floating pv candidate site report

Floating PV Candidate Site Report

Joydia Baor, Bangladesh

Asian Development Bank

September 2020 Rev03


September 2020 │ Rev03

Contents

Glossary ............................................................................................................................................ 6

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 8

1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 13

1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 13

1.2 Initial site selection and scope of the study ..................................................................... 14

1.3 FPV technology overview ................................................................................................ 14

2 Site Characteristics ................................................................................................................. 22

2.1 Joydia Baor ...................................................................................................................... 22

2.2 Ownership, management and current uses of the lake ................................................... 22

2.3 Ground conditions ............................................................................................................ 23

2.4 Climate ............................................................................................................................. 23

2.5 Site access and laydown area ......................................................................................... 23

2.6 Site assessment findings ................................................................................................. 25

2.7 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 37

3 Design Studies and Final Concept .......................................................................................... 38

3.1 FPV design considerations .............................................................................................. 38

3.1.1 Behaviour of the structure in relation to movement of the water .......................... 38

3.1.2 Design studies ....................................................................................................... 38

3.1.3 Ground investigations ........................................................................................... 39

3.2 FPV construction methodology ........................................................................................ 40

3.2.1 Detailed design ..................................................................................................... 40

3.2.2 Installation ............................................................................................................. 40

3.2.3 Testing and commissioning .................................................................................. 41

3.2.4 Operation and maintenance ................................................................................. 41

3.3 FPV Subproject layout and electrical configuration ......................................................... 42

3.3.1 Site constraints ...................................................................................................... 42

3.3.2 Final concept design ............................................................................................. 43

3.3.3 Auxiliary structures ................................................................................................ 49

4 Irradiation and Yield ................................................................................................................ 50

4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 50

4.2 Irradiation ......................................................................................................................... 50

4.2.1 Global and Diffuse Horizontal Irradiation .............................................................. 50

4.2.2 Global Inclined Irradiation ..................................................................................... 51

4.3 System Design ................................................................................................................. 52

4.3.1 Modelled system design and approach ................................................................ 52

4.3.2 String sizing ........................................................................................................... 53

4.4 Detailed Performance Ratio Calculations ........................................................................ 53

4.4.1 PR Calculations..................................................................................................... 53

4.4.2 Availability assumptions ........................................................................................ 55

4.4.3 Yield estimations ................................................................................................... 55



4.5 Uncertainty Analysis ........................................................................................................ 55

4.5.1 Long-term irradiation variability ............................................................................. 55

4.5.2 Irradiation uncertainty over multiple years ............................................................ 56

4.5.3 Uncertainty in yield modelling assumptions .......................................................... 56

4.5.4 Combined uncertainties ........................................................................................ 56

4.5.5 Probabilities of exceeding estimation ................................................................... 57

4.5.6 Yield probability calculation approach .................................................................. 57

5 Grid Assessment ..................................................................................................................... 58

5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 58

5.2 Option 1............................................................................................................................ 60

5.2.1 Substation site ....................................................................................................... 61

5.2.2 Security of supply .................................................................................................. 61

5.2.3 Physical connection .............................................................................................. 61

5.2.4 Cost ....................................................................................................................... 62

5.3 Option 2............................................................................................................................ 64

5.3.1 Substation site ....................................................................................................... 64

5.3.2 Security of supply .................................................................................................. 65

5.3.3 Physical connection .............................................................................................. 65

5.3.4 Cost ....................................................................................................................... 66

5.4 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 67

6 Social Impact Assessment ...................................................................................................... 68

6.1 Background and general socio-economic profile ............................................................ 68

6.2 Impact .............................................................................................................................. 73

6.3 Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement (permanent) ........................................... 73

6.4 Impacts due to grid connection / evacuation lines (temporary) ....................................... 74

6.5 Indigenous Peoples ......................................................................................................... 75

6.6 Impact on fishing and livelihood ...................................................................................... 75

6.7 Social, poverty and gender .............................................................................................. 76

6.8 Other impacts ................................................................................................................... 77

6.9 Public consultations and findings .................................................................................... 77

6.10 Conclusion and recommendations .................................................................................. 81

7 Environmental Assessment..................................................................................................... 84

7.1 General ............................................................................................................................ 84

7.2 Potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures ............................................. 85

7.2.1 Potential land loss ................................................................................................. 85

7.2.2 Impacts on Indigenous People ............................................................................. 86

7.2.3 Potential loss of livelihood, food and ecosystem services ................................... 86

7.2.4 Site clearance and site preparation ...................................................................... 88

7.2.5 Impact to local roads and traffic ............................................................................ 88

7.2.6 Navigation and transportation at lakeside and on the water ................................ 89

7.2.7 Air quality and noise quality .................................................................................. 89

7.2.8 Changes to water quality at the Baor.................................................................... 90

7.2.9 Construction waste and hazardous waste generation .......................................... 93

7.2.10 Land use and land value ....................................................................................... 93

7.2.11 Habitat and aquatic life impacts ............................................................................ 94



7.2.12 Impacts on protected and internationally recognised areas ................................. 95

7.2.13 Social impacts associated with construction ........................................................ 96

7.2.14 Employment opportunities and income generation .............................................. 96

7.2.15 Industrial and economic development .................................................................. 96

7.2.16 Human safety ........................................................................................................ 96

7.2.17 Climate change impacts ........................................................................................ 97

7.2.18 Objects of cultural or achaeological importance ................................................... 98

7.2.19 Visual intrusion and reflection issues.................................................................... 98

7.2.20 Subproject decommissioning ................................................................................ 99

7.3 Conclusions and recommendations ................................................................................ 99

8 Financial Analysis.................................................................................................................. 102

8.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 102

8.2 Methodology and major assumptions ............................................................................ 102

8.2.1 Subproject cost estimate ..................................................................................... 102

8.3 Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) .................................................................. 104

8.4 Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR) ....................................................................... 105

8.4.1 Sensitivity analysis .............................................................................................. 106

8.5 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 106

9 Economic Assessment .......................................................................................................... 107

9.1 Power sector and renewable energy development ....................................................... 107

9.1.1 Renewable energy policy target ......................................................................... 107

9.1.2 Macroeconomic background ............................................................................... 107

9.1.3 Electricity demand ............................................................................................... 108

9.1.4 Electricity supply ................................................................................................. 109

9.1.5 Fuel mix ............................................................................................................... 109

9.1.6 Potential role of floating PV................................................................................. 110

9.2 Economic evaluation of the proposed Subproject ......................................................... 111

9.2.1 Background ......................................................................................................... 111

9.2.2 Subproject costs.................................................................................................. 111

