Hydrological Research Letters 11(1), 6–11 (2017)

Published online in J-STAGE (www.jstage.jst.go.jp/browse/hrl). DOI: 10.3178/hrl.11.6

Assessment of small hydropower potential in the Ciwidey subwatershed,

Indonesia: a GIS and hydrological modeling approach
Naufal Rospriandana1* and Masahiko Fujii2
1
Graduate School of Environmental Science, Hokkaido University, Japan
2
Faculty of Environmental Earth Science, Hokkaido University, Japan

Abstract: Java, Madura and Bali, with deficits in other regions

(Vithayasrichareon et al., 2012; PLN, 2015). At the same
Generally, the remoteness of potential sites for small time, rural Indonesia also has reported lack of electricity
hydropower (SHP) which are mostly located in mountainous access particularly due to logistical constraints and chal-
regions, and complex hydrological phenomena, remain sig- lenges in extending the power grid through difficult terrains
nificant barriers for SHP development. However, hydrologi- (hilly mountainous areas, islands, ocean, etc.). This forces
cal modeling together with the advancement of remote sens- rural people to rely on fossil fuel (diesel), for which they
ing and geospatial technology can be used to assess SHP have to bear the additional costs of fuel transport. There
potential. This study combined geographic information sys- are 16.8 million households, equivalent to 63 million
tem (GIS) methods with the Soil and Water Assessment Tool Indonesian people that have no access to modern electricity
(SWAT) hydrological model to assess the potential for SHP (PricewaterhouseCoopers Indonesia, 2013). Hence, a more
development in the Ciwidey subwatershed, Indonesia. Nine effective strategy to meet energy needs has become an urgent
potential sites for SHP were identified according to criteria agenda for the country. Nevertheless, considering fossil fuel
such as head/elevation drop, stream order, and distance resource depletion, high import prices, and the importance
between each potential site. The SWAT model reproduced of clean energy and global concern related to climate change
the observed discharge in the watershed accurately produc- mitigation, the optimization of low carbon electricity through
ing an acceptable coefficient of determination (R2 = 0.75) renewable energy (RE) should be considered. Thus, the
and Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE = 0.67). According to Government of Indonesia is now struggling through its pol-
Flow Duration Curve (FDC) analysis at 60, 75, and 90% icy to improve development efforts and attract investments
dependability threshold, a maximum SHP potential total of into RE.
1.72 MW can be harnessed in the Ciwidey subwatershed. Among RE sources, hydroelectric power plants (HPP)
This study is expected to boost the initiative of promoting have been among the earliest and most robust RE generation
renewable energy, mainly SHP, in Indonesia. Based on these methods adopted (Patil et al., 2013). Often the cheapest
results and the goal of increasing renewable energy resources energy generation method (International Renewable Energy
to bolster national energy security, we recommend an initia- Agency/IRENA, 2015), hydropower has been a backbone of
tive promoting SHP in Indonesia. the energy economy in many countries, including China,
India, and Brazil (Zhao and Zhu, 2004; Khan, 2015).
KEYWORDS renewable energy; small hydropower; SWAT; However, it is undeniable that large HPP associated with
hydrological modeling; GIS; Indonesia dams, often cause socio-environmental problems, such as
land inundation and resettlement of residents (Cernea, 2004;
Sovacool and Bulan, 2012). Therefore, rather than large
INTRODUCTION
scale infrastructure, this study intends to emphasize the uti-
lization of small hydropower (SHP). The United Nations
As a developing country, Indonesia faces an acute energy Industrial Development Organization categorizes SHP as
crisis caused by rapidly increasing energy demand surpass- hydropower with an installed capacity of 1–10 MW (Liu et
ing a limited supply availability, as well as low penetration al., 2013), typically employing a run-of-river design.
of electricity into rural areas (Perusahaan Listrik Negara/ Meanwhile, hydropower with installed capacities below 1
PLN, 2015). Along with economic development, electricity MW is often called mini or micro hydropower. Instead of
demand has been growing rapidly and is predicted to double large dams, SHP only utilizes small weirs (European Small
from 201.5 in 2014 to 424 TWh in 2024 (PLN, 2015). Such Hydropower Association/ESHA, 2004), thus it minimizes
a situation will cause Indonesia to struggle to meet its energy environmental tradeoff along with providing a clean and
needs. Indeed, the Indonesian power system has been reliable energy solution.
reported to have an undersupply issue and is no longer con- In regards to SHP development, good planning and design
sidered secure. The national electricity supply reserve play an important role. Yet, generally, complex hydrological
(reserve margin) remains low at 24% in the main regions of phenomena and the remoteness of SHP potential sites which
Correspondence to: Naufal Rospriandana, Graduate School of Environ­
mental Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-0810, Japan. E-mail:
[email protected] Received 31 August, 2016
* Present address: Water Energy Food Nexus Project, Research Center for Accepted 3 December, 2016
Geotechnology, Indonesian Institute of Science. Published online 21 January, 2017
© The Author(s) 2017. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s)
and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

