Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Techno-economic evaluation of small-hydro power plants: Modelling

and characterisation of the Abruzzo region in Italy
Roberto Carapellucci*, Lorena Giordano, Fabio Pierguidi
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale e dell'Informazione e di Economia, University of L'Aquila, Via Giovanni Gronchi 18, 67100 L'Aquila, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The potential of “small hydro” power generation in Europe is still largely unexploited because of strict
Received 23 January 2014 environmental requirements and legal rights for water use. Among the EU-27 member states, Italy is
Accepted 2 October 2014 recognised as one of the most promising countries for the further exploitation of small hydro power.
Available online 25 October 2014
This paper presents a methodology for assessing the technical and economic potential of small hydro
on a regional scale. The methodology is applied to the Abruzzo region in Italy. The investigation covers
Keywords:
approximately 90 river branches belonging to the major regional basins. The methodology characterises
Small-hydro
the flow duration curves of suitable stretches of river using a regional analysis based on a graphical
Duration curves
Regionalisation procedure
approach.
Graphical approach An energy model evaluates the rated power and the annual electricity production of installable small-
Residual potential hydro power plants based on the flow duration curve and the type of hydraulic turbine. The economic
analysis estimates the unit cost of electricity produced and the profitability of the initial investment
assuming two scenarios based on different fixed- and variable-cost models. The net potential obtained
from the energy analysis is adjusted to give the economically feasible potential at different levels of
economic competitiveness for the regional basins investigated.
© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In Europe, exploiting the potential of small hydroelectric power
plants, or small hydro, is attracting growing interest because of the
concerns over the lack of suitable sites for large installations and
the environmental effects of related civil structures [1]. According
to the definition proposed by the ESHA (European Small Hydro-
power Association) [2], small-hydro power plants are those in-
stallations with a rated capacity of less than 10 MW.
The small-hydro power capacity in the EU-27 reached approx-
imately 13.7 GW in 2010, resulting in an annual electricity pro-
duction of 50 TWh that prevented the release of 29 Mt of CO2
emissions into atmosphere. According to the roadmap outlined by
the HYDI (Hydro Data Initiative) [2], over the next 10 years the
installed capacity will increase by nearly 30%, reaching 17.3 GW in
2020. Among the individual countries, Germany has the largest
number of installations (over 7500), followed by Austria (2590),
Italy (2430) and France (1900).
Moreover, Italy has the largest installed capacity (2.73 GW) and
electricity production (10.9 TWh). According to HYDI projections,
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ39 0862 434320; fax: þ39 0862 434403.
E-mail address: roberto.carapellucci@univaq.it (R. Carapellucci).
this leadership position will continue in 2020, when the installed
capacity will reach nearly 4 GW [2]. Among the regions of southern
Italy, the Abruzzo region has the largest number of hydroelectric
plants (57) and a total installed capacity of 1002 MW, with
approximately 10% contributed by small-hydro installations [3].
However, because of the morphological characteristics of this ter-
ritory, the Abruzzo region has a number of suitable sites for the
construction of small hydro power plants. In fact, the Abruzzo re-
gion includes 25 river basins, with 8 having catchment areas
greater than 200 km2.
The Regional Water Protection Plan [4] evaluated the availability
of the water resources of these basins, focussing on river branches
regarded as “significant” according to the definition of Legislative
Decree 152/06 [5]. As part of that investigation, a water balance
model was implemented in the commercial software MIKE BASIN
[6] to evaluate the main hydrological variables of each river branch,
including the natural water flow rate (Qn), the minimum vital flow
(MVF) and the actual water flow rate (Qm), considering derivations
for drinking water or irrigation [7]. Then, the gross heads of the
watercourses were characterised in the water resource planning
study [8], which allowed the identification of river branches suit-
able for hydro power production.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.10.008
0960-1481/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
396 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406
Starting from the results of the previously cited studies, the goal
of this paper is the development of a methodology for assessing the
technical and economic potential of small hydro power plants on a
regional scale. The study focused on 87 river branches within the
Aterno-Pescara, Sangro, Vomano, Saline, Foro, Tordino, Liri-
Garigliano and Sinello river basins. The methodology is based on
the definition of a specific flow duration curve [9] for each suitable
river branch to characterise the river flow regime on an annual
basis. The flow duration curve is evaluated through a region-
alisation procedure based on a graphical approach [10,11]. For the
Aterno-Pescara, Sangro, Vomano, Saline, Foro and Tordino basins,
the starting point for implementing the graphical method is the
regionalisation study of the CESI Research Institute [12] involving
the main river basins between the Marche and Abruzzo regions.
In this paper, the regionalisation procedure has also been
extended to the Sinello and Liri-Garigliano basins. Thus, two ho-
mogeneous regions have been identified (Liri-Garigliano and
Trigno-Sinello), and the corresponding regional flow duration
curves were evaluated by processing the daily flow rate data of
gauging stations in these regions. The homogeneity of these areas
with respect to the flow duration curve is verified by implementing
the Hosking and Wallis test [13] in the software R, a free tool for
computing statistics [14]. The rated capacity of each installable
small-hydro power plant is defined on the basis of the net head, the
design flow rate (Qd) and the hydraulic turbine efficiency. The
annual electricity production is then evaluated by integrating the
instantaneous power over the entire period of plant operation,
given the flow duration curve and the technological constraints of
the hydraulic turbine.
For the economic analysis, two different scenarios are investi-
gated. In the first one, capital costs and operating and maintenance
expenses are evaluated through cost functions presented in a study
by the Polytechnic of Milan [15]. In the second scenario, the cost
items are estimated using statistical data provided by the HYDI [16].
The economic analysis of a small-hydro power project attempts to
evaluate the unit cost of electricity (COE) and the profitability of the
initial investment, taking into account the Italian incentive scheme
that was recently reformed by the Ministerial Decree of 6 July 2012
[17]. Given the net potential from the energy analysis, the
economically feasible potential is evaluated at various levels of
economic competitiveness on the basis of the cost of electricity and
the profitability of the initial investment [18].
2. Characterisation of regional water resources availability
The actual availability of regional water resources was evaluated
in a study conducted by the Abruzzo region with the purpose of
defining the Water Protection Plan [4], a document designed to
ensure the water environmental quality and the sustainability of
the water supply in compliance with the European Directive 2000/
60/EC [19].
As part of this investigation, the surface and ground water re-
sources of each regional river basin were characterised qualitatively
and quantitatively. In particular, the study focused on the water-
courses identified as significant according to Legislative Decree
152/06 [5], namely:
- watercourses of the first order (discharging into the sea), having
a catchment area of at least 200 km2;
- watercourses of the second (discharging into first-order water-
courses) or higher order, having a catchment area of at least
400 km2.
The methodology adopted for estimating water resources in-
cludes the following main phases [20]:
- the delimitation of the Abruzzo region in the river basins;
- the acquisition of hydro-meteorological data;
- a hydrogeological characterisation of the area and the identifi-
cation of ground water bodies;
- a quantitative assessment of surface and ground water
resources.
The river basins were delimitated through a digital elevation
model of the soil [21] using a horizontal resolution of 250 m and a
vertical resolution of 1 m. Thus, the basins were identified by an
automatic procedure known as the eight-direction four-point al-
gorithm, or method D8. This method is based on subdividing the
land into cells (250 m  250 m), thus allowing the flow direction to
be defined with the maximum slope among the eight directions
connecting a given cell with the adjacent ones.
Having identified the drainage network, the boundaries of the
regional basins were traced, allowing the evaluation of the corre-
sponding surface area. Unlike the definition of boundaries based on the
knowledge of regional topographical features, the results of this pro-
cedure do not depend on user choices, only on the model resolution.
The regional river basins were characterised from the hydro-
logical, hydrogeological and climatic conditions on the basis of in-
formation provided by local administrations or gathered from
previous studies [20]. The hydrological and hydrogeological bal-
ances were defined for each river basin using the simulation soft-
ware MIKE BASIN (DHI Water and Environment) [6]. MIKE BASIN is
an integrated tool for the simulation of drainage basins that oper-
ates in a GIS environment. This software is an efficient tool for low-
flow and data-scarce hydrological simulations that allows the rivers