9.2.3 Subproject benefits ............................................................................................. 113

9.2.4 Economic feasibility ............................................................................................ 114

9.2.5 Sensitivity and risk analysis ................................................................................ 119

9.2.6 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 120

10 Climate Hazard Risk Assessment for Joydia Baor ............................................................... 121

10.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 121

10.2 Biophysical context ........................................................................................................ 121

10.3 Current climate ............................................................................................................... 121

10.4 Observed and projected climate change ....................................................................... 123

10.5 Assessed climate change risks for Joydia ..................................................................... 124

10.6 Potential climate proofing measures ............................................................................. 129

Appendices

A. Subproject Configuration and Layout

B. Irradiation Database Information



C. Irradiation Methodology

D. System Design

E. PR losses

F. Uncertainty in Yield Modelling Assumptions

G. Grid Impact Study

H. Breakdown of Subproject Cost Estimates

I. Report of Local Livelihoods and Activities of Joydia Baor

J. Project Spill Response Plan

K. Constrcution and Operation Waste and Hazardous Waste Management Plan


September 2020 │ Rev03 6

Glossary

Acronym Meaning

AC Alternating Current

ADB Asian Development Bank

BDT Bangladeshi Taka

BFDC Bangladesh Fisheries Development Corporation

BERC Bangladesh Energy Regulatory Commission

BPDB Bangladesh Power Development Board

BRTA Bangladesh Road Transport Authority

BREB Bangladesh Rural Electrification Board

CRVA Climate Risk and Vulnerability Analysis

DC Direct Current

DFO Divisional Forest Officer

DHI Diffused Horizontal Irradiation

EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return

EPC Engineering, Procurement and Construction

EYA Energy Yield Assessment

FIRR Financial Internal Rate of Return

FPV Floating Photovoltaic

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GIS Geographic Information System

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GHI Global Horizontal Irradiation

GM Ground-Mounted

GOB Government of Bangladesh

HDPE High-Density Poly-Ethylene

HV High Voltage

IP Indigenous Peoples

IPP Independent Power Producers

LV Low Voltage

MPEMR Ministry of Power, Energy and Mineral Resources

MV Medium Voltage

MVPS Medium Voltage Power Station

NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

O&M Operation and Maintenance



Acronym Meaning

PBS Palli Bidyut Samiti (rural electricity co-operative)

PGCB Power Grid Company of Bangladesh Limited.

PoC Point of Connection

PR Performance Rati

RINA RINA Tech UK Ltd

RMSE Root Mean Squared Error

SCF Standard Conversion Factor

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

SERF Shadow Exchange Rate Factor

SIA Social Impact Assessment

SMP Social Management Plan

SPS Safeguard Policy Statement

SREDA Sustainable Renewable Energy Development Authority

STATCOM Static Compensator

SWRF Shadow Wage Rate Factor

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNO Upazila Nirbahi Officer (sub-district officer of Bangladesh Administrative

Service)

USD United States Dollar

WACC Weighted Average Cost of Capital

WMO World Meteorological Organisation

WTP Willingness To Pay



Executive Summary

Bangladesh aims to increase its installed renewable energy capacity significantly over the next 20

years, with solar and wind technologies to be the key focus areas for future capacity addition. Due

to the increasingly high demands placed on land, e.g. for agricultural and forestry purposes, the

Government of Bangladesh has initiated a programme of development for floating photovoltaic

(‘FPV’) technology; this is expected to involve a combination of public and private development.

This Feasibility Study Report presents an assessment of Joydia Baor (the ‘Subproject’), in which

the main criteria affecting the future deployment of floating PV have been assessed with respect to

the constraints of the water body.

Site characteristics

Joydia Baor is an oxbow lake located in Jhenaidah District, within the Khulna Division of

Bangladesh. The activities carried out at the Baor include fishing (commercial and recreational),

jute retting, cropland irrigation, washing and bathing, cooking and duck farming. There is a regular

boat service route connecting the communities on the east and west banks of the Baor.

In general, water bodies in Bangladesh are owned by the Ministry of Land and leased by other

agencies and organisations to meet different needs. Joydia Baor is leased and managed by the

Department of Fisheries. The community members of the Baor include 184 fishermen. These

people are responsible for guarding the Baor to prevent poaching and also to catch fish during the

harvesting season. Other local fishermen have licenses to catch small fish with local handmade

traps and specific nets to earn their livelihood. The community members get 40% share of the total

harvest and 35% goes to Department of Fisheries. The remaining 25% belongs to local District

Commissioner Office as an annual lease fee.

Access to the lake is unsuitable for large vehicles due to a number of sharp turns and narrow

culverts; however, small trucks may be used to gain access to the site. It is recommended that

materials are stored at Jessore PBS Warehouse and transported to site with small trucks/vans.

The soil surrounding Joydia Baor is clay loam. The ground in the vicinity of the Baor is

predominantly flat, with a slope towards the water body. We recommend that further geophysical

and geotechnical analysis of the lakebed where the floating platforms, inverter stations and anchors

are to be located should be conducted as part of the development phase. This is because, although

the overall geological structure of the lake has been considered in this study, the detail of specific

areas of the lakebed should be fully investigated prior to installation works.

Concept design

The conceptual design presented in this report features six similar FPV DC platforms. Preferably,

platform design should aim for simple shapes (regular squares or rectangles) bearing in mind the

prevailing wind direction to account for wind loads. In this case, a longer east-west axis would

enable increased mooring points to counter the effects of wind considering the south and southeast

prevailing winds of the region. Although the waterbody offers an open surface onto which to locate

regular-shaped platforms, the presence of the aforementioned numerous komors conditions the

available space. This represents the main constraint accounted for in terms of design.



On the LV DC-side, the FPV array has a total capacity of 9,072.0 kWp, which consists of 22,680 x

400 Wp modules distributed in 840 strings of 27 modules across the six platforms. The system

features three AC floating skid medium voltage power stations (MVPS) platforms totalling a

cumulative AC capacity of 7,500 kVA (at 50°C). Each of these MVPS platforms collects 3,024 kWp

of module DC cumulative power.

The platforms cover large areas and have been located to minimise disruption on navigation and

fishing within the lake. Particularly, platform locations have been envisaged to minimise the

disruption on the ‘inner’ half section of the Baor, where fishing activity has greater presence.

The module row distance and tilt angle are specified in accordance with typical FPV technology

designs from a leading supplier. It is noted that the tilt angle of FPV systems are lower than normally

seen on ground-mount arrays; this design was developed to reduce wind loading on the platforms.

