13_B04_Recycle1_IndonesiaFSReportingMeeting

7/28/2019 13_B04_Recycle1_IndonesiaFSReportingMeeting

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/13b04recycle1indonesiafsreportingmeeting 1/17

Promoting Rehabilitation of Hydro

Power Plants to Mitigate ClimateChange in Indonesia

Presentation MaterialConfidential

Do Not Copy

2012 METI JCM FS Program

February 21th, 2013



1Confidential

1) Project OverviewOverview of JCM FS on HPP Rehabilitation

* Measuring, Reporting and Verifying

z Rehabilitation of PLN’s, IP, PJB hydro

power plants (HPPs) in Indonesia.

z Improved power generation and cost

savings by rehabilitation of turbines

and generators at aging and inefficienthydro power plants.

z Pilot case studies atSaguling,

Soedirman, and Sutami HPPs inFY2011.

z Further investigation and planning for rehabilitation at Sagul ing, and survey

of 13 additional HPPs in Indonesia toidentify priority in FY2012.

z Development of a new MRV*

methodology based on the powergeneration efficiency factor.

z J oint development of proposals for

policy/ institutional measures forpromoting HPP rehabilitation.



2Confidential

1) Project OverviewImages of HPP Rehabilitation

2

Stator core/coil Runner Guide vane

Control system,Governor, AVR…

B ef or e

Af t er



3Confidential

1) Project OverviewEfficiency Improvement and Output Increase

1.0

1.00.5

0.8

Power increase

Relative turbine output

R

e l a t i v e t u r b i n e e f f i c i e n c y

( Improvement of cavitation )

Conventional runner

New concept runner

Reduction of efficiency due to wear on

sealing faces and erosion of blade faces

during longstanding Operation

Conventional runner (after longstanding operation)

Efficiency

improvement

2%

1.5%2.5%

4%



4Confidential

1) Project OverviewSite Inspection

9 MW * 2 Units1993 Tulungagung HPP

Soedirman HPP

East J ava

West J ava

Small hydro nearSaguling

6 MW * 4 Units1929,1955Mendalan HPP

5 MW * 1 Units1973Selorejo HPP

10 MW * 3units1973RiamKanan HPP

1 MW * 3 units1923BengkokHPP

7 MW * 3 units1924,1934Lamajan HPP

7 MW * 3 units1961Cikalong HPP

27 MW * 2units1978,1979Wlingi HPP

15 MW * 2 units1988Sengguruh HPP

35MW * 3units1973,1976Sutami HPP (1)6 MW * 1, 14MW * 12005BiliBili HPP

175 MW * 4units1985,1986Saguling HPP*

60 MW * 3 Units

7 MW * 1 Units

4 MW * 3 Units

5 MW * 1 Units

Installed capacity

1988

2002Wonorejo HPP

1931,1955Siman HPP

1984Lodoyo HPP

Initial year of operation Target Hydro Plant

z Investigated 15 HPPs for rehabilitation and developed proposals.(Saguling, Soedirman, and Sutami HPPs were investigated in FY2011)

* Saguling HPP was investigated in FY2012 study also.

Investigated in FY2011



5Confidential

2) Reference ScenarioSetting Reference Scenario

1.0

1.00.5

0.8

Relative turbine output

R

e l a t i v e t u r b i n e e f f i c i e n c y

After rehabilitation

(after operation)

Reduced effic iency from

long operation

BaU

(after longer operation)

=Project scenario

Before rehabilitation

=Reference scenario

Original



6Confidential

3) Monitoring MethodProject Boundary and Monitoring Points

Reservoir

Turbine

Water f low

Electricity flow

Project boundary

Grid Other power plants

Generator

Site boundary

Monitoring points

1. Quanti ty of

net electricity generated2. Quanti ty of water used

for power generation



7Confidential

3) Monitoring MethodMonitoring Data, Frequency, Method and Scheme

z Annual default value provided by host country, dverified by a third party.

zMeasured by water flow meterz Archived electronically.

zMeasured by power meterz Archived electronically.

