Eindhoven University of Technology

MASTER

Microhydropower in Indonesiareflecting on learning processes

Kooij, J.Y.

Award date:2011

Link to publication

DisclaimerThis document contains a student thesis (bachelor's or master's), as authored by a student at Eindhoven University of Technology. Studenttheses are made available in the TU/e repository upon obtaining the required degree. The grade received is not published on the documentas presented in the repository. The required complexity or quality of research of student theses may vary by program, and the requiredminimum study period may vary in duration.

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain

https://research.tue.nl/en/studentthesis/microhydropower-in-indonesia(40d68b91-5d9a-4450-8de7-d35cc3df3c98).html

J. Y.

Koo

ij

2011

Mic

rohy

drop

ower

in I

ndon

esia

R

efle

ctin

g on

lear

ning

pro

cess

es

Supervisors: Dr. S. Arora, TU/e Dr. Ir. A. M. C. Lemmens, TU/e Eindhoven, June 2011

Microhydropower in Indonesia Reflecting on learning processes

by J. Y. Kooij

0602430 In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Technology & Policy Eindhoven University of Technology

i |

Acknowledgements

This thesis represents my final work for the fulfilment of the Master Technology and Policy for Developing Economies at the department of Industrial Engineering & Innovation Sciences at the Eindhoven University of Technology.

In order to write this thesis, I have been living in Indonesia for six months and conducted my field work there. While my main activity in Indonesia was to explore learning cycles, the foremost learning cycle has perhaps been my own. Learning to understand a different culture and a new language has been a valuable experience to me.

My learning cycle would not have been possible without the help of many people. I would like to thank Mr Hariadi and the team of PUSPER (Pusat Studi Pengelolaan Energi Regional) for welcoming me at the Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta (UMY). While at UMY, the people of the Pusat Pelatihan Bahasa (Language Study Centre) teached me Indonesian and accommodated me, for which I am very grateful. Special thanks to Mr Saibun for accompanying me on my trips to Pekalongan and all of his assistance to get started in Indonesia. Furthermore I am grateful to Mrs Rosmaliati for accompanying me to the projects in Lombok and to the people of Pt Entec for accommodating me in Bandung.

I am very thankful to all the people of Pekalongan, Lombok, Klaten and Yogyakarta for their warm welcome and cooperation. Not only did they tell me about MHP, but they also showed me their way of life and accommodated me at their village. Back in the Netherlands my learning cycle continued and I would like to thank my first supervisor Mr Aurora for guiding it in the right direction. Furthermore I am grateful to Mr Lemmens for giving me the opportunity to go to Indonesia. A last special thanks to all of my friends who supported me, especially to Erik for listening to all of my stories on MHP and having me reflect upon my own stories and to Miss Ana for her moving spirit. With this thesis I hope to complete this learning cycle and I am looking forward to new learning cycles. J. Kooij Eindhoven, June 2011

ii |

Abstract

In 2004 around 73 million people in Indonesia of the then population of 218 million people did not have access to electricity. This represents an electrification ratio of 67% on average, while ratios are lower in remote areas. The government of Indonesia intends to increase this ratio to 95% in 2025. However expanding the electricity grid is an intricate issue. Expansion of the grid is difficult in isolated areas, due to the long distances and the poor condition of the infrastructure. Therefore microhydropower (MHP) is considered to expand access to electricity. MHP plants are stand alone systems, do not require expansion of the national electricity grid and use water as fuel. So far only about 10-15% of the potential capacity of microhydropower has been realized and some plants are not running anymore. This thesis is therefore an attempt to understand the working and non-working of microhydropower projects. Research approach The Multilevel Perspective (MLP) is used as the theoretical framework, combined with the learning selection and the learning process approach. The MLP consists of three levels; the regime, landscape and the niche. The central level of the MLP, the sociotechnical regime, considers the technology with its related routines and rules as the standard structure. The landscape is the broader context of the regime with sudden events or societal trends, such as the Asian financial crisis, that impact the regime and can subvert the regime. The niche nurtures technologies until they have reached maturity and are ready to be released from the protection. An unstable regime can offer opportunities for a technology in the niche (in this thesis electricity generation by means of MHP) to replace or complement the regime (in this thesis the sector of centralized electricity generation).

One of the processes at the niche level is learning as a way to overcome barriers. To allow for the analysis of this learning, learning cycles have been explored on the niche level. In learning cycles people first have an experience of which they try to make sense. Consequently people draw conclusions out of these explanations and will take action accordingly. Experiences on the local level of the niche can be aggregated to the global level of the niche. Understanding these learning processes will create insights in the working of MHP projects. Data collection The focus of the research was on exploring the learning processes. To reconstruct these learning processes different MHP projects were visited during field trips in Indonesia between November 2008 and May 2009. People active on the local level were interviewed, mostly villagers, operators of MHP systems and village heads. Also people employed on the global level were interviewed such as employees of project implementing organizations and provincial governments. The analysis of the regime and landscape is based on literature research as well as on information gathered during the interviews with regime actors. Findings The regime and landscape show difficulties as well as possibilities for electricity generation by means of MHP in the niche. Insufficient infrastructure makes it difficult to visit sites and to transport parts. Subsidies on fuels make electricity generation from diesel appear a low cost option to supply electricity to households in remote areas, while the true costs may be higher than decentralized renewable energy options such as MHP. Nevertheless Indonesia is emitting large amounts of greenhouse gasses, and MHP can help to expand electricity access without contributing to the increase of the emission of greenhouse gasses and does not require expansion

iii |

of the electricity grid. Furthermore the MHP plants can also supply electricity in areas where the capacity of centralized electricity generation is low. The study of the learning processes revealed that the technical, organizational and financial barriers were intertwined. Technical barriers could for instance be overcome by an organizational arrangement.

Technical barriers could sometimes be overcome by operators. If their own knowledge was inadequate, operators often used information from operators of neighbouring MHP projects in technical learning cycles.

The organizational learning cycles were facilitated by a supportive community. Users in a village could support the MHP organization to initiate a learning cycle to solve problems of their MHP project. Moreover support of the community helped to manage the collective nature of MHP installation. Conversely, an unsupportive community demotivated the MHP organization to initiate any learning cycles to solve problems and consequently problems remained unsolved. Financial barriers were often overcome by raising the tariff. However more substantial financial problems caused by considerable unforeseen repairs often remained unsolved. Understanding how learning cycles evolve contributes to the understanding of the removal of barriers. The process to finding a successful solution is as essential as the outcome. The factors facilitating the learning cycles are not static terms that need to be fulfilled in order for a MHP project to run successfully. An important aspect of learning cycles is their dynamic interactivity. This interactivity was observed in several respects. Incomplete learning cycles often triggered new learning cycles. When learning cycles did not lead to a solution, learning cycles occurred in order to adapt to the problem. However, completed learning cycles also resulted in negative consequences. Interactivity between projects could lead to input and initiation of precautionary learning cycles. Successful projects were interactive as they could stimulate other projects. Learning cycles are also interactive as the information of local learning cycles was aggregated to the global niche level. Experiences on the local level were used to improve practices and procedures and products. Implications From the analysis of the MLP levels and the learning cycles, several implications were derived.

