submersible) 1200 Wp 238 212 171 108 9
PV pump (submersible) 1680 Wp 292 255 198 110 28
PV pump (submersible) 1800 Wp 327 287 226 132 17
2. Biogas driven dual fuel engine pump (Capacity: 5 hp)
Community biogas plant 15 m3 302 754 1535 2914 5385
20 m3 496 1099 2140 3978 7274
25 m3 706 1460 2761 5058 9178
3. Producer gas driven dual fuel engine pump
5 hp 296 290 283 276 269
10 hp 388 376 363 349 335
4. Windmill pump
AV-55 5.7 m 108 103 96 87 74
AV-45 4.5 m 83 79 74 67 57
GM-II 3.0 m 76 74 71 66 60
SICO 3.0 m 108 102 94 82 67
APOLY-12-PU-500 5.0 m 19 38 63 99 148
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
3142 P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144

Table 8
Financial performance indicators of renewable energy technologies for irrigation water pumping

Technology Capacity Unit Diesel replacement Electricity replacement

B/C NPV (000, Rs.) B/C NPV (000, Rs.)

xd ¼ 0:00 xd ¼ 0:08 xd ¼ 0:00 xd ¼ 0:08 xe ¼ 0:00 xe ¼ 0:08 xe ¼ 0:00 xe ¼ 0:08

1. PV pump
PV pump (surface) 900 Wp 0.26 0.37 117 100 0.25 0.44 119 88
PV pump (surface) 1800 Wp 0.27 0.38 226 191 0.25 0.46 230 167
PV pump (submersible) 1200 Wp 0.18 0.25 256 233 0.17 0.30 258 217
PV pump (submersible) 1680 Wp 0.19 0.28 317 284 0.18 0.33 320 262
PV pump (submersible) 1800 Wp 0.19 0.27 353 318 0.18 0.32 -357 294
2. Biogas driven dual fuel engine pump (Capacity: 5 hp)
Community biogas plant 15 m3 1.05 2.12 31 754 1.00 2.04 3 697
20 m3 1.17 2.37 135 1099 1.12 2.27 97 1023
25 m3 1.28 2.59 254 1460 1.23 2.48 207 1365
3. Producer gas driven dual fuel engine pump
5 hp 0.23 0.26 370 353 0.21 0.24 305 294
10 hp 0.31 0.35 489 456 0.28 0.32 407 385
4. Windmill pump
AV-55 5.7 m 0.12 0.19 112 103 0.11 0.18 113 104
AV-45 4.5 m 0.12 0.18 85 79 0.11 0.18 86 80
GM-II 3.0 m 0.08 0.13 78 74 0.08 0.13 79 75
SICO 3.0 m 0.14 0.22 112 102 0.13 0.21 113 103
APOLY-12-PU-500 5.0 m 1.09 1.72 5 38 1.04 1.64 2 33

Table 9
Break-even prices of diesel and electricity (with and without fuel price escalation)

Technology Capacity Unit Breakeven price

Diesel (Rs./l) Electricity (Rs./kWh)

xd ¼ 0:00 xd ¼ 0:08 xe ¼ 0:00 xe ¼ 0:08

1. PV pump
PV pump (surface) 900 Wp 123.4 68.4 16.2 9.0
PV pump (surface) 1800 Wp 120.4 66.7 15.8 8.8
PV pump (submersible) 1200 Wp 182.0 100.9 23.9 13.3
PV pump (submersible) 1680 Wp 164.7 91.3 21.6 12.0
PV pump (submersible) 1800 Wp 170.0 94.2 22.3 12.4

2. Biogas-driven dual fuel engine pump (Capacity: 5 hp)

Community biogas plant 15 m3 30.3 11.2 3.9 1.5
20 m3 26.3 9.2 3.5 1.2
25 m3 23.5 7.8 3.1 1.0
3. Producer gas-driven dual fuel engine pump
5 Hp 141.2 122.5 19.3 16.9
10 Hp 104.2 90.4 14.2 12.5

4. Windmill pump
AV-55 5.7 m 271.8 171.8 35.7 22.6
AV-45 4.5 m 274.5 173.6 36.1 22.8
GM-II 3.0 m 384.6 243.2 50.6 32.0
SICO 3.0 m 232.1 146.8 30.5 19.3
APOLY-12-PU-500 5.0 m 29.4 18.6 3.9 2.4

to the capacity utilization of the system and the price of 7. Conclusions

biomass feedstock. For a 10 hp producer gas-driven dual
fuel engine pump the unit cost of water has been estimated A simple framework for financial evaluation of RETs
as Rs. 0.71/m3 in case of 50% capacity utilization factor (as (such as PV pump, windmill pump, biogas and producer
compared to Rs. 0.83/m3 for 1.8 kWp PV pump). gas-driven dual fuel engine pumps) for irrigation water

