Sustainable hydroelectric power project planning under socio-economic and environmental concerns using Index based approach

Abstract

PurposeThis study aims to identify and gauge the sustainability indicators (SUSIs) for sustainable Hydroelectric Power (HEP) project development. It examines major SUSIs under the social, economic and environmental (SEE) fronts and categorizes them under push and pull impacts which helps to identify challenges and opportunities associated with projects. Additionally, the study calculates an empirical sustainability index (SI) to assess the sustainability level of HEP. Finally, the study suggests mitigation measures across stakeholders, which will optimize government/developer/investor investments.Design/methodology/approachThis paper examines the interaction of sustainable HEP development with SUSIs using Uttarakhand as a study area. Additionally, SI has been developed quantitatively. For the indicator classification, the authors conducted a literature review and secondary survey of all affected parties, including investors, developers, NGOs and villagers. The fuzzy logic theory (FLT) is used to determine the SI of the study area and classify projects in their level of sustainability. On the basis of expert opinion and literature review, mitigation measures are proposed across stakeholders.FindingsThe authors found that there is a mixed effect of SUSIs on HEP development across various projects in Uttarakhand. Furthermore, the authors suggest that index-based assessment and planned collaboration play a significant role in sustainable HEP development. Mitigation measures should be suggested to all affected stakeholders based on specific project issues, i.e. collaborations, training, public awareness campaigns, and initiatives by the government that would improve sustainability conditions.Research limitations/implicationsIn addition to supporting the ongoing and upcoming initiatives launched by the Government of India, including the Green Energy Corridor, independent power producers (IPPs); and the India-Renewable Resources Development Project with IDA and participates in Net zero target.Practical implicationsThe structured, sustainable HEP planning suggested in the study will help to conserve society, economy, save resources and in parallel reduce the cost and time of developers and policymakers. This will also help to improve the socioeconomic status of the villagers and prolong the life of the project.Originality/valueThe innovative SI-based push-pull approach identifies a sustainable HEP project planning.

Environmental reporting in the hydropower sector: analysis of EMAS registered hydropower companies in Italy

“…Although 11 aspects were listed in over 80% of the ESs, only 6 were considered significant in more than half of the ESs (soil contamination, biodiversity, waste production, risk of environmental accidents, water pollution and flow management, and noise emissions). All those aspects received attention in the literature, with a particular focus on "biodiversity" and "water quality" (Parish et al, 2019;Nautiyal and Goel, 2020;Roy and Roy, 2022). On the other hand, the technical aspects were rarely considered significant (only by less than 20% of the ESs), as well as "stakeholder engagement", "light pollution", "transport", and "odor emissions".…”

“…The available literature has considered the sustainability assessment of the HP sector since about 25-30 years ago (Goodland, 1994;Kaygusuz, 2002), and it is mostly devoted to the sustainability assessment of new HP installations through site-specific indicators (i.e., "soil contamination", "biodiversity", "waste production", "risk of environmental accidents", "water pollution and flow management", and "noise emissions"). The applied approach usually compared the status of the site before and after the construction of the HP plant (Lopes et al, 2022;Roy and Roy, 2022), while much less focus is dedicated to the impacts associated to existing plants. A recent study that assessed the ecological impacts of HP plants in operation proposed an ecological impact scorecard based on four criteria: environmental flow, hydropeaking, fish protection and passage performance, and sediment management (Alp et al, 2020).…”