There is a limit to which learning cycles could be successfully completed by people on the project level. Expensive repairs were not possible under the relatively low tariffs charged. Also complex electronic components are difficult to be repaired by local people. The learning processes sometimes need guidance to prevent them from going in a negative direction. Assistance of for instance the government could be helpful but should be considered critically. When learning cycles can not be completed locally, people on the project level often expand their learning cycle to the global level. However people do not know who to approach on the global level and moreover not by which means. It can therefore be valuable to have the communication methods of villagers or operators and governments geared to one another.

Going through learning cycles eventually supplies operators with know-how and know-who. Operators could use this information gained in learning cycles to facilitate future learning cycles. However once they leave the MHP organization their knowledge is lost and it would therefore be valuable to save their knowledge by means of documentation or training.

A barrier found at the regime level affecting microhydropower in the niche was the comparison with other fuels. Subsidies give a distorted comparison of the prices of different energy sources. Rearranging the subsidies could show the benefits of MHP, although it should be considered carefully as there are many people who do not have access to electricity yet and rely on diesel.

iv |

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................................i Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................ ii Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... iv List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ vii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................. vii Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................................... viii 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction to Indonesia‟s energy sector .............................................................................. 1 1.2 Introduction to research ............................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Research questions ..................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Outline ......................................................................................................................................... 4

2 Conceptual framework .................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Multilevel perspective ................................................................................................................ 7

2.1.1 Sociotechnical regime ........................................................................................................ 7 2.1.2 Sociotechnical landscape ................................................................................................... 9 2.1.3 Sociotechnical niche .......................................................................................................... 9 2.1.4 Dynamic multilevel perspective ..................................................................................... 10

2.2 Strategic Niche Management .................................................................................................. 11 2.2.1 Niche processes ................................................................................................................ 11

2.3 Learning ..................................................................................................................................... 13 2.3.1 Learning selection ............................................................................................................ 14 2.3.2 The learning process approach ...................................................................................... 15

2.4 Research framework ................................................................................................................ 16 3 Microhydropower ........................................................................................................................... 19

3.1 Technology ................................................................................................................................ 19 3.2 Civil engineering components ................................................................................................ 21

3.2.1 Weir, intake, power canal, forebay and tailrace ........................................................... 21 3.2.2 Penstock support facilities .............................................................................................. 21 3.2.3 Powerhouse....................................................................................................................... 21

3.3 Mechanical components .......................................................................................................... 22 3.3.1 Penstock ............................................................................................................................ 22 3.3.2 Valves ................................................................................................................................. 22 3.3.3 Turbines ............................................................................................................................ 22 3.3.4 Generators ........................................................................................................................ 24 3.3.5 Mechanical transmission of power between turbine and generator ......................... 25

3.4 Electronic components ........................................................................................................... 25 3.4.1 Governing the turbine and generator ........................................................................... 25 3.4.2 The mechanical governor ............................................................................................... 26 3.4.3 The electronic governor and the control panel ........................................................... 27

3.5 Transmission and distribution of energy .............................................................................. 29 3.5.1 Transmission of electricity and the reduction of losses ............................................. 29 3.5.2 Distribution and consumption of energy by the households .................................... 30

4 Data collection approach .............................................................................................................. 33 4.1 Microhydropower project locations ...................................................................................... 33 4.2 Learning processes at the project level ................................................................................. 35 4.3 Inputs and facilitative environment of learning processes at the project level ............... 36 4.4 Outputs learning processes project level to global niche level .......................................... 36

5 Regime characteristics ................................................................................................................... 39

v |

5.1 Regime actors ............................................................................................................................ 39 5.1.1 Government...................................................................................................................... 39 5.1.2 PLN .................................................................................................................................... 39 5.1.3 Users .................................................................................................................................. 40

5.2 Privatization .............................................................................................................................. 41 5.3 Regulations ................................................................................................................................ 41 5.4 Subsidies .................................................................................................................................... 43 5.5 Electricity grid ........................................................................................................................... 44 5.6 Capacity...................................................................................................................................... 45 5.7 Conclusion................................................................................................................................. 47

6 Landscape ........................................................................................................................................ 49 6.1 National Decentralization policy ........................................................................................... 49 6.2 Financial crises .......................................................................................................................... 50 6.3 Infrastructure developments .................................................................................................. 51 6.4 National Development imperative ........................................................................................ 51 6.5 Rising population and increasing demand ............................................................................ 52 6.6 Natural resources ...................................................................................................................... 53 6.7 Renewable energy plans of Indonesia ................................................................................... 54

6.7.1 Negative impacts .............................................................................................................. 54 6.7.2 Future plans renewable energy ....................................................................................... 54

6.8 Conclusion................................................................................................................................. 55 7 Niche ................................................................................................................................................ 57

7.1 Global actors ............................................................................................................................. 58 7.1.1 MHPP ................................................................................................................................ 58 7.1.2 Pt. Entec ............................................................................................................................ 58 7.1.3 Manufacturers ................................................................................................................... 59 7.1.4 Government bodies ......................................................................................................... 60 7.1.5 IMIDAP ............................................................................................................................ 61 7.1.6 Universities........................................................................................................................ 61 7.1.7 PLN .................................................................................................................................... 62

7.2 Actor network ........................................................................................................................... 62 7.3 Local projects ............................................................................................................................ 63

7.3.1 Organization ..................................................................................................................... 64 7.3.2 Songgodadi and Curugmuncar ....................................................................................... 64 7.3.3 Depok ................................................................................................................................ 64 7.3.4 Timbangsari ...................................................................................................................... 65 7.3.5 Gunung Halu .................................................................................................................... 65 7.3.6 Sedau .................................................................................................................................. 65 7.3.7 SelenAik ............................................................................................................................. 66 7.3.8 Aik Berik ........................................................................................................................... 66 7.3.9 Lantan ................................................................................................................................ 66

7.4 Communication networks ....................................................................................................... 67 7.4.1 Pekalongan ........................................................................................................................ 67 7.4.2 Lombok ............................................................................................................................. 69 7.4.3 Gunung Halu .................................................................................................................... 70

7.5 Expectations .............................................................................................................................. 70 7.6 Conclusion................................................................................................................................. 70

8 Learning processes ......................................................................................................................... 71 8.1 Local learning cycles ................................................................................................................ 71

8.1.1 Overcoming technical barriers ....................................................................................... 72 8.1.2 Overcoming financial barriers ........................................................................................ 77

vi |

8.1.3 Overcoming organisational barriers .............................................................................. 79 8.2 Aggregation to the global level ............................................................................................... 82 8.3 Conclusion................................................................................................................................. 84