1.4
Unit cost of water (Rs/m3)
1.3
CUFbg
1.2
1.1
pb 1.0
0.9
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20
Percentage variation from the base case
Fig. 1. Sensitivity analysis for unit cost of water delivered by a 5 hp
producer gas driven dual fuel engine pump with respect to (i) capacity
utilization factor; CUFbg and (ii) price of biomass, pb.
pumping has been made in the present work. The following
points have been observed based on this study.
For the base values of input parameters assumed in the
study a significantly large variation is observed in the unit
cost of water delivered by the four renewable energy
technology options for irrigation water pumping. Dual fuel
engine pumps using biogas obtained from community
biogas plants is the least cost option for irrigation water
pumping with the unit cost further reduced for large
capacity biogas plants reflecting the effect of economy of
scale in their capital cost. The unit cost is substantially
higher for PV pumps as compared to the corresponding
values for diesel or electric pumps. As the unit cost of water
delivered for a windmill pump would critically depend
upon the prevailing wind resource at the site as well as the
design characteristics (cut-in, -out and rated wind speeds)
for the windmill rotor, considerable variation in its values
can be anticipated. It is, therefore, very important to match
the design characteristics of the rotor of the windmill pump
with the wind resource available at the end use location.
Except the biogas-based dual fuel engine pumps and
appropriate designs of windmill pumps in selected niche
areas, the RETs for irrigation water pumping are presently
not financially attractive to the users of diesel/electric
pumps.
The use of producer gas-driven dual fuel engine pumps
make financial sense at locations, where the biomass
feedstock is freely available. Use of producer gas-driven
dual fuel engine pumps at higher CUF will also make these
systems financially more attractive as compared to the PV
and windmill pumps.
Acknowledgments
The author is extremely grateful to Dr. T. C. Kandpal,
Professor, Centre for Energy Studies, Indian institute of
Technology Delhi for his patient guidance and continuous
ARTICLE IN PRESS
P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144 3143
advice during the development of this work. The financial
assistance provided by the e7 Network Secretariat (e7
Postdoctoral Sustainable Energy Development Scholar-
ship) is gratefully acknowledged.
References
Ackermann, T., Söder, L., 2002. An overview of wind energy status 2002.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 6 (1 and 2), 67–127.
Arab, A.H., Chenlo, F., Mukadem, K., Balenzategui, J.L., 1999.
Performance of PV water systems. Renewable Energy 18, 191–204.
Badran, O., 2003. Wind turbine utilization for water pumping in Jordan.
Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 91 (10),
1203–1214.
CGWB, 2001. Groundwater Year Book: Reports of various States in
40 60 80 100 India, Central Ground Water Board (CGWB), Ministry of Water
Resources, New Delhi.
CMIE, 1993. Basic Statistics Relating to the Indian Economy. Centre for
Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) Private Limited, Bombay.
Derrick, A., 1994. Solar photovoltaics for development: progress and
prospects. Renewable Energy 5 (1–4), 229–236.
EIL, 2003. Cost Reduction of Water Pumping Windmills and Small
Aerogenerators. Engineers India Limited, New Delhi.
ESCAP, 1991. Solar-Powered Water Pumping in Asia and the Pacific.
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific
(UNESCAP), Bangkok.
FAI, 2000. Fertilizer Statistics: 1999–2000. The Fertilizer Association of
India (FAI), New Delhi.
GOI, 2003. Annual Report: 2002–03. Ministry of Water Resources.
Government of India, New Delhi.
Gupta, B.K., 1986. Weibull parameters for annual and monthly wind
speed distributions for five locations in India. Solar Energy 37 (6),
469–471.
Hamidat, A., 1999. Simulation of the performance and cost calculations of
the surface pump. Renewable Energy 18, 383–392.
Hammad, M., 1995. Photovoltaic, wind and diesel: a cost comparative
study of water pumping options in Jordan. Energy Policy 23 (8),
723–726.
ICG, 2003. India Country Gateway, Department of Information
Technology, Ministry of Communications and Information Technol-
ogy, Government of India, New Delhi /www.incg.org.inS.
Kandpal, T.C., Garg, H.P., 2003. Financial Evaluation of Renewable
Energy Technologies. Macmillan India Ltd., New Delhi, India.
Kandpal, T.C., Purohit, P., Kumar, A., Chandrasekar, B., 2003.
Economics of renewable energy utilization in developing countries.
SESI Journal 13 (1 and 2), 57–82.
Kou, Q., Klein, S.A., Beckman, W.A., 1998. A method for estimating the
long-term performance of direct-coupled PV pumping systems. Solar
Energy 64 (1–3), 33–40.
Leuven, J.V., 1984. The economic feasibility of small-scale wind energy
conversion systems, European Wind Energy Conference, 22–26
October, Hamburg.
Mani, A., Mooly, D.A., 1983. Wind Energy Data for India. Allied
Publishers, New Delhi.
Mani, A., Rangarajan, S., 1982. Solar Radiation Over India. Allied
Publishers, New Delhi.
Manolakos, D., Papadakis, G., Papantonis, D., Kyritsis, S., 2004. A stand
alone photovoltaic power system for remote villages using pumped
water energy storage. Energy 29 (1), 57–69.
MNES, 1994. Annual Report: 1993–94. Ministry of Non-Conventional
Energy Sources (MNES), New Delhi.
MNES, 2006. Annual Report: 2005–06. Ministry of Non-Conventional
Energy Sources (MNES), New Delhi.
MOA, 2002. Agricultural Statistics at a Glance. Ministry of Agriculture
(MOA), New Delhi.
Muljadi, E., Flowers, L., Green, J., Bergey, M., 1996. Electric design of
wind electric water pumping systems. Journal of Solar Energy
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
3144 P. Purohit / Energy Policy 35 (2007) 3134–3144
Engineering: Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME) 118 (4), 246–252.
Purohit, P., 2004. Techno-economics of Renewable Energy Utilization in
Indian Agriculture Sector. Ph.D. Thesis, Centre for Energy Studies,
New Delhi, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi.
Purohit, P., Kandpal, T.C., 2004. Techno-economic evaluation of water
pumping windmills in India. International Journal of Global Energy
Issues 21 (3), 263–275.
Purohit, P., Kandpal, T.C., 2005a. Solar photovoltaic pumping in India: a
financial evaluation. International Journal of Ambient Energy 26 (3),
135–146.
Purohit, P., Kandpal, T.C., 2005b. Renewable energy technologies
for irrigation water pumping in India: projected levels of dissemina-
tion, energy delivery and investment requirements using available
diffusion models. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 9 (6),
592–607.
Purohit, P., Kandpal, T.C., 2007. Techno-economics of biogas-based
water pumping in India: an attempt to internalize CO2 emissions
mitigation and other economic benefits. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 11 (6), 1208–1226.
Purohit, P., Michaelowa, A., 2006. CDM potential of SPV pumps in
India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, in press (Available
online 17 July 2006).
Purohit, P., Kumar, A., Rana, S., Kandpal, T.C., 2002a. Using renewable
energy technologies for domestic cooking in India: a methodology for
potential estimation. Renewable Energy 26 (2), 235–246.
Purohit, P., Kumar, A., Kandpal, T.C., 2002b. Renewable energy
technologies for domestic cooking in India: estimation of CO2
emissions mitigation potential. International Journal of Ambient
Energy 23 (3), 127–135.
Purohit, P., Tripathi, A.K., Kandpal, T.C., 2006. Energetics of coal
substitution by briquettes of agricultural residues. Energy 31 (8 and 9),
1321–1331.
Ravindranath, N.H., Hall, D.O., 1995. Biomass Energy and Environment:
A Developing Country Perspective of India. Oxford University Press,
Cambridge.
Suehrcke, H., Appelbaum, J., Reshef, B., 1997. Modelling a permanent
magnet DC motor centrifugal pump assembly in a PV energy system.
Solar Energy 59 (1–3), 37–42.
TERI, 2002. TERI’s Energy Data Directory and Yearbook 2002–03. Tata
Energy Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
Tripathi, A.K., Iyer, P.V.R., Kandpal, T.C., 1999. Financial analysis of
biomass gasifier based water pumping in India. Energy 24 (6), 511–517.
UNDP, 1987. Global Windpump Evaluation Programme: Country Study
on India-Preparatory Phase. World Bank and United Nations
Development Programme, Amersfoort.