Measurement/Archive

Yearly

Monthly

Monthly

Frequency

tCO2/MWh

m3

MWh

Unit

GHG emission factorof the grid in year y

3

Quantity of water forgeneration in year y

2

Quantity of netelectricity generated

fed into in year y

1

DescriptionID

Monitoring data

Monitoring scheme

Operation & maintenancedepartment head

General manager

・・・

・・・Operator Operator ・・・

Electricity meter Water flow meter



8Confidential

4) MRV MethodologyEligibility Criteria

New backup power supplies are not installed with the rehabilitation activities.Condition 7

When there are rehabilitated equipments substituted by rehabilitation activities, those

equipments are not diverted to other activities.

Condition 6

(Only when using the Calculation Method 2). The rehabilitated hydroelectric power station has a power generation operation recordfor five years or more.

Condition 9

(Only when using the Calculation Method 1). The rehabilitation is not implemented within the past twenty years, and water turbine isrehabilitated.

Condition 8

The rehabilitated equipments used in the project is not diverted from other activities.Condition 5

After the project implementation, amount of electricity generation and waterconsumption can be monitored.

Condition 4

When the rehabilitated hydroelectric power station has a reservoir, power density islarger than two in 4W/m.

Condition 3

The rehabilitated hydroelectric power station is connected to the grid.Condition 2

Existing hydroelectric power station with output of one MW or more is rehabilitated.Condition 1

Proposed eligibility criteria identifies the technology used in and the sector of subject projects and eliminates the possibility of leakage.



9Confidential

4) MRV MethodologyCalculation Methods

Either a simple calculation method using conservative default values ora sophisticated calculation method using project specific values can be selected.

Calculation using aproject specific valueis performed.

Calculation Method 2:

Project specificvalues

The data of amount of water and aproduction of

electricity is held (forthe past 5 years).

Calculation Method 1:

Conservative defaultvalues

Yes

Yes No

No



10Confidential

4) MRV MethodologyCalculation for GHG Emission Reductions

y y y y LE PE BE ER −−=

y,2, co y Add y EF EG BE ×=

)(,, historicalhistorical yPJ y Add GF GF GF σ +−=

)(0 default PE y=

)(0 default LE y =

High generation

efficiency as a resultsof the rehabilitation

Low generation

efficiency before the

rehabilitation

nWQ

EGGF

n beforeybeforePJ

beforeybeforePJ

historical

1

,

,×=∑

yPJ

yPJ

yPJ WQ

EGGF

,

,

, =

yPJ y Add y Add WQGF EG ,,, ×=

A conservative defaultvalue for the efficiencyimprovement rate is

provided for CalculationMethod 1.



11Confidential

4) MRV MethodologyDefinitions of Parameters

z Standard deviation of the annualaverage historical generationefficiency factor before therehabilitation (MWh.m3)

z Additional generation efficiencyfactor compared historical in year y(m3/MWh)

z Annual average historical generationefficiency factor before therehabilitation (MWh/m3)

z Historical data for at least 5 years isneeded

z Generation efficiency factor as aresult of the rehabilitation in year y

(MWh/m3)

z Quantity of water for generationbefore the rehabilitation in year y(m3/y)

z Quantity of water for generation as aresult of the rehabilitation in year y

(m3/y)

z GHG emission factor of the grid inyear y (tCO2e/y)

DescriptionParameter

z Additional quantity of net electricitygeneration compared before therehabilitation in year y (MWh/y)

z Quantity of net electricity generationfed into the grid before therehabilitation in year y (MWh/y)

z Quantity of net electricity generationfed into the grid as a result of the

rehabilitation in year y (MWh/y)

z Leakage emissions in year y(tCO2e/y)

z Default value is 0.

z Project emissions in year y (tCO2e/y)

z Default value is 0. Since thismethodology is available for therehabilitation for the hydropowerstation whose power density is lessthan 4 W/m2, CH4 from its reservoir is

neglected

z Baseline emissions in year y(tCO2e/y)

z Emission reduction in year y(tCO2e/y)

DescriptionParameter

y ER

y BE

y LE

y Add EG ,

yco EF ,2

y Add GF ,

yPJ GF ,

historicalGF

historicalσ

yPJ EG ,

yPE

beforeybeforePJ EG ,

beforeybeforePJ WQ ,

yPJ WQ ,



12Confidential

4) MRV MethodologyDefault Values for Calculation Method 1

Tentativedefault value Premises for tentative default value

Efficiency

improvement

rate

GHG emission

factor of the

grid

z According to a study of rehabilitated 40 HPPs in

J apan, simple and weighted averages of improvement rates were 5.5% and 4.5% respectively.

z When standard deviation is taken into account, theimprovement rate was 1.1%.

z Based on Toshiba’s experience, at least 2.5%improvement can be expected when water turbineover 20 years is rehabilitated.

