Hydropower and policy - Revision history

Bendikhansen at 15:57, 11 August 2020

2020-08-11T15:57:17Z

Bendikhansen at 15:46, 11 August 2020

2020-08-11T15:46:52Z

Bendikhansen at 15:42, 11 August 2020

2020-08-11T15:42:55Z

Bendikhansen at 15:39, 11 August 2020

2020-08-11T15:39:45Z

Bendikhansen: /* Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants */

2020-08-11T15:33:28Z

Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants

Bendikhansen: /* Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants */

2020-08-11T15:32:49Z

Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants

Bendikhansen: /* Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants */

2020-08-11T15:31:42Z

Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants

Bendikhansen: /* National legislation */

2020-08-11T15:25:21Z

National legislation

Bendikhansen: /* National legislation */

2020-08-11T15:22:43Z

National legislation

Bendikhansen: /* National legislation */

2020-08-11T15:18:08Z

National legislation

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:57, 11 August 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~The hyropower and policy section is divided into three categories:~~
−	*[[EU policies]]
−	*[[National legislation]]
−	*[[Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants]]

	=EU policies=		=EU policies=

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:46, 11 August 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	The hyropower and policy section is divided into three categories:
		+	*[[EU policies]]
		+	*[[National legislation]]
		+	*[[Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants]]
		+
	=EU policies=		=EU policies=

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive concerns the assessment procedure for any plan or project that could affect one or more Natura 2000 site. This is relevant for new hydropower projects as well as for plants to upgrade or modernize existing hydropower plants. In essence, the assessment procedure requires that any plan or project that is likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 site undergoes an appropriate assessment to study these effects in detail.
-The second set of provisions of the nature Directives concerns the protection of certain species across their entire natural range within the EU, i.e. also outside Natura 2000 sites. These provisions also need to be taken into account for hydropower plants, especially on rivers harbouring migratory species, such as the European sea sturgeon Acipenser sturio or the apron Zingel asper both of which are listed in Annex IV of the Habitats Directive (EC, 2016).1
+The second set of provisions of the nature Directives concerns the protection of certain species across their entire natural range within the EU, i.e. also outside Natura 2000 sites. These provisions also need to be taken into account for hydropower plants, especially on rivers harbouring migratory species, such as the European sea sturgeon Acipenser sturio or the apron Zingel asper both of which are listed in Annex IV of the Habitats Directive (EC, 2016).
 Finally, the new EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 includes targets for restoring freshwater ecosystems which are also relevant to activities related to hydropower production. The Strategy targets include the restoration of at least 25,000 km of rivers into free-flowing rivers by 2030 and the restoration of degraded ecosystems, like floodplains and wetlands. Also water abstraction and impoundment permits should be reviewed to implement ecological flows in order to achieve good status or potential of all surface waters and good status of all groundwater by 2027 in line with the WFD.
@@ Line 222: / Line 222: @@
 | style="vertical-align:bottom; font-size:small; text-align:left;" | Legal Framework of Activities Developed   under the National Electric System (2012)
 |}
-Source: Kampa et al. (2017).2
+Source: Kampa et al. (2017).
 =Mitigation requirements for hydropower plants=
@@ Line 239: / Line 239: @@
 This page cannot give a comprehensive picture of mitigation requirements for hydropower plants in the EU. You may refer to the FIThydro report “Deliverable 5.1. Review of policy requirements and financing instruments” for a review of mitigation requirements in eight European countries (Spain, Portugal, France, Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway) with some examples provided below.
-The impacts from disrupted upstream fish migration and modified flow conditions are the ones most commonly required by legislation to be mitigated. Requirements to mitigate modified flow conditions usually refer to minimum flow requirements and, in different countries, different methods are used for determining minimum flow (Kampa et al., 2017).3
+The impacts from disrupted upstream fish migration and modified flow conditions are the ones most commonly required by legislation to be mitigated. Requirements to mitigate modified flow conditions usually refer to minimum flow requirements and, in different countries, different methods are used for determining minimum flow (Kampa et al., 2017).
-In some countries, there are no mitigation requirements related to gravel transport (sediment), hydropeaking impacts and downstream fish migration, mainly due to still open questions which need clarification through further research or pilot studies. For these types of impacts, several countries follow a case-by-case approach when defining mitigation requirements (Kampa et al., 2017).4
+In some countries, there are no mitigation requirements related to gravel transport (sediment), hydropeaking impacts and downstream fish migration, mainly due to still open questions which need clarification through further research or pilot studies. For these types of impacts, several countries follow a case-by-case approach when defining mitigation requirements (Kampa et al., 2017).
 Requirements for mitigation Selected examples from European countries
@@ Line 306: / Line 306: @@
 | style="text-align:left;" | Austria: there is a requirement to minimise impacts as far as possible   for new plants and to achieve good status/potential, which means that morphological<br /> mitigation measures have to be implemented. Existing HPP with an impoundment are usually designated as heavily modified and the definition of GEP <br />includes morphological improvements.
 |}
-Source: Kampa et al. (2017).5
+Source: Kampa et al. (2017).