Energy yield

An Energy Yield Assessment (EYA) was carried out to determine the expected energy yield of the

proposed plant. The analysis was based on the indicative design information developed by RINA

for the concept design and irradiation data from satellite and ground station databases.

Global Horizontal Irradiation (GHI) was assessed from a number of sources before a value of 1,752

kWh/m2/yr was selected. This value was then uplifted to be appropriate for module arrays facing

south (azimuth: 0°) and inclined at 11° to horizontal. On the basis of the system design assumptions

detailed in this report, a Performance Ratio (PR) has been calculated using industry standard

PVsyst software and RINA proprietary models.

Calculations have been performed using hourly irradiance and ambient temperature values

generated for the site. Shading has been estimated using a 3D model constructed in PVsyst (v6.75)

and based on the detailed module layout, findings during the site visit and online mapping images.

Resulting first year energy yield predictions are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Year one energy yield summary

PR Installed

capacity (kWp)

Probability of

exceedance

Specific yield

(kWh / kWp)

1st year

production

(kWh)

81.4% 9,072.00

P50 1,495 13,563,495

P75 1,445 13,110,536

P90 1,400 12,702,858

The P50 specific yield already contains an assumption of 0.2% for the first-year degradation. When

used to calculate output in subsequent years, a linear degradation of 0.4% should be applied.

This energy yield study assumes 100% availability of the plant. Final achieved availability will

depend on technical characteristics of the Subproject and the contractual guarantees, however a

value of 100% is unlikely to be achievable. It is noted that the FIRR and EIRR analysis has

considered availability separately to the energy yield figure.



Grid impact

The grid impact study analyses the impact on the Bangladeshi network as a result of the connection

of a 9.1 MWp FPV plant at Joydia Baor.

There are two possible options to connect the Joydia FPV plant to the Bangladeshi grid network:

1. Connect to the 33 kV bus of the Moheshpur-2 33/11 kV substation; and

2. Connect to the 33 kV bus of the Kotchandpur substation.

From the practical perspective the best option is connecting to the 33 kV substation at the

Kotchandpur substation as this is nearest to the site and will be the most economic option. This

requires construction of 9.33 km of overhead line (OHL) from the onshore station to the

Kotchandpur substation. The proposed route of the 33 kV OHL line will run along the public highway

thus negating the complications associated with the routing through private land.

The grid impact analysis has therefore been conducted for the preferred connection option of

connecting at the Kotchandpur substation 33 kV substation.

Social impact assessment

The Subproject will have some negative impacts in terms of loss of income and livelihood due to

restriction of water use for fishing. However, some local employment will be generated temporarily

during construction. Based on the assessment and also suggestions from the local people, various

conclusions, suggestions and recommendations are provided. A summary is provided below and

the social management plan for mitigation measures is provided in Section 6.10 of the main report.

The Subproject planning shall avoid fishing areas and use only the water body areas where

there are no fishing activities;

The Subproject shall not take more than 10% of the surface area. If possible, dredging options

shall be explored if no adverse environment impacts. However, dredging seems to be

unlikely; and

People expect some direct benefits from the Subproject. This requires adequate mitigation

measures for uninterrupted fishing activities and any loss in the future shall be compensated

and mitigated by the Subproject.

Environmental impact assessment

There are various impacts associated with the Subproject during construction and operations,

including impacts to land, roads, water quality, wildlife (birds and fish), fishing activity and livelihood,

navigation and recreational activities.

Most environmental impacts identified can be reduced to acceptable levels with the implementation

of various avoidance and mitigation measures proposed in the IEE and EMP along with those

measures recommended in the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Social

Management Plan (SMP).

It is recommended that the Subproject should be categorised as B for ADB environmental

assessment purpose.



The major potential impact from the Subproject will be to fishing activity and the potential lost

revenues, livelihood and food source. It is important that the Executing Agency for the Subproject

work with the Lands Department, the Department of Fisheries and the Baor fishing community to

implement the SMP measures. All stakeholders need to come to agreement on future leasing

arrangements for joint use of the water resource to allow for fishing activity to continue and for the

Subproject to be developed.

Financial analysis

The financial evaluation of the proposed investments was carried out in accordance with the Asian

Development Bank (ADB) Financial Management and Analysis of Subprojects. Cost streams used

to determine the financial internal rate of return (FIRR) include capital costs (excluding price

contingencies), operation and maintenance (O&M) costs, and taxes and duties. The weighted

average cost of capital (WACC) was calculated and compared with the FIRR to ascertain financial

viability.

WACC as calculated in real terms is 0.8%, considering loans from external financing to be extended

to the government, which will be on-lent to the implementing agency. On-lending from these

external sources will be in foreign currency (US$) for a period of 20 years with a 5-year grace

period. Government on-lending margins and lending rates have been modelled in accordance with

the GOB regulation.

For the purpose of financial analysis, the rate for ground mounted solar PV projects of 12.00

BDT/kWh has been considered. The applicability of this tariff to an FPV project may need to be

confirmed in regulation, however as an FPV project might be expected to have a higher cost than

a ground mounted PV project, the rate is not considered unreasonable at this stage. The FIRR has

been calculated at 8.1%.

The FIRR is expected to comfortably exceed the WACC for the Joydia Subproject. Sensitivity and

risk analysis indicate that the FIRR are robust under most conditions. As such, each investment

Subproject is concluded to be financially viable.

Economic assessment

The economic evaluation of the proposed investment was carried out in accordance with ADB’s

guidelines on Power Sector Project Appraisal. The background costing study presented three

financial price scenarios for the Subproject. This study is considered the base cost case in the

analysis. Under the base case, the total Subproject cost (direct and indirect costs) would amount

to US$ 11.85 million. All Subproject costs were expressed in terms of economic prices. Investment

and O&M costs in financial prices were adjusted to reflect the economic resource cost of Subproject

inputs in terms of domestic price numeraire.

The economic assessment shows that the economic performance of the Subproject can be

considered as robust, considering that the EIRR of 9.31% is above the benchmark rate of 9% used

in the study. A sensitivity analysis was carried out showing that even with a relatively high increase

in key investment parameters, the proposed Subproject would remain economically viable. From

an economic standpoint, the Subproject is considered beneficial to the economy and should be

financially supported.



Climate hazard assessment

The Joydia Subproject is located on the Ganges floodplain in Jhenaidah District, which is already

affected by a range of climate-induces hazard risks, including strong winds and cyclonic events,

variations in temperature and rainfall, and flooding and sedimentation.

The main risks for Joydia Baor are based on the preliminary site visit, and as assessed under the

CRVA for the Subproject, are those arising from an increase in extreme rainfall events and

cyclones, and include flooding, erosion and sedimentation.