—6—
 HYDROPOWER: GIS AND HYDROLOGICAL MODELING

are mostly in mountainous regions, remain barriers that Company (2005) and Pravin (2012) provide a basic, simple,
complicate the assessment effort and make it time consum- and understandable introduction to SHP.
ing, and lead to the requirement for large capital budgets.
However, with the advancement of remote sensing and
geospatial mapping technology together with hydrological
STUDY LOCATIONS
modeling, it is possible to optimize the assessment of SHP
potential. GIS can help with topography and spatial analysis, The Ciwidey subwatershed, Upper Citarum has been
and recent hydrological modeling (Moradkhani et al., 2009 selected as the analogical study location illustrating the use
on Devi et al., 2015) can be used to predict the basin sys- of GIS and hydrological modeling to assess SHP potential.
tem’s behavior and to understand complex hydrological pro- The study region covers a catchment area of around 204 km2
cesses within various climate possibilities. Studies of water with elevations ranging from 624 to 2,425 m a.s.l dominated
resources assessment and climate change impact are indeed by agricultural land and rice farms alongside some low-­
the most popular studies of hydrological modeling particu- density residential areas (Figure 1). The river originates at
larly for planning and disaster risk purposes, e.g., HEC- Wayang Windu Mountain and flows through Bandung City,
HMS for simulating flood inundation in Bago Basin, a major regional city. The Ciwidey subregion has a tropical
Myanmar (Zin et al., 2015) and Soil Water Assessment Tools climate with a mean temperature of 18–25°C. The average
(SWAT) for assessing climate change impact in Laos annual precipitation is 2,000–2,500 mm. Records show that
(Sayasane et al., 2016) . Yet, in this study, GIS and hydrolog- more than 85% of the precipitation is concentrated in the
ical modeling were used to assess the HPP potential. Previous rainy season (September–December) and transition periods
researchers have either introduced the use GIS alone or GIS (January–April) leaving the dry season of June, July, and
and hydrological modeling together as powerful tools to pro- August with little rainfall. In regards to SHP planning,
vide a potential assessment study of hydropower. Dealing empirical records show that during the years 2006–2013, the
with the energy security in the country, some Indian research- precipitation amount in the study location is considered
ers have shown big interest as discussed within Kusre et al. large enough. The number of wet months (with monthly
(2010), Patil et al. (2013), and Goyal et al. (2015) who rainfall of more than 100 mm) is 9 months and average
developed a similar methodology to SWAT to estimate the monthly precipitation is greater than 150 mm. Such high
SHP potential in India in four river catchment areas within precipitation, which also identically occurred in the tropical
Kopili, Bennihalla, and Mahanadi basin. On the other hand, Indonesian regions, implies a high discharge particularly for
another hydrological modeling approach of HYDREEMS SHP generation.
was also used by Toyoda et al. (2015) to evaluate the poten-
tial of SHP generation in Japan. Using the GIS and manual
DATA AND METHODOLOGIES
Soil Conservation Service-Curve Number (SCS-CN) mea-
surement, Das and Paul (2006), Feizizadeh and Haslauer
(2012) and Setiawan (2015) worked on SHP development in In accordance with GIS tools, particularly ArcGIS or
Himalayan Region of India, Tabriz Basin of Iran and QGIS, SWAT comes as an interface program. SWAT is a
Kalimantan, Indonesia, respectively. physically based long-term hydrological simulation model
Departing from the above discussion, it can be seen that
the SHP potential assessment through GIS and hydrological
modeling becomes necessary considering the urgency of the
increasing energy demand and the need to overcome the low
energy access of the Indonesian rural areas. The utilization
of water resources for energy needs with minimal ecosystem
interruption also has been an advantage of SHP. Here, the
tools of GIS and SWAT were chosen as the main methodol-
ogies. There are several objectives of this study as follows:
(a) identifying SHP potential sites using GIS; (b) assessing
and estimating the potential power generation through SHP
in study areas combining GIS with hydrological modeling.
In this study, the formula of SHP potential (pE–SHP) (kW) is
outlined in Equation (1).
pE  SHP   water  g Q H  (1)
where ρ is the water density (kg m–3), g is the acceleration
due to gravity (9.8 m s–2), Q is the dependable discharge
(m3 s–1), H is the head (height difference) or elevation drop
(m), and η is the efficiency constant (0.8) (Nasir, 2014).
Through GIS and hydrological modeling, this study aims to Figure 1. Overlaid maps of land use and sub-basin distribu-
determine the potential sites of SHP according to H and Q. tion in Ciwidey subwatershed, Indonesia. Areas are covered
Head is the distance that a given water source has to fall by agriculture land, rice fields, and some low density urban
before the point where power is generated while Q rep- settlements. 29 subbasins were identified in the Ciwidey
resents the dependable amount of water to be converted into subwatershed areas through spatial analyst tools in ArcGIS.
electricity. Some literatures, e.g., Tokyo Electric Power Numbers denote each subbasin