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 There are significant differences between EU countries in terms of the extent to which hydropower is used in their renewable energy mix. This is highly influenced by geographic conditions, climate, precipitation patterns, the availability of affordable energy supply alternatives, as well as institutional capacities and technical competences.
-==Water Framework Directive (WFD)==
+===Water Framework Directive (WFD)===
 The legal requirements of the WFD concerning hydropower are mostly contained in Article 4 on the environmental objectives of the Directive. The Directive’s main aim is to achieve ‘good status’ of all EU waters, including surface and groundwater, by 2015 through coordinated action (Article 4(1)). For surface water bodies, the Directive distinguishes between good ecological and good chemical status. Ecological status is "good" when the values for biological quality components of surface waters indicate anthropogenic influences, but deviate to only a negligible extent from values normally recorded in the absence of disturbing influences. Hydromorphological and physico-chemical parameters are supporting elements to the biological quality elements for classifying the status of water bodies.
@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 programme of measures to tackle significant pressures on water bodies, including among others those from hydropower activities.
-==Birds Directive, Habitats Directive, EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030==
+===Birds Directive, Habitats Directive, EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030===
 The overall objective of the Birds/Habitats Directives is to ensure that the species and habitat types they protect are maintained and restored to a favourable conservation status throughout their natural range within the EU. In addition, according to Article 3(1) of the Habitats Directive, a coherent European ecological network of special areas of conservation has been set up under the title "Natura 2000", which comprises sites hosting the natural habitat types listed in Annex I and habitats of the species listed in Annex II of the Directive.
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 Finally, the new EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 includes targets for restoring freshwater ecosystems which are also relevant to activities related to hydropower production. The Strategy targets include the restoration of at least 25,000 km of rivers into free-flowing rivers by 2030 and the restoration of degraded ecosystems, like floodplains and wetlands. Also water abstraction and impoundment permits should be reviewed to implement ecological flows in order to achieve good status or potential of all surface waters and good status of all groundwater by 2027 in line with the WFD.
-==Eel Regulation==
+===Eel Regulation===
 The EU Eel regulation (aims to establish measures for the recovery of the stock of the European eel. The Eel Regulation is a legally binding regulation to protect this species within and beyond the Natura 2000 network. Member States are obliged to identify and define eel river basins and to set up Eel Management Plans aiming to reduce anthropogenic mortalities so as to permit with high probability the escapement to the sea of at least 40 % of the silver eel biomass relative to the best estimate of escapement that would have existed if no anthropogenic influences had impacted the stock. Article 2 of the regulation explicitly requests that “in the Eel Management Plan, each Member State shall implement appropriate measures as soon as possible to reduce the eel mortality caused by factors outside the fishery, including hydroelectric turbines, pumps or predators, unless this is not necessary to attain the objective of the plan.”
-==Environmental Impact Assessment Directive==
+===Environmental Impact Assessment Directive===
 According to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive, the development consent for projects which are likely to have significant effects on the environment should be granted, only after an assessment of its likely environmental effects has been carried out.
@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 The EIA Directive distinguishes between projects requiring a mandatory EIA ("Annex I projects") and those where Member State authorities must determine, in a procedure called “screening”, if projects are likely to have significant effects, taking into account certain criteria ("Annex II projects"). With regard to hydropower, Annex I projects include those for “dams and other installations designed for the holding back or permanent storage of water, where a new or additional amount of water held back or stored exceeds 10 million cubic meters’. Most installations for hydropower production are Annex II projects.
-==Invasive Alien Species regulation==
+===Invasive Alien Species regulation===
 The EU regulation on Invasive Alien Species addresses plants and animals that can have negative consequences when introduced (intentionally or accidentally) to new, non-native environments. The regulation outlines a set of measures to be taken with regards to alien species on a list of “Invasive Alien Species of Union concern”, which are grouped into: prevention, early detection and rapid eradication, and management. The development of hydropower installations can create new connections between river systems, leading to the spread and dispersal of various aquatic organisms. These can be difficult to identify and prevent, as they often involve the movement of small organisms through flowing water.