It is expected that these hazards will be exacerbated by changes in the climate and the intensity of

climatic disasters like tropical cyclones, droughts and floods into the future and these need to be

fully taken into account during the detailed design phase of the Subproject, especially in relation to

the sensitivity of FVP infrastructure to: increasing temperatures extremes and hot days; increasing

intensity of rainfall and associated fluctuations in water levels; increased frequency and intensity of

flood events and associated sedimentation; and increasing intensity of wind velocity and cyclone

weather conditions.

Based on the review of literature and best practice undertaken for the CRVA, we further identified

a limited range of hazard risk mitigation measures for climate proofing infrastructure proposed

under this Subproject, including the following:

It is recommended that the effects of changing flood levels and behaviour due to climate change

be taken into account and accommodated in the Subproject design process through application

of appropriate international standards and guidelines;

FVP infrastructure to be located in low risk areas to minimise system vulnerabilities to possible

climate impacts and threats from string winds, currents and debris associated with floods;

Identify and select suitable materials for construction of infrastructure assets and structures to

minimise damage and/or deterioration of FVP infrastructure cyclonic winds and other related

climate change impacts.



1 Introduction

1.1 Background

Bangladesh is one of the fastest growing economies in South Asia. Over the past decade, it has

been growing at an annual rate of around 6%1. The Government of Bangladesh aims to achieve

the status of a ‘middle-income country’ by 2021 and that of a ‘high-income country’ by 2041.

Electricity plays a vital role in poverty eradication, sustained economic growth, infrastructure

development and security of a country. For this reason, Bangladesh intends to address the barriers

to higher growth posed by low access to reliable and affordable power; limited availability of

serviced land; rapid urbanisation; vulnerability to climate change and natural disasters, to achieve

its socioeconomic growth targets.

The performance of Bangladesh’s power sector in the last five years has been impressive due to

the progressive efforts of policymakers, support from development partners, and effective project

implementation by public and private developers. The growth in terms of capacity addition in the

last 10 years has been remarkable, from around 4.5 GW in 2007–08 to 17.8 GW in 20192 . Private

sector participation in generation accounts for about 60% of the total installed capacity.

In accordance with the recent Power System Master Plan, Bangladesh aims to add 2 GW

renewable energy projects to achieve a total installed capacity of 2,470 MW by 2021, and to

increase that to 3,864 MW by 2041. Solar and wind will be the key focus areas for future capacity

addition, accounting for c. 50% and 40% of the renewable installed capacity by 2021 respectively3.

Consideration for Floating Photovoltaic (FPV) systems has been prioritised due to the fact that

many surface water bodies located in developing regions have considerable solar resource.

Floating PV uses the surfaces of rivers, lakes and reservoirs by mounting PV modules on floating

structures. It was first deployed commercially in 2007 with a project in the Japanese prefecture of

Aichi. The surface area of existing water bodies such as reservoirs, lakes, and exposed water

storage/treatment basins could be used to accommodate FPV technology, giving added value to

the area. It also has the potential to improve water security in hotter climates by reducing water

losses due to evaporation. Furthermore, research undertaken by the Malardalen University in

Sweden indicates that FPV may improve module energy yield due to the cooling effect of the water

body4. This report presents an FPV Feasibility Study for Joydia Baor (the ‘Subproject’), which is

located in the Jhenaidah District in Bangladesh.

FPV is an effective way of scaling up solar generating capacity, especially in countries with high

population density and competing uses for available land. It is noted that there are significant

pressures on land availability in Bangladesh due to the high density of people in the country

combined with a growing population. Considering the high percentage of land usage for essential

1 World Bank national data and OECD national Accounts Data files (2017).

2 Overall public and private generating capacity accounted in June 2019. The figure does not include imported

capacity from India (approximately 1,160 MW) and captive generation (approximately 2,800 MW).

3 Power System Master Plan, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (2016).

4 Optimization of Floating PV Systems: Case Study for a shrimp farm in Thailand, L. Wasthage, Malardalen

University, Sweden (2017)



activities such as agriculture and the availability of large water bodies in certain regions, solutions

supporting the development of PV solar projects on water are considered more appropriate.

1.2 Initial site selection and scope of the study

In order to select appropriate water bodies for potential installation of FPV plants, an initial study

was undertaken to identify all large water bodies, reservoirs and lakes which could be considered

suitable options. This initial investigation used satellite imagery5 to survey permanent areas of

surface water across the whole of Bangladesh. Certain types of water bodies were rejected due to

reasons of ecological sensitivity, seasonality and technical difficulties in implementation (e.g.

wetlands). As a result of this assessment, several key areas of Bangladesh were selected and a

number of candidate sites identified for further investigation.

The scope of this report is to provide a feasibility assessment of the potential for the installation of

a floating PV (‘FPV’) plant at one of the candidate sites, Joydia Baor (the ‘Subproject’), located in

Jhenaidah region. Additionally, an assessment of available grid infrastructure as well as any

necessary reinforcement works is provided. This report deliverable covers the following topics:

Site assessment;

Concept design;

Yield and irradiation analysis;

Grid impact assessment;

Social impact assessment;

Environment impact assessment;

Financial analysis of the Subproject;

Economic assessment; and

Climate change vulnerability assessment.

This FPV Feasibility Report presents the results of these assessments for the Subproject.

1.3 FPV technology overview

The basic configuration of an FPV system comprises a floating platform to retain the PV modules,

combiner boxes and cables, rather than typical ground or roof mounting steel structure. The floating

platform is held in place on the lakebed or shores with mooring lines connected to anchors. The

system feeds into inverter stations, from which point the FPV system does not differ from a ground

mount system.

Figure 1 below is indicative of typical FPV plants. It is noted that this report does not cover less

commonly used innovative technologies, e.g. floating concentrated PV and partially submerged

thin film arrays.

5 https://global-surface-water.appspot.com/map



Figure 1: Typical FPV schematic

Source: Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore (SERIS)

In electrical terms, FPV systems are identical to traditional ground-mounted (‘GM’) PV systems.

That is to say, DC electricity is generated by PV modules and fed into inverters which convert the

energy generated into useable AC electricity. This is then either directly consumed at the point of

connection or fed into a distribution or transmission network to be consumed remotely.

The single greatest difference lies in how the PV modules are mounted or placed. In the case of

GMPV systems, the mounting of panels is based on a rigid structure with a firm foundation. Static

and dynamic loads are readily calculated according to established engineering methods and the

geometry of the module arrangements is relatively easy to control.