—7—
 N. ROSPRIANDANA AND M. FUJII

Table I. List of necessary datasets in this study. All maps were projected to UTM/WGS 84 zone 48S
No. Type of Data Specification Source Description
Shuttle Radar Topographic
1 DEM (Digital Elevation Model) Resolution 30 m USGS Earth Explorer Mission 1 Arc-Second Global
(tiff file)
Geospatial Information
2 Land use 1:25,000 Land use classification (.shp file)
Agency of Indonesia (2010)
Department of Agriculture,
3 Soil type 1:250,000 Soil type (.shp file)
Republic of Indonesia
Water Resources Agency of
4 Daily precipitation 9 stations (2006–2013) Precipitation in mm
West Java, Indonesia
5 Max. and min. daily temperature Temp. in °C
6 Relative humidity Global Weather SWAT Fraction
2 stations (2006–2013)
7 Average wind speed Database (CFSR, 2016) Speed in m s–1
8 Solar irradiation MJ m–2
1 station Water Resources Agency of
9 River discharge m3 s–1
(monthly, 2009–2012) West Java

homogenous land use, slope, and soil type characteristics.

The HRU are distributed into sub-basins spatially within
SWAT (Neitsch et al., 2001). Theoretically, SWAT is based
on the formula of hydrological cycle, known as the water
balance equation (Arnold et al., 1998; Goyal et al., 2015),
shown here as Equation (2):
t n
SWt  SW0   Rday  QSurf  Ea  Wseep  Qgw (2)
 