and the main tributaries to be described by a network consisting of
branches and nodes. The subdivisions are defined in such a way
that the branches correspond to river stretches with constant flow
rates and the nodes are located at the confluence points between
different branches or at important locations where model results
are required. Thus, the river branches are identified on the basis of
the numbers of upstream and downstream nodes.
The implementation of river basin models in MIKE BASIN re-
quires the time series of the rainfall, the temperature and the
aquifer flow rates, which were obtained from the Hydrographic
Service of Pescara [22], that provides data updated until the year
2000. With regard to weather and climate data, the mean monthly
rainfall and temperature data recorded at 172 stations between
1920 and 2000 were used. The aquifer flow rate data were obtained
from field measurements taken between 1898 and 2000 (more
frequently from 1954 to 1963 and from 1980 to 1986).
Based on these data and using a rainfall-runoff model, the MIKE
BASIN software allowed the evaluation of the natural flow rate (Qn)
and the actual flow rate (Qm), taking into account deductions for
human consumption, irrigation, industrial and hydroelectric
purposes.
Moreover, the model allowed the minimum vital flow (MVF) to
be defined, representing the minimum flow to be restored to
safeguard aquatic wildlife and to guarantee that underground
water is replenished [7]. Finally, the available flow (Qav) was eval-
uated, which is the difference between the actual flow rate and the
minimum vital flow.
3. Identification of suitable river branches for installing
hydroelectric power plants
The river stretches that are suitable for the exploitation of water
resources for hydroelectric purposes were identified as a part of a
study of water resources planning for hydro power production [8].
This investigation involved the main regional river basins, except
for the interregional-basins of Tronto and Trigno. Preliminary data
 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406
were acquired to characterise the flow regimes of the various river
basins. Using data from the Water Protection Plan [4], the branches
of the river network were characterised in terms of the actual flow,
the minimum vital flow and the value of criticality, that is the
number of months in which the actual flow rate is less than the
hydrological component of the MVF [7].
After excluding the river branches falling within protected areas
(parks and nature reserves), a database of suitable stretches for the
exploitation of water resources for hydroelectric purposes was
defined. Moreover, the gross head of each river branch was evalu-
ated through the digital elevation model based on the 1:10,000
orthophoto of the Abruzzo region [23].
The results of this investigation were the starting point for the
evaluation of the residual hydroelectric potential on a regional
scale. In the present study, attention is focused on 87 branches
belonging to 8 regional river basins: Aterno-Pescara, Sangro,
Vomano, Saline, Liri-Garigliano, Tordino, Sinello and Foro. Fig. 1
summarises for each investigated basin the extension, the num-
ber of exploitable river branches and their main hydrological var-
iables, i.e., the actual flow rate and the gross head. The figure shows
that the actual flow rates of the river branches in the Sangro and
Aterno-Pescara basins vary over a rather wide range, from 0.4 to
47 m3/s and from 2.1 to 17 m3/s, respectively. In the remaining
basins, the actual flow rates of the river branches are nearly always
less than 10 m3/s. Moreover, all the branches with the exception of
a branch belonging to the Sangro basin have a gross head less than
250 m, and the majority have a gross head of less than 50 m. Linear
curves plotted on logarithmic scales highlight the gross or natural
potential, the maximum theoretical potential for a hydro power
plant, which depends on the gross head (Hg) and the actual flow
rate (Qm). The river branches have gross potentials generally be-
tween 1 MW and 5 MW in the Aterno-Pescara, Sangro, Vomano and
Liri-Garigliano basins and less than 1 MW in the remaining basins.
It is noteworthy to observe that the actual flow rate could be
changed over the years, due to climate change related to global
warming effects. According to the projections of IPCC, the mean
annual flow rate of rivers in Southern Europe should decrease in the
period of 2016e2035 compared to 1986e2005; as regard to Italy,
such reduction is expected to be moderated, varying in the range
of 10÷0% [24].
Fig. 1. Characterisation of the regional river basins in terms of actual flow rate (Qm), gross head (Hg) and natural potential.
397
4. Characterisation of the methodology for the techno-
economic evaluation of small-hydro power potential at
regional scale
The identification and characterisation of the suitable river
branches for the exploitation of water resources for electricity
production are the starting point for the modelling of the technical
and economical small-hydro power potential at regional scale.
The methodology outlined in the present study consists of the
following main steps:
- Definition of a specific flow duration curve for the suitable river
branches, by multiplying the mean actual flow rate by the
dimensionless regional flow duration curve, arising from a
regionalisation procedure based on graphical approach (Section
5.1);
- Correction of the flow duration curve to account for the value of
the criticality, that identifies the number of months with actual
flow rate less than the hydrological component of the minimum
vital flow (Section 5.1.2);
- Evaluation of the rated power and the annual electricity pro-
duction, based on the corrected flow duration curve and the
small-hydro turbine technology (Section 5.2);
- Estimation of unit cost of electricity and the profitability of the
investment with reference to different scenarios for estimating
capital and operating and maintenance costs (Section 6);
- Evaluation of the net potential at regional scale by summing
contributions of the different river branches (Section 7.1);
- Definition of the economically feasible potential, assumed as the
fraction of net potential that meets different level of economic
competitiveness, defined with respect to the unit cost of elec-
tricity (COE) and the profitability index (PI) (Section 7.2).
5. Energy model for evaluating the potential for small hydro
on a regional scale
To evaluate the residual potential for small hydro, the meth-
odology requires that the suitable river branches are defined in
terms of the net head and the flow duration curve to reveal the
398 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406
variability of the flow regime throughout the year [25]. The net
head is evaluated assuming reasonable values for the concentrated
and distributed head losses due to friction and turbulence in the
penstock. Flow duration curves are defined through a regional
approach if historical flow rate time series are lacking for the river
branches under investigation.
5.1. Flow duration curve
The definition of a flow duration curve is based on knowledge of
the historical time series of stream-flow data, whose availability is
generally limited to only a small number of rivers. If there is a lack
of observed stream-flow data, a flow duration curve can be ob-
tained by spatially transferring the flow information from nearby
gauged sites through a regionalisation of the flow characteristics
[26].
Various procedures for regionalisation have been proposed in
the literature; they can be grouped into three main categories:
statistical, parametric and graphical approaches [11]. In statistical
methods, the flow duration curve is defined as the complement of
the flow rate cumulative distribution function. Parametric methods
represent flow duration curves through an analytic function
(polynomial, exponential, logarithmic or power function) whose
parameters are determined by a multiple-regression analysis that
includes morphological characteristics and climatic conditions.
Unlike other methods, the graphical approaches do not rely on
specific assumptions for the distribution or the shape of the
regional flow duration curve but use standardised graphical rep-
resentations of FDCs with a regional validity.
In this paper, the graphical approach proposed by Smakhtin [25]
will be used for evaluating the flow duration curves of the river
Fig. 2. Subdivision of the study area into homogeneous regions for the application of the graphical method.
branches under investigation. The methodology includes the
following main steps:
- a preliminary division of the territory into homogeneous zones
that are characterised by a significant hydrological affinity;
- the identification of gauging stations in each homogeneous zone
with measured daily stream-flow time series extended over a
period longer than five years;
- the normalisation of the experimental duration curves by
dividing the empirical FDCs by an index of flow such as the mean
daily stream flow evaluated in the available record period;
- the determination of the regional flow duration curves for the
homogeneous zones by averaging the normalised flow duration
curves.
The flow duration curve for an ungauged river branch in a given
homogeneous region is therefore obtained by multiplying the
dimensionless regional flow duration curve by the mean daily
stream flow [12]:
Q ðDÞ ¼ Q ðDÞadim Qm (1)
In this study, the average flow (Qm) is assumed to be the actual
flow rate of the river branch under consideration, as identified by
the Regional Water Protection Plan [4]. The regional dimensionless
flow duration curves coincide with those resulting from the
regionalisation study by the CESI Research Centre [12], which
involved the major river basins of the Abruzzo region including the
Aterno-Pescara, Sangro, Vomano and Tordino, and smaller basins
near the coast (Saline, Tavo-Fino, Alento, Foro, Moro and Feltrino).
In particular, to apply the graphical method, this portion of regional
territory is subdivided into 8 homogeneous areas shown in Fig. 2.
 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406 399