By contrast, in FPV systems the dynamic nature of the water surface, along with the various forces

acting on the modules (wind drag, tethering cables, wave motion etc.), require more novel structural

designs that are able to withstand significant movement, and wear and tear. In addition, control of

the module geometry and implementation of tracking is particularly challenging to achieve.

A further significant difference is in the physical construction and design of electrical equipment,

such as inverters and cabling, which have to be marine rated for FPV systems. This typically

requires IP ratings and corrosion resistant materials that are usually not necessary for standard

GMPV systems.

With regards to the stakeholder structure, the major difference to GMPV is frequently the presence

of more competitive uses for water reservoir, in comparison to the land used for standard PV plants.

More stakeholders may need to be managed and also changes in future use cases need to be

considered when implementing an asset of 25-year lifetime on reservoirs that may require de-silting

from time to time or that may be used for recreational or fishing purposes.



A comprehensive comparison of FPV systems versus GMPV systems is presented in Table 2

below. This includes characteristics already discussed, such as FPV resolving land scarcity issues,

and additional characteristics such as the relative safety of the two different systems.



Table 2: Comparison of GMPV and FPV systems characteristics

Characteristic FPV GMPV

Advantages Disadvantages Advantages Disadvantages

Land/water

surface use

Does not compete for land

with agricultural, industrial, or

residential projects.

More appropriate solution in

densely populated areas.

Since water bodies often

have a single owner, the

permitting process is often

less complicated.

Expected lower leasing cost

Potential integration with

aquaculture.

May save water resources by

reducing water evaporation.

Competes with fishery, boat

and recreational activities.

Potential ecological impact on

water bodies.

No impact on potentially

sensitive water bodies.

Potential integration for certain

farming activities (e.g.

grazing).

Suitable/affordable land may

be far away from load centres,

thus requiring costly

transmission infrastructure.

Requires land usable for

commercial/industrial

installations.

Competes for land with city

dwellings, industrial

development, and agriculture.

Plant design Modular design on flat

surface.

Anchoring cables require

periodic inspection and

maintenance of at least every

5 years.

Design must consider changes

in water level over season and

over plant lifetime and

subsurface terrain elevations.

Design should intent to never

have the reservoir area below

the FPV plant dry out

Easier to implement tracking.

Yield prediction is better

established.

Design must accommodate

terrain and area constraints.




(minimum water depth

requirement) and to not

exceed current maximum

water level depths of 90m.

Design must consider

humidity, wet conditions

through wave height and

occurrence and flooding

(storm).

Limited tilt due to wind load

considerations imply a lower

energy yield in high-latitude

regions.

Performance/

energy yield

Lower module temperatures

(effect is dependent on

climate).

Nearly no shading.

Lower soiling from dust from

within the Subproject site.

Overall 5–10 percent higher

initial performance ratio

(climate specific) determined

by experiments performed by

SERIS considering the

cooling effect of water

evaporated, wind speeds,

Long-term degradation (e.g.,

potential induced degradation)

is still uncertain.

Can benefit from tracking,

bifacial, and optimum tilt angle.

Increased temperature losses

in hot climates.




and reduction of inter-row

shading and dust.6

Installation and

deployment

In general, easy assembly,

but highly variable depending

on location and workforce

availability.

Transportation of floats to site

is difficult; favours local

production.

Needs suitable launching area.

Needs underwater anchoring

of the floating structures.

In general, easy assembly, but

highly variable depending on

location and workforce

availability.

Needs heavy equipment and

land preparation.

Depends on soil quality.

Power system

Synergy with existing

electrical infrastructure.

Possible hybrid operation

with hydropower.

Intermittent power generation. Synergy with existing electrical

infrastructure.

Intermittent power generation.

Environmental Potential to reduce algae

growth.

Potential to reduce water

evaporation.

Potential destructive impact on

aquatic ecosystems, birds and

other animal habitats (anchors

penetrating ground, FPV

blocking sunlight penetrating

into water body, cooling water

body, among others).

Long-term effects on water

quality are not well

established.

Generally low impact, only

some adverse impacts during

construction.

Potential habitat loss or

fragmentation.

Potential detrimental impact on

ecosystems, birds and other

animal habitats.

6 World Bank Group, ESMAP and SERIS. 2019. Where Sun Meets Water: Floating Solar Market Report. Washington, DC: World Bank.




Investment Cost of floats may drop as

scale of deployment

increases.

Slightly higher costs on

average due to floats,

anchoring, mooring, and plant

design.

Higher perceived risk due to

lower level of maturity,

resulting in typically higher

interest rates for loans and

lower availability of project

finance options and

commercial lenders. Balance

sheet finance is still commonly

applied for FPV projects to

mitigate this early technology

risk.

Huge installed capacity and

hence very established

investment and financing

sector.

Costs continue to drop.

Operation and

maintenance

Easy access to water for

cleaning.

Lower risk of theft/vandalism.

Harder to access and replace

parts.

Biofouling.

Animal visits and bird

droppings.

Harder to maintain anchoring.

Can be affected by aquatic

growth in some regions.

Easy to access.

Easier to deploy cleaning

routines.

Generally more affected by

vegetation growth.

Safety Less affected by risks of

burning vegetation in dry

season.

Close to water, tend to have

lower insulation resistance to

ground.

Generally safe. More affected by risks of

burning vegetation in dry

season.




Constant movement poses

challenge for equipment

grounding.

Risk of personnel falling into

water.

Safety easier to manage as

the plant can be easily fenced

off.

Regulation and

Permits

More difficult for natural lakes

and easier for artificial ponds.

Lack of specific regulations

and potentially additional

complexity due to new players

such as reservoir owner and

/or management agency.

Well established permitting

process.

Clear regulations.

Experience/

level of maturity

Cumulative capacity as of end

of 2019: >1.3 GWp.

Only 4 years of experience

with large-scale projects.

Cumulative capacity as of end

of 2019: >500 GWp.

Thousands of projects built

10–30 years of experience.



2 Site Characteristics

2.1 Joydia Baor

Joydia Baor is an oxbow lake located in the Jhenaidah District, within the Khulna Division of

Bangladesh. The lake, pictured in Figure 2, has a crescent shape and is approximately 6 km long

with a width of 250-400 m.

Figure 2: Joydia Baor

The Baor is widely used for washing and bathing by many in the wider lakeside community; people

also use the water for cooking and washing their clothes. There is a regular boat service route

connecting the communities on the east and west banks of the Baor.

