Sunteți pe pagina 1din 1

# The annual operating costs re estimated and entered in the sixth row and when summed with

the fifth row, capital recovery cost, the total annual cost is obtained and is given in the seventh
row.
Using the Kilowatt-hours of energy as calculated for the case of q
20
= 4700 pies
3
/s and h = 210,
yielding 51,200 KWh, the annual benefit can be calculated by multiplying by unit sale value of
the energy. This is step 12. In this case the unit rate value was taken as 30 mills or \$ 0.03/KWh,
(1981 prices). Plotting annual cost and annual benefits against the installed plant capacity will
then permit determination of the optimum plant capacity by showing where the maximum net
benefit is or where marginal benefit equals marginal cost. This is shown in Fig. 6.7 and is step
13 of the flow diagram of Fig. 6.5. More detail on procedures, formulas, and approaches to
economic analysis of hydropower is presented in chapter 12.
This example is based on a flow duration analysis. A similar procedure could be applied to
sequential flow analysis of operation studies by choosing different alternatives of varying the
capacity of the units. In that case one must choose enough alternatives for plant capacity to
bracket the scale size that represents the most economic unit size.
Consulting firms, manufacturers, and governmental agencies have digital computer programs
that will quickly run either a duration type study or a sequential flow study to determine the
annual energy output. In the case of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, there is an H.E.C.-3
program (1976), and a HYDUR program (1980). With these computer programs, it is possible to
make computations similar to those in the example, but which require making several
alternative runs at different discharges to find the optimum installed capacity.
As the mathematical expression in Eq. (6.1) indicated, there re variables other than flow and
head that can influence the selection of the type and size of turbines. At the final design stage
it should be worthwhile to try alternatives such as variation in runner speed and variation in
the height of the runner above minimum tailwater. Manufacturers making selections make
these more detailed analyses with more precise variations in the size, runner speed, and
turbine setting evaluation. Figure 6.8 is a qualitative graph showing how parameters of speed
and turbine setting can be used in making an optimum selection of turbine for a given location
and sequence of flows.