t 1

where SWt is the final soil water content (mmH2O), SW0 is

the initial soil water content (mm H2O), t is the day, Rday is
the amount of precipitation on day t (mmH2O), Qsurf is the
amount of surface runoff on day t (mmH2O), Ea is the amount
of evaporation and transpiration (ET) on day t (mmH2O),
Wseep is the amount of percolation and bypass through the
bottom of the soil profile on day t (mmH2O), and Qgw is the
amount of return flow on day t (mmH2O).
Potential site identification
Figure 2. Flowchart of small hydropower (SHP) potential
assessment method using GIS and the SWAT hydrological Figure 2 illustrates the working flow of SHP assessment in
model. The formula of SHP potential (pE–SHP) (kW) is defined this study. Using spatial analyst tools in ArcGIS, the Digital
as pE–SHP = ρwater × g × Q × H × η where ρ is the water density Elevation Model (DEM) with a 30 m resolution from USGS
(kg m–3), g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.8 m s–2), H is were first extracted to produce delineated stream segments
the elevation drop (m), and Q is the dependable discharge with a minimum threshold of 500 meters. Later, the DEM
(m3 s–1) and stream segment map were overlaid and analyzed to gen-
erate the sub-basins distribution. Then, to select potential
SHP sites, some requirements were applied during the anal-
which has proven tremendous applicability in various hydro- ysis as follows: (a) potential sites should be located in stream
logical studies (Abbaspour et al., 2007; Kusre et al., 2009; order higher than 2nd order since smaller stream segments
Abbaspour, 2015; Goyal et al., 2015). The SWAT model also (≤ 2nd order) are not considered good sites for SHP due to
has complete ability to quantify the impact of land manage- intermittent flow; (b) the elevation drop or height difference
ment practices in large and complex catchments. The main (H) should be higher than 10 meters; (c) distance between
components or inputs of SWAT are topographical data or each potential site should be at least 1 km.
Digital Elevation Model (DEM), soil type data, land use/
land cover data, and weather data such as temperature and
Discharge assessment in SWAT and model calibration
precipitation. Table I lists the necessary datasets in this The SWAT model was set to produce monthly discharge
study. SWAT divides a watershed into stream network during 2009–2012 to obtain dependable discharge for the
sub-basins, which are later distributed again spatially into purpose of SHP generation. Following this, discharge model
multiple HRU (hydrological response unit) which have calibration was performed by changing the hydrological

—8—
 HYDROPOWER: GIS AND HYDROLOGICAL MODELING

Table II. Optimal values of hydrological parameters in the

SWAT model
Parameter (abbreviation in SWAT model) Optimal value
Curve number (r_CN2.mgt) 36.2–51.4
Baseflow recession (v_ALPHA_BF.gw) 0.000123
Groundwater delay time (v_GW_DELAY.gw) 226.25
Threshold in shallow aquifer for return flow 1762.5
(v_GWQMN.gw)
Coefficient for groundwater movement from 0.065
shallow aquifer to unsaturated zone “Revap”
(v_GW_REVAP.gw)
Threshold in shallow aquifer for revap or 5.65
percolation (v_REVAPMN.gw)
Deep aquifer percolation fraction 0.1335
(v_RCHRG_DP.gw)
Surface runoff lag coefficient 21.6425
(v_SURLAG.bsn)
Roughness of streambed (v_CH_N1.sub) 0.091425
Effective hydraulic conductivity 10.85
(v_CH_K2.rte)

parameters to minimize model-data misfits (see Table II).