9 Summary and conclusion .............................................................................................................. 87 References .................................................................................................................................................. 93

vii |

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Indonesia .................................................................................................................................. 1 Figure 1.2: Subquestions ............................................................................................................................ 4 Figure 1.3: Outline of the report .............................................................................................................. 5 Figure 2.1: Static multilevel perspective................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2.2: Processes in a social-technical regime .................................................................................. 8 Figure 2.3: Local projects and global niche-level ................................................................................... 9 Figure 2.4: Technological trajectory carried by local projects ............................................................ 10 Figure 2.5: Multi-level perspective on transitions ................................................................................ 11 Figure 2.6: The relation between niche processes ................................................................................ 12 Figure 2.7: Learning between projects, local niche and global niche ................................................ 13 Figure 2.8: Learning framework. ............................................................................................................ 17 Figure 3.1: The MHP plant...................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 3.2: Components MHP plant ...................................................................................................... 20 Figure 3.3: Head-flow ranges of small hydro turbines ........................................................................ 23 Figure 3.4: Cross flow turbine ................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 3.5: Open-flume turbine .............................................................................................................. 24 Figure 3.6: MHP system ........................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 3.7: Ballast load MHP project Aik Berik and control panel (right) ....................................... 27 Figure 3.8: Single line diagram ELC ....................................................................................................... 28 Figure 3.9: Electrical step- up and step-down transformer SelenAik................................................ 30 Figure 3.10: Household connection to distribution line ..................................................................... 31 Figure 4.1: MHP projects visited in Indonesia ..................................................................................... 33 Figure 4.2: Central Java ............................................................................................................................ 34 Figure 4.3: Pekalongan ............................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 4.4: Lombok .................................................................................................................................. 35 Figure 5.1: Government spending and fuel subsidy ............................................................................ 43 Figure 5.2: Major power plants and electricity grids in 2005 .............................................................. 45 Figure 5.3: Installed generating capacity, electricity sold and real GDP (1998 = 100) ................... 46 Figure 6.1: Administrative divisions of Indonesia ............................................................................... 50 Figure 6.2: Population growth Indonesia .............................................................................................. 52 Figure 6.3: Expected electricity demand growth .................................................................................. 52 Figure 6.4: Fuel import and export ........................................................................................................ 53 Figure 6.5: Energy target for 2025 according to presidential regulation No. 05/2006 .................. 55 Figure 7.1: Niche actors ........................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 7.3: Niche actors connected according to hierarchical reporting structure ......................... 63 Figure 7.4: Organization MHP project .................................................................................................. 64 Figure 7.5: Sedau I and II after flood ..................................................................................................... 66 Figure 7.6: Kooperasi Lantan .................................................................................................................. 67

List of Tables

Table 5.1: Indicative variable costs for various plant types, Java, 2007. ........................................... 44 Table 5.2: Installed power plant capacity of PLN (in MW) ................................................................ 45 Table 6.1: Potential and installed capacity renewable energy sources in Indonesia ........................ 54 Table 7.1: Turbines produced ................................................................................................................. 60 Table 7.2: MHP projects visited ............................................................................................................. 63

viii |

Abbreviations

ADB Asian Development Bank AGMHP ASEAN German Mini Hydro Project AMES-E Access to Modern Energy Services Ethiopia DESM Departemen Energi Dan Sumber Daya Mineral (Department of Energy and Natural Resources) DJLPE Direktorat Jenderal Listrik dan Pemanfaatan Energi

(Directorate General of Electricity and Energy Utilization) DPE Dinas Pertambangan dan Energi (Department of Mining and Energy) GEF Global Environment Facility GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (German Agency for Technical Cooperation) HKM Hutan Kamasyarakatan (Social Forestry Program) IDR Indonesian Rupiah IMIDAP Integrated Micro-Hydro Development and Application Program IPP Independent Power Producer KESDM Kementerian Energi Dan Sumber Daya Mineral

(Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, formerly known as and still often referred to as DESDM)

MHP Micro Hydro Power MHPP Mini Hydro Power Project MLP Multilevel perspective OPEC Organization of Petroleum Producing and Exporting Countries PPA Power Purchase Agreement PLN Perusahaan Umum Listrik Negara (Indonesian State Electricity Company) PLTMH Pembangkit Listrik Tenaga Mikro Hidro (Micro Hydro Generation Plant) RI Republik Indonesia (Republic of Indonesia) SKAT Schweizerische Kontaktstelle für Angepasste Technik (Swiss Centre for

Appropriate Technology) SNM Strategic Niche Management UGM Universitas Gadjah Mada UNDP United Nations Development Programme USAID United Stated Agency for International Development WPU Wahana Pengembangan Usaha (Forum for enterprise development) YKKSI Yayasan Keluarga Sehat Sejahtera Indonesia (Indonesian Family Health and

Welfare Foundation)

Technical abbreviations

ELC Electronic Load Controller IG Induction Generators IGC Induction Generator Controller kW Kilowatt SCR Silicone Controlled Rectifier SG Synchronous Generator V Volt W Watt

http://www.undp.org/

1 |

1 Introduction

This research regards the diffusion of microhydropower (MHP) in Indonesia. As many people in the rural areas of Indonesia have no access to electricity and there is an abundance of water resources available, microhydropower technology could be applied to supply electricity. However this thesis shows that making projects successful is more complicated than only installing the technology.

In this introduction the energy sector in Indonesia and the research will be shortly introduced. This will lead to the research questions. Subsequently the outline of the thesis will be described.

1.1 Introduction to Indonesia’s energy sector

Indonesia is a large archipelago, consisting of 17,500 islands even though more than 7,000 are uninhabited. More than 60 % of the population lives on the islands of Java and Bali, representing 7% of the complete surface area of Indonesia. Populated by 226 million people (UNDP 2008), Indonesia accommodates around 350 ethnic groups. Many of them have developed their own customs, language and norms (Britannica 2009; Resosudarmo 2005).

Figure 1.1: Indonesia Source: (Britannica 2009)

Indonesia has rich and very varied marine and forest resources and disposes of natural resources like oil, gas and minerals. The exploitation of these natural resources however significantly intensified after Suharto became president in 1966-1967. In the period of the 1970s the revenues of natural resources, especially oil, represented the main source of economic growth. Halfway through the 1990s Indonesia was the largest exporter of liquefied natural gas and third largest exporter of thermal coal of the world, after Australia and South Africa (Resosudarmo 2005). Gas and oil exports accounted for 30% of the total exports of Indonesia (Kuncoro et al. 2004). However decreasing output and increasing demand have caused Indonesia to become an oil importing country in 2004.

The energy sector is accounting for 9 % of total emissions of Indonesia. It is expected to be tripled in the next 25 year and therefore of great concern to the Indonesian government. The increase of emissions can indirectly affect the seasonal hydrological cycle of Indonesia. Dry seasons become longer and precipitation levels will increase, causing floods. A large archipelago like Indonesia is very vulnerable to floods. Also drought will pose problems to the agricultural sector, where 16 % of GDP is generated (PEACE 2007).

2 |

1.2 Introduction to research

Sustainable access to modern energy services is widely promoted and realized in developing countries. Energy is regarded as indispensable in improving the quality of life and therefore energy access is seen as a crucial aspect for development. Furthermore energy access is crucial in supporting economic growth (Watkins 2008).

The importance of expanding electricity access in order to improve the quality of people‟s lives and to overcome poverty has been recognized by the government of Indonesia. In 2004 around 73 million people in Indonesia of the then population of 218 million people did not have access to electricity (World Bank 2005). This represents an electrification ratio of 67%. The Indonesian government has set the target for the electrification ratio to be 95% in 2025 (KESDM 2006; World Bank 2005).

Households without access to electricity are especially concentrated in the rural areas where only one out of five households has access to electricity. Due to this lack of access to electricity these households depend on other sources of energy such as diesel and biomass.

The economic situation of Indonesia is internationally as well as internally dependant on electricity access. Internationally, Indonesia‟s electrification is lagging behind electrification in neighbouring countries causing an unfavourable position in regional (World Bank 2005). Internally, the electrification ratio is diverse on different islands, with the electricity access being significantly better around the economic centres of the islands of Java and Bali than on other islands (World Bank 2005). The costs of connections between the islands and the long distances from the existing electricity grid to the remote areas make it difficult to extend the existing electricity grid to these distant areas.

