Laserfiche WebLink
d. Nearby power transmission lines. <br />e. Access for construction, operation and maintenance. <br />3) There are very minimal environmental impacts associated with this site and none that <br />cannot be mitigated with the proposed technology. <br />Alternative generation equipment was then considered for the site. Two turbines were considered <br />to be appropriate for use with the infrastructure that exists at the site. The VLH� Turbine and the <br />Natel SLH Hydroengine were compared for both technical and economic feasibility. <br />TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY <br />To evaluate the technical feasibility of a specific turbine for implementation into an existing low <br />head site, the site conditions and geometry of the existing infrastructure must be considered. Low <br />head sites have recently become more economically feasible with the introduction of innovative <br />turbines that make use of the existing infrastructure to lower implementation costs. Also to keep <br />the cost of these turbines low, standardized sizes are being manufactured. The turbine must both fit <br />within the range of site conditions and be able to utilize the existing infrastructure to be considered <br />technically feasible. <br />VLH Turbine <br />The VLH Turbine is offered in five sizes to <br />accomidate a range of site conditions. This <br />turbine is intended to be installed in an open <br />channel, and a head differential will be created <br />across the turbine. The turbine will be offered <br />in five sizes to accomidate a range of site <br />conditions. Both the 3550 and the 4000 models <br />were considered for this site. The 3550 would <br />be capable of producing 325 kW using up to <br />500 cfs of flow at 10 feet of head. The 4000 <br />would produce 414 kW using up to 650 cfs at <br />10 feet of head. The site conditions do fall <br />���� A � � � � , <br />� <br />� � � <br />, .. <br />�� ��- � � >� �: :. �., <br />� . <br />,;�. ..- .- � . <br />k <br />���.�� � ,� . .. _ _.�' �� <br />. <br />_. <br />. <br />s,- _ _ <br />�,, : : �� , ...,; . .. <br />�,�+r.�r�.. �: ;�..�: <br />.�n, �, � � <br />y� ��,j "�' *s" p k . .. . <br />'� �� � � �.�,� <br />within the range of these turbines, although � `�` ` "� �� <br />during low flow periods the turbines would run at less than full capacity, which is typical of a <br />hydropower facility. <br />As shown in the photograph above, the turbine is installed between two concrete walls, and the <br />turbine can be operated to maintain the head differential needed at the diversion dam between the <br />upstream and downstream sides. The head is maintained by automatic adjustment of the runner <br />blades as flow rates fluctuate. The 3550 is 15.4 feet wide and the 4000 is 17.7 feet wide, between <br />the concrete walls. The existing concrete sand gate is only 10 feet wide. In order to install either of <br />these turbines the center wall dividing the sand gates would need to be removed and relocated. The <br />width of the turbines would leave between 3 and 4 feet for a sand gate within the existing two bays. <br />The remaining sand gate may need to extend into the existing Ogee weir. <br />Alterations to the area downstream of the turbine would also have to be made. There are minimum <br />requirements for the elevation of tailwater or submergence downstream of the turbine. A <br />significant amount of excavation would be needed to meet these requirements. <br />Rio Grande Canal Water Users Association � Project Description � ■ <br />