HomeMy WebLinkAboutRural Energy Development in Chile Case Study 01-11-2008Rural Energy Development in Chile:
An Illustrative Case Study
Ian Baring-Gould
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Chile’s National Context
•Goal: Electrify 90% of the population in each region
•CNE sponsors all rural energy programs, regional
governments or utilities submit project proposals,
which are then evaluated and awarded guaranteeing
a set return for the 20 year project life.
•UNDP Grant given to CNE to develop the use of
renewable technologies in rural electrification (tackle
national level barriers)
•The Chiloe Islands project is the flagship program
Chiloe
Region •Comprised of large central island, Grand
Chiloe, which protects a gulf containing
more than 40 islands in southern Chile.
•Project designed to electrify 32 of these
islands using renewable based
technology.
•Wealth varies considerably among
islands with an economies based on
commercial fishing operations, animal
husbandry, and farming.
•Each island community
includes a school, church,
health clinic, and in some
cases, police and other
social services.
The Chiloe Islands
•Islands tend to be a patchwork of farms,
fields, and forests.
•Between 12 and 453 homes per island
•Some islands have existing
diesel gensets in the larger
communities that run several
hours per day
•Most larger islands have roads
or trails but transport is a
problem
•Expected loads of 17 to 1004
kWh/day
•Access is difficult in the winter
due to the weather
•Minimal port facilities exist on
each island
Program Plan
Initial Feasibility Study -Determined base line
information on the approach and usefulness of
renewable technologies
Pilot Project -Demonstration system installed to
provide insight into the system operation &
maintenance
Detailed Project Analysis –All data used in the
initial analysis validated, refined & supplemented for
more detailed analysis
System Implementation and Support –
Replication activities, oversight of system installations
& operation
Feasibility Study
Study demonstrated the economic viability of
electrifying the islands with wind-diesel
systems, used in discussions with local and
federal officials to determine scope and
funding level for project.
Study used to:
•Design distribution system and estimate costs
•Evaluate electrification options (Grid, battery
charging, independent power systems)
•Analyze system design
•Estimate project’s life cycle costs
•Analyze social benefits
Implementation of Isla Tac Pilot Project
•Information on local
consumption
•Cost of system
implementation
•Cost of operation and
maintenance
•Equipment problems
•Local acceptance and
understanding
•Publicity and visibility
Detailed Data Collection
1003005007009001100130015001700190021002300January
July0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Load (kW)Time of day
lighting load for islands project
Monthly Energy Usage for different demand classes - Acuy island
Comparison between linear and progresive demand excelation rates
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
YearMonthly Usage (kWh/mo)linear CAS A JC-A Curve
linear CAS B JC-B Curve
linear CAS C JC-C Curve
Very little was known about the energy needs and
resources in this area. Project lifetime, seasonal and
daily load profiles, population, economic data, local
electric usage and the Isla Tac Pilot project.
Socioeconomic analysis
Socioeconomic
evaluation completed
on most islandsDATOS GENERALES
INHABITANTS (aprox.) 1000
FAMILIES 205
GROWTH POPULATION 0
SCHOOLS 2
POST 1
CHURCHES 1
SALMONERAS 2
CLASSIFICATION 3 a 4
DATOS GEOGRAFICOS
CARACTERISTICAS Island of great extension and one of the far away, 2 hrs. navigating from Quemchi.
SECTORES DE LA ISLA Metahue , Maluco, Coneb, San José, Nayahue.
AIR STRIP Yes, in good state.
ROADS Bad in Winter, it lacks rubble and canalization of waters,
there is a lot of mud when it rains.
ACCESSES Via marine, it is dangerous with strong winds. Ramp in sector Metahue.
RIVERS If, there are 3 profitable rivers, with flows of more than 100 lts/seg in Winter.
LAGOONS No.
PERSONAS CLAVES nombre teléfono servicios
PDTE. JUNTA DE VECINOS Luis Bascur 09-6437627 Lodging, food, transfers (quick boat
and 2 Jeeps to move inside the
Island).