However expanding access to electricity is a miscellaneous concern as expanding electricity access by means of burning fossil fuels causes other problems such as CO2 emissions. Indonesia is a large emitter of greenhouse gasses (PEACE 2007). The challenge is hence to expand energy access while at the same time limiting the possible negative consequences of increased energy production like carbon emissions.

Yet there are abundantly available water resources in Indonesia, creating good prospects for microhydropower (MHP), which is an attractive technology to supply rural areas with electricity. The MHP technology makes it possible to supply households in remote areas with electricity, as the plants are stand-alone schemes and no connection to the national electricity grid is required. Furthermore expanding electricity by means of MHP plants is not accompanied by an increase in CO2 emissions, as the MHP plants are fuelled by the flow of water. Since this water is flowing naturally and no fossil fuel is required, there are no fuel costs after construction of the plant. The MHP plant might in some cases replace small scale diesel generators, reducing the amount of CO2 emissions. Moreover the ecological impact of an MHP plant is relatively small. The so called run-of-river schemes that are mostly used for MHP only use a small water stream of the river or fall that they are build next to and do not require a large water deposit behind a dam.

The benefits of MHP led to the installation of several MHP plants in Indonesia, deploying a total capacity of around 60 MW in 2003. Nevertheless this accounts for a little over 10% of the total potential of MHP installations in Indonesia. The total potential of MHP installations in Indonesia was approximately 460 MW in 2003 (DESDM 2003). The potential is

3 |

constantly being expanded by means of feasibility studies and estimated to reach around 950 MW in 2025 (Ariati 2009).1

1.3 Research questions

Since only a little over 10% of the potential of MHP is reached in Indonesia, MHP is not yet diffusing widely in Indonesia or autonomously scaling-up after the realization of the first projects. Earlier research has indicated that different barriers are hindering the diffusion of MHP. Moreover, many MHP projects that were installed during previous projects are not running anymore (Meier 2001). The identified barriers, which could also be classified as technological and organisational can be considered as problems to be overcome by learning. Exploring where learning occurs or does not occur can help to understand how the diffusion process is hindered. Learning about a new technology should contribute to overcoming uncertainty and barriers (Kemp, Schot et al. 1998). To improve the understanding of the successes and failures of the MHP plants, the learning processes will therefore be explored. The main question of the research will be; How can the barriers hindering the diffusion of microhydropower be overcome by learning? The main question will be subdivided into sub questions according to the theoretical framework used. The research question will be approached using a combination of the theories of Strategic Niche Management (SNM) and the learning selection approach by Douthwaite (2002). The niche that is regarded in SNM is part of the Multilevel Perspective (MLP). The MLP is made up of three levels, being the regime, landscape and the niche. The central level of the MLP, the sociotechnical regime, considers the technology with its related routines and rules as the standard structure. The landscape is the wider context of the regime where sudden events occur or societal trends take place that can impact the regime and can eventually destabilize the regime. The niche nurtures a technology until it is mature enough to be released from the protection it has been under in the niche. An unstable regime can offer opportunities for a technology in the niche, in this thesis microhydropower, to replace or complement the regime. According to SNM, MHP technology can be regarded as a technology that is being developed and used in a niche. The regime is in this thesis regarded as the sector of centralized electricity generation.

The niche is divided into a global and a local level. One of the processes at the niche level is learning. In successful innovation methods learning by key stakeholders is essential according to Douthwaite et al. (2002). Learning can help overcome barriers. On the niche level therefore the learning processes as described by the learning selection approach by Douthwaite (2002) have been explored. According to learning selection people first have an experience of which they try to make sense. Consequently people draw conclusions out of these explanations and will 1 Sources differ on the exact installed capacity and potential of MHP in Indonesia. This may be caused by the different definitions used by different actors. The Department of Energy and Mineral Resources mentioned in 2003 an installed capacity of 64 MW out of a potential of 460 MW, considering micro (

4 |

take action accordingly. This action can help overcome the barrier, or it can lead to another process if learning selection. The learning processes studied in this thesis are located in the local niche, as indicated in Figure 1.2 below. Understanding these learning processes will create insights in the working of MHP projects. Experiences of the learning selection processes on the local level of the niche can be aggregated to the global level of the niche. The research subquestions are indicated by means of their respective numbers. Subquestion 1 regards the learning processes at the project level of the niche. Subquestion 2 considers the inputs and facilitative environment to the learning processes. Subquestion 3 regards the outputs of the learning processes. The framework will be further explained in chapter 2 of the thesis.

Figure 1.2: Subquestions

The numbers in the figure refer to the following sub questions: 1. What are the reflective and interactive learning processes at the project level? 2a. What are the direct inputs to these project-level learning processes? 2b. What facilitates the project-level learning processes? 3a. How do the outputs of the learning processes contribute to learning at the local niche

level and the local project success? 3b. How do the outputs of the learning processes at the project level contribute to

knowledge accumulation at the global niche level?

1.4 Outline

In Figure 1.3 below the outline of the thesis is represented. The first three chapters set up the framework and data for the analysis. Chapter 2 on theory describes the theoretical framework that is formed out of a combination of existing theories. The technology chapter explains basic functions and the principles of the MHP technology. Some technical components are explained in more detail to comprehend the learning cycles that will be described in chapter 8. The chapter on data collection then discusses how the field research was conducted. The data collection approach is structured according to the sub research questions and also features the locations visited in Indonesia.

The analysis includes a description of the regime, the landscape and the niche. In chapter 7 the niche composition in terms of the local projects and the communication network between the different actors is discussed. The learning cycles that are taking place in the local projects of the niche are subject of the chapter thereafter. Lastly the thesis will be completed by a conclusion.

5 |

2

Theory

5

Regime

4

Data

collection

7

Niche

6

Landscape

3

Technology

8

Learning

processes

Nic

he

An

aly

sis

Intro

du

ctio

n

9

Conclusions

Figure 1.3: Outline of the report

7 |

2 Conceptual framework

This chapter describes the theoretical framework that will be used in this thesis. The framework consists of different theories that will be combined into a framework. In this chapter, first the Multilevel Perspective, including Strategic Niche Management, will be explained. In the next section the learning selection approach will be discussed. Finally the theories will be synthesized to a framework in the last section of this chapter.

2.1 Multilevel perspective

The multi-level perspective (MLP) (Geels 2002a; Rip et al. 1998) is developed to model transitions in sociotechnical systems. A transition can be described as “a structural change in a societal (sub)system that is the result of a co-evolution of economic, cultural, technological, ecological and institutional developments at different scale levels” (Rotmans et al. 2008). The perspective of MLP is based on insights of evolutionary economics, but also comprehends sociocultural elements (Geels et al. 2000). MLP allows moving beyond individual projects, to multiple levels of transitions. To understand processes of transitions slowly changing macro-elements as well as interacting elements on the meso- and micro-level are essential to comprehend. Therefore, the MLP divides the sociotechnical system in which individual technologies are developed into three levels: respectively the landscape, regime and niche as shown below in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Static multilevel perspective Source: (Geels 2002a)

2.1.1 Sociotechnical regime

The central level of the MLP is the sociotechnical regime. The key in evolutionary approaches of technological change is that designs or solutions evolve in a structured manner. Structure is formed by policies, requirements and cognitive routines of engineers while possibilities outside of these routines are disregarded (Geels 2005). This structure is named a technological regime and can then be described as “the grammar or rule set comprised in the complex of scientific knowledge, engineering practices, production process technologies, product characteristics, skills and procedures, and institutions and infrastructures that make up the totality of a technology or a mode of organization” (Kemp et al. 2001). The rule set refers to formal rules like government

8 |

regulations or user requirements as well as to values, norms and beliefs (Geels 2004). Since the rules of a regime are broader than the technical heuristics and standards of engineers the term was extended to sociotechnical regime (Geels and Kemp 2000). The rules of a social-technical regime are shared by various groups such as engineers, policy makers, consumers or business people (Markard et al. 2008).