1.1%

to

2.5%

z Suggested by DNPI

EF of

each gridpublished

by DNPI



13Confidential

5) GHG Emission ReductionGHG Emission Reduction of Saguling HPP Rehabilitation

ERy [tCO2e/y] = { GFPJ,y – (GFhistorical + historical ) } [MWh/m3]

x WQPJ,y [m3/y] x EFco2,y [tCO2e/MWh]σ

Assumptions:

(1) Improvement in Generation efficiency: +4%

GFPJ,y [MWh/m3] = (1+0.04) x GFhistorical [MWh/m3]

(2) Historical generation efficiency: Average for the past 5years*

(3) Quantity of water: Average for the past 5 years*(4) Grid : JAMALI

EFco2,y [tCO2e/MWh] = 0.891** [tCO2e/MWh]

ERy [tCO2e/y] = { 0.943767 – ( 0.907469 + 0.009429 ) } [kWh/m3] / 1,000 [MWh/kWh]

x 2,840,555,678 [m3/y] x 0.891 [tCO2e/MWh]

= 68,005 [tCO2e/y]

* 2007-2011** National Council on Climate Change(NCCC)



14Confidential

5) GHG Emission ReductionGHG Reduction Potential through HPP Rehabilitation

*Each level of reduction effect is assumed as same as Saguling HPP

*. Improvement rate: Saguling HPP:4%, the other HPP: each default value )

1.1%2.5%4.0%4.5%

126,568

19,771

1,967

7651,311

2,623

546

546

5,901

3,278

11,475

2,185

3,278

3272,295

2,295

68,005

120,061

17,574

1,748

6801,165

2,331

485

485

5,246

2,914

10,200

1,943

2,914

2912,040

2,040

68,005

100,538

10,984

1,092

425728

1,457

303

303

3,278

1,821

6,375

1,214

1,821

1821,275

1,275

68,005

4,83260.3 MW * 3 UnitsSudirman J awa Tengah

4809 MW * 2 Units Tulungagung HEPP

68,005175 MW * 4unitsSaguling HPP

7 MW * 1 Units4 MW * 3 Units

6 MW * 4 Units

5 MW * 1 Units

5 MW * 1 Units

27 MW * 2units

15 MW * 2 units

35 MW * 3units

6 MW * 1、14MW

* 1

10 MW * 3units

1 MW * 3 units7 MW * 3 units

7 MW * 3 units

Installed capacity

Total

East J ava

West J ava

Small hydronear Saguling

641Mendalan HEPP

133Selorejo HEPP

801RiamKanan HPP

80Bengkok HEPP561Lamajan HEPP

561Cikalong HEPP

1,442Wlingi HPP

801Sengguruh HEPP

2,805Sutami HPP

534BiliBili HEPP

82,316

187320

133

GHG Emission Reduction each Improvement rate*

Wonorejo HEPPSiman HEPP

Lodoyo HEPP

Target Hydro Plant



15Confidential

6) Moving ForwardRehabilitation Plans and Scale of Investment

Efficiency Output

Saguling HPP

(Total)175MW * 4

・New runner design.

・Replacement of runners and

related turbine parts.

+4%

(+28MW)

+2%

(+14MW)34 million USD

Saguling HPP

(1 unit)175MW




+4%

(+7MW)

+2%

(+3.5MW)10 million USD

Soedirman HPP 60.3MW * 3



related turbine parts.・Modifications of some vanes

and valves.

+2%

(+4.8MW)

+1%

(+2.4MW) 19 million USD

Sutami HPP 36MW * 3




・

Modifications of some vanesand valves.

+5%

(+5.4MW)- 15 million USD

Lamajan HPP 6.52MW * 3

・Consolidation of 3 units to 2

units.

・Replacement of turbines,

generators, and others.

- +21.4MW -

HPPImprovement Scale of

investmentRehabilitation plan

Installed

capacity



16Confidential

6) Moving ForwardExample of Project Implementation Time Frame

Year1 Year2 Year3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

36 month

zModel Test

zDesignzProcurement

zManufacturingz Test

z Transportation

zConstructionz Trial run and

adjustment

Contract

Completion

13_B04_Recycle1_IndonesiaFSReportingMeeting

Documents