2.5 2.5
Vomano-Aterno
2.3 2.3
Castellano-Tordino
2.0 Liri-Giovenco
2.0 Coastal basins of type I
Coastal basins of type II 1.8 Trigno-Sinello
1.8
Sangro and Tasso

Qadim (D)
1.5
Q adim (D)

1.5 Upper Sangro basins

Lower Aterno and SagiƩario 1.3
1.3
Lower Pescara 1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.3 0.0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 DuraƟon (%)
DuraƟon (%)
Fig. 4. Regional dimensionless flow duration curves for homogeneous zones Lir-
Fig. 3. Regional dimensionless flow duration curves based on the graphical approach. ieGiovenco and Trigno-Sinello.

The regional FDCs in those areas were evaluated using the daily homogeneous groups of basins having the same record lengths as
stream flow data collected between 1921 and 2000 in 35 hydro- those of the observed data.
graphic stations located in the Abruzzo region. Fig. 3 shows the According to Hosking and Wallis, the region should be regarded
regional flow duration curves obtained by applying the graphical as acceptably homogeneous if the test metric Hk satisfies Hk < 1,
approach. possibly heterogeneous if 1 < Hk < 2, and definitely heterogeneous if
Hk > 2.
The heterogeneity measures are evaluated as follows:
5.1.1. Regionalisation to characterise the Liri-Garigliano and Sinello
basins
Vk  mk
The regionalisation procedure for the flow duration curves was Hk ¼ for k ¼ 1; 2 (2)
extended in this study to the Sinello and Liri-Garigliano basins, thus sk
leading to the identification of two other homogeneous zones,
where
namely, the LirieGiovenco and Trigno-Sinello zones (Fig. 2).
Initially, the daily stream flow time series were collected for the ,
gauging stations of Liri-Garigliano and Sinello from the National X
R  2 X
R