Within a sociotechnical regime, more sub-regimes such as social, market, technological and policy regimes are linked together as described in Figure 2.2. Technological regimes include for instance technical standards, problem solving strategies, R&D subsidies and product specifications. Social regimes describe ideas about impacts of technologies, symbolic meanings of technologies and cultural values in society. The user and market regime comprehends user practices, relations between firms and users and market subsidies. The policy regime comprises formal regulations on technology like standards on safety, guiding principles such as liberalisation, administrative procedures and policy goals (Geels 2004).

Ongoing processes are formed by the activities of the actors in the sub-regime such as creating new knowledge or developing regulations. In a stable regime these processes will go in one specific direction (Geels 2005, p. 23). This direction is the outcome of the progress of the regime and in line with earlier developments. Technical change is guided in that direction. The existing technology in the regime is stabilized by a regulated combination of the rules of different social actors. This creates lock-in for technical change as the change will be in the same direction. The change will be incremental, preventing radical change. Since existing technologies are embedded in this regime of broader practices, values and technical and social beliefs, new technologies face cognitive, technological, social and economic barriers created by this embedding (Kemp et al. 1998, p. 182). These barriers make it hard for new technologies to breakthrough to the regime and make a transition possible.

An example is the energy regime, where the rules, regulations and infrastructure are primarily based on the use of fossil fuels. Within the energy regime other, different sub-regimes can be distinguished like the electricity regime or the transport fuel regime. In the energy regime cars use fossil fuels and electricity is mainly generated from fossil fuels. Habits and policies are built around the dominant fossil fuels and the use of fossil fuels is embedded in social and cultural systems. Cars on fossil fuel are the norm, highways are equipped for cars on fossil fuels and the car has become a symbol of status. Policy scenarios often assume the use of fossil fuels as the major energy source. Renewable energy systems therefore face difficulties trying to break through as they may need a different kind of distribution of fuels, or are put at a disadvantage because they do not comply with the existing legislation.

Figure 2.2: Processes in a social-technical regime

Adapted from (Geels 2005)

9 |

2.1.2 Sociotechnical landscape

The sociotechnical landscape is the broader context of the regime and niches. It consists of factors and developments external to the regime and niches, but that still have an influence on the regime and niches. The landscape comprehends material elements like infrastructure of power lines and roads, but also immaterial elements like cultural values and „common sense‟ (Geels and Kemp 2000). Landscape factors can develop slowly like broad societal trends as environmental problems, or as shocks triggered by events like terrorist attacks or oil crises. The landscape events could make the regime unstable as the rules of the regimes can be changed by the events, creating a possibility for new technologies to breakthrough to a new regime. For instance an oil crisis could lead to a government changing the regulation in order to promote renewable energy.

2.1.3 Sociotechnical niche

The third level, below the regime, is the sociotechnical niche. A niche is a place where innovations can be nurtured and protected from market selection pressures. Furthermore it can provide a place where social networks emerge that support new technologies (Genus et al. 2008). Those new and emerging networks can learn from and experiment with a technology in a protected niche. The niches create the possibility for users and policy makers to give feedback to the engineers developing the technology (Geels and Raven 2006). The innovations are protected against conventional market selection (Geels et al. 2007).This protection is accomplished by for instance powerful firms and/or through subsidies from the government. Firms could initiate pilot projects or R&D projects by a special group within the firms with a high degree of independence and freedom from business constraints (Kemp et al. 2001). Governments invest to foster innovations that are not yet profitable in the niche because they reason that the innovations will become important in the future to realise collective and societal goals (Schot et al. 2008). An example of this are projects experimenting with electric vehicles in European cities where the government and firms cooperated in order to test the technology and explore the markets (Kemp et al. 2001).

Although niches are mostly focused on new technologies, niches could also accommodate old technologies (Markard and Truffer 2008). Niches are similar to regimes in structure, although they differ in size and stability. For instance, the community of interacting groups is large and stable in a regime whereas it is small and unstable in a niche. Also the rules of a regime are stable while the rules in the niche are still in the process of coming into being (Geels and Schot 2007).

The niche can be divided into a local level carried by projects and the global niche level of an emerging community with emerging cognitive, formal and normative rules as indicated in Figure 2.3.

Figure 2.3: Local projects and global niche-level

Source: (Geels and Raven 2006)

10 |

Local niche

The local niche entails multiple local projects. Actors directly involved in local projects are part of the local network (Geels and Raven 2006). Local practices in projects may contribute to the emerging field at the global level (Schot and Geels 2008). The local projects generate new lessons and experiences. These results and lessons can be selected and aggregated into generic rules for the global technological trajectory through interpretation of outcomes and experiences and social learning, which will be described below. In return however projects are not determined by the trajectory, but are rather local variations of a generic design derived from a particular emerging niche trajectory (Raven et al. 2008). The knowledge on the local level is mostly tacit skills and practical knowledge (Geels and Raven 2006).

Global niche

The global niche consists of a global stream of knowledge, experiences and shared rules which were initially diffuse and unstable. The global knowledge is made up of technical models and abstract knowledge forming rules. These knowledge and rules become more stable and eventually lead to an emerging technological trajectory (Geels and Raven 2006). “Technological trajectories are stable patterns that exist at the global level of a community of actors” (Geels and Raven 2006). Because the technological search activities in different locations are focused in a similar direction, they add up to a technical trajectory as illustrated in Figure 2.4 (Geels and Raven 2006).

Figure 2.4: Technological trajectory carried by local projects

Source: (Geels and Raven 2006)

Although the exact meaning of the term global is ambiguous, for this thesis the national level will be regarded as the global level.

2.1.4 Dynamic multilevel perspective

The ongoing processes of the developments of the landscape, regime and niche interact. Through this interaction it is possible for a transition to come about. As described in Figure 2.5 the niche innovation builds up at the micro level, while at the landscape level the landscape developments put pressure on the regime. This may cause destabilisation of the regime, through which the regime opens up to niche developments. However niche innovations can develop in

11 |

several manners. They can develop into a regime and in time replace the old regime or they can be integrated into the existing regime and alter the regime from inside (Schot and Geels 2008).

Figure 2.5: Multi-level perspective on transitions

Source: (Geels 2002b)

2.2 Strategic Niche Management

The sociotechnical niche is the focus of Strategic Niche Management. The notion of SNM is that sustainable innovation is possible by developing technologies in niches, where the technologies can be nurtured and experimented with (Schot and Geels 2008). SNM is aimed at organizing projects about radical new technologies through their early development in the niche. Due to their low performance new technological innovations often cannot compete with technologies of the regime. They have to be protected from the market in order to develop first. Strategic Niche Management therefore describes the creation of niches to nurture innovations (Geels and Kemp 2000) as explained in section 2.1.3.

