A decentralized energy source with potential

Tips: What significance do small hydropower plants have for regional and supra-regional electricity supply?

Ablinger: Small hydropower generates more than 6.5 terawatt hours of electricity throughout Austria. This covers more than 10 percent of domestic electricity needs. Around two million households could be supplied with it – that is almost 50 percent of domestic small hydropower. This already shows its great importance. In a decentralized manner, its importance is often even greater, as entire regions are supplied by small hydropower. In addition, it often enables the integration of other renewable energies (energies, editor’s note).

Tips: What environmental benefits do small hydropower plants offer compared to larger hydropower plants or other renewable energy sources?

Ablinger: Small hydropower is very decentralized and therefore close to the consumers, which reduces the strain on the grid. Small hydropower is very compatible with the partially good and very good condition of the water bodies, and its impact on natural water bodies is very limited. In the course of the survey of particularly protected stretches of water in Upper Austria, for example, stretches in very good condition were identified, then 50 meters of flowing water, then a power plant, then 50 meters of flowing water, then again in very good condition. We will need all technologies for the urgently needed energy transition. Everyone must contribute their strengths. With small hydropower, the advantages would be good availability and predictability, controllability, grid services, etc.

Tips: What do you have to do to operate a small hydropower plant? What challenges do you have to overcome?

Ablinger: Ideally, you already have a plot of land with access to a river that has a greater gradient at this point. Then you can think about a sensible use of hydropower and contact us or a planning office with your initial idea for an initial assessment. If a transverse structure is already in place, you can also take advantage of the federal government’s advisory funding. In any case, a series of approval procedures must be completed (water law, nature conservation law, possibly also electricity law, forestry law, etc.) and permits must be obtained. The corresponding procedures usually take many months or years. After successful approval, funding applications can then be submitted – without this, unfortunately, it is currently not possible to run a commercial operation without it (due to other market interventions). This can also take some time. The main challenges, in addition to obtaining approval and ensuring commercial operation, are that the requirements placed on an operator often deteriorate significantly afterwards or the situation is made more difficult, often without the corresponding evidence being provided. The fact that this is then economically viable is often hardly or not at all manageable and is simply accepted here.

Tips: What do you think are the legal framework and approval procedures for the construction of small hydropower plants?

Ablinger: The procedures are very extensive and often the same or similar topics are dealt with in different procedures (e.g. aquatic ecology and fish in water law and nature conservation procedures). This sometimes leads to contradictory or unclear requirements, and in any case it drags out the process. In addition, water law is a federal matter and nature conservation law is a state matter. In addition, both are lagging behind in implementing the Renewable Energy Directive. Acceleration and standardization – as planned by the BMK with the Renewable Energy Expansion Acceleration Act – is urgently needed.

Tips: What are the economic aspects for operators of small hydropower plants? Is the investment profitable and what funding options are available?

Ablinger: Small hydropower is a very durable and long-term technology. It is often also a generational project – not only because it contributes to the preservation of a habitable environment for future generations as a climate protection measure. In the current situation, with still very high subsidies for fossil fuels and at the same time sharply rising construction costs and ever higher additional requirements, subsidies are necessary to enable financing. This is reinforced by a market that is based on marginal costs and not on full costs. Politicians must definitely develop new market rules here to make the urgently needed expansion – not just in hydropower – affordable. These are investments in our future from both an economic and an ecological point of view.

Tips: Are there any special initiatives or projects to promote small hydropower plants?

Ablinger: The population is extremely positive about the expansion of hydropower, as recent surveys show. However, the necessary funding and support is still far from sufficient. In the area of ​​the Renewable Energy Expansion Act, funding for new construction is already very attractive. However, the revitalization that has been called for many times and supported by a federal advisory campaign is extremely unattractive – also due to additional requirements. The following must apply to both new plants and revitalizations: Anyone who meets the strict standards of domestic water law must be eligible for funding. At the same time, however, the approach to this process must change; the aim must be to find common solutions that meet our objectives in terms of ecology and the expansion of renewable energies. At the moment, one often has the feeling that this goal is being lost sight of.

Tips: Are there any current best practice examples from Upper Austria?

Ablinger: Hardly. Even when building transverse structures that have to be preserved due to other uses, the implementation of projects is difficult. On the contrary, some power plants with fish passes that have been approved as functional are currently being declared impassable. They would then have to invest several hundred thousand euros again to replace their systems that have already been approved and originally recognized by the authorities as functional. Without there being any proof that the fish passes are impassable. The operators would have to prove that they are functional, which is not possible due to a lack of the extremely large individuals that would be required here – this is usually not possible purely statistically. And the use of farmed fish for proof is not permitted. This is completely absurd.

We have many requirements and measures in place for one purpose: to maintain and improve the good condition of our watercourses. However, the requirements must not become an end in themselves; they must always have the goal of achieving the goal in mind and these must be based on scientific evidence.