@@ Line 260: / Line 260: @@
 {| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
-|- style="text-align:left; background-color:#cbcefb;"
+|- style="text-align:left;"
 ! Requirements for mitigation
 ! Selected examples from European countries
 |-
-| rowspan="3" style="background-color:#cbcefb;" | Upstream fish   migration
+| rowspan="3" | Upstream fish   migration
 | style="text-align:left;" | Germany: the federal States have specific technical and hydraulic requirements for upstream fish migration measures.
 |-
@@ Line 271: / Line 271: @@
 | style="text-align:left;" | Switzerland: HPP (new and existing ones) are required to mitigate interrupted fish migration by 2030
 |-
-| rowspan="3" style="background-color:#cbcefb;" | Downstream fish   migration
+| rowspan="3" | Downstream fish   migration
 | style="text-align:left;" | Germany: some federal states indicate in specifications on fish protection (e.g. protection screens) in their federal laws.
 |-
@@ Line 278: / Line 278: @@
 | style="text-align:left;" | Norway: requirements related to downstream migration have historically been an issue only to a limited extent, and have received less <br />attention than upstream migration. However, there is growing concern that this is a key issue which also requires mitigation.
 |-
-| rowspan="3" style="background-color:#cbcefb;" | Flow conditions
+| rowspan="3" | Flow conditions
 | style="text-align:left;" | Germany: the amount of minimum flow is aligned with management objectives according to the WFD (according to law WHG §§ 27-31).
 |-
@@ Line 285: / Line 285: @@
 | style="text-align:left;" | Spain: minimum flows were to be implemented in the river basin management plans, generally before 2015, on a case by case basis. A basic legal <br />framework for ecological flows exists and many licenses include requirements concerning minimum flows. Depending on specific conditions, new <br />minimum flow requirements for existing plants may be determined on case by case.
 |-
-| rowspan="3" style="background-color:#cbcefb;" | Hydro-peaking
+| rowspan="3" | Hydro-peaking
 | style="text-align:left;" | Switzerland: hydropeaking needs to be mitigated by 2030. Structural or operational measures can be applied.
 |-
@@ Line 292: / Line 292: @@
 | style="text-align:left;" | Norway: requirements on hydropeaking operations have been defined in   only very few cases so far (some producers introduced voluntary restriction <br />on such operations in some cases).
 |-
-| rowspan="3" style="background-color:#cbcefb;" | Gravel transport   (sediment)
+| rowspan="3" | Gravel transport   (sediment)
 | style="text-align:left;" | Austria: a national   ordinance (mainly applicable to new HPP) states that good ecological status   can be achieved with high confidence if sediment <br />dynamics is only modified   within short river stretches.
 |-
@@ Line 299: / Line 299: @@
 | style="text-align:left;" | Germany, Portugal, France: requirements for mitigating gravel   transport are assessed on a case-by-case basis.
 |-
-| rowspan="3" style="background-color:#cbcefb;" | Habitat enhancement
+| rowspan="3" | Habitat enhancement
 | style="text-align:left;" | Switzerland:   revitalization and improvement of morphology is required by 2090.
 |-

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:31, 11 August 2020
Line 259:		Line 259:
	Habitat enhancement Switzerland: revitalization and improvement of morphology is required by 2090. Germany: habitat improvements are indirectly required via the provisions of the WFD. Austria: there is a requirement to minimise impacts as far as possible for new plants and to achieve good status/potential, which means that morphological mitigation measures have to be implemented. Existing HPP with an impoundment are usually designated as heavily modified and the definition of GEP includes morphological improvements.		Habitat enhancement Switzerland: revitalization and improvement of morphology is required by 2090. Germany: habitat improvements are indirectly required via the provisions of the WFD. Austria: there is a requirement to minimise impacts as far as possible for new plants and to achieve good status/potential, which means that morphological mitigation measures have to be implemented. Existing HPP with an impoundment are usually designated as heavily modified and the definition of GEP includes morphological improvements.