2.2 Ownership, management and current uses of the lake

The Department of Fisheries is responsible for the entire management of the Baor. The Baor is

owned by the Ministry of Land. The Department of Fisheries took lease of the Baor from the local

District Commissioner. Fish stocking is the sole responsibility of the Department of Fisheries. The

community members of the Baor include 184 fishermen. These people are responsible for guarding

the Baor to prevent poaching and also to catch fish during the harvesting season. Other local

fishermen have licenses to catch small fish with local handmade traps and specific nets to earn



their livelihood. The community members get 40% share of the total harvest and 35% goes to

Department of Fisheries. The remaining 25% belongs to local District Commissioner Office as an

annual lease fee.

In addition to fishing, the Joydia Baor is used for:

Irrigation of adjacent croplands;

Jute retting;

Washing and bathing;

Cooking; and

Duck farming.

Further details regarding activities and management of the Baor are provided in the survey report

included in Appendix I.

2.3 Ground conditions

The soil surrounding Joydia Baor is clay loam. The ground in the vicinity of the Baor is

predominantly flat, with a slope towards the water body. There are relatively few publicly available

data on the physical environment. It is recommended that the lake’s morphometric and

hydrographic features are fully investigated prior to the finalisation of the design. Responsibility for

these investigations should rest with the EPC contractor.

Furthermore, it is expected that a geotechnical investigation would be performed by the EPC

contractor prior to designing the final layout and anchoring of the PV plant. The ground

investigations required and allocation of responsible parties to conduct them are fully described in

Section 3.1.3.

2.4 Climate

Joydia Baor lies in the path of heavily moisture-laden monsoon winds. The rainy season extends

from June through November and about 80% of the annual rainfall is concentrated in this season.

Humidity is 35-45% between November and March and it increases to approximately 80% during

the rainy season (June to October). We recommend that final design adheres to international

design requirements, for which the EPC contractor is expected to assume responsibility. Based on

data available from the Global Wind Atlas, it is noted that the lakes experiences average speeds

of approximately 3.03 m/s at a height of 10 m.

2.5 Site access and laydown area

Site visits were undertaken to Joydia Baor area between the 20th and 23rd of November 2019 by

the team of Consultants.

Access to the Baor is gained via a brick flat soling road which is connected to a paved regional

road. The brick flat soling road is approximately 10 feet wide, which is considered to be suitable for

small trucks. The limited road width and turn means that it is not suitable for large trucks. An access

way to carry equipment from road to the assembly point would need to be created by shaping the

land and correcting the slope.



We have identified a large, empty and generally flat area adjacent to the lake, which we would

consider suitable as a storage area. It is recommended that the assembly area is located closer to

the lake.

The area surrounding the lake is largely flat. However, it is noted that many of the banks of the lake

are sloped and as such would require a pulley system to lower the floating platform onto the Baor’s

surface. Nevertheless, this is not expected to pose a material risk to the construction of the plant.

Figure 3 below shows the potential storage and assembly areas.

Figure 3: Proposed storage and assembly areas

Potential

Assembly

Point Potential

Storage

Area



2.6 Site assessment findings

Table 3 below provides an overview of the most notable features based on the obtained evidence.

Each of the broad criteria, together with any sub-criteria and their associated conditions of

acceptability are presented in general, with a specific assessment for Joydia Baor given in the right-

hand columns.



Table 3: Joydia Baor site visit assessment details

Criterion Sub-criterion Description Comment Evidence

Topography Suitability of

terrain for

assembly.

Assessment of site

accessibility for:

1. construction /

assembly phase

and

2. O&M.

Ideally a flat area

is required for

assembly of the

floats and

modules.

The proposed assembly

area is on the north western

bank of the Baor.

The soil is clay loam type.

Semi-flat with a slope

towards the water body.




Available area

at the proposed

assembly

location.

Is area available

and suitable for

assembly of

floating platforms?

The proposed assembly

area is approximately

1,400 m2 (based on Google

Maps imagery) which is

adequate for assembling.

Landfilling is required in

some places and levelling is

required all through for a

flat surface.

Suitability of

location for

storing

equipment (site

building) during

assembly and

operation

phase.

- The road adjacent to the

proposed assembly point is

approx. 10 feet wide. It is a

brick soling road that is

connected to a paved

regional road.

Material shifting from

central warehouse/storage

is possible for small trucks,

but not for large trucks due

to the limited road width

and turn.

An access way to carry

equipment from road to the

assembly point needs to be

created by shaping the land

and correcting the slope.




Obstructions on

site.

As above.

Specifically, with

regards to floating

system assembly

area and O&M

buildings.

A few trees may require

cutting down on the

roadside for access of

equipment to the area.

Geology Suitability of

soil/subsoil.

Assessment of

sedimentation,

geology of

potential

anchoring points,

evidence of

eutrophication.

The soil is clay loam type.

The anchoring needs to be

arranged on the Baor bed

with proper civil works.

There is no evidence of

eutrophication observed.




Any suitable

banks for

anchoring?

Used to inform

assessment

anchoring design

options. Bank

anchoring is

typically the most

cost-effective to

construction and

for O&M activities

The north shore of the Baor

adjacent to the pontoons

may be used for shore

anchoring. This will be

limited anchoring only to

one side; others needs to

be done on the waterbody

(Baor) bed.

N/A

Ask if de-silting

is planned for

these

reservoirs and

discuss

anchoring

obstruction.

Used to inform

assessment

anchoring design

options.

No Information received

from managing authority

(Dept. of Fisheries) but the

local community has

requested dredging.

N/A

Erosion. Used to inform

assessment

anchoring design

options. May

adversely affect

bank anchoring.

No consistent erosion has

been observed.

N/A

Seismic zone. Used to determine

the risk of

anchoring coming

The area falls within

Seismically Quiet Zone III.

Source: Bangladesh Disaster Knowledge Network.




loose and/or water

disturbance during

a seismic event.

Also required for

O&M building

design.

Hydrology What are the

min and max

water levels for

the reservoir?

The operating

water level range

affects the design

of the mooring

system and it

should be

considered at

detailed design

stage.

The water level of the Baor

varies between 1 to 10 m.

The proposed location for

pontoons has relatively

lower depth of up to 2 to

3 m.

N/A

Water level

measurements

available?

In order to verify

the minimum and

maximum levels

stated.

Not available. N/A

Are flow rate

measurements

available?

Necessary to

determine drag

loads on the floats,

and anchoring.

Not available. The water is

discharged through

controlled irrigation canal.

N/A

Wind speed

measurements

/ data

available?

Necessary to

determine wind

loads on the

panels, floats, and

anchoring.

1 – 2.4 m/s. Cyclone data is

unavailable.