Niches are important to prepare the take-off of a new technology. They make it possible to demonstrate the new technology and help to foster support from customers and suppliers. Furthermore financial means are generated in the niche for expansion and learning processes on institutional adjustments and complementary technologies are initiated.

2.2.1 Niche processes

Three internal niche processes are of importance for the success of introducing innovations; creating networks concerning different sorts of actors in the niche, the shaping of expectations on the new technology and learning processes (Mourik et al. 2006). This research focuses on the process of learning. However the other two processes, the shaping of expectation or strategies for the performance of the new technology and creating networks, are interconnected to the

12 |

learning processes as illustrated in Figure 2.6. Learning takes place within the context of a social network of actors by using the innovation and interacting with the other actors in the niche2. Learning should be about how to make the new innovation function accurately, not only technically, but also institutionally. This then comprehends learning on issues such as the technology, the user context, necessary infrastructure and regulatory framework (Mourik and Raven 2006).

Figure 2.6: The relation between niche processes Source: (Geels and Kemp 2000)

The actors in the niche have their expectations and subsequently base their strategies on these expectations (Geels and Kemp 2000). Expectations are materialized by networks, where different actors have different expectations. The network tries to align these different expectations through learning by interacting. Actors like users and producers, insiders and outsiders to the regime can create dynamic relations within and between networks and with their environment. These dynamic relations can lead to active learning about the technology. This learning can bring about alignment between the niche and the actors outside (Mourik and Raven 2006). According to Strategic Niche Management several experiments executed by the stakeholders of the new technology in a niche contribute to a gradual learning process. Local practices contribute to a gradual process of sharing and creating rules (Raven 2005) and subsequently to the stabilisation of an emerging niche trajectory (Geels and Deuten 2006) as discussed in section 2.1.3.

Retention and transfer to the global niche level

Learning takes place within projects, the local and the global level and between those levels. Through intra-project learning arrangements, knowledge moves within a local project. Inter-project learning diffuses from the projects to the local niche and vice versa. The circulation of people, experiences and documents between the local projects can facilitate this learning. Inter-projects links could have a positive effect, as working together is a way to compensate for the lack of external resources such as finances and information in marginal areas (Wu et al. 2004). Knowledge could however not only move from a project to another project by means of inter-project learning, but also via the global niche and back (see Figure 2.7).

Learning in the local projects is diffused to the global level through an aggregation process. This aggregation process generates the formulation of general rules and lessons from local projects (Geels and Deuten 2006, p. 275). Knowledge to the global level does not flow spontaneously from the local level, but is realized by three processes. Firstly social networks and a sense of community are important to the circulation of experience and actors. Secondly

2 learning by using and learning by interacting will be discussed in section 2.3

13 |

intermediary actors such as industry associations and professional societies (Raven et al. 2008) are important to create knowledge flows between projects on the one hand as well as to decode local knowledge into global-level knowledge on the other hand. Thirdly a knowledge infrastructure is necessary. This can be formed by for instance journals, conferences or workshops and promotes the circulation of knowledge and experiences. The knowledge flows require devoted formal and informal activities by dedicated intermediary actors (Geels and Deuten 2006). Firms may also set up collective associations or research and standardisation organisations are established. Circulation of knowledge and actors is important in order to compare local activities and global rules (Geels and Raven 2006). Globalised rules, standardised in books and standards can form a guide for local practices (Geels and Deuten 2006).

Figure 2.7: Learning between projects, local niche and global niche Adapted from (Geels and Deuten 2006)

Finally, the presence of networks, intermediaries and infrastructure may not always lead to aggregation of knowledge and transfer to the global niche level. Successful knowledge retention and transfer may require learning in underlying institutions. This institutional learning can be crucial in possibility in improving capabilities (Szirmai 2005, p. 135). Institutions are regarded as the “set of common habits, routines, practices, rules or laws that regulate the relations and interactions between individuals and groups” (Hall et al. 2006). Institutional learning refers to learning how to do things in new ways. Rules and norms may have to be changed to improve the way things are being done (Horton et al. 2003). Institutional learning and technological learning are not isolated types of learning, but are frequently intertwined. Institutional learning is interconnected to technological learning as institutional change could enhance technological innovation. Conversely technological learning can enable institutional change.

The Multilevel Perspective and Strategic Niche Management approaches allow articulation of multiple levels. To allow for the analysis of learning on the project level, SNM is complemented by the learning approaches by respectively Korten (1980) and Douthwaite (2002).

2.3 Learning

Writers like Korten (1980) and Douthwaite (Douthwaite 2002) emphasize the importance of learning in projects as an indispensable action in successful innovation methods. Projects should not be planned as blueprint approaches, but consist of an interactive learning process, adapting to the local conditions. Learning can be described as "the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience” (Kolb 1984). This emphasizes the process of learning

14 |

and adaptation over the outcome or content. Knowledge is seen as being constantly (re)created and transformed as a result of experience (Kolb 1984). Nevertheless the word learning is frequently used to comprise both the process as well as the outcome of the process (Brown 1998). Learning occurs in many different ways. The different types of learning that will mainly be regarded in this thesis are interactive learning and experiential learning such as learning by doing and using. Learning by doing as well as learning by using is considered by Douthwaite (2002) in the approach of learning selection which will be discussed in section 2.3.1.

Experiential learning

By means of learning by doing increased skill of producing is developed. It occurs at the manufacturing stage. Participation in the production process and the ability to reflect the observations through experience and training improve the production skills. The effect of the improved skills in production by learning by doing is improved labour costs. Manufacturers mostly make modifications to the machine hardware, also known as embodied knowledge. Embodied knowledge is knowledge accumulated by experience with the new technology. This leads to a better understanding and improvements embodied in new hardware (Rosenberg 1982).

Linked to learning by doing is learning by using. Learning by doing is internal to the production process whereas learning by using is a consequence of the utilization of the product. Learning by using starts only after the product is used. The experience with the product leads to learning about possible improvements. One of the objectives of learning by using is to find out the optimum of the performance characteristics of a product (Rosenberg 1982). Users mostly make modifications to the technology software (Douthwaite et al. 2002), or disembodied knowledge. Disembodied knowledge concerns knowledge about performance and leads to improvements in productivity, without modifications of the hardware (Rosenberg 1982).

Interactive learning

Learning by interacting links to the formation of networks in order to use the input from different actors to improve the innovation (Mourik and Raven 2006). Learning by interacting is also described as interactive learning by Foray and Lundvall (1998). Learning by interacting could transform the outcomes of local learning by doing and using to general solutions. “From the view-point of the whole economy the learning by interacting has the effect of transforming local learning into general knowledge embodied in for instance new machinery, new components, new software-systems or even new business solutions” (Lundvall 2005, p. 7). Proximity, mutual interests and the presence of an intermediary are conditions that could facilitate learning by interacting (Kamp et al. 2004).

2.3.1 Learning selection

Douthwaite (2002) has built the learning selection process on the experiential learning cycle of Kolb (1984). In this interactive and experiential learning process, two types of experiential learning are incorporated, learning by doing and learning by using as discussed above. The learning cycle as described by the learning selection of Douthwaite et al. (Douthwaite et al. 2002) consists of four stages; experience, making sense, drawing conclusions and action succeed. In this cycle, after an experience or observation of what was successful or not, the experience is reflected upon by a participant. This leads to the development of personal explanations of the experience. The participant bases these explanations on theories and earlier experiences. After drawing conclusions out of these explanations, the participant develops a supposition and will

15 |

consequently test it by undertaking action. This might subsequently lead to another learning cycle as the novelty is tested, which may create insights and problems as well as the need for a new learning cycle (Douthwaite 2006).