ENCARGADA REG. CIVIL Gloria Ojeda
DUEÑA DE SUPERMERCADO Marcela Vidal 09-6443546 Lodging, foods.
ECONOMIA
ACTIVIDADES PRODUCTIVAS Most works around the salmoneras, the other ones are devoted to the fishing and a
little to the cattle raising. They are also devoted to the gathering of algae and shellfish.
FAMILIAS POR SECTOR Maluco 17 Low level
Coneb 33 Low level
San Jose 31 medium level
Nayahue 32 medium level
Metahue 76 High level
COMUNA DE QUEMCHI
Realizado por :Hernán Silva
Drago Bartulin
Socio-economic standing of the population of
Islands
Percent of population of each social
economic class level
Island Name Class A
(CAS 3)
Class B
(CAS 2)
Class C
(CAS 1)
Acuy 0% 90% 10%
Ahullini 14% 62% 24%
Alao 3% 37% 60%
Añihue 9% 66% 25%
Apiao 14% 62% 24%
Aulin 50% 50% 0%
Butachauques 9% 75% 16%
Caguache 6% 68% 26%
Cailin 14% 51% 35%
Chaulinec 5% 65% 30%
Chaullin 14% 62% 24%
Chelin 28% 50% 22%
Cheniao 7% 67% 26%
Loads Assessment Completed
DEMAND ASSESSMENT Island:Acuy
Parameters and Assumptions File:Chiloe3a modified.xls
Date:30-Jul-02
E.I. Baring-Gould
DESIGN PARAMETERS Notes
Population Growth:0.0%Based on information from Javier Castillo,
and Health Post worker.
Connection Growth:0.27%Calculated based on 90% to 95% growth
over 20 years (below), the number of users
connected increases over time.
Consumption Growth (kWh):1.5%Based on information from Javier Castillo,
for mainland Chile
Demand Growth (kW):3.0%No information from Chile. 3% Reasonable
for RE in Bolivia. Aprox. 6% historically for
rural Cochabamba, Bolivia.
Load Factor:0.3 Range in Bolivia from 0.18 (lowest RE area)
to 0.60 (industrial area).
Analysis Horizon:20 years Chilean government requires a 20 year
analysis horizon for non-conventional
electrification projects.
Assumptions Year 0 Year 1 Year 10 Year 20 Notes
Losses 10%10%10%10%With a new system and a loss control
program 10% is realistic, but this can climb
if not controlled.
Coverage 90%90 94%95%Initial coverage in Bolivia typically from 50%
to 65%. After a year of operation on Isla
Tac, there is a 92.4% coverage rate.
USERS Year 0 Year 1 Year 10 Year 20 Percent of User Type From Drago's Survey
Total Population 23 23 23 23 100%
Type A - Serviced 0 0 0 0 0%
Type B - Serviced 19 19 19 20 90%
Type C - Serviced 2 2 2 2 10%
Total Serviced Users 21 21 21 22 91%
Usage and Demand Calculations Notes
Usage
Type A usage (kWh/usr/mo)88 64 104 105
Type B usage (kWh/usr/mo)45 25 54 54
Type C usage (kWh/usr/mo)25 12 30 30
Total Est. Cons. (kWh/mo)192 503 1135 1149 Total monthly island usage FROM "Dem"
sheet, using J. Castillo's demand curves.
Demand
User Type A (kW/usr)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
User Type B (kW/usr)1.2 2.8 5.6 5.7
User Type C (kW/usr)0.0 0.3 0.7 0.7
Total Demand (kW)1.3 3.1 6.4 6.4 Includes losses.
These data are taken FROM the Demand
Proj. sheet, where REA formulas are used
to calculate the demand.