Monthly discharge data from one available gauging station
was used to calibrate the model. To be a good model, the
model results should satisfy the requirements of established Figure 3. Top figure (a) shows observed and modeled
indices, e.g., coefficient of determination (R2) and Nash- time-series of discharge in subbasin 6 from January 2009 to
Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) as recommended by the American December 2012: observed (in blue), uncalibrated (with ini-
Society of Civil Engineers (Ahl et al., 2008). tial hydrological parameter values; in red), and calibrated
(with optimized hydrological parameter values; in green)
Dependable discharge through Flow Duration Curve values are included. Bottom figure (b) presents scatter plot
In the case of hydropower, a Flow Duration Curve (FDC) of observed vs. calibrated monthly discharge in subbasin 6,
describes the water flow resource and is a critical piece of R2 = 0.75
information that feeds into the design of a hydropower proj-
ect. The FDC is a cumulative frequency curve that shows
the percent of time during specified units (e.g., discharge)
Output of SWAT model and calibration
equaled or exceeded in a given period (Searcy, 1959). FDC Using SWAT, we modeled the discharge of each subbasin
was used to obtain dependable discharge (Q) for SHP gener- within the subwatershed. To calibrate the model, observed
ation. In this study, FDC at dependability levels of 60%, and modeled discharge data in subbasin 6 were compared
75%, and 90% were undertaken accommodating uncertainty and analyzed, as shown in Figure 3. Although (R2) was 0.76,
level due to seasonal variability. Together with H, the NSE was quite low, at –0.16. Therefore, calibration of the
dependable discharges (Q) obtained were input into equation hydrological parameters was necessary to improve the accu-
(1) to estimate the potential power output of SHP (pE–SHP). racy of model outputs. Calibration was performed for the
period of 2009–2012. The sensitivity of each parameter was
also evaluated carefully (Patil et al., 2013). The model’s per-
RESULTS
formance in reproducing observed discharge improved after
the calibration of the hydrological parameter values, with
Results of this study consist of (a) result of potential sites; (R2) = 0.75 and NSE = 0.67 (Figure 3; Table II).
(b) output of SWAT model and discharge calibration; (c)
results of FDC and power estimation.
Results of FDC and power estimation
The SHP potential assessment was performed through
Result of potential sites
evaluating the dependable discharge at each potential site
Nine potential sites were identified that meet the criteria using FDC analysis. The FDC describes the water flow that
with head of 11–19 m, in streams higher than 2nd order, and can be relied upon as a resource and is a critical piece of
where horizontal distance between each site is equal to or information for the design of hydropower projects.
greater than 1 km. The potential sites were distributed in five Accommodating the impact of seasonal variability towards
subbasins (see Figure 5 for overall results). SHP generation throughout the year, the dependability rates
of 60%, 75%, and 90% have been considered to represent

—9—
 N. ROSPRIANDANA AND M. FUJII

optimum, normal, and minimum discharge thresholds (par-

ticularly during dry season). In the example, we found that CONCLUSION
the dependable discharges of the 5-year modeling period
(2009–2013) were ranging from 3.3 to 7.55 m3 s–1 in sub­ The development of RE in Indonesia has become an urgent
basin 7. A similar approach was then applied to all nine SHP agenda. Nationally, an energy crisis has resulted from a rapid
potential sites in five subbasins to find the dependable dis- increase in electricity demand and a limited supply of power,
charge of SHP (Figure 4). The SHP potentials were then cal- together with low penetration of modern energy and electric-
culated according to equation (1), using head data obtained ity infrastructure across rural Indonesia. At the same time,
from the DEM and dependable discharge based on the SWAT fossil fuel resource depletion and the threat of climate change
model (Figure 5). We found that overall total potential rang- are also experienced globally. In terms of available resources,
ing from 762–1.722 kW can be harnessed in the Ciwidey hydropower generation is one of the most promising RE
subwatershed depending on seasonal variability. sources in Indonesia. However, instead of large-scale hydro-
power, this study emphasized SHP due to its lower environ-
mental burden and more direct effect on local communities.
The traditional SHP planning, in which potential sites are
relatively located in remote areas, is time and cost consum-
ing and results remain inaccurate due to a failure to capture
complex hydrological phenomena. Hence, with the advance-
ment of geospatial mapping technology, spatial analysis and
hydrological modeling can be used to assess SHP potential.
For this purpose, we combined GIS-based topographical and
spatial analyses with a SWAT model to characterize the
hydrological properties of the Ciwidey subwatershed.
Considering the importance of study that can help acceler-
ate Indonesian energy diversification, we suggest that GIS
and SWAT should be a proper solution and capable tool for
Figure 4. Example of Flow Duration Curve to determine the the study of SHP potential assessment. The method is
dependable discharge identified as optimum, moderate, and expected to help promote renewable energy, mainly SHP, in
minimum threshold (60–90% dependability rate) for SHP Indonesia. However, our findings and experience show how
generation in subbasin 7 the availability of hydrological data, e.g., gauged discharge
station and daily precipitation, become one of the barriers to
be overcome to produce a potential assessment study through
this approach. For instance, the support of adequate hydro-
logical data can be further used to study potential SHP gen-
eration in every Indonesian watershed. The appropriate
assessment will help facilitate the development of SHP in
the future towards national energy security and attract more
investors to support the development of energy infrastruc-
ture in Indonesia.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study was financially supported by the R-08-Init