Hydrographic Service of Italy [22]. V1 ¼ ni t2; i  t 2 ni (3)

i¼1 i¼1
For the Liri-Garigliano basin, attention focused on the Liri and
Giovenco rivers, where the river stretches suitable for small hydro and
are located. The daily stream flow time series were collected for the
gauging stations of Liri at Sora and Giovenco at Pescina, where ,
X
R h 2  2 i1=2 X
R
hydrological data have been recorded for 46 and 29 years,
V2 ¼ ni t2; i  t 2 þ t3; i  t 3 ni (4)
respectively.
i¼1 i¼1
Regarding the Sinello basin, there is only one gauging station
(Sinello at Casalbordino), where stream flow data were recorded for give measures of dispersion, V1 for LCV and V2 for both LCV and LCS.
only one year. In this case, the regionalisation procedure was In Equations (3) and (4), t2,i, t3,i and ni are the values of LCV and
applied using the gauging stations of the Trigno basin, which had LCS and the sample size of the site i, respectively, t 2 , t 3 and R are the
the greatest similarity to the Sinello basin hydrologically because of mean values of LCV and LCS and the number of sites, respectively.
the geographic proximity [27]. The data from the two gauging The Hosking and Wallis homogeneity test [13] was applied to
stations located on the river Trigno (at Pescolanciano and at the three parameters, i.e., the stream flow variability index (Q20/
Chiauci) were considered, being the only ones with recording pe- Q90), the low-flow variability index (Q50/Q90) [25] and the concavity
riods exceeding 5 years. index (CI), based on the flow duration curve. The last index estab-
The regional flow duration curves for the two homogeneous lishes the shape of the dimensionless flow duration curve,
zones were derived by applying the graphical method described. providing a measure of the contrast between the low-flow and
Fig. 4 shows the trends of the regional flow duration curves for the high-flow regimes [28]:
homogeneous zones LirieGiovenco and Trigno-Sinello.
The homogeneity of these regions was checked with the Hosk- Q10  Q99
ing and Wallis method [13], which is based on the L-moment ratios CI ¼ (5)
Q1  Q99
LCV (coefficient of L-variation) and LCS (coefficient of L-skewness).
This test compares the regional variance of the L-moment ratios in a The results of the test, listed in Table 1, show that the Lir-
pooling group to the variation that would be expected in a homo- ieGiovenco region can be considered homogeneous because the
geneous group. The expected mean value (mV) and the standard heterogeneity measures H1 and H2 are always less than unity for all
deviation (sV) of the L-moment ratios for a homogeneous group are three parameters investigated. In the Trigno-Sinello region, a sub-
evaluated through repeated simulations, thereby generating stantial degree of homogeneity is detected because only the value
400 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406

Table 1 5.2. Rated power and annual electricity production

Results of the Hosking and Wallis homogeneity tests for CI, Q20/Q90 and Q50/Q90.

LirieGiovenco Trigno-Sinello The rated capacity of a small hydroelectric power plant in each
Index H1 H2 H1 H2
suitable river branch can be calculated as:

CI 0.13 0.83 1.1 0.4 Pn ¼ rgQd Hn hturb ðQd Þ (6)

Q20/Q90 1.1 0.55 0.32 0.36
Q50/Q90 0.57 0.66 0.77 0.65
where Qd and hturb(Qd) are the flow rate and the efficiency at the
design condition, respectively, and Hn is the net head.
The design flow rate is the difference between the available flow
of H1 related to the concavity index has a value slightly greater than rate and the minimum vital flow [29]:
unity (1.1).
Qd ¼ Qm  MVF (7)
5.1.2. Correction of flow duration curve to account for criticality
As is well known, friction losses strongly depend on the mate-
The regional flow duration curves do not account for differences
rial, the length and the diameter of the penstock [30]. For the sake
among the river branches in the criticality, the number of months in
of simplicity, in this paper the net head is evaluated assuming that
which the actual flow rate is less than the hydrological component
the concentrated and distributed head losses amount to 6% of the
of the MVF [23].
gross head [31]. The efficiency of the hydraulic turbine at the design
The values of the criticality in the basins investigated in this
condition is calculated as a function of the design flow rate, the net
study ranged from 1 to 6. The criticality is 0 for 64 river branches
head and the hydraulic turbine type through Gordon's empirical
and greater than 3 (which is considered significant) in 24 stretches,
relationships [32].
mainly those belonging to the Vomano (7), Liri-Garigliano (5) and
The annual electricity production is evaluated by integrating
Sangro (5) basins.
the instantaneous power during the operational period of the
To avoid overestimating the annual electricity production for
plant:
river branches with significant values of criticality, the flow dura-
tion curves produced by the regionalisation procedure were cor- Z1
rected by holding constant the mean annual flow rate. Therefore, Ep ¼ he hop rgQt ðDÞHn hturb ðQt ðDÞÞdD (8)
the regional flow duration curves of certain river branches are
0
rotated about Qm in such a way that the flow rate is less than or
equal to the hydrological component of the minimum vital flow for
where hop is the plant operating time in hours and he is the system
a period corresponding to the value of the criticality.
electrical efficiency, which takes into account the gearbox, electric
Fig. 5 compares the flow duration curves for a river branch in the
generator and transformer losses.
Saline basin resulting from the regionalisation procedure with and
The hydro-turbine flow rate, that is, the amount of water
without the correction, taking into account the effective value of
flowing through the hydro turbine, Qt(D), is defined on the basis of
the criticality, which is 3 for the case examined. As shown, by
flow duration curve [33]:
rotating about the mean value (Qm ¼ 1.62 m3/s), the corrected FDC
8
shows a flow rate coincident with the hydrological component of < 0; Q ðDÞ < Qmin
the MVF (Q* ¼ 0.2 m3/s) for a duration of 75%, corresponding to a Qt ðDÞ ¼ Q ðDÞ; Qmin  Q ðDÞ  Qd (9)
criticality of 3. :
Qd ; Q ðDÞ > Qd

The definition includes the constraints related to the design flow

rate and the minimum allowable flow rate passing through the
hydraulic turbine. The latter is selected to minimise the unit cost of
electricity production of the small-hydro power plant while taking
into account the domain of application of the various technologies
with regard to the design flow rate and the net head.

