CEDREN_annual report 2015_web

16 / 28

16
Improved management tools
The aim of EcoManage is to improve tools and indicators used to develop and manage water and energy resources.
EcoManage aims to provide users with an improved methodological basis for determining the costs and benefits of
ecosystem services in regulated rivers, also providing the best ways to compare and decide on future development of
renewable energy.
We are introducing energy indicators and ecosystem ser-
vices as tools. Energy indicators are tools for comparing
energy efficiency of different renewable and non-renewable
technologies. Ecosystem services means benefits that people
obtain from a multitude of resources and processes supplied
by natural ecosystems.
How well does hydropower work? No energy
production is without energy investment, neither in the
construction phase nor in the operational phase. Different
energy production technologies have different demands of
energy input, so how do we choose the optimal technology
or the best mix of energy production?
How does hydropower production compare to other energy
production technologies? In EcoManage, two main energy
indicators were selected: 1) Cumulative Energy Demand
(CED), and 2) Energy Payback Ratio (EPR). Even though the
system boundaries were different, hydropower came out as
the technology with the best ratio between energy input and
energy output, when compared to wind, biomass, coal and
natural gas.
Looking at the bigger picture Hydropower con­
cessions in Norway are often approved individually for river
sections. What cost-effect gains could be made for both
power and salmon if hydropower licences were evaluated
across several sites instead of one river section at a time?
Using the concept of biodiversity offsetting, i.e. further
improving one site while utilizing another site for increased
power production, the scientists evaluated power production,
salmon production and habitat restoration against each other
to find the optimal mix of solutions through scenarios.
By analysing several important criteria for different stakehold-
ers at the same time, a cost-effectiveness analysis showed
that the gain in salmon production when releasing water was
much higher in one of the sites. This means that it is more
effective to carry out mitigation measures at this site, and main-
tain a high power production in the other site.
Numerical modelling in Mandal River showed that physical
habitat restoration is more effective than increasing environ-
mental flow when costs for power loss are included. Habitat
improvements through weir removal also affect river aesthet-
ics, as shown through photo-simulations. In addition, meso-
habitat analysis before and after habitat adjustments showed
that weir removal also provided a number of additional sites
for recreational fishing.
Contact: