Small Hydro Resource Mapping in Tanzania PREFEASIBILITY STUDY: LUEGERE January 2018 This report was prepared by SHER in association with Mhylab, under contract to The World Bank. It is one of several outputs from the small hydro Energy Resource Mapping and Geospatial Planning Tanzania [Project ID: P145287]. This activity is funded and supported by the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP), a multi-donor trust fund administered by The World Bank, under a global initiative on Renewable Energy Resource Mapping. Further details on the initiative can be obtained from the ESMAP website. This report is an interim output from the above-mentioned project. Users are strongly advised to exercise caution when utilizing the information and data contained, as this has not been subject to validation using ground measurement data or peer review. The final output from this project will be a validated Tanzania Small Hydro Atlas, which will be published once the project is completed. Copyright © 2018 THE WORLD BANK Washington DC 20433 Telephone: +1-202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org The World Bank, comprising the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA), is the commissioning agent and copyright holder for this publication. However, this work is a product of the consultants listed, and not of World Bank staff. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work and accept no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for non-commercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: +1-202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Furthermore, the ESMAP Program Manager would appreciate receiving a copy of the publication that uses this publication for its source sent in care of the address above, or to esmap@worldbank.org. Phase 2 - Ground Based Data Collection PREFEASIBILITY STUDY OF THE LUEGERE HYDROELECTRIC SCHEME Renewable Energy Resource Mapping: Small Hydro - Tanzania [P145271] January 2018 IN ASSOCIATION WITH FINAL OUTPUT SHER Ingénieurs-conseils s.a. Rue J. Matagne, 15 5020 Namur – Belgium Phone : +32 81 32 79 80 Fax : +32 81 32 79 89 www.sher.be Project Manager: Rebecca DOTET SHER reference: TNZ01 Phone : +32 (0) 81 327 982 Fax : +32 (0) 81 327 989 E-mail : dotet@sher.be Rev.n° Date Content Drafted Verified 0 04/12/2017 Prefeasibility Study Report - draft version Damien DUBOIS Pierre SMITS Quentin GOOR Lionel MATAGNE Alice VANDENBUSSCHE 1 19/01/2018 Prefeasibility Study Report - final version Damien DUBOIS Quentin GOOR SHER INGÉNIEURS-CONSEILS S.A. IS ISO 9001 CERTIFIED Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project ABREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ASTER GDEM Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer Global Digital Elevation Model CHIRPS Climate Hazards Group InfradRed Precipitation database DSM Digital Surface Model ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESMAP Energy Sector Management Assistance Program EWURA Energy and Water Utilities Regulatory Authority FAO Food and agricultural organization GIS Geographic Information System GoT Government of Tanzania GSHAP Global Sismic Hazard Assessment GW Gigawatt GWh Gigawatt hour IFC International Finance Corporation IPP Independent Power Producers kW Kilowatt kWh Kilowatt hour MW Megawatt MWh Megawatt hour NASA United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration OP Operational Polices REA Rural Energy Agency RE Renewable Energy SRTM Shuttle Radar Topography Mission TANESCO Tanzania Electric Supply Company USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers WES Waterways Experimental Station SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 5 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project TABLE OF CONTENT TABLE OF CONTENT .................................................................................................................................... 6 TABLE OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................... 8 LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................... 9 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 10 2 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 12 2.1 Overview of the ESMAP Program ........................................................................................................ 12 2.2 Objectives and Phasing of the Study ................................................................................................... 12 2.3 Context and Scope of the Prefeasibility Study ..................................................................................... 13 3 CONTEXT OF THE LUEGUERE HYDROELECTRIC SCHEME ...................................................................... 14 3.1 Project Area ......................................................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Site Access .......................................................................................................................................... 14 3.3 General Site Description ...................................................................................................................... 17 3.3.1 Site overview .................................................................................................................................................... 17 3.3.2 Existing infrastructure ....................................................................................................................................... 18 3.4 Previous Studies .................................................................................................................................. 18 4 TOPOGRAPHY AND MAPPING ............................................................................................................. 19 4.1 Existing Mapping.................................................................................................................................. 19 4.1.1 Topographic Mapping....................................................................................................................................... 19 4.1.2 Thematic Mapping ............................................................................................................................................ 19 4.1.3 Digital Surface Model ....................................................................................................................................... 20 4.2 Mapping Carried out as Part of the Study ............................................................................................ 20 4.2.1 Digitization and geo-referencing....................................................................................................................... 20 4.2.2 Additional surveying ......................................................................................................................................... 20 5 HYDROLOGICAL STUDY ..................................................................................................................... 23 5.1 Objectives and Limits ........................................................................................................................... 23 5.2 Description of the Study Area .............................................................................................................. 23 5.2.1 Physical Context............................................................................................................................................... 23 5.2.2 Land cover and protected areas....................................................................................................................... 24 5.2.3 Climate ............................................................................................................................................................. 26 5.3 Hydro-meteorological database ........................................................................................................... 27 5.3.1 Rainfall and meteorological data ...................................................................................................................... 27 5.3.2 Hydrological data.............................................................................................................................................. 27 5.3.3 Annual and monthly rainfall .............................................................................................................................. 28 5.3.4 Inflow analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 28 5.4 Flood Study .......................................................................................................................................... 31 5.4.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................................... 31 5.4.2 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................................... 31 5.4.3 Extreme rainfall events estimates .................................................................................................................... 31 5.4.4 Hydrological parameters estimates .................................................................................................................. 32 5.4.5 Flood estimates ................................................................................................................................................ 32 5.5 Key Hydrological Parameters of the Luegere Project .......................................................................... 32 6 GEOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 34 6.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 34 6.2 Geological Reference Map................................................................................................................... 34 6.3 Local geological setting ........................................................................................................................ 34 SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 6 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 6.3.1 Geological context ............................................................................................................................................ 34 6.3.2 Technical characteristics .................................................................................................................................. 35 6.4 Seismicity ............................................................................................................................................. 37 6.5 Conclusions and Recommendations for Additional Investigations ....................................................... 37 6.5.1 Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................ 37 6.5.2 Additional investigations ................................................................................................................................... 38 6.6 References........................................................................................................................................... 38 7 PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS .............................................................. 39 7.1 Socio-Environmental background ........................................................................................................ 39 7.2 World Bank operational policies and guidelines ................................................................................... 40 7.3 Socio-environmental constraints .......................................................................................................... 41 8 PROPOSED SCHEME AND DESIGN ...................................................................................................... 42 8.1 Proposed Scheme Description............................................................................................................. 42 8.1.1 Diverting structure, intake, waterway and powerhouse .................................................................................... 42 8.1.2 Type of scheme ................................................................................................................................................ 44 8.1.3 Design flow ....................................................................................................................................................... 44 8.1.4 Design Floods .................................................................................................................................................. 44 8.2 Structures Design ................................................................................................................................ 46 8.2.1 Diverting structure type and characteristics ..................................................................................................... 46 8.2.2 Temporary diversion......................................................................................................................................... 49 8.2.3 Outlet structures ............................................................................................................................................... 49 8.2.4 Waterway ......................................................................................................................................................... 49 8.2.5 Electromechanical Equipment .......................................................................................................................... 52 8.2.6 Power and energy generation performance assessment ................................................................................. 61 8.2.7 Powerhouse ..................................................................................................................................................... 62 8.2.8 Transmission line and substation ..................................................................................................................... 63 8.2.9 Access .............................................................................................................................................................. 63 8.2.10 Temporary infrastructure during the construction period ............................................................................. 64 8.2.11 Permanent camp ......................................................................................................................................... 64 8.3 Key Project Features ........................................................................................................................... 65 9 COSTS AND QUANTITIES ESTIMATES .................................................................................................. 67 9.1 Assumptions ........................................................................................................................................ 67 9.1.1 Unit Costs ......................................................................................................................................................... 67 9.1.2 Reinforcements and concrete .......................................................................................................................... 67 9.1.3 Hydro and electromechanical equipment costs estimate ................................................................................. 68 9.1.4 Indirect costs .................................................................................................................................................... 68 9.1.5 Site facilities costs ............................................................................................................................................ 68 9.1.6 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Mitigation Costs ...................................................................... 68 9.2 Total Costs (CAPEX) ........................................................................................................................... 69 10 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 70 10.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 70 10.2 Assumptions and Input Data ................................................................................................................ 71 10.3 Economic Analysis and Conclusions ................................................................................................... 71 11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMANDATIONS ............................................................................................. 73 12 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 74 12.1 Detailed proposed scheme and main components .............................................................................. 74 SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 7 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1. Study area ................................................................