Important is to understand the motivation of the people involved in the learning processes (Douthwaite et al. 2002). Learning is a reflective process of repeating practices that are successful or realizing that a mistake has been made and not repeating it. But if not understood why something was successful or not, it is much more problematic to envisage whether different circumstances will have better results (Honadle et al. 1985). Actors may not know as much as necessary about the new technology to start learning selection in order to improve the effectiveness of the technology. Or actors might get demotivated to persist when problems occur if the technology may not work as expected or community members are unsupportive (Douthwaite et al. 2002).

Learning selection however does not always occur automatically. Actors must be motivated and informed about the technology and be stimulated and able to adapt the technology. It is essential that at least one actor is able to understand the technology sufficiently to be able to operate the technology by himself (Douthwaite 2002, p. 220). Not only personal experiences lead to learning, but also interaction with others (Raven 2007). In time other actors will learn how to take over by means of learning by doing, learning by using and learning by interacting.

2.3.2 The learning process approach

According to Korten (1980) successful programs originated in learning processes in which knowledge and resources are shared by villagers and program initiators. A fit is created between the needs of villagers and the capabilities of the supporting organization. This fit is formed by a development process of the program, and therefore the exact approach varies for different projects, unlike one single blueprint approach for all the projects. Blueprint approaches where a well-planned project plan is executed are often not successful as they do not create the necessary fit between the villagers and program initiators. Objectives in development programs are often not clear or multiple and are therefore not very suitable for blueprint approaches with clear goals (Korten 1980).

Korten presents the learning process approach in three stages. The three learning stages of effectiveness, efficiency and expansion succeed each other. In the first stage of learning to be effective the emphasis is on the required fit between the needs of the beneficiaries and a suitable program model. In this first stage, investments will have to be made in knowledge and in learning how fit can be achieved. In the beginning the efficiency will be low and error rates high. But when a program is effective and responds to the needed fit, it could make the transition to the second stage.

The second stage of learning to be efficient concerns the reduction of input needed per unit of output. The analysis of practices and activities not contributing to effectiveness during the first stage leads to essential actions becoming routine in the second stage. However some effectiveness will be lost in order to increase efficiency. When the program is stable, the organization is established and sufficient effectiveness and efficiency are achieved, the transition to the third stage will be possible.

To achieve the stages of effectiveness and efficiency, a learning cycle could be used. The learning selection approach of Douthwaite et al. (Douthwaite et al. 2002) is therefore used to analyze the process to become effective and efficient.

As the program goes into the third stage, the stage of learning to expand, it should develop further to reach a larger-scale. The necessary fit between the beneficiaries and the

16 |

organizations should however still be kept in mind. The end of the third stage should lead to a stable program on a large scale. After the third stage the cycle may be repeated by the beneficiaries in order to align the program or the organization may start to solve other problems by repeating the learning cycle (Korten 1980). Regarding the theoretical framework this third stage exceeds the project level. However success on a higher level might be harder to achieve as it requires more human capacity, more funding and relatively more complex institutional arrangements than smaller scale projects (Bai et al. 2009).

Learning about technology

Learning on the technical success concerns the technical aspects of the microhydropower plant. To let the MHP plant function properly, it has to be maintained daily by the operator and also small repairs are frequently needed. The daily maintenance entails for example the cleaning of the tank and components. Villagers can also learn on technology as they get acquainted with new applications, such as water or rice cookers.

Learning about organizational issues

Learning about organization considers the organizational affairs around the MHP project. To maintain the MHP plant, collect the tariff and make arrangements with villagers an organization is set up. Other organizational issues are for instance where to obtain spare parts and how to transport the spare parts to the MHP plant.

Learning about finances

Financial success regards the self-sustainability of the MHP project. The income should cover the daily operation and repairs, as well as a complete revision once every 5 years. The income consists of the tariff paid by the villagers. In case of productive end-use or connection to the grid the profits can be counted as well. Learning on financial success can for instance come about by means of bookkeeping.

2.4 Research framework

The research framework integrates the different approaches. The Multilevel Perspective (MLP) (Geels 2002a; Rip and Kemp 1998) is combined with the learning process approaches of Korten (1980) and Douthwaite (2002).

As described in Figure 2.8, the niche of the MLP is composed of the global and local niche. At the global and local niche levels learning through aggregation processes as described in section 2.2.1 take place. Within projects, the learning selection of Douthwaite (2002) is used to analyze the process to become effective and efficient as described by Korten (1980). The learning cycles are used to determine if the learning cycle has led to effectiveness or efficiency. The learning cycle by Douthwaite (2002) is located at the local level in the figure below. Learning to become effective and efficient consists of learning on multiple components. The three main components that are considered in this thesis are technology, organization and finances. The stage to expand of Korten (1980) is described by the emerging technological trajectory in Figure 2.8, which may eventually go in the direction of the regime, displayed by the small arrows converting into one arrow towards the regime in Figure 2.5

17 |

Figure 2.8: Learning framework. Combination of:

Strategic Niche Management (Geels 2002a; Mourik and Raven 2006; Rip and Kemp 1998) Learning selection (Douthwaite 2002), Learning process approach (Korten 1980)

19 |

3 Microhydropower

In this chapter the technology of microhydropower will be explained. First the common installation will be explicated. Then the civil engineering components, mechanical and electronical components will be explained. Lastly the transmission and distribution of the generated energy is discussed. The main purpose of these explanations is to allow the reader to better comprehend the learning cycles as described in chapter 8, as several of these learning cycles are related to the technology employed in a MHP plant.

3.1 Technology

Figure 3.1 illustrates the general installation and the main components of a MHP plant. The basic principle of hydropower is to pipe water from a certain level to a lower level, which will result in pressure that can be used to work. The water pressure is used to move a mechanical component, transforming the water energy into mechanical energy. This mechanical energy is then transformed into electricity. A level difference in the landscape allows for obtaining the needed water pressure. The MHP plant employs this combination of height difference (between the intake and the powerhouse) and the related water flow as a source of kinetic energy.

Figure 3.1: The MHP plant Source: (Inversin 1986)

The water flow is measured as the amount of water flowing through the river in a given amount of time, indicated with cubic meters per second (m3/s). The difference in height between the intake and the powerhouse (where the turbine and generator are installed) is defined as the „head‟, measured in meters (m). These variables, the water density (1000kg/m3) and g (9,8m/s2) determine the available power, calculated with Equation 1. It can thus be observed that the available power is the product of „head‟ and „flow‟ and these can vary depending on the location

20 |

(mountainous areas may have a high head, whereas flat areas will have a low head that may be compensated by a large flow).