The following calculations are based on Drago Bartulin's field survey of users in the Chiloe islands area. It is
important to note that many of these users have been connected to diesel grid power for some time, and have
acquired numerous appliances. The
The following calculations are based on NRECA field experience and illustrate one simple approach to monthly
energy usage calculations.
Year zero numbers taken from Drago's
surveys.
Island # Homes
Community
Energy Usage
Average
household
energy
usage
Average
individual
energy usage
System
Capacity
Average
household
demand
kWh/day kWh/day kWh/month kW W/house
Acuy 23 42 1.8 54.9 6 280
Ahullini 25 50 2.0 61.1 8 301
Alao 122 176 1.4 43.8 22 181
Añihue 77 139 1.8 54.8 18 229
Apiao 174 333 1.9 58.1 40 227
Aulin 31 87 2.8 85.1 12 385
Butachauques 212 400 1.9 57.3 47 223
Caguache 111 194 1.7 53.1 24 216
Cailin 163 171 1.0 31.9 22 134
Chaulinec 136 297 2.2 66.5 36 264
Chaullin 22 44 2.0 61.4 7 311
Chelin 103 222 2.2 65.6 27 261
Cheniao 98 171 1.7 53.0 21 217
Chuit 29 55 1.9 57.9 8 279
Chulin 50 95 1.9 57.7 13 252
Coldita 73 130 1.8 54.2 17 228
Huar 453 1101 2.4 73.9 124 273
Laitec 124 214 1.7 52.5 26 212
Linlin 155 269 1.7 52.7 33 210
Llancahue 55 106 1.9 58.5 14 251
Llanchid 19 40 2.1 64.8 6 336
Llingua 114 231 2.0 61.5 28 245
Mechuque 140 307 2.2 66.6 36 260
Meulin 171 320 1.9 56.8 38 223
Nayahue 28 53 1.9 57.8 8 281
Quehui 267 640 2.4 72.9 73 274
Quenac 155 321 2.1 62.9 38 246
Quenu 38 71 1.9 56.8 10 260
Queullin 92 179 1.9 59.0 22 240
Tabon 126 242 1.9 58.4 29 232
Talcan 45 86 1.9 58.1 12 257
Tauculon (Incl. Voigue)34 60 1.8 53.3 9 251
Resource Data Re-
assessed
•Detailed wind resource
assessment
•Data collected from local
weather stations to
complete an additional
assessment
•Re-analysis by EdF
basically confirmed original
wind map.
Detailed cost data collected
•Data on installation of
the Isla Tac systems
•Data from purchase of
the Isla Tac system
•O&M cost from the Isla
Tac system
•Cost data collected
from different
equipment
manufactures
•Local fuel prices based
on salmon farms
Fixed Cost Wind turbine Cost ( Bergey)
Building 6,000$ Turbine 18,400.00$
Step up transformer 1,300$ Tower and Grounding 11,628.00$
Other supplies 1,000$ Installation 4,000.00$
DC source center with disconnects 2,800$ Shipping 2,000.00$ 36,028.00$
11,100$ O&M 200.00$ year
Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost Wind turbine Cost ( Northern Power )
Fixed Annual cost #Cost Turbine 7,700.00$
Site service 12 270$ 3,240$ Tower and Grounding 9,328.00$
Transportation to site 8 150$ 1,200$ Installation 2,500.00$
Technical Administration 5 500$ 2,500$ Shipping 2,000.00$ 21,528.00$
Local operator 12 300$ 3,600$ O&M 100.00$ year
10,540$
Battery bank Unit cost Maintenance
Fuel price calculation (CP/L)Trojan L-16 280.00$ 15
General fuel price $232.60 (Castro basic fuel price 10/23/00 (P282.1/l) and 11/01 (P183.1/l)SEC 6-M100-17 311.00$ 15
Tax rebate for prime power -40.9 (10/23/01)SEC 6-M100-33 512.00$ 15
Transport to site 140
Delivered fuel cost (CP/L)$331.70
Trojan L-16 40 11,200.00$
Delivered Fuel Cost ($/L)0.471$ SEC 6-M100-17 120 37,320.00$
SEC 6-M100-33 0 -$
Yearly transport 1,193$