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 2. Site access overview ................................................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 3. Access to the site (topographic map) ........................................................................................................................ 16 Figure 4. Site overview (Google Earth) .................................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 5. Views of the waterfall during the rainy season (March 2017) ................................................................................... 17 Figure 6. Existing infrastructure situated 1.5km upstream the proposed weir location. Water was overflowing both sides of the weir (March 2017) .................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 7. More details on the existing weir ............................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 8. eBee Plus drone equipped with a camera for the topographical survey ................................................................... 20 Figure 9. Digital Surface Model (DSM) and orthophotography from drone survey for SF022 site ........................................... 21 Figure 10. Ortho-photography of the Luegere site and contour lines (5 m interval) ................................................................. 22 Figure 11. Luegere River catchment and Digital Surface Model .............................................................................................. 24 Figure 12. Hypsometric curve of the Luegere River catchment ............................................................................................... 24 Figure 13. Land cover in the Luegere River catchment ............................................................................................................ 26 Figure 14. Climatic diagram of the Luegere River catchment ................................................................................................... 27 Figure 15. Temporal variation in rainfall for the Luegere catchment ........................................................................................ 28 Figure 16. Spatial Variation of the annual rainfall on the Luegere catchment .......................................................................... 29 Figure 17. Modelled flow duration curve of the Luegere River at the hydroelectric project ...................................................... 30 Figure 18. Location and Geology map of Site SF022. As per this regional map, site lies within plagioclase amphibolites with some amphiboles and acid injection materials). QDS 132, Geological Survey of Tanzania. ................................................... 34 Figure 19. NNE-SSW Prominent joint set, SF022 .................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 20. Proposed weir position ............................................................................................................................................ 35 Figure 21. A snap of a topographic map showing the location of the power station ................................................................ 36 Figure 22. Foliated quartzo-feldsparthic gneiss as observed 10m west of the proposed power station .................................. 36 Figure 23. Horizontal acceleration due to seismicity (source: GSHAP) ................................................................................... 37 Figure 24. Proximity of the villages of Mgambazi and Lukoma (IN = intake) .......................................................................... 39 Figure 25. Agricultural plots ...................................................................................................................................................... 39 Figure 26. Vegetation cover ..................................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 27. Agricultural plots along the access path close to the powerhouse .......................................................................... 40 Figure 28. Weir, intake and desilting basin’s position .............................................................................................................. 42 Figure 29. Detailed proposed scheme and main components ................................................................................................. 43 Figure 30. Usable flow duration curve of the Luegere River at the project location ................................................................. 44 Figure 31. Creager rating curve ............................................................................................................................................... 47 Figure 32. Typical cross section of a Creager weir .................................................................................................................. 48 Figure 33. Approximate area to be reshaped upstream and downstream the proposed weir location .................................... 48 Figure 34. Turbidity of the water close to the proposed weir location ...................................................................................... 50 Figure 35. Main dimensions of the Pelton unit ......................................................................................................................... 56 Figure 36. Example of two vertical Pelton turbines with 5 nozzles ........................................................................................... 58 Figure 37. Energy production and number of turbine versus the probability of time ................................................................ 62 Figure 38. Access to create to access the proposed Luegere hydropower scheme ................................................................ 64 SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 8 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Key features of the proposed hydroelectric scheme ................................................................................................. 10 Table 2. Administrative data ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 Table 3. Collected thematic maps ............................................................................................................................................ 19 Table 4. Physical and morphological characteristics of the catchment .................................................................................... 23 Table 5. Land cover in the Luegere River catchment ............................................................................................................... 25 Table 6. Flow duration curve of the Luegere River at the hydroelectric project ....................................................................... 30 Table 7. Extreme rainfall events estimates for the Luegere River watershed .......................................................................... 31 Table 8. Ten years and hundred years return period flood events ........................................................................................... 32 Table 9. Key hydrological features of the site .......................................................................................................................... 32 Table 10. Size classification (USACE) ..................................................................................................................................... 45 Table 11. Hazard potential classification (USACE) .................................................................................................................. 45 Table 12. Recommended spillway design floods (USACE) ..................................................................................................... 46 Table 13. Weir key features ..................................................................................................................................................... 47 Table 14. Flushing gates characteristics .................................................................................................................................. 49 Table 15. Intake characteristics ................................................................................................................................................ 50 Table 16. Preliminary design criteria for the desilting basin ..................................................................................................... 51 Table 17. Comparison between Pelton and Francis turbines ................................................................................................... 54 Table 18. Characteristics of the powerhouse ........................................................................................................................... 63 Table 19. Key features of the proposed scheme ...................................................................................................................... 65 Table 20. Unit prices (2017 USD) ............................................................................................................................................ 67 Table 21. Indirect costs ............................................................................................................................................................ 68 Table 22. Project costs estimates (2017 US$) ......................................................................................................................... 69 Table 23. Economic modelling assumptions ............................................................................................................................ 71 Table 24. Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) ............................................................................................................................ 71 SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 9 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The key features of the proposed Luegere hydroelectric scheme are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1. Key features of the proposed hydroelectric scheme FEATURE PARAMETER VALUE UNITS Location Region Kigoma - River Luegere - Hydrology Catchment area 1,317 km² Median streamflow (Q50%) 4.56 m³/s Firm streamflow (Q95%) 1.41 m³/s Design flow 4.33 m³/s Design flood (100 years) 220 m³/s Gravity weir Diverting structure Structure type - (Overflowing section : Creager) Material used Concrete - Overflowing section crest length 50 m Total structure length 70 m Overflowing section height 4.50 m Non-overflowing section height 7.15 m Crest elevation 943.00 masl Slab elevation 938.50 masl Gated flushing channel Number of bays 2.00 pce Gate section 1.4 x 1.5 mxm Intake Number of bays 2 pce Invert elevation 941.00 masl Equipment Trash rack (manual cleaning) - Desilting structure Yes Number of basins 2.00 pce Water level 943.00 masl Waterway Headrace canal length 1 420 m Canal Headrace canal section 2 x 2.3 mxm Average slope 0.001 m/m Forebay Yes - - Water level 941.58 masl Penstock Number of penstock(s) 1 pce Length 1 110 m Diameter 1.20 m Powerhouse and electrical / Floor elevation 786.00 masl electromechanical equipment Gross head 157.00 m Number of units 3 pce Turbine type Pelton - Operating discharge per unit 1.44 m³/s Total installed capacity 5 340 kW Average annual energy generation 34.40 GWh/year Access road Length of road to build 9,000 m SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 10 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Length of road to rehabilitate 0 m Transmission lines Length 85 km Voltage 33 kV CAPEX - without access road and Economic data 13.14 M$ transmission lines LCOE - without access road and 0.05 $/kWh transmission lines CAPEX - access road and 24.97 M$ transmission lines included LCOE - access road and 0.10 $/kWh transmission lines included SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 11 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE ESMAP PROGRAM ESMAP (Energy Sector Management Assistance Program) is a technical assistance program managed by the World Bank and supported by 11 bilateral donors. ESMAP launched in January 2013 an initiative to support the efforts of countries to improve the knowledge of renewable energy (RE) resources, establish appropriate institutional framework for the development of RE and provide "free access" to geospatial resources and data. This initiative will also support the IRENA-GlobalAtlas program by improving data availability and quality, consulted through an interactive atlas. This "Renewable Energy Mapping: Small Hydro Tanzania" study, is part of a technical assistance project, ESMAP funded, being implemented by Africa Energy Practice 1 (AFTG1) of the World Bank in Tanzania (the ‘Client’) which aims at supporting resource mapping and geospatial planning for small hydro. It is being undertaken in close coordination with the Rural Energy Agency (REA) of Tanzania, the World Bank’s primary Client country counterpart for this study. The "Provision of Small Hydropower Resource Data and Mapping Services" IDA 8004801 Framework contract was signed on the 29th May 2013, while the specific contract " Renewable Energy Mapping: Small Hydro Tanzania", n. 7169139, is dated 4th of November 2013. 2.2 OBJECTIVES AND PHASING OF THE STUDY The objectives of the study are:  To improve the quality and availability of information on Tanzania’s small hydropower resources. The project will provide the GoT (Client) and commercial developers with ground-validated maps (at least 70+ sites up to 10 MW) that show the varying levels of hydro potential throughout the country, and highlight several sites most suited for small hydropower projects.  To contribute to a detailed comprehensive assessment and to a geospatial planning framework of small- hydro resources in Tanzania; (ii) to verify the potential for the most promising sites and prioritized sites (~ 20 prioritized sites) to facilitate new small hydropower projects and ideally to guide private investments into the sector; and (iii) to increase the awareness and knowledge of the Client on RE potential. The study is delivered in three phases: PHASE 1: Preliminary resource mapping based on satellite and site visits. PHASE 2: Ground-based data collection. PHASE 3: Production of validated resource atlas that combines satellite and ground-based data. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 12 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 2.3 CONTEXT AND SCOPE OF THE PREFEASIBILITY STUDY This report is delivered in the context of PHASE 2 (Ground-based data collection). In accordance with our Terms of References (Revised Terms of References for the Phase 2 and 3 of the Project, 30 June 2016), the prefeasibility study covers the following aspects:  Review of the existing data and GIS information ;  Additional site visit to the sites and main load centers / national grid connection by relevant sector experts ;  Additional topographic and geotechnical surveys, update of the hydrology, and assessments of environmental and social impact to reach study results at pre-feasibility level;  Preparation of a conceptual design and drawings at pre-feasibility level; Schematic Layout of Hydro Powerhouse, weir or dam (when applicable), waterways and Transmission Lines to the main load centers / national grid connection;  Preparation of a Budgetary Cost Estimate, including costs for environmental and social costs, and Electricity Generation Estimate for a range of installed capacities;  Preliminary economic analysis. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 13 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 3 CONTEXT OF THE LUEGUERE HYDROELECTRIC SCHEME 3.1 PROJECT AREA The Luegere River originates in the Katavi region at elevations over 2,000 m. The Luegere River flows mainly from the Southeast to the Northwest and discharges into the Lake Tanganyika about 10 km downstream to the hydroelectric project. The geographical coordinates (WGS1984) of the proposed weir location are 30.028°East and 5.895°South. At the proposed intake weir location, the watershed of the Luegere River drains an area of 1317 km². Figure 1 presents the exact location of the proposed site in Tanzania. The administrative and location data are detailed in Table 2 below. Table 2. Administrative data Item Value Atlas code SF-022 Site name Luegere River Luegere Major river basin Malagarasi and Lake Tanganyika Region Kigoma District Kigoma Rural Division Igalula Village Lokoma Reference topographic map Topographic map n° 132/3 (scale 1/50,000) 3.2 SITE ACCESS The proposed site is located 130km South of Kigoma. Access to the site is possible by taking a good dirt road up to the village of Lokoma. Before reaching the village, a dirt road leads to the left bank of the Luegere River. From there, the proposed weir location is accessed with a 3km long track. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 14 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 1. Study area SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 15 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 2. Site access overview Figure 3. Access to the site (topographic map) LOKOMA SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 16 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 3.3 GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION 3.3.1 Site overview The site is located East of Tanganyika Lake, in a large river (Luegere River) with a large waterfall (Figure 5). Slopes of the right and left valleys are steep. The project would supply the Kigoma mini-grid, towns along the Tanganyika Lake and Mahale National Park facilities. Figure 4. Site overview (Google Earth) Large waterfall Downstream Downstream Existing infrastructure LOKOMA  Upstream Figure 5. Views of the waterfall during the rainy season (March 2017) Upstream SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 17 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 3.3.2 Existing infrastructure An existing intake structure is located 1.5km upstream the proposed weir location for water supply purposes (Figure 6 and Figure 7)). The infrastructure is not in operation. Figure 6. Existing infrastructure situated 1.5km upstream the proposed weir location. Water was overflowing both sides of the weir (March 2017) Figure 7. More details on the existing weir 3.4 PREVIOUS STUDIES To the best of our knowledge, there are no previous studies of the proposed site. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 18 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 4 TOPOGRAPHY AND MAPPING 4.1 EXISTING MAPPING 4.1.1 Topographic Mapping The JPEG format (not georeferenced) 1:50,000 scale topographic maps have been acquired from the Survey and Mapping Department of the Ministry of Land in order to cover the entire study area. The JPEG format (not georeferenced) 1:100,000 scale topographic maps have been also obtained from the Ministry of Land. The 1:50,000 scale map of interest is the sheet 132/3. The contour lines interval is 20m. All the topographic maps have been georeferenced as described in section 4.2. 4.1.2 Thematic Mapping Thematic maps and their key features, sources and format are presented in Table 3 below. Table 3. Collected thematic maps THEMATIC FORMAT KEY FEATURES SOURCES Country / Regions / Districts / FAO Global Country Boundaries, 2012 Administrative boundaries Vector Divisions REA, 2014 Major cities Vector 32 cities Open Street Map, 2014 1:250,000 (64 tiles) Ministry of Land, Survey and Mapping Raster Full country coverage Department Topographical maps 1:50,000 (1,333 tiles) Ministry of Land, Survey and Mapping Raster Full country coverage Department SRTM v4.1 NASA, 2014 Raster Spatial resolution ~ 90m http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm/ Digital Elevation Model ASTER GDEM v2 Raster Spatial resolution ~ 30m http://www.jspacesystems.or.jp/en_/ (experimental) Land cover Vector Tourist Board ; Tanzania Conservation Protected areas, National Parks Resource Centre ; Ministry of Land ; World Protected areas Vector and Game reserves Database on Protected Areas ; Protected Planet, 2014 IPCC default soil classes derived ISRIC-WISE Soil map Raster from the Harmonized World Soil http://www.isric.org Data Base (v1.1) Satellite image Raster Image Landsat 2013 Google Earth Census data at village and National Bureau of Statistics ; Ministry of Population Shapefile region levels Finance, REA FAO, 2000 Lakes Vector Inland water bodies in Africa http://www.fao.org/geonetwork River "flow accumulation" FAO, 2006 River network Vector network from the HYDRO1k for http://www.fao.org/geonetwork Africa Monthly average rainfall grid WorldClim, v1.4 Rainfall Raster Spatial resolution ~ 1km http://www.worldclim.org/ National, regional and other Road network Vector World Bank AICD database roads of Tanzania Rail network Vector Main rail network World Bank AICD database Ports Vector Major ports World Bank AICD database Airports Vector Major airports World Bank AICD database Power grid Vector Existing power grid IED, 2013 ; REA ; TANESCO SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 19 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 4.1.3 Digital Surface Model The digital surface model (DSM) used in the hydrological study is based on the "Shuttle Radar Topography Mission" (SRTM, version 1 arc-second). These data were acquired in February 2000 by the United States Space Agency (NASA) through radar measurements from space shuttle Endeavor. These data have a spatial resolution of 1 arc-second (about 30 m at the equator). The DSM of the study area is illustrated in Figure 11 of the chapter describing the Hydrological Study. 4.2 MAPPING CARRIED OUT AS PART OF THE STUDY 4.2.1 Digitization and geo-referencing The 1:50,000 scale topographic maps were geo-referenced using the Quantum GIS software and the following projection parameters:  Projection Transverse Mercator UTM zone 36S  Latitude of origin = 0  Central meridian = 33  Scale factor = 0.9996  False Easting = 500,000  False Northing = 10,000,000  Datum WGS 1984 4.2.2 Additional surveying 4.2.2.1 Digital surface model The topographic survey was carried out by remote sensing. An eBee Plus Figure 8. eBee Plus drone equipped with a camera for the drone equipped with a specific camera designed for photogrammetric topographical survey mapping was used (Figure 8). Outputs from drone survey are (1) a high-resolution orthophotography (0.10m resolution) and (2) a Digital Surface Model (DSM). The DSM includes the vegetation cover, but it gives an excellent overview of the topographical features of the site of interest. Contour lines are calculated from the DSM. The ortho-photography as well as contour lines deduced from the digital surface model are presented at Figure 10. Elevations resulting from this topographic survey are relative to each other and have not been linked to the national system. Consequently, the elevations of the works mentioned in this report are not the absolute altitudes of the Tanzanian national system. 4.2.2.2 Digital terrain model The digital surface models was then post-processed to eliminate the effects of vegetation and hence represent the natural terrain elevation. This has been be achieved by identifying pixels at the natural terrain level (excluding vegetation and other anthropogenic elements) and performing a spatial interpolation of these points in order to obtain a digital terrain model (DTM). At this prefeasibility stage, only the weir/intake and tailwater areas were post-processed to obtain the DTM. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 20 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 9. Digital Surface Model (DSM) and orthophotography from drone survey for SF022 site SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 21 Small Hydro Madagascar ESMAP / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 10. Ortho-photography of the Luegere site and contour lines (5 m interval) SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 22 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 5 HYDROLOGICAL STUDY 5.1 OBJECTIVES AND LIMITS The objective of the hydrological study is to establish and quantify the climatological and hydrological characteristics of the study area in order to determine the hydrological parameters and time series required for the design of the Luegere hydroelectric project as well as for the economic analysis of the pre-feasibility study. 5.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA 5.2.1 Physical Context The Luegere River originates in the Katavi region at elevations over 2,000 m. The Luegere River flows mainly from the Southeast to the Northwest and discharges into the Lake Tanganyika about 10 km downstream to the hydroelectric project. As shown in Figure 11, the Luegere catchment at the proposed hydroelectric project site features a marked relief with elevations between 2,036 m and 976 m (1,420 m on average). The drainage basin of the Luegere River at the proposed intake site is 1,317 km² (delimitation based on the SRTM DSM of spatial resolution 1 arc- second, i.e. approximately 30 m). The main physical and morphological features of the river catchment are presented in Table 4 below. The hypsometric curve of the river catchment is shown in Figure 12. This curve shows the percentage of the catchment area above a given elevation. It shows that slopes are important in the upstream part of the catchment and that the rest of the catchment flows on a plateau characterized by a relatively steep slope. This is clearly observed in Figure 12 and Figure 11. Table 4. Physical and morphological characteristics of the catchment PARAMETER VALUE UNIT Area 1,317 km² Average elevation 1,420 m a.s.l. Maximum elevation 2,036 m a.s.l. Maximum elevation (percentile 5%) 1,751 m a.s.l. Minimum elevation 976 m a.s.l. Minimum elevation (percentile 95%) 1,105 m a.s.l. Slope index 8.6 m/km Elevation range 646 m Perimeter 271.8 km Gravelius index 2.10 - SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 23 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 11. Luegere River catchment and Digital Surface Model Figure 12. Hypsometric curve of the Luegere River catchment 5.2.2 Land cover and protected areas Data from the CCI Land Cover project (© ESA Climate Change Initiative - Land Cover project 2016) is a widely accepted source of information for land use around the world. These data are derived from satellite images SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 24 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project acquired by the MERIS instrument of the European Space Agency. The land cover includes 5 years of satellite imagery acquisition between 2008 and 2012. The information is provided in raster format with a spatial resolution of 300m and allows defining the land use classes shown in Figure 13. Figure 13 and Table 5 show that the Luegere catchment is characterized by a very abundant vegetation cover composed mainly of a forest of deciduous (73.6% of the catchment area, i.e. 969 km²), shrubland (11.2%, i.e. 147 km²) and grassland (8.2%, i.e. 108 km²). Table 5. Land cover in the Luegere River catchment AREA CODE LEGEND [%] [KM²] 10 Cropland rainfed 0.3% 3.40 11 Cropland rainfed - Herbaceous cover 0.4% 5.10 12 Cropland rainfed - Tree or shrub cover 0.1% 0.66 30 Mosaic cropland (>50%) / natural vegetation (tree/shrub/herbaceous cover) (<50%) 0.5% 6.42 40 Mosaic natural vegetation (tree/shrub/herbaceous cover) (>50%) / cropland (<50%) 0.2% 3.12 50 Tree cover broadleaved evergreen closed to open (>15%) 1.0% 12.85 60 Tree cover broadleaved deciduous closed to open (>15%) 53.2% 700.30 61 Tree cover broadleaved deciduous closed (>40%) 2.8% 36.75 62 Tree cover broadleaved deciduous open (15-40%) 17.6% 231.50 90 Tree cover mixed leaf type (broadleaved and needleleaved) 0.1% 1.80 100 Mosaic tree and shrub (>50%) / herbaceous cover (<50%) 1.7% 22.67 110 Mosaic herbaceous cover (>50%) / tree and shrub (<50%) 0.0% 0.19 120 Shrubland 11.2% 146.90 130 Grassland 8.2% 107.90 160 Tree cover flooded fresh or brakish water 2.5% 33.07 180 Shrub or herbaceous cover flooded fresh/saline/brakish water 0.3% 4.06 TOTAL 100% 1317 SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 25 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 13. Land cover in the Luegere River catchment 5.2.3 Climate According to the Köppen classification based on rainfall and temperature, the study area (Luegere River catchment) is characterized by a tropical savanna climate with a pronounced dry season and constant high temperatures (Aw class). Köppen defines the temperate climate «A» by the following characteristics:  Average temperature of each month of the year > 18 °C ;  High annual precipitation (greater than annual evaporation) ;  No winter season. The rainfall regime « w » (dry season in winter) is defined by a savanna climate with a precipitation of the driest winter month < 60 mm and < [100 – (mean annual precipitation) / 25]. Figure 14 shows the climatic diagram as well as the temperature curve for the Luegere River watershed. Precipitations are very low during the dry season (June to September) but significant during the wet season. July is the driest month without precipitation (on average) whereas the wettest month is December with 213 mm on average. The average annual precipitation is 1,208 mm. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 26 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 14. Climatic diagram of the Luegere River catchment It is observed that the average annual temperature is 24.1°C. Temperature does not varies much throughout the year with an average amplitude of 3.5°C. The warmest month is October with 25.5°C and July is the coldest, with an average temperature of 22.0°C. 5.3 HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATABASE 5.3.1 Rainfall and meteorological data Rainfall data from two sources were used in this study: (i) the WorldClim climate database and (ii) the Climate Hazards Group InfradRed Precipitation database (CHIRPS). WorldClim is a set of global data representative for the period ~1970-2000 available with a spatial resolution of about 1 km and at a monthly timestep. The spatial resolution is obtained by interpolation of ground-measured data. Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Station data (CHIRPS) is a 30+ year quasi-global rainfall dataset at a daily timestep. Starting in 1981 to near-present, CHIRPS incorporates 0.05° resolution satellite imagery with in-situ station data to create gridded rainfall time series for trend analysis and seasonal drought monitoring. Values extracted from these satellite images are the means of the precipitation that falls each day on the entire catchment. 5.3.2 Hydrological data An existing streamflow monitoring station (ref: Luegere River at Lubalisi, 4D1) is located 2 km downstream the hydroelectric project. Data have been collected in the Lake Tanganyika Water Basin Office. The completeness of the time-series (12% of daily data gap, 1975-1988) is not sufficient for a reliable statistical analysis. To estimate the streamflows of the Luegere River at the hydroelectric project, a method based on the generation of synthetic streamflows on the basis of precipitation data through hydrological modelling was developed and is described in the next section. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 27 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 5.3.3 Annual and monthly rainfall 5.3.3.1 Annual and monthly distribution The analysis of the annual distribution of rainfall within the study area is based on the CHIRPS dataset, presented in section 5.3.1. The results are presented monthly in the section 5.2.3, Figure 14. 5.3.3.2 Spatial distribution The analysis of the spatial variation of rainfall within the study area is based on the WorldClim dataset, presented in section 5.3.1. The spatial variation of average annual rainfall within the watershed is significant with a minimum of 1,056 mm in the northwestern part of the catchment and a maximum of 1,283 mm in its northern part. This is illustrated in Figure 15. 5.3.3.3 Temporal variation The temporal variation in rainfall for the Luegere catchment has been studied from CHIRPS dataset (period 1981-2017) and the results are presented in the graph below. Annual average is fluctuating between 1,000 mm and 1,400 mm but it does not feature any clear trends in annual patterns. Figure 15. Temporal variation in rainfall for the Luegere catchment 5.3.4 Inflow analysis 5.3.4.1 Methodology Given the characteristics of the data available (daily datasets with gaps), the hydrological model selected was a daily lumped rainfall-runoff model called GR4J (in French, modèle du Génie Rural à 4 paramètres Journalier, https://webgr.irstea.fr/en/modeles/journalier-gr4j-2/). First, the model needs three inputs:  daily precipitation (obtained from CHIRPS satellite imagery)  daily evapotranspiration (obtained from CLIMWAT agroclimatic stations) SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 28 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project  daily observed streamflow (obtained from data collection in the Lake Tanganyika Water Basin Offices) From these inputs, the rainfall-runoff relation is established by four parameters. The optimization of these parameters permits to reproduce as much as possible the observed hydrograph. Once the model (or the rainfall-runoff relation) is optimized, the synthetic streamflows can be generated from the daily precipitation and evapotranspiration data. As these data are available for the period of 1981-2017, the synthetic streamflows can be simulated for the same period. The hydrological modelling is only applicable if the time-series of observed streamflow period covers at least three consecutive high-quality hydrological years(1) after 1981 (first year of the CHIRPS data). Figure 16. Spatial Variation of the annual rainfall on the Luegere catchment 5.3.4.2 Flow duration curve Among the hydrological parameters, the determination of the flow duration curve is essential to know the availability of the flows in the river for the hydroelectric project. Indeed, this curve shows the percentage of time that the streamflow in a river is likely to equal or exceed some specified value of interest. For the hydrological modelling method used in this study, the flow duration curve is made directly applying a probability function P(X>x) on the time-series of synthetic streamflow data. This function determines the probability of exceedance of each flow reaching the hydroelectric project. 1A hydrological year is defined as the 12-month period beginning after the dry season. In Tanzania, the hydrological year begins on November 1 and ends on October 31. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 29 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Table 6 and Figure 17 show the modelled flow duration curve as well as the main percentiles. The proposed model shows that the streamflow of the Luegere River at the hydroelectric project is less than 12.0 m³/s 50% of the time and that it is higher than 26.8 m³/s only 10% of the time (over a year period). The flow guaranteed 90% of the time (329 days per year) is estimated at 3.4 m³/s. Table 6. Flow duration curve of the Luegere River at the hydroelectric project STREAMFLOW EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY [M³/S] [L/S/KM²] [-] 1.41 1.07 Q95% 1.59 1.21 Q90% 1.99 1.51 Q80% 2.57 1.95 Q70% 3.39 2.57 Q60% 4.56 3.46 Q50% 5.99 4.55 Q40% 7.83 5.95 Q30% 10.74 8.15 Q20% 16.29 12.37 Q10% 20.91 15.88 Q5% Figure 17. Modelled flow duration curve of the Luegere River at the hydroelectric project SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 30 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 5.4 FLOOD STUDY 5.4.1 Introduction The flood study is essential for designing structures and equipment such as spillways or floodgates but also for temporary infrastructure such as cofferdams and temporary diversions during the construction period. The flood study will focus on 10 years and 100 years return period. These floods will be used respectively for the construction and operation phases. A detailed justification for these return periods can be found in section 8.1.4 of this report. 5.4.2 Methodology Given the lack of observed streamflow data, the methodology used to estimate the floods is a hydrological modelling only based on land features (topography, soil type, and land cover). Hence, the results remain flood estimates and will have to be confirmed at the next stage of the study. The software used is Hydrological Modelling Software (HEC-HMS v4.2.1) developed by the Hydrologic Engineering Center of the US Army Corps of Engineer. This program is designed to simulate the complete hydrologic processes of dendritic watershed systems. The software includes many traditional hydrologic analysis procedures such as event infiltration, unit hydrographs, and hydrologic routing. Hydrological modelling aims to represent the hydrologic response of the watershed for specific rainfall events. Hydrological models are composed by several parameters that can be estimated from land features (topography, soil type, and land cover) influencing the infiltration (production function) and the dynamic of the surface flow (transfer function). These parameters must be calibrated on observed streamflow data in order to establish the best rainfall-runoff relationship to the model. Validated, the model can be used to estimate the hydrographs for extreme rainfall events. Given the lack of observed streamflow data, it is not possible to calibrate and validate the hydrological model. That is why, at this stage of the study, the results of this hydrological study are indicative only. 5.4.3 Extreme rainfall events estimates The extreme rainfall events have been determined for 10, 25, 50 and 100 years return period from the CHIRPS dataset by a statistical extrapolation of the observed maximum precipitations (log-normal law2). Then, the 24-hr precipitations intensity have been statistically distributed to represent a typical event at the simulation time step. Results are presented in the table below. Table 7. Extreme rainfall events estimates for the Luegere River watershed Return period 10 years 25 years 50 years 100 years 24-hr precipitation 50.2 mm 56.9 mm 61.7 mm 66.4 mm 2 This law is advocated by some hydrologists who justify it by arguing that the appearance of a hydrological event results from the combined action of a large number of factors that multiply. Consequently, the random variable follows a log-normal distribution. Indeed, the product of variables is reduced to the sum of the logarithms of these variables and the central-limit theorem makes it possible to assert the log-normality of the random variable. [Translated from Musy A. (2005). Hydrologie générale. http://echo2.epfl.ch/e-drologie/] SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 31 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 5.4.4 Hydrological parameters estimates Production function3: to estimate the runoff generated for each sub-basin, a “production function” is used. This function evaluates the precipitation amount that does not infiltrated into the soil. The SCS Curve Number method has been selected. The parameter of this method (curve number) is calculated from two land features: (a) the hydrologic soil group (HSG) determined from soil type and (b) the land cover. Transfer function4: to estimate the dynamic of the runoff for each sub-basin, a “transfer function” is used. This function represents how the water coming from the precipitation that is not infiltrated into the soil is moving within each sub-basin to reach the outlet. The SCS Unit Hydrograph method has been selected. The parameter of this method (time of concentration) is calculated from topographic land features: (a) the area and slope of the sub-basin and (b) the length and the slope of the main channel. 5.4.5 Flood estimates Ten years and hundred years return period flood estimates at the Luegere hydroelectric scheme are presented in the following table. Table 8. Ten years and hundred years return period flood events ATLAS FLOODS [M³/S] SITE NAME CODE T = 10 YEARS T = 100 YEARS SF022 Luegere 91 213 5.5 KEY HYDROLOGICAL PARAMETERS OF THE LUEGERE PROJECT The key hydrological features of the Luegere hydroelectric project on the Luegere River are summarized in Table 9 below. Table 9. Key hydrological features of the site CHARACTERISTIC PARAMETER VALUE UNIT Catchment Area 1,317 km² Mean elevation 1,420 m a.s.l. Maximum elevation 2,036 m a.s.l. Minimum elevation 976 m a.s.l. Average slope 8.6 m/km Rainfall Long-term average annual 1,208 mm/y (CHIRPS) Streamflow Guaranteed (Q90% ) 1.6 m³/s Median (Q50% ) 4.6 m³/s Flood estimates 10 years 91 m³/s 100 years 213 m³/s The study reveals that the Luegere River features a favorable hydrology at the proposed location of the hydroelectric project. However, hydrological uncertainties are important and it is strongly recommended that hydrological monitoring of the river be done beyond this study. This will include: 3 For more details about SCS Curve Number method: https://www.hydrocad.net/neh/630ch10.pdf 4 For more details about SCS Unit Hydrograph method: https://www.hydrocad.net/neh/630ch16.pdf SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 32 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project - To continue the measurement of water levels at the automatic station installed downstream the hydroelectric project; - To continue the gauging operations of this river in order to improve and validate the rating curve. Beyond the development of the Luegere hydroelectric project, it is strongly recommended that the Government of Tanzania set up a hydrological monitoring network for its rivers with high hydropower potential in order to better understand the available water resources and thus promote the development of hydroelectric projects across the country. It is only in a context of reduced uncertainties through reliable, recent and long-term records (more than 20 years) that technical parameters and economic and financial analyzes of hydroelectric developments can be defined accurately, enabling optimization of their design and their flood control infrastructure (temporary and permanent). SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 33 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 6 GEOLOGY 6.1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this chapter is to generate preliminary geological datasets and other important baseline information at the proposed site that will be used for the design of the hydroelectric scheme at the pre-feasibility study level. These data and information will also be used to define the geotechnical investigations that will have to be carried out at next stages of the study. This study aims to inform about the geological conditions and the types of materials existing in the region, as well as to give an initial overview of the geotechnical properties of these materials. Recommendations are also formulated regarding the need for further studies and investigations if necessary. 6.2 GEOLOGICAL REFERENCE MAP The geological reference map is sheet 132, Kakungu. 6.3 LOCAL GEOLOGICAL SETTING 6.3.1 Geological context The geology of the area (Figure 18) is characterized by phyllitic rocks and aphibolitic rocks. These rocks don’t seem to be significantly fractured or jointed. A limited number of prominent joints show that one joint set trends NNE-SSW, whereas the prominent foliation is characterized by shallow dipping planes due south (Figure 19). Figure 18. Location and Geology map of Site SF022. As per this regional map, site lies within plagioclase amphibolites with some amphiboles and acid injection materials). QDS 132, Geological Survey of Tanzania. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 34 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 19. NNE-SSW Prominent joint set, SF022 6.3.2 Technical characteristics Proposed intake or weir position: At the proposed weir position (Figure 20), the geology looks ideal because there are rocks right from the left bank where the photograph in Figure 20 was taken to the right bank. The rocks seem to be moderately weathered but less fractured / jointed. This implies that the rocks are likely to be suitable for weir construction. Later studies (during dry season) shall point out any element of doubt on this site if any. Figure 20. Proposed weir position Left bank support aspect: Rocks are of similar characteristics as those of the proposed weir position. Right bank support aspect: Same as for left bank support aspect. Intake and waterway: The water intake and waterway are possible to be set on the left bank. On this side, the topography is relatively smooth and geology suitable. Powerhouse: The powerhouse platform has to be established by excavating the ground as indicated by the purple circle in Figure 21. Field relationship shows that about 2m or more of loose materials need to be excavated at this point in order to intersect stable rocks, the foliated quartzo-feldsparthic gneiss (Figure 22). SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 35 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 21. A snap of a topographic map showing the location of the power station Figure 22. Foliated quartzo-feldsparthic gneiss as observed 10m west of the proposed power station SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 36 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 6.4 SEISMICITY Tanzania is located along the Great African Figure 23. Horizontal acceleration due to Rift. Seismicity in this area is relatively seismicity (source: GSHAP) unknown, mainly due to the lack of historical data. Within the framework of the Global Seismic Hazard Assessment (GSHAP), the assessment of the seismic hazard in West Africa was carried out based on two data sources: - The catalog of the British Geological Survey (Musson, 1994), containing quakes of magnitude greater than 4 from 1600-1993 (this is assumed to be complete for magnitudes greater than 5 beyond the year 1950 and for Magnitudes greater than 6 since the beginning of the 20th century), - The NEIC catalog for more recent events (1993-1998). A statistical method was used to determine the horizontal acceleration values due to earthquakes. The map below shows the distribution of seismic acceleration coefficients for the entire African continent. It can be seen that the project area is characterized by horizontal accelerations between 0.4 and 1.8 m/s². Those values will of course have to be confirmed by additional studies. 6.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATIONS 6.5.1 Conclusion There are no major geological contraindications to the construction of the Luegere hydroelectric scheme. There is no visible geological risk at this stage of the study. However, further investigations will have to be carried out during the detailed studies phases in order to confirm the observations (and analysis) made concerning geology and geotechnical characteristics (rock resistance, soil strength, rock compactness, rock permeability, etc.). A table presented in the following section summarizes the uncertainties to be removed and the type of investigations to be carried out to remove them. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 37 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 6.5.2 Additional investigations ELEMENT UNCERTAINTY TO REMOVE SURVEY TYPE  Undertake detailed studies on structural  There are limited structural (and geology so as to propose the optimal lithologic units) data on site due to the Bed at weir orientation of the weir (Figure 19). This fact that almost all the rocks are covered has to be undertaken when the water level by voluminous flowing water is lowest. Left support at weir  No uncertainty  N/A Right support at weir  No uncertainty  N/A  Lithologic units and soil type along the  Visit and study all the areas that shall be entire trace of water way, not well proposed after detailed topographic studies. Waterway established due to accessibility Major aim shall be to study the type of rocks challenges in some parts of the river and structures along the length of the water bank way trace. Penstock  No earmarked uncertainty  N/A  Quantity of overburden (boulders and  Excavate and make a platform for the power Powerhouse soils). station. The materials to be excavated shall be ≥2m 6.6 REFERENCES Compilation of the GSHAP regional seismic hazard for Europe, Africa and the Middle East (http://www.seismo.ethz.ch/static/GSHAP/eu-af-me/euraf.html). SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 38 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 7 PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS The Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) is the procedure for prior analysis of the impacts that a project may have on the environment. It ensures the integration of environmental concerns into project planning and allows for consideration of likely environmental measures from the design stage of the project. 7.1 SOCIO-ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND The project is located in the Luegere River near the two villages of Mgambazi and Lukoma, in Uvinza District, Kigoma Region. Figure 24. Proximity of the villages of Mgambazi and Lukoma (IN = intake) The area is characterized by gentle to steep hills (called Mgambazi hills) with a moderate vegetation cover. The proposed project area is used for agriculture. Most of crops observed during the site visit were maize and beans for food crops and sugarcane and banana for cash crops. Figure 25. Agricultural plots The vegetation cover in the area is composed of Miombo woodland dominated by Mibaga, Mikongo, Mininga. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 39 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 26. Vegetation cover Figure 27. Agricultural plots along the access path close to the powerhouse Mahale National park boundaries are very close to the site. The forests have various valuable tree species such as Pterocarpus angolensis (Mninga), Khaya nyasica (Mkangazi), Afzelia quanzensis (Mkora), Milecea- exelsa (Mvule), Brachystegia spiciformis (Mtundu), and Pterocarpus all species (Mkurungu). Moreover, some tombs and headstones are present near the site (between 100m and 700m). 