6. Economic model

The estimation of the unit cost of electricity of a small-hydro

Fig. 5. Comparison between regional FDC and corrected regional FDC for a river
branch in the Saline basin.
power plant involves a preliminary evaluation of the initial in-
vestment and the annual operating and maintenance costs.
The initial investment cost can be divided into three main
components: electro-mechanical equipment costs, civil works costs
and engineering and administration costs [34]. As well known,
investment costs of hydro power systems are highly site-
dependent. However, cost data for small hydro power plants
operating in the Abruzzo region are not readily available from
technical literature or power companies. Hence, based on cost data
at a national level, two different models for estimating capital and
O&M costs of SHPs have been implemented, thus reflecting a
pessimistic and an optimistic scenario.
In the first one (the pessimistic scenario), cost functions have
been derived by interpolating data arising from the study con-
ducted by the Polytechnic of Milan [15]:
 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406 401

(
an all-inclusive tariff, comprising both the incentive and the
4929Pn0:26 Hn < 80m
CI ¼ (10) remuneration of the energy production.
4257Pn0:2 Hn > 80m
Furthermore, in the present study it is assumed that for these
small-hydro power plants, where the effective lifetime is greater
CO&M ¼ 180:4Pn0:47 (11) than the conventional one, the energy production at the end of the
incentive period benefits from the simplified purchase/resale ar-
where CI and CO&M are capital cost and the annual operating and rangements. The simplified purchase/resale arrangements provide
maintenance cost, respectively. that the energy supplied to the grid is sold at a guaranteed mini-
In the second one (optimistic scenario), costs functions of the mum price, depending on the type of renewable energy source and
pessimistic scenario have been modified to take into account eco- the amount of energy supplied to the grid.
nomic statistics provided by HYDI (Hydro Data Initiative) [16]. For For small-hydro power plants with a rated capacity exceeding
the EU-27 Member States, it defines an average capital cost per unit 1 MW, the incentive is the difference between the “base tariff” and
of installed capacity and a range of variability of operating and the hourly zone price. In this case, the energy production, which is
maintenance costs, expressed as a percentage of capital costs: at the producer's disposal, cannot be sold through the simplified
purchase-resale arrangements but only through bilateral contracts
8 in the energy market.
> 0:26
< 4500Pn Hn < 30m
CI ¼ 4150Pn0:23 30 < Hn < 100m (12)
>
:
3800Pn0:2 Hn > 100m 7. Evaluation of net and economically feasible potential of
small-hydro power plants
8
>
< 84:1Pn
0:51
Hn < 30m The implementation of the methodology previously described al-
CO&M ¼ 0:47 30 < Hn < 100m (13) lows the evaluation of the net potential and the economically feasible
70Pn
>
:
55:8Pn0:45 Hn > 100m potential of small-hydro power plants for the river basins investigated.
As depicted in Fig. 6, more than 70% (63) of the potential small-
Thus, the unit cost of electricity is given by: hydro power plants are low-flow installations (Qd < 10 m3/s), and
the remainder (24) are medium-flow installations
CI CRF þ CO&M (10 < Qd < 100 m3/s). Focussing on the individual river basins, it is
COE ¼ (14)
Ep noted that medium-flow small-hydro power plants are located only
in the Aterno-Pescara (10), Vomano (10), Sangro (3) and Liri-
where CRF is the capital recovery factor, assuming a discount rate of Garigliano (1) basins.
5% and a power plant lifetime of 30 years. Regarding the net head, 48 of the potential installations are low-
In addition to the unit cost of electricity, the profitability of the head (Hn < 30 m), 25 are medium-head (30 < Hn < 100 m) and 14
investment was assessed by means of two common indices [18], the are high-head (100 < Hn < 1000 m).
discounted payback period (DPP) and the profitability index (PI): The prevalence of low-head installations directly affects the
choice of the type of hydraulic turbine to be installed. Fig. 7 shows
NPV þ CI that a Kaplan turbine is the best choice in more than 70% of the
PI ¼ (15)
CI potential installations, followed by Pelton (15%) and Francis (9%)
turbines; a cross-flow turbine is the best choice in only one
These parameters were evaluated assuming that small-hydro
installation, located in the Aterno-Pescara basin.
power plants will benefit from the Italian incentives program,
which was radically redefined by the Ministerial Decree of 6 July
2012 [17]. According to this decree, the incentive for small hydro 7.1. Rated power classes and electricity production
power plants with a rated capacity of less than 1 MW is a “base
tariff” defined according to the size and guaranteed for the con- Table 2 summarises the main results of the energy analysis for
ventional plant lifetime. In this case, the incentive is configured as the river basins investigated, including the total rated power, the

Fig. 6. Classification of small hydro power potential installations with respect to design flow rate and net head.
402 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406

Fig. 7. Distribution of types of potential installable small hydro power plants.

Fig. 8. Distribution of potential installations with respect to rated power classes.