Project entitled “Human-Environmental Security in Asia-
Pacific Ring of Fire: Water-Energy-Food Nexus,” awarded
to the Research Institute of Humanity and Nature (RIHN),
Kyoto, Japan. Authors appreciate the Geospatial Information
Agency, Department of Agriculture, and Water Resources
Agency of West Java, Indonesia for their provision of data.
The first author would also like to thank the Indonesian
Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) for scholarship
support.

REFERENCES

Abbaspour KC, Yang J, Maximov I, Siber R, Bogner K, Mieleitner

Figure 5. Potential site identification results distribution of J, Zobrist J, Srinivasan R. 2007. Modelling hydrology and
the nine SHP generation potential sites of A through I in the water quality in the pre-alpine/alpine Thur watershed using
Ciwidey subwatershed. The available SHP potential (kW) SWAT. Journal of Hydrology 333: 413–430. DOI: 10.1016/j.
according to dependability rate were also presented (kW) jhydrol.2006.09.014.

—10—
 HYDROPOWER: GIS AND HYDROLOGICAL MODELING

Abbaspour KC. 2015. SWAT-CUP4: SWAT calibration and uncer- Moradkhani H, Sorooshian S. 2009. General review of rainfall-­
tainty programs – a user manual, Swiss Federal Institute of runoff modeling: model calibration, data assimilation, and
Aquatic Science and Technology, Eawag, Switzerland; 100. uncertainty analysis. Hydrological Modelling and the Water
Ahl RS, Woods SW, Zuuring HR. 2008. Hydrologic calibration and Cycle, Springer Berlin Heidelberg 63: 1–24. DOI:
validation of SWAT in a snow-dominated rocky mountain 10.1007/978-3-540-77843-1_1.
watershed, Montana, U.S.A. JAWRA Journal of the American Patil NS, Shirkol IT, Joshi SG. 2013. Geospatial Technology for
Water Resources Association 44: 1411–1430. DOI: 10.1111/j. Mapping Suitable Sites for Hydro Power Plant. International
1752-1688.2008.00233.x. Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering
Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR. 1998. Large (IJITEE): 2278–3075.
area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I: Model devel- Perusahaan Listrik Negara/PLN. 2015. General Planning of Power
opment. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Provision 2015–2024, Perusahaan Listrik Negara, Jakarta,
Association 34: 73–89. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998. Indonesia; 549 (in Bahasa Indonesia).
tb05961.x. Pravin. 2012. GGF Technical Workshop on Small Hydro Power in
Cernea MM. 2004. Social impacts and social risks in hydropower Tbilisi, June, 1, 2012. https://goo.gl/lQ0WVk. Last access
programs: preemptive planning and counter-risk measures. In December, 10, 2016.
Keynote address: Session on social aspects of hydropower PricewaterhouseCoopers Indonesia. 2013. Power in Indonesia:
development. United Nations Symposium on Hydropower Investment and Taxation Guide, PricewaterhouseCoopers
and Sustainable Development Beijing, China. Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia; 140.
CFSR (Climate Forecast System Reanalysis). 2016. Global Weather Sayasane R, Kawasaki A, Shrestha S, Takamatsu M. 2016.
Data for SWAT. http://globalweather.tamu.edu/. Last access: Assessment of potential impacts of climate and land use
December, 10, 2016. changes on stream flow: a case study of the Nam Xong water-
Das S, Paul PK. 2006. Selection of site for small hydel using GIS shed in Lao PDR. Journal of Water and Climate Change 7:
in the Himalayan region of India. Journal of Spatial Hydrology 184–197. DOI: 10.2166/wcc.2015.050.
6: 18–28. Searcy JK. 1959. Flow-duration curves. US Government Printing
