Canada Opens New Run-of-River Hydro Facility

November 02, 2005 | 5 Comments

With construction complete, water is spiraling down 145 meters of tubing to spin turbines at a new 25 MW "run-of-river" hydroelectric project in British Columbia. With no dam to alter the river's flow, the design attempts to mitigate the environmental concerns traditionally associated with commercial dam-based hydro projects.

The Upper Mamquam Hydroelectric Plant near Squamish, developed by Canadian Hydro Developers, is expected to deliver 98,000 MWh per year. Power from the CAD $39 million (US$ 33 million) project will be sold to BC Hydro under a 20-year power sale contract; BC Hydro has also purchased Renewable Energy Certificates from the project. The 25-MW project is located upstream of a 15 m waterfall on the Mamquam River. The distance from the water intake to the powerhouse of the Upper Mamquam Hydroelectric Project is 1.7 km. At full flow, 513 million gallons of water per day (at 27 cubic meters per second) will pass through the turbines. Four unique features of the plant include the 145 m tunnel allowing the buried steel penstock to pass through a rock wall, a bypass valve for uninterrupted river flow, the project's proximity to an urban area, and its location just upstream of another run-of-river hydro facility. Run-of-river hydro plants, which do not require dams, rely on the natural downward flow of the stream to guide water through pipes to a generating station. The force of the water spins a turbine, which drives an electric generator that creates electricity. Of the two major types of hydro projects, the environmental 'footprint' of run-of-river facilities is considered low-impact compared to the facilities that have large storage reservoirs. "Independent power producers are one of the key priorities for BC Hydro when it comes to meeting the province's future electricity needs," said Dave Kusnierczyk, BC Hydro's Manager of Power Acquisitions and Contract Management. "The Upper Mamquam project is an exceptional example of how the industry can step up to the plate and help BC Hydro meet its goal of electrical self-sufficiency." Now that the plant is operational, Canadian Hydro will seek certification as a Green Power facility under the Environmental Choice Ecologo program, which requires that projects use a renewable resource, and be environmentally and socially responsible.

"The Upper Mamquam project is an exceptional example of how the industry can step up to the plate and help BC Hydro meet its goal of electrical self-sufficiency." -- Dave Kusnierczyk, BC Hydro's Manager of Power Acquisitions and Contract Management

5 Comments

Milo Hulka
December 19, 2011

Looking for an opportunity as an investor for small hydro electric plant in Canada, Ontario. fender63@seznam.cz

Steve O'Gorman
November 9, 2005

In response to Dursun Sakarya, run-of-river hydro plants, like most renewable power facilities, are not derated. The annual production from the Upper Mamquam facility is a function of the water available throughout the year and will vary from year-to-year. The term that relates the rated capacity (25 MW) to annual production (98,000 MWh) is called capacity factor, with the Upper Mamquam project operating at 44.7% capacity factor. By way of comparison with other renewable resources, a good wind plant will operate in the 32-36% range. Wind and run-of-river hydro are complementary resources because wind production increases in the winter and decreases in the summer, with run-of-river hydro increasing in the summer and decreasing in the winter.

dursun sakarya
November 3, 2005

98,000 MWh per year is 11.2 MW. I assume there
is a rating factor from "base plate" rating.
Does anyone know the derating factor for coal
power plants??

Nate Bourell
November 3, 2005

Whatever "derating" factor for coal power plants is, this seems like it is actually considerably cheaper than coal. If they sold all their energy for $0.05 per kWh (the average cost for coal, the cheapest source of energy other than hydropower), the system would pay for itself in only 10 years even with an interest rate of 10%, and an operating cost of 1 million dollars per year. That would mean that if they sold it for the same price as it costs to make energy from coal, after about 10 years, they would be making about 4 million dollars per year of pure profit. That is way cheaper than coal; even if the system only lasts 20 years, it will still be 1/2 the price of coal. Any renewable energy production as cheap and as environmentally friendly as this one is awesome.

Nate Bourell
November 3, 2005

Although small hydropower isn't getting much press, it seems like it has been growing in popularity. On my last PG&E (main Northern California power company) bill's sources of power notice, small hydroelectric has risen from 0% of the total power mix last year to 5% of their total power mix this year. After reading this article, I can see why they chose to do so, but I still would like to hear more about small hydropower. I think that we should be trying promote small hydropower plants because even if there are a limited number of places where hey would work, we should build them wherever we can, and with prices that cheap, even someone who does not care about the environment at all couldn't object to this technology.