average power of the potential installations and the annual elec-

tricity production. regard, it should be noted that the design flow rates for two river
Thus, the net residual potential of small-scale hydro power in branches, one in the Aterno-Pescara basin and one in the Sangro
the Abruzzo region amounts to 146.1 MW. The Aterno-Pescara basin, were not the difference between the actual mean flow rate
basin, with an installed capacity of 52 MW, has the highest po- and the minimum vital flow but were set to the limit value so that
tential, accounting for more than 35% of the total rated power. The the rated power did not exceed 10 MW.
Sangro basin is the second most important basin with 46.1 MW With regard to the capacity factor, more than 40% (37) of the
(31.5%), followed by the Vomano basin with 16.3 MW (11.2%) and total potential installations have values between 0.4 and 0.6,
the Liri-Garigliano basin with 13.8 MW (9.4%). whereas only 20% (18) have values greater than 0.6. The differences
Indeed, the aforementioned basins are characterised by the in the behaviour of the river basins are depicted in Fig. 9, repre-
greater number of suitable river branches and by the highest senting the capacity factor as a function of the rated power of the
average rated power, ranging between 1.4 MW in the Vomano basin potential installations.
to approximately 3 MW in the Sangro basin. The rated capacities It is noted that the capacity factor ranges between 0.3 and 0.5 for
are significantly lower in the other river basins, which overall ac- the Vomano, Tordino, Saline and Foro basins; the same is true for
count for approximately 12% of the total net potential, with rated the Sangro basin, except for two installations having a capacity
capacities ranging between 2.5 MW (Foro) and 7.1 MW (Tordino). factor close to 0.6.
Fig. 8 shows that 44 of the 87 potential small-hydro power As regards the Aterno-Pescara basin, 15 of the 20 potential in-
plants have a rated capacity less than 1 MW, 36 have a rated ca- stallations have a capacity factor greater than 0.6. Conversely, the
pacity between 1 MW and 5 MW and the remainder have a rated capacity factor is less than 0.4 for each investigated river branch in
capacity greater than 5 MW. As regards the individual river basins, the Sinello basin. This is primarily due to the differences in the flow
the rated capacity is less than 1 MW for all the potential in- duration curves, which are generally more flat for river stretches in
stallations in the Saline basin; small-hydro power plants with a the Aterno-Pescara basin than for those in the Sinello basin, as
rated power greater than 5 MW are possible only in the Aterno- revealed by the dimensionless regional flow duration curves pre-
Pescara (3), Sangro (3) and Liri-Garigliano (1) basins. In this sented in Figs. 3 and 4.
Therefore, the total electricity production amounts to 690 GWh,
with the most important contributions coming from the Aterno-
Table 2 Pescara (45.4%) and Sangro (26.9%) basins, followed by the Liri-
Net residual potential of small hydro power for regional basins investigated.
Garigliano (9.3%) and Vomano (8.9%) basins.
River basin River Pn Pn,mean Pn (%) Ep Ep (%) Ep/Pn Fig. 10 shows the distribution of annual electricity production
branches (MW) (MW) (GWh) (GWh/MW) with respect to the rated capacity class of the small-hydro power
Aterno-Pescara 20 52.1 2.6 35.7% 313 45.4% 6.0 plants. It is noted that approximately 90% of the overall electricity
Foro 3 2.5 0.8 1.7% 10 1.5% 3.9 production is from installations with a rated capacity greater than
Liri-Garigliano 9 13.8 1.5 9.4% 64 9.3% 4.6 1 MW, and the contributions of those plants with up to 5 MW of
Saline 12 5.2 0.4 3.6% 19 2.8% 3.7
Sangro 15 46.1 3.1 31.5% 185 26.9% 4.0
capacity are greater than 50%. This is because of the predominant
Sinello 6 2.9 0.5 2.0% 10 1.4% 3.3 contributions of the Aterno-Pescara, Sangro and Liri-Garigliano
Tordino 10 7.1 0.7 4.9% 27 3.9% 3.7 basins, where the incidence of installations with a rated power of
Vomano 12 16.3 1.4 11.2% 62 8.9% 3.8 greater than 1 MW is greater than 90%.
Moreover, it is interesting to observe that there are significant
Total 87 146.1 1.7 100% 690 100.0% 4.7
contributions from installations with a rated power ranging from
 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406 403

Fig. 9. Capacity factor as a function of rated capacity of small-hydro power plants.

1 MW to 5 MW, not only for the Vomano basin but also for the
Tordino and Foro basins, despite the greater number of plants with
smaller capacities. The share of small-hydro power plants with
capacities between 1 MW and 5 MW decreases significantly in the
Sinello basin (38%) and down to zero in the Saline basin, where the
electricity production is totally attributable to installations of less
than 1 MW, with approximately 60% of those greater than 500 kW.
Thus, the annual electricity production potential of small-hydro
power plants would increase by approximately 40% the current
hydroelectric production of the Abruzzo region (1756.4 GWh). This
contribution is even more significant considering that approxi-
mately 90% of hydro power is currently produced by large plants
with a rated power exceeding 10 MW.
7.2. Cost of electricity and economically feasible potential
The semi-logarithmic plots of Fig. 11 show the trend of the unit
cost of electricity production as a function of the small-hydro

Fig. 10. Distribution of electricity production with respect to rated power classes.
404 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406

Fig. 11. Unit cost of electricity production as a function of rated capacity of small-hydro power plants.

power plant rated capacity and the river basin investigated. The
COE was evaluated in two different economic scenarios:
- the pessimistic scenario, shown in blue (in the web version),
which is based on cost models obtained from the Polytechnic of
Milan investigation [15];
- the optimistic scenario, shown in red (in the web version),
which is based on cost models derived from HYDI statistics [16].
It is noted that the COE for the river basins investigated de-
creases with increasing rated capacity according to a specific power
law. In the case of the Aterno-Pescara basin, the unit cost of elec-
tricity varies over a rather wide range, between 3 and 27 cV/kWh.
In the pessimistic scenario, the COE is less than 10 cV/kWh for more
than 70% of the potential installations, with a clear prevalence of
those with a COE greater than 5 cV/kWh. Conversely, assuming the
optimistic scenario, more than 50% of the small-hydro power plants
have a COE lower than 5 cV/kWh.
As regards the Sangro basin, the unit cost of electricity is be-
tween 4 and 34 cV/kWh. However, except for the installations with
a rated power of less than 1 MW, the COE is always less than 15 cV/
kWh. Moreover, switching from the pessimistic to the optimistic
scenario, the number of installations with a COE greater than 10 cV/
kWh markedly declines because of an increase in the number of
plants with a COE less than 5 cV/kWh. In the Liri-Garigliano basin,
the unit cost of electricity shows a pronounced variability

