A feasibility and economic study into the use of micro hydro power applications to generate electricity from the Victoria Capital Regional District’s municipal water facility. Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.

Verkefnið er unnið í tengslum við Háskóla Íslands og Háskólann á AkureyriThe Victoria Capitol Regional District (CRD) operates several pressure reducing facilities (PRF) as part of their potable municipal waterways. The Humpback PRF has the largest flow and head conditions, and was used as the study site in this thesis. A feasibility and economic study was conducted to observe the viability of a proposed hydropower station at the Humpback PRF. Feasibility analysis of flow and pressure: Flow and head conditions vary over the course of time, with lows in 2004 of 0.2 cubic meters per second (m3/s) and 15 meters (m) of head, to highs in 2009 of 2.3 m3/s and 67 m of head. The Sooke Reservoir is the source of water and has a head tank open to atmospheric conditions at an elevation of 169 m.a.s.l. The proposed centerline for the hydro turbine runner is around 109 m.a.s.l., allowing for a brute head of 60 m at that point. Frictional headlosses were calculated, and are not as significant as the head losses that result in the treatment plants. Average flow and head conditions were established, and used to determine the turbine design size, and were found to be: • 1.3 cubic meters per second • 48.0 meters of head. Economic analysis: RETScreen, a free downloadable program created by The Government of Canada, was used to perform six (6) economic scenarios. Two (2) export price rates were set, and applied to three (3) economic scenarios: best, expected, and worst case resulting in the six different scenarios. Market options, penalties, ownership options, and future steps were examined. A summary of the Humpback PRF power potential was provided by RETScreen and is listed below: Proposed Turbine Size: 426 kW (.426 MW) Power Output (80.8% capacity factor): 3,014 MWh The economic potential of this project was studied with two prices and under a best, an expected, and a worst case scenario. The best case scenario with the higher electricity export price rate had a rate of return of over 60% on the equity invested. In contrast, the worst case scenario with the lower electricity export price rate had a return on investment of -6%. Penalties and other accrued costs were not incorporated in either of these rates of return but are noted within this paper