Devi GK, Ganasri BP, Dwarakish GS. 2015. A Review on Office.
Hydrological Models. Aquatic Procedia 4: 1001–1007. DOI: Setiawan D. 2015. Potential Sites Screening for Mini Hydro Power
10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.126. Plant Development in Kapuas Hulu, West Kalimantan: A GIS
European Small Hydropower Association (ESHA). 2004. Guide on Approach. Energy Procedia 65: 76–82. DOI: 10.1016/j.
How to Develop a Small Hydropower Plant, ESHA, Brussels, egypro.2015.01.034.
Belgium; 151. Sovacool BK, Bulan LC. 2012. Energy security and hydropower
Feizizadeh B, Haslauer EM. 2012. GIS-based procedures of hydro- development in Malaysia: The drivers and challenges facing
power potential for Tabriz basin, Iran. Proceeding of 6th the Sarawak Corridor of Renewable Energy (SCORE).
Geoinformatics Forum July 3–6, 2012 Salzburg, Austria; Renewable Energy 40: 113–129. DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2011.
495–502. 09.032.
Goyal MK, Singh V, Meena AH. 2015. Geospatial and hydrological Tokyo Electric Power Company. 2005. Renewable Energies
modeling to assess hydropower potential zones and site Workshop in Republic of Fiji, November, 14–25, 2005. http://
location over rainfall dependent Inland catchment. Water www.globalelectricity.org/projects/fiji/. Last access December,
Resources Management 29: 2875–2894. DOI: 10.1007/ 10, 2016.
s11269-015-0975-1. Toyoda Y, Sato T, Isii T, Arai R. 2015. The evaluation of small
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). 2015. Renewable hydroelectric generation unit price in a mountain stream
Power Generation Cost in 2014, IRENA, Innovation and through the use of runoff analysis. JSCE Journal of Japan
Technology Centre (IITC), Bonn, Germany; 164. Society of Civil Engineers 71: 247–255. DOI: 10.2208/
Khan R. 2015. Small Hydro Power in India: Is it a sustainable jscejer.71.I_247 (in Japanese).
business? Applied Energy 152: 207–216. DOI: 10.1016/j. United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2016. SRTM 1 Arc-
apenergy.2014.11.063. Second Global. https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/. Last access
Kusre BC, Baruah DC, Bordoloi PK, Patra SC. 2010. Assessment August, 1, 2016.
of hydropower potential using GIS and hydrological model- Vithayasrichareon P, MacGill IF, Nakawiro T. 2012. Assessing the
ing technique in Kopili River basin in Assam (India). Applied sustainability challenges for electricity industries in ASEAN
Energy 87: 298–309. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.07.019. newly industrialising countries. Renewable and Sustainable
Liu H, Masera D, Esser L. 2013. World Small Hydropower Energy Reviews 16: 2217–2233. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2012.
Development 2013, United Nations Industrial Development 01.019.
Organization, International Center on Small Hydro Power, Zhao J, Zhu X. 2004. Private participation in small hydropower
Beijing, China; 466. development in China – Comparison with international com-
Nasir BA. 2014. Design considerations of micro-hydro-electric munities. Proceeding of UNHYDRO October 27–29, 2004
power plant. Energy Procedia 50: 19–29. DOI: 10.1016/j. Beijing, China; 1–10.
egypro.2014.06.003. Zin WW, Kawasaki A, Win S. 2015. River flood inundation map-
Neitsch SL, Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Williams JR. 2001. Soil and ping in the Bago River Basin, Myanmar. Hydrological
Water Assessment Tool – Version 2000 – User’s Manual, Research Letters 9: 97–102. DOI: 10.3178/hrl.9.97.
Temple, Texas, USA; 506.

—11—