Fig. 12. Comparison between net and economically feasible potential for pessimistic (a) and optimistic (b) economic scenarios.
 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406
(4e43 cV/kWh), but with a clear prevalence of installations with a
COE of approximately 10 cV/kWh. In the Vomano basin, the COE
varies over a more restricted range, from 5 to 21 cV/kWh.
Finally, in the Saline, Sinello, Tordino and Foro basins, the unit
cost of electricity is greater than 10 cV/kWh in nearly all cases
because of the moderate rated capacities of the potential
installations.
It is important to recognise that the differences in terms of the
cost of electricity are not only related to the rated capacity of a
potential installation but also to the capacity factor, which in-
fluences the annual electricity production. For instance, for a fixed
rated power in the Sangro basin, the cost of electricity is greater
than in the Aterno-Pescara basin because of the lower capacity
factors (Fig. 9). This aspect is even more noticeable in the Saline and
Sinello basins, where the capacity factor is always less than 0.5.
At the global level, the COE in the pessimistic scenario is less
than 5 cV/kWh for approximately 3% of the total installations, be-
tween 5 and 15 cV/kWh for approximately 55%, and greater than
15 cV/kWh for the remainder. However, in the optimistic scenario
the percentage of installations with a COE less than 5 cV/kWh in-
creases to approximately 18%, with a corresponding reduction in
those with a COE greater than 15 cV/kWh (22%).
The net potential of the regional basins investigated was
compared with the economically feasible potential. In this paper, the
latter is the fraction of the net potential that meets the prescribed
economic requirements defined in terms of the cost of electricity
(COE) and the profitability index (PI). Considering the variability in
the COE for small hydro in Italy (8e15 cV/kWh), a limit value of
15 cV/kWh was used to evaluate the economically feasible potential.
As shown in Fig. 12, to obtain a COE <15 cV/kWh and a PI > 1, the
economically feasible potential ranges from 121.8 MW (pessimistic
scenario) to 142.6 MW (optimistic scenario), whereas the corre-
sponding annual electricity production ranges from 605 to 678 GWh.
In the pessimistic scenario, the economically feasible potential is
more than 80% of the net potential, despite the reduction in the
number of potential installations from 87 to 40. This is because of
the small contribution of non-viable power plants in terms of rated
capacity, as highlighted by the increase in the average capacity of
installable power plants from 1.7 MW to approximately 3 MW. In
this case, the Aterno-Pescara basin accounts for approximately 41%
(50.2 MW) of the total economically feasible potential, whereas the
Sangro and Vomano basins account for 35% (42.9 MW) and 9%
(10.9 MW), respectively.
In the optimistic scenario, the economically feasible potential is
approximately 98% of the net potential, and the number of
Fig. 13. Discounted payback period of economically feasible installations with COE <15 cV/kWh and PI > 1.
405
installations is 68. In this case, the contributions from the Aterno-
Pescara (36%) and Sangro (32%) basins decrease and that from the
Vomano basin (11%) significantly increases.
Fig. 13 shows the distribution of small-hydro power plants with
respect to the length of the discounted payback period (DPP). In
both scenarios, nearly all viable installations in the Aterno-Pescara
basin have a DPP less than 10 years, with a clear prevalence of those
with a DPP greater than 5 years. This trend is basically true for the
Sangro basin, whereas the remainder, particularly those in the
Vomano basin, are dominated by small-hydro power plants with a
DPP greater than 10 years.
To obtain a COE <15 cV/kWh and a PI > 1.5, the number of viable
installations varies from 28 (pessimistic scenario) to 48 (optimistic
scenario), whereas the economically feasible potential varies from
102.6 MW to 124.8 MW (Fig. 12), thus allowing an electricity pro-
duction per year in the range of 533e616 GWh. The contribution of
the Vomano basin decreases (4e6%) and that of the Aterno-Pescara
basin markedly increases, reaching a peak of approximately 50% in
the first scenario.
Finally, the economically feasible potential resulting in a COE
less than 15 cV/kWh and a PI greater than 2 remains approximately
54% (78.6 MW) and 72% (105 MW) of the net capacity in the first
and second scenarios, respectively. In both cases, nearly all the
viable installations are located in the Aterno-Pescara basin, ac-
counting for approximately either 60% (pessimistic scenario) or 50%
(optimistic scenario) of total feasible potential.
8. Conclusions
The goal of this paper was to define a methodology for
evaluating the technical and economic residual potential of
small-hydro power plants having a rated capacity less than
10 MW. The methodology was applied to the case of the
Abruzzo region of Italy, which has a considerable number of
suitable sites for the construction of small hydro power in-
stallations. Specifically, the investigation involved 87 river
stretches belonging to the main regional basins, namely, the
Aterno-Pescara, Sangro, Vomano, Saline, Foro, Tordino, Liri-
Garigliano and Sinello basins.
The energy model proposed evaluates the design flow rate, the net
head, the rated power and the annual electricity production of po-
tential installations based on the flow duration curve and the hy-
draulic turbine type. The flow duration curves were defined through a
regionalisation procedure based on a graphical approach, and the type
of hydraulic turbine was selected to minimise the unit cost of
406 R. Carapellucci et al. / Renewable Energy 75 (2015) 395e406
electricity produced. The cost of electricity was evaluated assuming
two economic scenarios based on different capital, operating and
maintenance cost functions. Moreover, the economic model allowed
the assessment of the profitability of the initial investment by eval-
uating the profitability index and the discounted payback period.
The residual potential of small hydro in the investigated basins
was 146.1 MW. The most important contribution is provided by the
Aterno-Pescara basin (52.1 MW), followed by the Sangro
(46.1 MW), Vomano (16.3 MW) and Liri Garigliano (13.8 MW) ba-
sins. More than 50% of the total potential installations had a rated
capacity less than 1 MW (44), approximately 40% had a rated ca-
pacity between 1 and 5 MW, and the remaining 8% (7) had a rated
capacity exceeding 5 MW (these seven were located in the Aterno-
Pescara (3), Sangro (3) and Liri-Garigliano (1) basins).
The annual electricity production amounted to 690 GWh, with the
Aterno-Pescara and Sangro basins accounting for more than 70%