Exchange rate: CP per $704 ########
Diesel Cost and Maintenance expense
Capital Combined O&M
Size (kW)Cost (US$)Major (60%)Minor (30%)every 8500h$/hr Wind turbine Cost ( Westwind 10.0)
2.3 2069 2069 Turbine 15,560.00$
4.8 4036 4036 Tower and Grounding 13,791.94$
6.5 3545 3545 Installation 4,000.00$
7.5 6000 6000 Shipping 2,000.00$ 35,351.94$
7.5 6000 $1,317 O&M 200.00$ year
10 6,750$ 4,050$ 2,025$ 3,038$ 0.28$
13.5 13,799$ 8,279$ 4,140$ 6,209$ 0.28$ Wind turbine Cost ( Westwind 5)
15 7,426$ 4,456$ 2,228$ 3,342$ 0.28$ Turbine 9,544.00$
20 8,500$ 5,100$ 2,550$ 3,825$ 0.30$ Tower and Grounding 6,339.00$
25 11,744$ 7,047$ 3,523$ 5,285$ 0.36$ Installation 3,000.00$
30 13,286$ 7,971$ 3,986$ 5,979$ 0.40$ Shipping 2,000.00$ 20,883.00$
35 14,589$ 8,753$ 4,377$ 6,565$ 0.43$ O&M 150.00$ year
40 15,635$ 9,381$ 4,691$ 7,036$ 0.46$
50 17,604$ 10,562$ 5,281$ 7,922$ 0.51$
55 18,410$ 11,046$ 5,523$ 8,284$ 0.54$
60 19,145$ 11,487$ 5,744$ 8,615$ 0.56$ Wind turbine Cost ( Westwind 2.5)
70 20,448$ 12,269$ 6,134$ 9,202$ 0.59$ Turbine 4,900.00$
80 21,577$ 12,946$ 6,473$ 9,710$ 0.62$ Tower and Grounding 6,339.00$
90 22,573$ 13,544$ 6,772$ 10,158$ 0.65$ Installation 2,000.00$
100 23,463$ 14,078$ 7,039$ 10,559$ 0.67$ Shipping 2,000.00$ 15,239.00$
110 24,269$ 14,561$ 7,281$ 10,921$ 0.70$ O&M 100.00$ year
Overhaul (Major every 17000h)
Program Development
•Detailed cost data used to obtain subsidy funding
from the Federal and Regional government.
•Numbers used to obtain $40 Million IADB loan for
rural electrification activities with a focus of
renewable technologies.
•The e7 international utility group became
interested in the project and has worked with
CNE to further develop the analysis.
•e7 would team up with a local utility to develop
the project.
•Chile UNDP program is supporting further dev.
•Team approach allows better project coordination
through implementation.
Implementation
•Likely funded by a combination of private,
national, and international funds.
•Implemented by a team of national and
international technical organizations
incorporating the experience gained on the
Isla Tac project.
•Operation and maintenance would be
conducted by local organizations, likely under
contract from a regional utility using a service
boat similar to ones used in the salmon
farming Industry.
Process Pro’s
•Detailed staged assessment that allows all
levels of government to agree on the project
•Allows for economic based decisions on
project details
•Technology neutral
•Regionally focused yet nationally applied
•Based on locally available data
•Provides the type of information required by
international funding and business
organizations -investment opportunities
•Built in project publicity
Process Con’s
•The project has never been developed
•Taken a long time to develop
–Analysis paralysis
•Analysis requires more information and is an
intensive process
•Government required to develop the project -high
federal costs compared to private development.
–Changes in the government, force changes in the project
•Partnerships are a two edged sword –each new
partner wants to put their own stamp on the process
•Uses different technologies, difficult for some
organizations to agree to the concept.