7.2 WORLD BANK OPERATIONAL POLICIES AND GUIDELINES The World Bank has developed a series of operational policies (OP), or safeguards, to help identify, avoid, and minimize social and environmental impacts. These operational polices and safeguards are prerequisites to accessing the World Bank funding assistance to address certain environmental and social risks for specific development projects. There are 11 OPs and associated World Bank procedures that apply to environmental and social risks. Similarly, there are eight IFC performance standards. The details will be provided as part of either the prefeasibility or feasibility studies for each priority projects. This section summarizes the World Bank's safeguard policies that contribute to the sustainability and effectiveness of development within the World Bank's projects and programs by helping to avoid or mitigate the impacts of these activities on people and society, environment. It ensure potential adverse environmental and social impacts that may result from individual project activity are identified early, and appropriate safeguard measures are prepared prior to implementation to avoid, minimize, mitigate and, in cases where there will be residual impacts, offset or minimize adverse environmental and social impacts. The following World Bank safeguard policies could be triggered when implementing the Luegere hydroelectric project: SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 40 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project  OP 4.01 – Environmental Assessment (EA): The Bank requires Environmental Assessment (EA) of projects proposed for Bank financing to ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus to improve decision making. However, we can already estimate that the adverse impacts on human populations and environment-linked areas are limited. They are reduced, not irreversible and some measures can prevent, mitigate or minimize them. Moreover, these measures can improve the environmental performance.  OP 4.11 – Cultural Heritage: There are a few tombs close to the site.  OP 4.12 – Involuntary Resettlement: The project needs new use of some areas (implementation of the plant, renovation of the access roads to the site…) that can be crop zones.  OP 4.04 – Natural Habitats: Not applicable. The projected weir (4.5m high) is classified as a small dam (<15m high); the usual generic safety measures for dams are appropriate and do not need the implementation of OP 4.37 – Safety of Dams (for large dams). The triggering process of the policies will be completed by the World Bank during dedicated projects appraisal. 7.3 SOCIO-ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS Overall, the project does not feature any major environmental or social constraints that cannot be mitigated by appropriate measures and that would jeopardize its development. Some hamlets are situated in the vicinity of the proposed scheme (weir, canal, penstock pipes and powerhouse). Potential impacts (noise, traffic, atmospheric emissions) on the riparians during the construction phase will have to be mitigated by appropriate measures. Overall, the development of the project will lead to positive externalities by the use of local labor during the construction phase, increase local skills and bring electricity to local communities that will eventually foster local economic development. Finally, as mentioned above, a water supply project was intended to be built. However, the project was not completed because of shortage of fund. According to the Village Executive Officer (VEO-Likoma), the fund from the donors were provided to Uvinza District Council, but was missed. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 41 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 8 PROPOSED SCHEME AND DESIGN 8.1 PROPOSED SCHEME DESCRIPTION 8.1.1 Diverting structure, intake, waterway and powerhouse As illustrated in Figure 28, the diverting structure (consisting of a weir) is located on the bedrock of the river which is on the riverbed in this section of the river. Moreover, this position allows to set a 50-m long overflowing weir and minimizes the water level over the crest during exceptional floods. It is followed by a small waterfall 100m behind the weir, which should ensure that headrace canal is above flood level. The natural river slope behind the weir also allows desilting basins to flush properly the accumulated sediments. Figure 28. Weir, intake and desilting basin’s position The entire proposed scheme is presented in Figure 29 below and in Appendix 12.1. The intake structure, waterway and power plant will be located on the left bank of the river. The valley features several thalwegs hence civil works will be needed in some places. The access to the intake and the desilting basin will require a crossing bridge over the weir. The weir is equipped with a gated flushing channel to prevent the accumulation of sediments in front of the intake and the weir. A 1 420m long headrace canal (rectangular section) will convey the water from the intake structure (including a desilting structure) to the forebay. The intake and the waterway are designed to minimize the head losses. The 1 110m long pressure penstock will convey the water from the forebay to the hydroelectric power plant located on the left bank of the river, above extreme flood level. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 42 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 29. Detailed proposed scheme and main components SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 43 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Geographical coordinates of the main structures are presented in the table below: Structure Latitude* Longitude* Weir and intake -5.895 30.028 Hydropower plant -5.898 30.011 * Decimal degree, WGS1984 8.1.2 Type of scheme The Luegere project is a run-of-the-river hydropower type of scheme without regulation capacity. 8.1.3 Design flow The flow duration curve was determined in chapter 5 of this report. It does not however correspond directly to the flow available to the equipment. Indeed, the Luegere River will be by-passed over a length of approximately 3.2 km. An environmental flow guaranteed at all times is required for environmental and ecological reasons. In the absence of commonly agreed international standards and given the uncertainties on the available streamflow of the river, the ecological flow is set at 230 L/s, which corresponds to 5% of the median flow (Q50%) of the river in natural conditions. Since this flow is not available for the turbines, it is necessary to subtract it from the flow duration curve of the river. The flow duration curve that can actually flow through the turbines is finally obtained by considering the design flow rate of equipment chosen at the pre-feasibility stage, namely 4.33 m³/s. The usable flow duration curve is illustrated in Figure 30 below. The final choice of design flow will be made at the feasibility study stage based on an economic analysis of alternatives. The flow duration curve must also be validated by the additional hydrological analysis and measurements. Figure 30. Usable flow duration curve of the Luegere River at the project location EXCEEDANCE STREAMFLOW [M³/S] PROBABILITY NATURAL AVAILABLE [-] 1.41 1.18 Q95% 1.59 1.36 Q90% 1.99 1.76 Q80% 2.57 2.34 Q70% 3.39 3.16 Q60% 4.56 4.33 Q50% 5.99 5.76 Q40% 7.83 7.60 Q30% 10.74 10.51 Q20% 16.29 16.06 Q10% 8.1.4 Design Floods Several national bodies have examined the problem of defining the relevant design flood to be considered for the design of spillway and other associated flood structures. Only US method is developed below. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 44 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project According to USACE (United States Army Corps of Engineers) in Recommended guidelines for safety inspection of dams, dam are classified in accordance with 2 characteristics: (i) the size of the structure and (ii) the potential hazard. The tables below present the classifications. Table 10. Size classification (USACE) STORAGE DAM HEIGHT CATEGORY (AC-FT – HM³) (FT – M) < 1000 Ac-ft < 40 Ft Small < 1.2 hm³ < 12.19 m > 1000 Ac-ft et < 50 000 Ac-ft > 40 Ft et < 100 Ft Intermediate >1.2 hm³ et < 61.7 hm³ 12.19 m et < 30.48 m > 50 000 Ac-ft > 100 Ft Large > 61.7 hm³ > 30.48 m In the table above, the height of the dam is calculated from the lowest point of the structure to the maximum level of the reservoir. The category is defined either by the storage capacity of the reservoir or by the height of the dam, depending on the characteristic that classify the dam into the less favorable category. The proposed weir on the Luegere will be less than 12m high and the storage volume or the reservoir will be less than 1.2 hm³. Therefore, the proposed weir is classified as being "Small". As far as potential hazard is concerned, it can be considered as "Low" according to the table below: there is no risk of loss of human life in the event of failure or misoperation of the diverting structure or appurtenant facilities. There is no significant industry or cultivated area have been identified downstream of the proposed hydropower projet. Table 11. Hazard potential classification (USACE) LOSS OF LIFE ECONOMIC LOSS CATEGORY (EXTENT OF DEVELOPMENT) (EXTENT OF DEVELOPMENT) Minimal None expected Low (undeveloped to occasional structures or (No permanent structures for human habitation) agriculture) Few Appreciable (Notable agriculture, industry or Significant (No urban development and not more than a structures) small number of inhabitable structures) High More than a few Extensive community, industry or agriculture Table 12 presents the USACE's recommendations for the design flood to be considered as a function of the potential hazard that may occur in the event of failure or misoperation of the diverting structure or appurtenant facilities and the size of the structure. The flood is expressed either by its return period (or frequency) or by the PMF. The PMF (Probable Maximum Flood) is the largest possible flood that can occur through the most severe combination of critical meteorological, geographic, geological and hydrological conditions reasonably possible in a watershed. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 45 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Table 12. Recommended spillway design floods (USACE) HAZARD SIZE SPILLWAY DESIGN FLOOD Small 50 to 100-year frequency Low Intermediate 100-year to ½ PMF Large ½ PMF to PMF Small 100-year to ½ PMF Significant Intermediate ½ PMF to PMF Large PMF Small ½ PMF to PMF High Intermediate PMF Large PMF Following the aforementioned guidelines of the USCA, the recommended design flood for the Luegere hydroelectric scheme is from 50-years to 100-years frequency. The hydrological study presented in chapter 5 estimates the 100-year return period flood to be 220 m³/s. 8.2 STRUCTURES DESIGN 8.2.1 Diverting structure type and characteristics Given the nature of the foundations as well as the estimated water head on the diverting structure for the design flood, a concrete gravity-overflow weir is the most appropriate structure. A concrete structure is also particularly recommended for submersible structures. This choice is motivated by the following elements: - The local geology shows that the rock is of good quality, adapted to the foundations of a concrete weir; - Given the magnitude of the design flood, the weir must be as low as possible in order to minimize the impact of the upstream water level rise; - An ungated weir/spillway will be easier to build and safer in design since there is no risk of dysfunction or misoperation of the gates, particularly during flood events. The crest length will be 50m, which limits the water level over the crest during floods. The weir will be equipped with a gated flushing channel on the left bank to flush the sediments that would have accumulated in front of the water intake (see section 8.2.3). The main function of a spillway is to allow the passage of normal (operational) and exceptional flood flows in a manner that protects the structural integrity of the structures and its foundations. The overflowing section of the weir will be designed with an ogee-type profile (Creager). The profile of this type of weir is close to the hydraulic profile of the nappe springing freely from a sharp crested weir. The advantage of such a profile is that, at an equivalent discharge, the ogee-type weir is characterized by a lower rise in the water level compared to a broad-crested weir. Similarly, considering the same hydraulic head on the spillway, a longer crest length is required for a broad-crested weir than for an ogee-shaped weir. Moreover, this profile also ensures the stability of the weir. The upstream face of the weir will be vertical at this stage of prefeasibility study but will have to be confirmed during the feasibility study based on a more detailed topography. The crest of the weir will have a hydraulic profile that meets the US Army Waterways Experimental Station (WES) standards and recommendations to minimize the risk to the weir structure due to negative SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 46 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project pressure and cavitation under the nappe. The discharge flowing over a spillway is calculated based on the following equation: 3 = ℎ2 √2 Where Q is the discharge [m³/s], Cd the spillway coefficient [-], L the length of the overflow crest [m], h is the total hydraulic head (static and dynamic head) over the crest [m] and g is the gravitational acceleration [m/s²]. Considering an ogee-shaped overflow weir, the hydraulic head over the crest for the design flood (220 m³/s) will be 1.65m. The Creager rating curve is presented in Figure 31 below. Figure 31. Creager rating curve 946.5 946.0 945.5 945.0 944.5 Elevation [m] 944.0 943.5 943.0 942.5 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Flow [m³/s] The main features of the weir are presented in Table 13 and a typical cross section of the profile is shown in Figure 32. Table 13. Weir key features PARAMETER VALUE UNIT Gravity Weir type Creager overflowing section Material used Concrete Overflowing crest length 50 m Total weir length 70 m Overflowing section height 4.50 m No-overflowing section 7.15 m height Crest elevation 943.00 masl Slab elevation 938.50 masl SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 47 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 32. Typical cross section of a Creager weir In order to obtain a 50-m overflowing crest length, excavation on both side of the river are needed. It is recommended to reshape the riverbanks upstream and downstream of the weir in order to remove the accumulated sediments and improve the hydraulic conditions for the intake and overflowing weir. The approximate area to be reshaped is illustrated in Figure 33. Figure 33. Approximate area to be reshaped upstream and downstream the proposed weir location Excavated area SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 48 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 8.2.2 Temporary diversion The purpose of the temporary diversion is to dry up part of the river to allow the construction of the weir and appurtenant structures described in the previous section. The temporary diversion will be implemented consecutively on the left bank in order to construct the gated flushing channel and the intake, then on the right bank. It will consist of a compacted embankment cofferdam or, if the ground conditions are favorable, sheet piles. 8.2.3 Outlet structures The outlet structure consist in a gated flushing channel. It is designed to allow inspection of the weir and intake. In addition, the outlet structure while open can create a strong current with the effect of flushing the accumulated sediments close to the intake structure. The flushing channel will be equipped with gates of which the invert is positioned at an elevation close to the elevation of the natural riverbed. The gates will be located on the left side of the weir, next to the intake structure to allow an effective flushing of the accumulated sediments. The number of bays and their size were calculated to ensure outflow corresponding to twice the Q30% streamflow of the river (15.66 m³/s). This objective is achieved with the installation of two 1.40m wide and 1.50m high radial gates. Table 14. Flushing gates characteristics PARAMETER UNIT VALUE Invert elevation masl 938.50 Number of bays - 2 Width m 1.40 Height m 1.50 8.2.4 Waterway 8.2.4.1 Intake structure The intake will be located on the left bank in the continuity of the weir. The intake will also be equipped with a screen and a manual screen cleaning system upstream of the intake gates, to prevent floating debris or large stones from obstructing the intake gates. The section of the bars and their spacing will be determined at the feasibility study stage. The intake is designed taking into account the following constraints: - The invert elevation will be set 2.50m above the invert of the flushing gates; - The velocity of water at the entrance of the screen should not be greater than 0.7 m/s to minimize turbulence and facilitate screening of debris. That will also minimize head losses. Hence, the intake will consist of 2 bays of 2.00m wide and 2.00m high, followed by a free inlet that will guide the current lines gradually towards the desilting structure. The invert of the intake will be set at elevation 941m. Details are presented in Table 15 hereafter. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 49 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Table 15. Intake characteristics PARAMETER SYMBOL UNIT Intake invert elevation masl 941 Intake top elevation masl 943 Screen inclination ° 15 Design flow m³/s 4.33 Number of bays - 2 Bay width m 2.20 Bay height m 2.00 Type of gate - radial Flow velocity at intake m/s 0.7 The free inlet which objective is to allow smooth converging of the current lines to the desilting structure will, for hydraulic reasons, be approximately 2.5 times the width of the intake, i.e. 15m. The feasibility study will analyze the hydraulic behavior of the intake in detail and update its design accordingly. 8.2.4.2 Desilting structure Solid transport is expected to be high, especially during the wet season. Consequently, the intake and desilting structures must be adequately designed to ensure the removal of the problematic sediment load before entering the headrace canal. It is recommended that the feasibility study include a solid transport study. Figure 34. Turbidity of the water close to the proposed weir location If not taken into account at the design stage, it would result in operational and maintenance problem of the hydroelectric plant. The sediments that would accumulate in front of the intake will be flushed by frequent flushing operations using the flushing gates designed for this purpose. The inlet of the desilting structure will have a sufficient slope in order to guide the solid particles to outlet of the basins. Moreover, the desilting basins will be long enough to ensure particle settling. The desilting structure is design based on topographic, hydraulic, type of sediments and operation constraints. At the pre-feasibility study stage, the key features considered for design are presented in the following table: SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 50 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Table 16. Preliminary design criteria for the desilting basin PARAMETER UNIT VALUE Invert elevation m a.s.l. 941 Sediment outlet elevation m a.s.l. 940 Water outlet elevation m a.s.l. 941 Design flow m³/s 4.33 Average solid inflow kg/m³ 0.8 Minimum diameter of the particles mm 0.3 Maximum flush frequency hours 24 The width of the desilting basin is determined in such a way that the horizontal water velocity is less than the maximum horizontal speed (which is determined based on the particles diameter). The length of the desilting structure is determined in such a way that a particle located on the surface can be deposited in the reservoir of the desilting structure. The horizontal and vertical velocity ratio is proportional to the ratio of the falling length to the falling height. The desilting structure will therefore be composed of 2 sub-basins each 4.5m wide and will have a sedimentation length of 19.25m. To this must be added the transition zones upstream and downstream of the settling tank of the desilting structure. The desilting structure will therefore have a total length of 21.75m and a total width of 10.50m and a maximum depth of 3.00m. The desilting structure will be equipped with a lateral spillway in the event of excessive inflows coming from the intake. 8.2.4.3 Headrace canal The headrace canal features a rectangular cross section. The slope of the headrace canal is kept below 0.1% in order to minimize the head losses. The canal dimensions are defined on the basis of the uniform flow equation (Manning): 2 1 3 2 = = −1 ℎ where A is the wetted area [m²], V is the mean flow velocity [m/s], n is the Manning coefficient, ℎ is the hydraulic radius [m] and i the slope of the canal [-]. The headrace canal is designed taking into account: - the average flow velocity is less than 2 m/s in order to avoid erosion of the concrete. - the cross section is the most economical section: for a given discharge, slope and Manning coefficient, the discharge capacity will be maximum when the hydraulic radius (ratio of the wetted section on the wet perimeter) is maximum. The canal features a rectangular cross-section of 2.00 m in width for a water height of 2.00 m, to which is added a freeboard of 30cm, which results in a total height of 2.30 m. The headrace canal is 1420m long. 8.2.4.4 Penstock The headrace canal and the pressure penstock meet at the forebay. The forebay will be equipped with a scour gate in order to drain the channel as well as the particles that would have sedimented in the latter back to the river. The forebay will be equipped with a safety spillway in the event of excessive inflows coming from the SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 51 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project headrace canal or allowing the spill of the water in excess during variations flow through the turbines (production decrease, shutdown of a group, etc). The pressure steel penstock will be overground and 1110m long. The penstock will be supported by reinforced concrete support blocks. At this stage of the study, the distance between two support blocks is 6m. Anchoring blocks will be placed at each elbow to balance the forces related to the change of direction of the flow. A suitable system allowing the thermal expansion of the penstock should be defined at the feasibility study stage. In order to limit the head losses to a maximum of 8% of the gross head, the penstock will have a diameter of 1.20 m. 8.2.5 Electromechanical Equipment 8.2.5.1 Basic data The following specific values corresponding to the latitude and elevation of the powerhouse are used for the equipment predesign and calculation: SYMBOL UNIT VALUE Gravity Acceleration g m/s2 9.778 Average temperature of water Twater C 20 Density of Water at 20C ρ kg/m3 998.8 8.2.5.2 Selection of the type of turbine and the number of units Method olog y The selection of the turbines type is made on the basis of the sites parameters such as the gross and net heads, and the plant design flow. With a plant design discharge equal to Q50%, which is guaranteed 50% of the year, unit flexibility is needed to follow the river flow variations all along the year, as the hydropower scheme is a run-of-the river one. Moreover, the Luegere site being connected to the Kigoma mini-grid, flexibility will also be needed to follow the demand during the day. In order to make a preliminary selection of the most suitable turbine type and of the number of units, a first selection is made according to the available head. The choice of the number of units is based on several criterion:  Flexibility and reliability: Even if some turbine types allow a strong flexibility, it is chosen to consider at least two units per site. This choice will prevent possible electricity delivery shortage as, at least, one unit will remain on the grid in case of maintenance or break.  Standardization or systemization: Considering the expected installed turbine capacities (<10MW per turbine) for ESMAP project, units will be standardized or systemized. In one hand, the best efficiency points will be a little lower than for large units, but, in the other hand, the cost and delivery time will be reduced. Moreover, the maintenance will be easier than for custom made products.  Access to the site and powerhouse infrastructure: As the site access can be a problem for larges equipment or equipment parts, it can be mandatory to increase the number of unit in order to allow their transport from the nearest harbor. The number of units also has a direct impact on the powerhouse. The greater the number, the bigger the power house, but the SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 52 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project bigger the crane capacity and the unit weight leading to high loads on the power house structure. Finally, the erection of smaller units will be easier than for bigger ones. The preliminary turbine design is based on statistical values. The detailed analysis of the other alternatives and the optimization of the choice must be made during feasibility study if the site is selected at the end of the prefeasibility phase. The power and rotation speed of the generators depend on the turbine hydraulic design. The selection process aims in finding the higher rotation speed (which reduces the size of the rotating parts and then price of the unit), taking into consideration hydraulic phenomenon as for instance cavitation. The efficiency of the generators is assessed according to their power and speed. At the prefeasibility stage, the power factor of the generators is considered as equal to 0.9. All the technical data (preliminary dimensions, rotation speeds, efficiency level, etc.) are given for information only. They have to be understood as orders of magnitude and can vary in further studies steps in function of the requested accuracy level. Select ion proc ess resu lts According to the net head (~147.6 m) and the available flow, two types of turbines can be considered:  Two or more vertical Pelton turbines with 4 or more nozzles and rotational speed of 500 or 600 rpm or,  Two or more high speed Francis turbine with 1’000 or 1’500 rpm. Considering the installed capacity and the previous criterion, it is better to select at least 2 units to increase the reliability and the availability of the production. Moreover, the rotational speed with one Pelton turbine would be 300 or 333 rpm which is not a good option in terms of equipment availability, weight, cost, transport and maintenance. A brief comparison of the Francis and Pelton alternatives is given hereafter:  The flexibility of the Francis is significantly lower than the one of a multi-jet Pelton. However, it can be noticed that the Q95 flow is equal to 1.18 m3/s, corresponding to 54% of the design discharge of one turbine, when selecting two units. So, both Francis and Pelton turbine are able to operate at this Q95 discharge with a rather good efficiency.  At nominal and maximal discharge the efficiency of a Francis turbine is higher than the one of a Pelton turbine. Due to the choice of Q50 as design discharge and to the fact that Q95 represents 54% of Q50, the preliminary calculation of the potential annual generation leads to a production of 34.4 GWh/yr with 2 Pelton turbines and 35.3 GWh/yr with 2 Francis turbine.  Due to a higher rotational speed, the generator of the Francis unit will be less expensive than the one of the Pelton unit. Moreover, the casing of the Pelton turbine is roughly two times bigger than the spiral casing of the Francis, what probably increases the cost of the powerhouse.  The penstock will be protected by a trash rack associated with a manual cleaning. Even with these equipment, it is not possible to exclude that solid materials, vegetal and other floating materials will pass through the rack and reach the turbine. The Francis geometry is more SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 53 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project sensitive to the floating material than Pelton, as it can, for instance, be blocked in the labyrinths, what will block the runner and lead to a runner dismantling. The Pelton is less sensitive to that kind of floating material. Moreover, it is easier to clean it if needed (easy access by the tailrace for instance).  The Francis need a watertight shaft seal, which is a wearing part. A vertical axis Pelton does not need one. Then maintenance is reduced and less spare parts are needed.  The Pelton turbines are equipped with jet deflector that divert the jet from the runner in case of black out, for instance, avoiding that the unit goes to, or remains for a long time at, runaway speed. It is then possible to close the nozzle slowly in order to limit the overpressure in the penstock to a maximum of 1.2 times the static pressure due to the gross head. This is a very efficient protection against water hammer.  The frequency regulation with a Pelton with 4 or more nozzles will be more accurate than with a Francis turbine. It will then be a strong advantage to control the frequency of the Kigoma mini-grid if the Luegere power plant output is high compared to the grid total power.  The high inertia of the low speed Pelton turbine will facilitate the follow-up of the load variation, helping to keep the grid frequency constant.  If the demand from the grid is less than 1MW, it could be a problem to supply it with one Francis unit. The hereafter table gives an overview of the comparison Table 17. Comparison between Pelton and Francis turbines PELTON FRANCIS Answer to discharge variations Excellent Medium Answer to demand variation Excellent Medium Start-up and synchronization Easy Easy Sensitivity to floating material Low Medium Sensitivity to solid material Low High Frequency regulation Excellent Good Watertight shaft seal No yes Runaway risk No Yes Water hammer risk Low Medium Maximum efficiency level 0.89 – 0.92 0.92 – 0.94 Rotational speed in the case of Luegere Low High Size in the case of Luegere Large Medium Weight in the case of Luegere High Medium Considering this short comparison and the prefeasibility study step, the Pelton turbine is selected. Francis alternatives could be considered in a full feasibility study. With 2 Pelton turbines with 4 nozzles, the size of the casing is 3.6m, which could be a problem for the transportation by road between the harbor the power house. Moreover, the weight of 12 or 14 poles generator SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 54 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project of 3’000 kVA is more than 20 t and could also be a problem for the transport and the maintenance operations. Then, for the prefeasibility study, a number of 3 units is considered and the highest rotational speed is preferred (5 nozzles or more). The main characteristics of the equipment are: Turbine type Pelton Number of turbines (-) 3 Nominal turbine discharge m3/s 1.443 Minimal turbine discharge m3/s 0.087 Net head (at Qn and with all the turbines)) m 147.6 Rotation speed rpm 600 Number of nozzles - 5 or more Max. Turbine efficiency (%) ≈ 90.5% Max. Generator efficiency (%) ≈ 94.9% Power Factor (-) 0.9 Generator Apparent Power kVA ≈1’980 Generator Power kW ≈1’780 Generator voltage kV ≥ 0.4 The preliminary main dimensions of the 3 Pelton units are: D1 Pitch diameter m 0.81 Dc Casing diameter m 2.88 Ha min Minimal height between the medium plan of the m 1.85 runner and the downstream water level Hab min Minimal height between the ceiling of the tailrace m 1.45 channel and the runner axis Hb min Minimal height between the medium plan of the m 0.60 runner and the top of the casing DD Diameter at the inlet of the turbine manifold m ≈0.80 L1 Length L1 of the turbine manifold m 2.7 L2 Length L2 of the turbine manifold m 2.7 W1 Width W1 of the turbine manifold m 2.7 W2 Width W2 of the turbine manifold m 2.4 DG Diameter of the generator m 1.5 HG Height of the generator m 2.5 WG Weight of the generator t 12 SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 55 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 35. Main dimensions of the Pelton unit 8.2.5.3 Hydro and electromechanical equipment of the powerhouse The plant equipment includes:  Three security valves, spherical or butterfly type, equipped with counterweight as an emergency closing mechanism in the event of the loss of the grid  Three Pelton turbines  Three low voltage synchronous generators  Three Step Up LV/MV transformers and the connection to the MV switchboards  The cabinets for control and monitoring systems, included the speed and voltage regulators, metering and relaying panels for each unit  The power plant control and monitoring cabinet  The cabinets for Low Voltage distribution  The Electrical protections and safety systems  One auxiliary LV transformer  One DC power supply and an Emergency diesel auxiliary power generator  Earthing and Lighting system with their protection The following points should be studied at a later step of the project:  Sediment issue and the requirement of anti-abrasion coating,  Need for flywheel (network stability),  Grid connection voltage 8.2.5.4 Net Head Calculation The Pelton turbine is an impulse turbine whose main characteristic is to use the velocity of the water to move the runner: The Pelton runner rotates in the air. Consequently the runner must be set above the maximum tailwater level to allow its operation at atmospheric pressure. With a vertical Pelton turbine, the gross head is the difference between the water level in the forebay tank and the runner axis level. The floor elevation of the powerhouse is 786 masl. The height between the runner axis SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 56 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project and the tail water will be of the order of 1.6 m. At the prefeasibility step, the tail water and floor levels are not accurately defined. Then the runner axis level is roughly assumed to be equal to the floor elevation. The water level in the forebay tank is 941.6 masl, and thus the gross head is 156.6 m. Taking into consideration the head losses between the forebay tank and the inlet of the turbine manifold, the net head at nominal discharge is then equal to 147.6 m. 8.2.5.5 Overview of the units operation The turbine governor will be controlled by the forebay tank level and the frequency measurement. The units operation is as follows:  If the available discharge is lower than the minimal discharge of one turbine, the plant is in shutdown state;  As long as the available discharge is between the minimal and maximal discharge of one turbine, only one unit is operating;  If the available discharge is over the maximal discharge of one turbine and the demand is exceeding one unit capacity, a second unit is started. The discharge of the first turbine is reduced and the discharge of the second one increases until both turbines operate at the same nozzle opening.  