(498 GWh). Regarding the distribution of the energy production with
respect to the rated capacity of small-hydro power plants, it is noted
that over 90% of the electricity is produced by installations exceeding
1 MW, despite the greater number of plants of smaller size.
The electricity generated by these new potential installations
could increase the current hydroelectric energy production of the
Abruzzo region (1756.4 GWh) by approximately 40%.
In the case of a pessimistic economic scenario, the unit cost of
electricity production was less than 15 cV/kWh for approximately
60% (51) of potential installations. Assuming as economic constraints
that the COE <15 cV/kWh and the PI > 1, the economically feasible
potential amounted to 121.8 MW, or approximately 80% of the net
capacity for an annual electricity production of 605 GWh. The
number of viable installations was 40, which were mainly located in
the Aterno-Pescara (16), Sangro (10) and Vomano (5) basins, with
rated capacities of 50.2 MW, 42.9 MW and 10.9 MW, respectively.
In the case of the optimistic economic scenario, the number of
installations with a COE <15 cV/kWh reached approximately 80%
(68); the economically feasible potential (COE <15 cV/kWh, PI > 1)
was approximately 97% (142.6 MW) of the net rated capacity, thus
enabling an electricity production per year of 678 GWh.
Assuming more stringent economic constraints (COE <15 cV/
kWh, PI > 2), the economically feasible potential ranges from
78.6 MW (pessimistic scenario) to 104.9 MW (optimistic scenario),
thus representing over 50% of the net potential, mainly because of
the viable installations in the Aterno-Pescara basin.
Nomenclature
Symbols
CI investment cost, MV/MW
CI concavity index
CO&M operating and maintenance cost, MV/(MW year)
Ep annual electricity production, GWh
Hg gross head, m
Hn net head, m
LCV coefficient of L-variation
LCS coefficient of L-skewness
Pn net hydro power potential, MW
Qd design flow rate, m3/s
Qm mean actual flow rate, m3/s
Qmin hydraulic turbine minimum flow rate, m3/s
Acronyms
COE cost of electricity, cV/kWh
CRF capital recovery factor, %
DPP discounted payback period, years
FDC flow duration curve
MVF minimum vital flow, m3/s
NPV net present value, MV
PI profitability index
Greek letters
he electrical efficiency
hturb hydraulic turbine efficiency
References
[1] Dursun B, Gokcol C. The role of hydroelectric power and contribution of small
hydropower plants for sustainable development in Turkey. Renew Energy
2011;36:1227e35.
[2] European Small Hydropower Association. Small hydropower roadmap e
condensed research for EU-27. 2012.
[3] Gestore Servizi Energetici. Statistical report 2011 e renewable energy power
plants in Italy.
[4] Abruzzo Region. Abruzzo water protection plan: general report. 2008.
[5] Legislative decree of 3 April 2006, n. 152 e Environmental Regulations.
[6] DHI Water & Environment. MIKE BASIN e a versatile decision support tool for
integrated water resources management planning. 2003.
[7] Abruzzo water protection plan: evaluation of minimum vital flow. 2008.
[8] Abruzzo Region. A water resource planning study for hydropower production.
2008.
[9] Davie T. Fundamental of hydrology. 2nd ed. Taylor & Francis; 2012.
[10] Booker DJ, Snelder TH. Comparing methods for estimating flow duration
curves at ungauged sites. J Hydrol 2012;434e435:78e94.
[11] Masih I, Uhlenbrook S, Maskey S, Ahmad MD. Regionalization of a conceptual
rainfall-runoff model based on similarity of the flow duration curve: a case
study from the semi-arid Karkheh basin, Iran. J Hydrol 2010;391:188e201.
[12] Galeati G. Analysis of water resources supporting power system e evaluation
of surfacewater resource at regional scale, Italy. 2002.
[13] Hosking JRM, Wallis JR. Regional frequency analysis e an approach based on
L-moments. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1997.
[14] R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing.
Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2013.
[15] Department of Energy of Polytechnic of Milan. Cost of electricity production
from renewable energy sources. December 2010.
[16] HYDI (Hydro Data Initiative) of European small hydropower association.
http://streammap.esha.be.
[17] Ministry of Economic Development, Ministerial Decree of 6 July 2012. In-
centives for the electricity production from renewable energy sources other
than photovoltaic power plants e implementation of Article 24 of Decree No.
28/2011.
[18] Pasqual J, Padilla E, Jadotte E. Technical note: equivalence of different prof-
itability criteria with the net present value. Int J Prod Econ 2013;142:205e10.
[19] Commission of European Communities. Council directive 2000/60/EC of 23
October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of
water policy.
[20] Abruzzo Region. Abruzzo water protection plan: methodology. 2008.
[21] Turcotte R, Fortin JP, Rousseau AN, Massicotte S, Villeneuve JP. Determination
of the drainage structure of a watershed using a digital elevation model and a
digital river and lake network. J Hydrol 2001;240:225e42.
[22] IHS. Annali Idrologici, edited by Italian Hydrografic Service. www.acq.
isprambiente.it/annalipdf/.
[23] Abruzzo Region. A water resource planning study for hydropower production:
annex 1. 2008.
[24] Kirtman B, Power SB, Adedoyin JA, Boer GJ, Bojariu R, Camilloni I, et al. Near-
term climate change: projections and predictability. In: Climate change 2013:
the physical science basis; 2013. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
[25] Smakhtin VU. Low flow hydrology: a review. J Hydrol 2001;240:147e86.
[26] Niadas IA. Regional flow duration curve estimation in small ungauged
catchments using instantaneous flow measurements and a censored data
approach. J Hydrol 2005;314:48e66.
[27] Abruzzo Region. Abruzzo water protection plan: hydrologic and hydro-
geologic balances. 2008.
[28] Sauquet E, Catalogne C. Comparison of catchment grouping methods for flow
duration curve estimation at ungauged sites in France. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci
2011;15:2421e35.
[29] European Small Hydropower Association. On how to develop a small hydro
site. 2nd ed. 1998.
[30] Alexander KV, Giddens EP. Optimum penstocks for low head microhydro
schemes. Renew Energy 2008;33:507e19.
[31] Natural Resources Canada. Micro-hydropower systems: a buyer's guide. 2004.
[32] Gordon JL. Hydraulic turbine efficiency. Can J Civ Eng 2001;28:238e53.
[33] Kaldellis JK, Vlachou DS, Korbakis G. Techno-economic evaluation of small
hydro power plants in Greece: a complete sensitivity analysis. Energy Policy
2005;33:1969e85.
[34] Aggidis GA, Luchinskaya E, Rothschild R, Howard DC. The costs of small-scale
hydro power production: impact on the development of existing potential.
Renew Energy 2010;35:2632e8.