Source: https://www.bamis.gov.bd/agro-

climate/normal/graph/windspeed

https://www.bamis.gov.bd/agro-climate/normal/graph/windspeed

https://www.bamis.gov.bd/agro-climate/normal/graph/windspeed




Cyclone

occurrence?

Frequency of

cyclones at the

lake.

Frequency not known. N/A

Max wind

speed of

cyclone?

- Not recorded, but being

adjacent to Jessore, it can

be assumed to be the same

as 110 km/hr recorded in

1988 at Jessore.

Source: https://met.baf.mil.bd/front/doc/climate/jesclimate.pdf

Evaporation

rate

measurements

/ data

available?

Useful in

determining the

anticipated water

saving due to

reduced

evaporation.

Not available.

N/A

What are the

max. wave

heights on site?

Necessary to

determine wave

loads on the floats

and anchoring.

No high wave experienced. N/A

Flooding risk. Used to inform

assessment

anchoring design

options.

There were instances of

flooding in 2000, 2005,

2008, and 2015.

Source: Current status and barriers to fisheries co-

management: evidences from an oxbow lake of Bangladesh,

Md. Monirul Islam, Chandan Kar, Goutam Kumar Kundu,

Gouri Mondal and Mohammad Shahneawz Khan

Actual

discharge

drainage

system.

Reservoirs should

have spill-over

points.

Water is discharged through

one sluice gate at southern

end and a canal (not

controlled) at northern end.

N/A

https://met.baf.mil.bd/front/doc/climate/jesclimate.pdf




Water quality. Necessary to

assess possible

corrosion of

equipment and to

verify against

equipment ratings.

It is used for fishing and

expected to be non-

corrosive.

N/A

Depth of

reservoirs,

bathymetry.

Used to inform

assessment

anchoring design

options.

Bathymetric survey

undertaken by the national

consultant team. Coarse

measurement data will

need to be verified for final

anchoring design.

N/A

Solar

Resource

Measurements

of Solar

resource and

Temperatures

(yearly

averages).

Useful for Energy

Yield Studies and

system design.

No ground measurements

locally available. Satellite

data is suitable for energy

yield modelling.

N/A

Far shading

(e.g. Hills,

buildings, trees,

etc.)

To inform Energy

Yield Studies and

system design.

Not likely. N/A

Near shading

(buildings,

trees, poles,

fences, large

boats).

To inform Energy

Yield Studies and

system design.

The floating system will be

set up some distance from

shore, which avoids near

shading obstructions.

N/A




Photographs

should be

taken, where

possible, of

west, south &

east to enable

a horizon line to

be mapped.

To inform Energy

Yield Studies and

system design.

- West:

South:




North:

Local road

networks

Road Access;

can large (40

foot) lorries get

to site?

Assessment of site

suitability for

construction and

O&M.

The connecting road is

herringbone brick at one

end and to the water body

end it is earth road with a

very narrow (approximately

10 feet wide) steep sloping

road. The access facility

needs to be developed.

The access road connects

the assembly area to the

regional asphalt paved road

which is approximately 15 -

20 feet wide. Access is not

possible for a trailer but

small trucks can move




easily. There are sharp

turns on the road. Materials

may be stored at Jessore

PBS Warehouse and

transported to site with

small trucks/vans.

Data network

access.

Assessment of site

connection to

BPDB

headquarters /

mobile phone

coverage etc.

Mobile phone coverage is

fair.

N/A

Construction

power and

water supply

and discharge.

Assessment of

power and water

requirements for

construction and

O&M.

Water is available from

lake. Power connection

may be extended from

0.4 kV line in close

proximity.

N/A

Impact of water

level changes

on access.

Assessment of site

for construction

and O&M (during

high water /

flooding).

During high flood the

assembly point may be

inundated.

N/A

Is site access

secured?

Site suitability for

construction and

O&M.

Not very secured inside the

Baor; the shore is

accessible to all. Need

N/A




security for storage and

construction materials.

Preference for

overhead or

underground

lines?

Used to assess

Subproject costs.

Overhead line to be

constructed.

N/A



2.7 Conclusions

The site is considered to be technically feasible for a floating solar application, although it is noted

that the water body is currently leased by the local fishing community and negotiations will need to

take place with the leaseholders in order for the Subproject to proceed at the Baor.

The access to the site is considered unsuitable for large vehicles. However, the plant equipment

could be ferried to the site in smaller trucks from a warehouse located in the nearby town of Jessore.

Various geophysical and geotechnical investigations should be conducted in the confirmed location

where the floating platforms, inverter stations and anchors are to be placed. This is because,

although the overall geological structure of the lake has been assessed, it is expected that the

lakebed may vary from one location to another.

The feasibility study has included some measurements and investigations of the lake depth, as well

as the collection of water level data. However, it is considered that more detailed bathymetric

studies will be required at the final confirmed location before the Subproject is tendered. These

investigations are described in more detail in Section 3.1.3.

It is recommended that a suitable construction methodology is developed to ensure equipment can

be safely installed when it is launched into the lake from the assembly area.



3 Design Studies and Final Concept

3.1 FPV design considerations

A number of key considerations apply to FPV installations that are not relevant to ground or roof

mounted projects. These considerations are outlined below. It should be noted that these

considerations are in addition to those which would typically apply to a solar farm and recommend

the responsibility for the fulfilment of these considerations are placed with the EPC contractor under

the EPC contract.

High-density polyethylene (‘HDPE’) float systems are widely considered as safe for use in potable

water applications. However, the safety of the plant for application on any water bodies used for

drinking water should be confirmed at the tender design stage in consultation with suppliers and

with reference to any relevant local laws and regulations.

Although not a specific technical risk the Consultant would also recommend advice is taken on

appropriate insurance in the event of major failure or a catastrophic event such as flooding or dam

failure.

3.1.1 Behaviour of the structure in relation to movement of the water

The final design of the floating platform at Joydia Baor must take into account the changes in water

level as well as the expected velocity of waves during the monsoon season. Furthermore, attention

should be paid to the location of the anchoring system as the monsoon season is likely to carry

debris that may damage the mooring lines or the floating platform itself.

3.1.2 Design studies

Given the specific challenges affecting design and implementation of FPV systems, a number of

studies are required prior to the finalisation of the plant’s structural and electrical layouts, as

detailed in the following sections. It is noted that the nascent FPV industry is yet to standardise

testing and certification for the partially understood elements of FPV plants. These partially

understood elements include the following:

Selection and location of floating platform, considering construction, O&M and safety.

Selection and location of anchoring and mooring solution, considering construction, O&M and

safety.