Pe Available power (W) Pe = Q * g * Hnet * D / 1000

Q g

Design flow (m3/s) Acceleration due to gravity (m/s2)

Hnet D

Net head (m) Water density (1000kg/m3)

Equation 1

Different run-of the river site layouts are possible. Schemes with a high and medium head such as represented in Figure 3.1 are equipped with a penstock. Weirs are used to channel the water into the penstock, which then conveys the water to the turbine. Besides penstocks, canals form another possibility and even the combination of a canal with a penstock is in some cases a possible scheme. In river valleys though, the heads or possible MHP schemes are relatively low. Here a short penstock could be installed or a barrage with sector gates and an integrated intake could be developed in the river (BHA 2005; Penche 1998). Other lay-out possibilities that are sometimes observed in Indonesia are integration of the MHP scheme in an irrigation channel or the application of a MHP plant at the water flow leaving factories. For each of these possible schemes there is an „ideal‟ mechanical turbine, as will be described in section 3.3.3. A MHP plant consists of civil engineering components (section 3.2), mechanical components (section 3.3) and electrical components (section 3.4). There are also components that combine two technology categories, such as the generator that transforms mechanical energy into electrical energy. Figure 3.1 shows mostly the civil engineering components, namely the dam/weir, power canal, forebay, and powerhouse. Most mechanical and electrical components are installed in the powerhouse and shown in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2: Components MHP plant

Source: (Harvey et al. 1998)

The main mechanical components are the penstock, flow controlling valves, the turbine and the transmission element that connects the output of the turbine to the generator. The main electrical/electronic components are the generator, the governor of the generator (not illustrated), the transmission line consisting of transformers (optional), the distribution grid, miniature circuit breakers and kWh meters (optional). In the remaining of this text these components and their working principles will be explained.

21 |

3.2 Civil engineering components

The main objective of the civil engineering components is to allow for the operation of a MHP plant by piping water from a certain level to a lower level, combining technical and economical feasibility with a long operation life. As the geographic characteristics may vary a lot between different areas, Fraenkel et al. (1991) define five essential points to be considered in the design of the civil engineering components of a MHP installation: - Use of the available head. The head influences the available power and the choice of turbine; - Flow variations. The MHP plant needs a (relatively) constant flow to operate, but a river may

vary a lot during the year due to rainy/dry seasons. - Sediment. The water carries sediments that may interfere in the good operation of the

turbine. - Floods. In rainy seasons a flooded river can damage the infrastructure of a MHP plant. - Turbulence. Sudden alterations of the water flow may cause turbulence, decreasing the

available power in the water flow. These points influence the design of the different civil engineering components. In the following sections a short description of these components is given. This information is based on Feibel (2003) and own observations.

3.2.1 Weir, intake, power canal, forebay and tailrace

These components collect and conduct water from the river up to the penstock. The projection of these components is very dependent on the local conditions and the availability of materials. In the field research it was noted that some MHP plants were completely destroyed by floods, including the elements as the power canal.

3.2.2 Penstock support facilities

The penstock is subjected to some heavy mechanical forces due to the high amount of pressurized water flowing through it. To allow for a stable operation of the penstock, preventing undesired movements and turbulence, it is important to have a good support structure for it. This structure consists of support piers and anchors that carry the weight of the pipe and the enclosed water and are therefore required to support vertical forces. Furthermore the infrastructure consists of a thrust block that prevents a buried pipe from moving by transmitting the force or thrust exerted by the penstock to the surrounding soil.

3.2.3 Powerhouse

The powerhouse accommodates and protects the turbine, generator and associated electronics. Although the dimensions of the different components vary according to their capacity it is recommended to plan a surface of about 4 m² for every machine. The power house has to be located at a low point making it especially prone to be damaged by floods, which was observed in the field research in Lombok.

22 |

3.3 Mechanical components

3.3.1 Penstock

The penstock pipe transports the water, under pressure, from the forebay to the turbine. Mild steel and HDPE pipes are widely used as penstocks for MHP plants. A fundamental characteristic in designing the penstock is the alignment that should be chosen such that the significant head can be gained at a short distance, reducing the costs of the penstock. Furthermore the number of bends should be minimized, as the friction and turbulence caused by them reduce the available power and require additional supporting infrastructure.

3.3.2 Valves

The penstock can optionally be complemented with a valve at its input. This valve allows cutting off the flow of water to the turbine, allowing for a complete shutdown of the turbine by closing the valve. In the field observations it was observed that these valves were eventually used to govern the MHP installation manually, when automatic governors were defect (see section 3.4.3).

3.3.3 Turbines

A turbine converts kinetic energy that the water has gained by falling down, into mechanical rotating energy. As was observed earlier, the available power is determined by the product of „head‟ and „flow‟ (Equation 1), and these can vary a lot depending upon the geographical conditions where the MHP plant is installed. Therefore the definition of the ideal turbine for a particular site depends upon available „head‟ and „flow‟.

Turbines are mainly categorized into three groups; high-head, medium-head, or low-head turbines. Generally speaking the shaft speed required for electricity generation should equal 1500 rpm to diminish the change of the speed between turbine and generator. As the speed of any turbine is lower if applied to a lower head, the low head schemes should be provided with a turbine that is fundamentally faster than a turbine for higher heads (BHA 2005).

Turbines can also be classified by means of their principle; impulse turbines and reaction turbines. All turbines convert kinetic energy gained by the height difference into mechanical energy. Impulse turbines use a nozzle to convert the kinetic energy of the water into the movement of the blades or buckets. Impulse turbines operate in the air, which is the main difference with reaction turbines. Reaction turbines are unlike impulse turbines completely immersed in the water flow (Holland 1983).

In Figure 3.3 the possibilities for turbines for a given head and given discharge are displayed, which may vary being subject to the manufacturer.

23 |

Figure 3.3: Head-flow ranges of small hydro turbines Source: (BHA 2005)

As this figure shows various turbines are available. They mainly follow the basic principle of converting energy into mechanical energy depending on the principles of impulse or reaction, which will be explained below. Nevertheless only the turbines that were applied at the sites visited during the field research in Indonesia will be elaborated below.

Impulse turbines

In impulse turbines, also noted as action turbines, the water jet is directed in the turbine wheel in a way that the resulting velocity at the outlet is small. The kinetic energy is then transmitted to the rotor (rotating wheel), which converts it subsequently into mechanical energy (Van Berkel 2007).

The main impulse turbines are the Pelton, Cross-flow and Turgo turbine. For relatively high heads the most commonly used turbines are the Pelton and the Michell Banki or cross-flow turbine. Fraenkel (1991) describes that the Pelton turbines are suitable for the site where ratio of head to flow is high. If there is more flow and low head is available the cross-flow turbine is suitable, which is also widely applied in developing countries.

The foremost impulse turbine used in the projects visited in Indonesia is the Michell Banki turbine also known as the cross flow turbine as the water runs right through the rotor (Van Berkel 2007), displayed on the left in Figure 3.4 below.

Figure 3.4: Cross flow turbine Left: The principle of the cross-flow turbine (BHA 2005), Right: Cross flow turbine in Aik Berik

24 |

Reaction turbines

Reaction turbines only convert part of the pressure of the running water into kinetic energy. The remaining part of the pressure is converted in the rotor. Not converting all the pressure into speed at the inlet causes the pressure at the outlet side of the rotor to be lower than the pressure at the inlet side of the rotor. Reaction turbines can experience a higher angular velocity and are therefore better suited for lower heads unlike impulse turbines that can only develop low speeds in situations with a low head.

The best known reaction turbines are Propeller, Francis and Kaplan turbines. The reaction turbine most commonly used at the projects visited during the field research are open flume propeller turbines (see Figure 3.5). From the side water runs through still standing guiding blades to the rotor inside. Although the guiding blades are standing still, they can be adjusted. The guiding blades give the running water a radial velocity, thereupon driving the rotor. The rotor is connected to the generator in top of the installation that will finally convert the energy again. The water leaves the turbine downwards and axially. The open flume propeller turbine can work with a head