		+	{\| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
		+	\|- style="text-align:left;"
		+	! Requirements for mitigation
		+	! Selected examples from European countries
		+	\|-
		+	\| rowspan="3" \| Upstream fish migration
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Germany: the federal States have specific technical and hydraulic requirements for upstream fish migration measures.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Austria; ensuring ecological continuity is compulsory except outside of the natural fish zone and very near to natural existing barriers.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Switzerland: HPP (new and existing ones) are required to mitigate interrupted fish migration by 2030
		+	\|-
		+	\| rowspan="3" \| Downstream fish migration
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Germany: some federal states indicate in specifications on fish protection (e.g. protection screens) in their federal laws.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Austria: as there as is no proven state-of-art-technology to ensure downstream migration, there is no general requirement (only some pilot facilities).
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Norway: requirements related to downstream migration have historically been an issue only to a limited extent, and have received less <br />attention than upstream migration. However, there is growing concern that this is a key issue which also requires mitigation.
		+	\|-
		+	\| rowspan="3" \| Flow conditions
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Germany: the amount of minimum flow is aligned with management objectives according to the WFD (according to law WHG §§ 27-31).
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| France: maintenance of minimum flow is an obligation since 2006 with the requirement to implement minimum flow values by 2014.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Spain: minimum flows were to be implemented in the river basin management plans, generally before 2015, on a case by case basis. A basic legal <br />framework for ecological flows exists and many licenses include requirements concerning minimum flows. Depending on specific conditions, new <br />minimum flow requirements for existing plants may be determined on case by case.
		+	\|-
		+	\| rowspan="3" \| Hydro-peaking
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Switzerland: hydropeaking needs to be mitigated by 2030. Structural or operational measures can be applied.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Austria: Due to still open questions, implementation of mitigation measures was postponed to WFD cycle after 2021. Hydropower companies have to <br />provide feasibility studies for their hydropeaking plants until 2021 on how hydropeaking can be mitigated effectively.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Norway: requirements on hydropeaking operations have been defined in only very few cases so far (some producers introduced voluntary restriction <br />on such operations in some cases).
		+	\|-
		+	\| rowspan="3" \| Gravel transport (sediment)
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Austria: a national ordinance (mainly applicable to new HPP) states that good ecological status can be achieved with high confidence if sediment <br />dynamics is only modified within short river stretches.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Switzerland: mitigation of gravel transport is required by 2030.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Germany, Portugal, France: requirements for mitigating gravel transport are assessed on a case-by-case basis.
		+	\|-
		+	\| rowspan="3" \| Habitat enhancement
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Switzerland: revitalization and improvement of morphology is required by 2090.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Germany: habitat improvements are indirectly required via the provisions of the WFD.
		+	\|-
		+	\| style="text-align:left;" \| Austria: there is a requirement to minimise impacts as far as possible for new plants and to achieve good status/potential, which means that morphological<br /> mitigation measures have to be implemented. Existing HPP with an impoundment are usually designated as heavily modified and the definition of GEP <br />includes morphological improvements.
		+	\|}
	Source: Kampa et al. (2017).5		Source: Kampa et al. (2017).5

@@ Line 66: / Line 66: @@
 ! Energy/<br />renewable energy
 ! Water <br />infrastructure
-! style="text-align:left;" | Name of laws <br />and dates
+! style="text-align:left;" | Name of laws and dates
 |- style="background-color:#dae8fc;"
-| rowspan="6" | NO
+| rowspan="6" style="font-weight:bold;" | NO
 | rowspan="6" | X
 | rowspan="6" | X
@@ Line 87: / Line 87: @@
 | style="vertical-align:bottom; font-size:small; text-align:left;" | The Energy Act (1991)
 |-
-| rowspan="5" | SE
+| rowspan="5" style="font-weight:bold;" | SE
 | rowspan="5" | X
 | rowspan="5" style="vertical-align:bottom;" |
@@ Line 104: / Line 104: @@
 | style="vertical-align:bottom; font-size:small; text-align:left;" | Electricity Preparedness Act (1997)
 |- style="background-color:#dae8fc;"
-| rowspan="6" | DE
+| rowspan="6" style="font-weight:bold;" | DE
 | rowspan="6" | X
 | rowspan="6" | X
@@ Line 123: / Line 123: @@
 | style="font-size:small; text-align:left;" | Environmental Damage Act (2007)
 |-
-| rowspan="3" | AT
+| rowspan="3" style="font-weight:bold;" | AT
 | rowspan="3" | X
 | rowspan="3" style="vertical-align:bottom;" |
@@ Line 136: / Line 136: @@
 | style="font-size:small; text-align:left;" | Green Electricity Act (2012)
 |- style="background-color:#dae8fc;"
-| rowspan="6" | CH
+| rowspan="6" style="font-weight:bold;" | CH
 | rowspan="6" | X
 | rowspan="6" style="vertical-align:bottom;" |
@@ Line 155: / Line 155: @@
 | style="font-size:small; text-align:left;" | Federal Act on Hydraulic Engineering (1991)
 |-
-| rowspan="13" | FR
+| rowspan="13" style="font-weight:bold;" | FR
 | rowspan="13" | X
 | rowspan="13" | X
@@ Line 188: / Line 188: @@
 | style="font-size:small; text-align:left;" | Law n°2015-992 on the energy transition for green growth
 |- style="background-color:#dae8fc;"
-| rowspan="4" | ES
+| rowspan="4" style="font-weight:bold;" | ES
 | rowspan="4" | X
 | rowspan="4" | X
@@ Line 203: / Line 203: @@
 | style="vertical-align:bottom; font-size:small; text-align:left;" | Electric Sector Act (2013)
 |-
-| rowspan="6" | PT
+| rowspan="6" style="font-weight:bold;" | PT
 | rowspan="6" | X
 | rowspan="6" | X