Then, the two turbines can operate with the same nozzle opening until they reach their maximum power. If there is enough water and the demand is exceeding two units capacity, the third turbine is started according to the same starting procedure as for the second unit.  If the available discharge is larger than the maximal discharge of the hydropower plant, the excess water is released in the river at the intake location.  If the discharge decreases, the automatic control system reduces the nozzle opening of the turbines in reversed order. In case of shutdown of one or more turbine, the excess water is released in the river at the intake location. The frequency regulation is used any time to adapt the production to the demand. The forebay tank reference water levels to start or stop the units is set to avoid hysteresis. 8.2.5.6 Pelton turbines The following description and preliminary design presented in chapter 8.2.5.2 are based on the consultant’s database. They are given for information and may vary from one manufacturer to another. The turbines performances and characteristics (rotational speed, efficiency guarantees, reliability, etc.) are realistic as long as the turbines are designed and manufactured on the basis of a hydraulic profile issued from laboratory tests and developments. As the number of nozzle is set to 5 or more, the axis of the turbine is vertical. Moreover, this configuration simplifies the maintenance as the overhung mounting of the runner on the generator shaft does not require shaft alignment and reduces the number of bearings. The nozzle actuators are preferably hydraulic. In case of emergency, for instance during a load rejection event, deflectors divert the jet from the runner to avoid runaway speed. The actuators of the deflectors must operate in the event of a power failure. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 57 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 36. Example of two vertical Pelton turbines with 5 nozzles SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 58 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 8.2.5.8 Generators The main characteristics of the generator are presented hereafter: Number of units 3 Type Three phase, Synchronous Axis Vertical with turbine runner overhanging freely Frequency (Hz) 50 Rated output (kVA) 1’980 Rated Power factor  (-) 0.9 Rated Voltage (V) Preferably 690 V or 400 V Rated speed (rpm) 600 Maximum runaway speed (rpm) ~1’140 Primary coolant air Index of protection IP 23 or above Insulation class F (design), operating B class According to the maximal power, the generator shall be designed with a self-ventilating open air cooling system. The efficiencies of the generators were assessed from a database collected from recognized generator manufacturers, with a particular emphasis on the rated power and rotational speed parameters. 8.2.5.9 Overhaul and safety valve Each turbine shall be protected by a safety valve. It could be a DN 900 butterfly or DN 800 spherical valve with PN 25. The minimal discharge of a multi-jet Pelton being low, the cavitation criteria must be carefully checked before the final selection of the valve. This valve can be used in case of maintenance and as a second safety device in case of emergency shutdown, deflector malfunction or failure. It opens with a hydraulic actuator and closes by counterweight. 8.2.5.10 High Pressure Unit (HPU) Each unit will have its own High Pressure Unit to drive the nozzles, the deflectors and the safety valve. It will include one hydraulic bladder in case of high pressure pump failure. 8.2.5.11 Control and monitoring system The plant operation being expected to be entirely automatic, its control and monitoring system has to be as simple as possible, so as to reduce human intervention to a minimum. The discharge will be controlled by the water level in the forebay tank, which will be measured by mean of a level gauge connected to the plant by optical fiber or other means. Each unit will have its own control and monitoring cabinet with its own PLC. One additional control and monitoring cabinet and PLC will be installed to control the whole power plant. It will be possible to operate the units either automatically or manually. In order to prevent untimely operations, manual controls must be locked with a key. The plant will restart automatically in case of power outage. However, for safety reasons both with regards to the plant’s operation and maintenance staff and to the electric grid, the plant will not restart automatically after an alarm, even if it would disappear without human action. The electric cabinets will at least include the following elements: safety valve opening, nozzle opening, Power Factor regulation, voltage and frequency controls, and emergency power supply. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 59 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project The following measurement instruments will be used: Grid and generator voltmeters, wattmeter, frequency meter, power factor measurement, synchroscope, speed sensor, headrace level, hours counter, start-up counter, bearings and alternator coils’ temperatures, emergency shut-down, emergency power-supply charge level. The following alarms will have to be considered: Insufficient water level, insufficient head, too low or too high frequency, alternator overload, overspeed, emergency shut-down, start-up fault, bearing defect, coils defect, current return, battery overload, battery defect. The plant could be remote-controlled. 8.2.5.12 Emergency power-supply A 48, or 110 V emergency power supply consisting in batteries, battery chargers, inverters, load indicators, protections, etc., will insure safety in case of power failure. Battery alarms for defects or overloads will be transmitted to the power plant control system. Under normal conditions, the emergency power supply will be powered by the low tension grid. The energy storage must be sufficient to ensure a safe turbine shutdown. An emergency diesel set or a small Pelton turbine set will maintain power supply to essential feeders of the power house, weir and intake and eventually to enable black start of the HPP (to be studied in the feasibility studies). 8.2.5.13 MV transformer and switchboard Each generator will be connected to a step up transformer enabling the outlet voltage to be increased to 30 kV. The main specifications of the LV/MV transformer area: Number of units 3 Type Dry Rated Power (kVA) 2’200 Number of phases 3 Primary voltage (V) 400 or 690 Secondary voltage (V) 30’000 On the medium voltage side of the power transformers, a single 30kV/630A circuit breaker will be installed for each generator. This circuit breaker will be strong enough to stand the continuous operating current, as well as the peak short circuits. Its mechanism will allow the interruption of the short circuit to avoid any damage to the transformers, generators, and other electrical equipment. 8.2.5.14 Auxiliary Transformer Ancillary services of the hydropower plants will be supplied by an auxiliary LV transformer with the following characteristics: Number of units 1 Rated Power (kVA) 250 Number of phases 3 Primary voltage (V) 30’000 Secondary voltage (V) 400 or 690 A circuit breaker shall be installed to protect the auxiliary equipment. The own consumption of the powerplant could be estimated roughly to 0.5% of the generated energy. This consumption is not taken into account in the energy production calculation and must be included as an expense in the financial analysis. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 60 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 8.2.5.15 Overhead travelling crane The power house will be equipped with an overhead crane that will be able to carry and place turbines, generators and other large devices during construction and maintenance operations. 8.2.5.16 Abrasion Solid transport is expected to be high, especially during the wet season. The scheme is equipped with a desilting basin to limit or remove most of the sediment. It is recommended that the feasibility study includes a solid transport study. According to the results of this study, especially the composition of the transported particles, the decision to add a protective coating for the critical turbine parts could be adopted. 8.2.6 Power and energy generation performance assessment The yearly electricity production is calculated by compiling the energy generation according to the flow duration curve and using the following expression: Eetot = 10-3 ∫  g Qt η(Qt) H(Qt) dt [kWh/year] Where Eetot = total yearly energy production [kWh/year]  = water specific weight [kg/m3] g = acceleration due to gravity [m/s2] η(Qt) = Overall unit efficiency, product of turbine, generator and transformer efficiencies, function of discharge [-] H(Qt) = Net head, function of global discharge of the power plant [m] The used turbine efficiencies come from statistical curves based on real turbines of similar type, power and specific speed, taking into account the head and discharge variation. The used generator efficiencies come from statistical curves based on real generators and taking into account the influence of the generator type, the rated output and the number of poles. The rated efficiency of the step-up transformers is slightly higher than 99%. The efficiency of the power transformer used in the annual energy generation is considered constant and equal to 99%, independently of the load. With the high flexibility of 3 multi-jet Pelton turbines, the overall efficiency is high and with small variation. Most of the time 3 units are in operation. It is the result of the design flow at Q50%. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 61 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 37. Energy production and number of turbine versus the probability of time The potential annual energy production is 34.4 GWh per year. The accuracy of the estimation of the energy production depends mainly from the accuracy of the hydrology. The optimization of the production must be made in further studies taking into consideration the choice of the design flow, the turbine type and the number of units. 8.2.7 Powerhouse The hydropower plant will be positioned on the left riverbank. A truck access road should be provided to allow the delivery of the turbine / generator units. A platform will also have to be constructed to allow the maneuvering of long vehicles. Further details are given in section 8.2.9 below. The power plant floor elevation is chosen so as to ensure that it remains above flood level. The tailrace canal will discharge the turbined outflow to the river downstream of the power station. It will have a length of 10m. The plant will consist of 3 + 1 bays, one per unit and one bay for assembly / dismantling. One floor is provided for offices, toilets, control room and meeting room. The area under the offices will allow the storage of tools and spare parts. A backup generator will also be placed there. The height of the plant will be governed by the size of the highest of the parts to be handled and by the characteristics of the crane. The dimensions of the plant, estimated at 15m wide, 35m long and 13m high, will have to be refined in subsequent studies. For safety reasons (fire hazard) the transformers will be positioned in the immediate vicinity of the plant in a separate room. The characteristics of the plant are given in the following table: SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 62 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Table 18. Characteristics of the powerhouse PARAMETER UNIT VALUE Water level in the forebay m 639.7 Elevation of the power house floor m 786 Tailwater elevation m 781 Powerhouse length m 35 Powerhouse width m 15 Powerhouse height m 13 Tailrace canal length m 10 8.2.8 Transmission line and substation The mini-grid of Kigoma is currently supplied by a 6.25 MW diesel-fired power station operated by TANESCO. Kigoma power station supplies power to the municipal of Kigoma-Ujiji, the new district of Uvinza and part of the new district of Buhigwe. The construction of the power station started in 2009 and became operational in June 2010. The total installed power is fully available and the maximum load demand recorded is 5.063 MW. Hence, the proposed Luegere hydroelectric project (5.340 MW) is a relevant alternative to the (costly) energy generation by that thermal power station. The connection of the Luegere hydroelectric project and the mini-grid of Kigoma that extends south through the village of Ilagala on the Malagarasi river would require the construction of an approximately 85km long medium voltage (33kV) transmission line. However, the Power Supply Master Plan (2016) proposes the construction of a 400 kV transmission line between Kigoma and Mpanda at horizon 2020. As a consequence, the required length of the transmission line to evacuate the power generated from the Luegere scheme could be strongly reduced, depending on the feasibility to connect directly to the 400 kV line with a dedicated substation. As the surroundings of the proposed project are currently not supplied by the electricity grid, the detailed studies shall analyze the technical and economic feasibility of supplying electricity to neighborhood and villages along the transmission line connecting Kigoma directly from the power plant. 8.2.9 Access A comprehensive description of existing access is presented and illustrated in Section 3.2 of this report. For the development of the site, it will be necessary to create 9km of access tracks. Two new tracks are needed. One track will connect, from the north, the existing Lokoma-Kigoma track to the weir, the intake and the desilting structure. A crossing bridge over the weir has to be built to access the intake and desilting basin located on the left riverbank. The other track will connect, from the south, the existing Lokoma-Kigoma track to the powerhouse situated on the left riverbank. These different accesses to create are illustrated in Figure 38 below. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 63 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project Figure 38. Access to create to access the proposed Luegere hydropower scheme 8.2.10 Temporary infrastructure during the construction period Temporary infrastructure includes: - Construction camp. - Construction works areas (e.g. concrete batching plant, cable crane plant). - Quarry locations. - Site access roads The construction camp is intended to accommodate allochthones workers working on the site. It will consist of accommodations, all the necessary sanitary facilities, a water treatment station and a wastewater treatment plant. This will serve both for the construction camp and for the permanent camp. 8.2.11 Permanent camp The permanent camp will be located near the power station. It will consist of accommodations for the operators of the power plant as well as for the plant manager. The water treatment plants, constructed for the temporary camp, will also ensure the treatment of the waters of the permanent camp and the power plant. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 64 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 8.3 KEY PROJECT FEATURES Table 19 below summarizes the key features of the proposed layout of the Luegere hydroelectric scheme. Table 19. Key features of the proposed scheme FEATURE PARAMETER VALUE UNITS Location Region Kigoma - River Luegere - Hydrology Catchment area 1,317 km² Median streamflow (Q50%) 4.56 m³/s Firm streamflow (Q95%) 1.41 m³/s Design flow 4.33 m³/s Design flood (100 years) 220 m³/s Gravity weir Diverting structure Structure type - (Overflowing section : Creager) Material used Concrete - Overflowing section crest length 50 m Total structure length 70 m Overflowing section height 4.50 m Non-overflowing section height 7.15 m Crest elevation 943.00 masl Slab elevation 938.50 masl Gated flushing channel Number of bays 2.00 pce Gate section 1.4 x 1.5 mxm Intake Number of bays 2 pce Invert elevation 941.00 masl Equipment Trash rack (manual cleaning) - Desilting structure Yes Number of basins 2.00 pce Water level 943.00 masl Waterway Headrace canal length 1 420 m Canal Headrace canal section 2 x 2.3 mxm Average slope 0.001 m/m Forebay Yes - - Water level 941.58 masl Penstock Number of penstock(s) 1 pce Length 1 110 m Diameter 1.20 m Powerhouse and electrical / Floor elevation 786.00 masl electromechanical equipment Gross head 157.00 m Number of units 3 pce Turbine type Pelton - Operating discharge per unit 1.44 m³/s Total installed capacity 5 340 kW Average annual energy generation 34.40 GWh/year Access road Length of road to build 9,000 m Length of road to rehabilitate 0 m Transmission lines Length 85 km Voltage 33 kV SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 65 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project CAPEX - without access road and Economic data 13.14 M$ transmission lines LCOE - without access road and 0.05 $/kWh transmission lines CAPEX - access road and 24.97 M$ transmission lines included LCOE - access road and 0.10 $/kWh transmission lines included SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 66 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 9 COSTS AND QUANTITIES ESTIMATES 9.1 ASSUMPTIONS At the prefeasibility study stage of a hydroelectric development, the assumptions detailed in the following paragraphs are commonly accepted. 9.1.1 Unit Costs The list of unit prices comes from the Consultant's database which includes prices of contractors competent in hydraulic works and which can prove similar works carried out to international standards. This database is based on unit prices valid in Africa for infrastructure projects and updated for Tanzania. Table 20. Unit prices (2017 USD) CLASS DESCRIPTION UNITS COST ($) Excavation (rock) m³ 33.00 Excavation Excavation (diverse) m³ 17.00 Excavation (soil) m³ 6.00 Random fill m³ 9.00 Compacted earthfill m³ 13.00 Backfill Rockfill m³ 55.00 Sand fill (pipe) m³ 11.00 Blinding concrete m³ 165.00 Mass concrete m³ 330.00 Structural concrete m³ 550.00 Concrete, stone and Concrete for weir m³ 385.00 Masonry Stone masonry m³ 127.00 Stone masonry (weir) m³ 154.00 Concrete bloc m³ 165.00 Rip-rap m³ 33.00 Rebar Kg 2.00 Steel Structure Kg 6.00 Roof m² 17.00 Access road (new) m 380.00 Access road Access road (rehabilitation) m 101.00 Transmission lines 33 kV Transmission line km 81 070.00 Cofferdam m² 110.00 Miscellaneous Finishing (powerhouse) package 253 110.00 Equipments Electromechanical equipment unit 731 500.00 Penstock m 1 925.00 Overhead travelling crane unit 64 900.00 Trashrack unit 14 740.00 Flush gate (1.4m x 1.5m) unit 60 500.00 Intake gate (2m x 2m) unit 97 900.00 Drain gate (1m x 1m) unit 44 770.00 Desilting isolation gate (2m x 4.5m) unit 158 180.00 Isolation gate (2.2m x 2.5m) unit 110 000.00 Safety valve unit 356 400.00 Electrical equipment package 653 400.00 9.1.2 Reinforcements and concrete The reinforcements necessary for the realization of the structural concrete are taken into account in the concrete costs (at 250 kg of steel per m³). No reinforcement is foreseen in mass concrete (mainly used for the weir). SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 67 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 9.1.3 Hydro and electromechanical equipment costs estimate The considered equipment are:  The hydro and electromechanical equipment: turbine, generator, valve, high pressure unit;  The electrical equipment: power and auxiliary transformers, switchboard, control system and monitoring, power supply, protection system, cables, earthing, cabinets. Total and unit prices for the main components are indicated in the Project Costs Estimated Table, and are based on recognized cost estimate model (NVE 2016, Electrobras small hydro, Ogayar et al., B. Leyland, in- house model for Pelton turbine). The selection of the appropriate models depends of the type of equipment, rated power, and experience/contract awards for small hydro projects in Africa, and especially in East Africa. Reference projects in East Africa have been used to adjust the cost estimate. For different reasons, as for instance, change of prices of raw material (such as steel, copper, etc.) or global small hydro market activity and manufacturing capacities, unexpected deviation from the proposed prices are possible. Nevertheless, cost estimate are taken as up-to-date and reliable enough for the purpose of the present level of the study. The estimated costs take into account: equipment design and manufacturing, workshop acceptance tests, transport, mobilization, engineering, erection and commissioning; but it does not take into account unforeseen, taxes and duties. 9.1.4 Indirect costs Indirect costs were estimated using fixed rates applied on different sub-totals of costs, as presented in the table below. Rates applied to Civil Works are higher than rates applied to Electrical and Mechanical Works as more uncertainties remain until the works have started. Table 21. Indirect costs INDIRECT COSTS APPLIED RATE Civil works contingencies 20% of civil works costs Electrical and mechanical works contingencies 10% of E-M costs Engineering (including ESIA), administration and supervision of works 10% of total costs Owner’s development costs 2% of total costs 9.1.5 Site facilities costs Costs for the Contractor site facilities and housing depend on the size of the project. Hence, this cost is taken as 10% of the total civil works costs. 9.1.6 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Mitigation Costs At this stage of the study and given the conclusions of the preliminary socio-environmental study, 2% of the total project costs are planned for the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and mitigation (ESIA costs). This amount shall cover: - Expropriation costs (compensation or allocation of new land); - Mitigation cost of environmental impacts. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 68 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project These costs should be specified in the full Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Study which will be carried out at a later stage of the project development. The costs of this study are taken into account in the indirect engineering costs presented in the previous section (section 9.1.4). 9.2 TOTAL COSTS (CAPEX) Table 22 below presents a summary of costs for civil works and electromechanical equipment. It also includes indirect costs related to studies, site supervision, project administration and environmental and social mitigation measures. Table 22. Project costs estimates (2017 US$) Item (%) Costs ($) Civil Works 16 917 000 Mobilization, installation, demobilization 275 000 Access 2 970 000 Dam/weir, spillway, purge and intake 726 000 Waterway (headrace channel, silting basin, forebay and penstock) 4 537 000 Powerhouse and tailrace channel 1 518 000 Transmission line 6 891 000 Electromechanical equipment 4 244 000 Electromechanical equipment 2 195 000 Hydro mechanical equipment 688 000 Electrical equipment and ancillaries 653 000 Transport 10% 354 000 Installation 10% 354 000 Sub Total (excl. contingencies) 21 161 000 Contingencies 3 809 000 Civil works contingencies 20% 3 384 000 Equipment contingencies 10% 425 000 Total direct project cost (incl. contingencies) 24 970 000 Indirect Costs 3 497 000 Social and environmental mitigation costs 3.0% 500 000 Administration fees 2.0% 500 000 Studies (incl. EIES) and works supervision 10.0% 2 497 000 Total cost of the project 28 467 000 SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 69 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 10 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 10.1 METHODOLOGY The economic analysis is based on the results of the field investigations and various studies presented in the previous chapters, which includes an estimate of the quantities and the construction costs of the project (Chapter 9) and the definition of the installed capacity and power output. Based on these results, the Consultant has estimated the cost to deliver energy from the development of the Luegere hydroelectric project. The energy generation alternatives (currently thermal units, fossil fuel-fired) will be compared based on their costs per kWh, the latter being expressed in terms Levelized Cost Of Energy (LCOE) which is a stream of equal payments, normalized over the expected energy production periods that would allow a project owner to recover all costs, an assumed return on investment, over a predetermined life span. The LCOE is defined from investment costs (CAPEX - Capital Expenditure), operating costs (OPEX - Operational Expenditure) and the expected production of energy. Investment costs are:  Study and work supervision costs, hereafter called “Studies and engineering costs” which include: o Civil works study and supervision costs o Electromechanical works study and supervision costs o Owner’s development costs  Civil works and equipment costs, hereafter called “HPP costs”  Resettlement and environmental impact costs, hereafter called “ESIA costs” Annual operating costs are:  Operation and maintenance costs, hereafter called “O&M costs” which include: o Fixed operation and maintenance costs (annual scheduled maintenance) o Costs related to interim replacement and refurbishments of major items in the course of the project’s life o Insurance costs The LCOE is then calculated based on expected production and costs from the following formula: ( + ) = ( ) Where NPV is the Net Present Value which is obtained by: () = ∑ (1+) where n is the discount rate. SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 70 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 10.2 ASSUMPTIONS AND INPUT DATA The main economic assumptions for the economic modeling of the LCOE calculation for the Luegere hydroelectric project are presented in Table 23 below. Table 23. Economic modelling assumptions Economic lifespan of the project 30 years Decommissioning cost at the end of the economic life 10% of civils works and equipment costs Engineering (incl. ESIA) and works supervision 10% of civils works and equipment costs Owner’s development costs 2% of civils works and equipment costs Environmental and social impact mitigation costs 3% of civils works and equipment costs O&M costs Interim replacement 0,25%/year of civils works and equipment costs Fixed operation costs 10 USD/kW/year Insurance costs 0,10% of civils works and equipment costs per year Distribution of costs over the project implementation process Year -2 = 60% Year -1 = 40% Year 0 = Commissioning Reference date for economic analysis 2017 Costs are expressed in constants (2017) USD Escalation costs (inflation) No escalation costs were applied to capital costs or operating costs. Financing costs etc. Financing costs, tax, duties or other Government levees are ignored at this stage but shall be included in the financial analysis that will be done during the detailed studies. Discount rate 10% The economic analysis is carried out by considering that all the energy produced is absorbed by the electricity grid. In other words, the analysis assumes that there is a demand for all the energy generated by the proposed hydroelectric scheme. 10.3 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS Table 24 presents the levelized costs of energy (LCOE) for the Luegere site. Table 24. Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) ANNUAL ENERGY INSTALLED CAPACITY DESIGN FLOW CAPEX LCOE [GWH] [MW] [M³/S] [M USD] [USD / KWH] Without Transmission lines and 13.14 0.05 access roads to be rehabilitated 34.40 5.34 4.33 With Transmission lines and 24.97 0.10 access roads to be rehabilitated SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 71 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project The economic analysis reveals that the proposed Luegere hydroelectric scheme is an economically attractive project with a LCOE of 0.05 $US/kWh (excluding the costs of transmission lines and access roads). Indeed, the LCOE calculated including the cost of transmission lines and access roads will be significantly reduced in the near future with the construction of the 400 kV transmission line between Kigoma and Mpanda at horizon 2020, as proposed in the Power Supply Master Plan (2016). The mini-grid of Kigoma is currently supplied by a 6.25 MW diesel-fired power station operated by TANESCO. Hence, the LCOE of the Luegere project must be compared with the cost of energy production by the thermal power plants currently in operation since the development of the Luegere hydroelectric project would replace the production of thermal energy by hydroelectricity. The cost of generating thermal power plants depends largely on the fuel costs. As outlined in the SREP-Investment Plan for Tanzania fuel cost from diesel-fired thermal power plant is expected to exceed 0.35 US$/kWh5. The LCOE of the proposed Luegere hydroelectric project is attractive when compared to the 0.095 US$/kWh corresponding to the standardized small power projects (SPPs) tariff for hydro between 5MW and 6MW in 2016. The latter is the tariff for SPPs selling bulk power to the national or a regional grid or to DNO-Owned Mini-Grids. It is important to note that the conclusions of this economic analysis are conditioned to the validation of the flow duration curve estimated in the hydrological study. This validation can only be done by the hydrological monitoring of the Muyovozi River. The hydrological monitoring should include not only the continuous recordings of water levels but also gauging operations of the river for the establishment of validated rating curves. 5 Source : SREP - Investment plan for Tanzania SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 72 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMANDATIONS The hydrological study revealed that the Luegere River is characterized by a good guaranteed low-flow that should be confirmed by hydrological monitoring of the River. The preliminary investigation of the surface geology concludes that from a geological point of view the site is favorable for the construction of the project as long as the appropriate mitigation measures are put in place. The site has no major problems of stability and leakages. Further studies will however have to be undertaken in further studies. Preliminary socio-environmental studies show that the development of the Luegere project has no major impacts that cannot be mitigated by appropriate measures. The economic analysis reveals that the construction costs of the 33kV transmission line to the Kigoma mini-grid are high. However, those costs will be significantly reduced in the near future with the construction of the 400kV transmission line between Kigoma and Mpanda at horizon 2020, as proposed in the Power Supply Master Plan (2016). The Luegere hydroelectric project is an economically attractive scheme with a LCOE of 0.05 US$/kWh if the costs of the transmission line costs and access roads are excluded. The Luegere Project features a production costs significantly lower than the standardized small power projects (SPPs) tariff for hydro between 5MW and 6MW, as approved by EWURA in 2016 (0.095 US$/kWh). It is important to note that the conclusions of this economic analysis are conditioned to the validation of the flow duration curve estimated in the hydrological study. This validation can only be achieved by hydrological monitoring of the Luegere River at the hydrometric station a few kilometers downstream from the proposed project site. This hydrological monitoring should include not only the continuous water level monitoring but also the gauging operations of the river for the establishment of a validated rating curve. Beyond the development of the Luegere hydroelectric project, it is strongly recommended that the Government of Tanzania further develop the existing hydrological monitoring network for its rivers with high hydropower potential in order to better understand the available water resources and thus promote the development of hydroelectric projects across the country. It is only in a context of reduced uncertainties through reliable, recent and long-term records (more than 20 years) that technical parameters and economic and financial analyzes of hydroelectric developments can be defined accurately, enabling optimization of their design and their flood control infrastructure (temporary and permanent). SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 73 Small Hydropower Resource Mapping Tanzania (~1-10 MW) REA / The World Bank Prefeasibility Study of the Luegere Hydroelectric Project 12 APPENDICES 12.1 DETAILED PROPOSED SCHEME AND MAIN COMPONENTS SHER / Mhylab January 2018 Page 74