The Consultant suggests that the floating element selection process is led by the developer. A

number of site studies should be prepared to be provided to tenderers, and tenderers should

produce Subproject specific design studies and installation and O&M strategies, focussing on

demonstrating how their technologies meet characteristics of the site and will be buildable and

operable over the Subproject lifetime. The Consultant suggests the following studies are performed

prior to tendering, but would suggest supply chain engagement to define whether any additional

studies would be valuable to tenderers to allow them to reduce costs or risks associated with

technology deployment:

Geotechnical study (discussed further below)

Identification of design wind, wave and water flow conditions and potentially other water quality

tests to identify any corrosion, microbial corrosion, or other risks represented by the water body.



It should be noted that the minimum and maximum wind resistance requirements for a floating

platform will be determined by a number of factors including inclination, final size of platform

and whether a rigid or flexible platform is chosen.

The choice of electrical layout fundamentally surrounds inverter positioning. The Consultant would

typically recommend inverters are placed onshore, to reduce cost and risk. In this feasibility report,

the Consultant has preliminarily placed the inverter and transformer stations (medium voltage

power stations or MVPS henceforth) on floating platforms near the PV arrays due to uncertainties

pertaining to the access of the surrounding land, which is privately owned and used for agricultural

activities. However, given the regular shape of the waterbody and the proximity to the banks, the

Consultant recommends that the option of locating the MVPS platforms onshore is explored

through appropriate community engagement and satisfactory compensatory measures to drive

down MVPS-related construction and operational costs.

The manufacturer confirmed that the SMA MVPS-2500 inverter station can be fitted with an oil

bund underneath the transformer to contain any leakages and avoid spillage into the water. While

dry type and cast resin transformers are commonly used in FPV applications, they are very

susceptible to weather conditions. They will require to be housed in a sealed enclosure which also

allows access. An alternative solution would be to utilise a transformer with biodegradable, natural

esters instead of oil. Oil or ester filled transformers have a longer life, higher reliability and the

insulating fluid provides an excellent medium to provide an understanding of the asset’s health.

However, there will be an increase in the cost of the transformer. The MIDEL 7131 is a

biodegradable synthetic ester which is readily biodegradable and exceptionally high moisture

tolerance and works well in a sealed or breathing transformer. Detailed transformer design will be

performed during the design phase.

3.1.3 Ground investigations

The geotechnical investigation step is vital for the success of any FPV plant. Typically, the work is

divided into three phases, with desk study performed to attempt to identify any red flags prior to

more costly intrusive investigations. It is noted that part of the Phase 1 has already been conducted

during the preparatory phase of the Subproject.

Phase 1: Desk study

– This phase involves gathering information from various sources, including scientific

literature, a variety of databases, with the purpose of assessing design options as well as

the planning of other phases.

Phase 2: Owner surveys

– Geophysical and bathymetric surveys

Depending on the level of desk-based information available, it may be necessary to

perform bathymetry and geophysical surveys to establish the shape of the lake’s bed

and soil structure across the site.

– Geotechnical surveys

This phase involves a combination of sampling for onshore laboratory testing and

offshore in-situ testing.

Phase 3: Contractor surveys

If possible, at a reasonable risk premium, the developer should attempt to have the contractor take

all ground risk. As such, Phase 2 studies would have been performed with the intention of providing



the developer and contractor with sufficient information to establish the feasibility of the Subproject,

without incurring undue costs. However, more comprehensive ground studies could be performed

by the contractor during construction in order to obtain sufficient information for full detailed design

of the anchoring, following the selection of the floating platform technology and considering any

further requirements or design specifications.

3.2 FPV construction methodology

The majority of construction tasks associated with an FPV project are similar or identical to a ground

mount project. Some specific differences worthy of consideration are discussed below. The below

sections focus solely on additional or different work which should be performed for an FPV project.

Construction of a solar PV plant requires safe and reliable access for large and heavy vehicles.

The bulk of the plant equipment is likely to be manufactured overseas and shipped to the nearest

port before being transported to site typically via road. It is therefore important to consider which

routes are likely to be used and the suitability of the existing infrastructure along those routes.

Joydia Baor is connected to the highway via the village road. Small trucks could access the site

bringing the PV system equipment and floats from a central warehouse based in Jessore. The

responsibility for the planning and execution of Subproject equipment transport and construction

traffic management would typically fall under the responsibility of the EPC contractor as part of its

scope of works.

3.2.1 Detailed design

The Consultant recommends the following studies are included as part of the Subproject’s detailed

design package when created by the contractor:

Analysis of hydraulic forces on anchoring system in extreme conditions.

Analysis of the fatigue to be experienced by the various parts comprising the mooring system.

Analysis of the maximum loading capacity of the mooring ropes.

We recommend any generic technology testing or bankability reports are provided at the tendering

stage and subject to careful review prior to selecting preferred suppliers.

3.2.2 Installation

Installation procedure is typically floater manufacturer/mooring system specific. Based on the

information gathered for Joydia Baor, both of the proposed assembly areas are considered to be

spacious, flat and allow for easy access to the water. The FPV platform sections would be

assembled in rows on shore and connected in small blocks prior to being launched into the lake

and towed to their final location by boat.

Final assembly and construction duration varies according to the available ground area for floater

assembly however an FPV plant of this capacity is expected to be completed within 5 – 6 months.

The plant can then be constructed with the dry season period (October to March).

The Consultant also recommends that temporary anchoring is utilised during the assembly process

to ensure that platform sections are not damaged by sudden change in wind or wave patterns.



3.2.3 Testing and commissioning

Due to the lack of standards in the industry, a number of additional tests are specified below. It is

suggested the following tests form the basis of any contractor’s inspection and test plan, however

it is noted this list is not exhaustive:

Fatigue tests on the chosen mode of floating island connection (e.g. connection pins, spreader

bars between floats, etc.) – required to ensure that means of float connections can withstand

the effects of repeated wave action. Low wave action places considerable strain on the

element’s connection the floating platform, which if not accounted for completely could

endanger the stability of the platform;

Anchor installation and pull-out tests – carried out to verify the results of the geotechnical study

and determine whether the anchors can withstand the maximum design loads. These are

typically carried out prior to construction commencement; however, we would recommend that

the designer provides alternative solutions based on the geotechnical study to ensure

construction is not delayed if the primary design proves to be unviable.

3.2.4 Operation and maintenance

O&M services for PV projects are typically undertaken by experienced O&M contractors, operating

under an O&M contract, based on a fixed scope of services undertaken for a fixed price, with

optional additional services undertaken at a pre-agreed price per event or hourly rates basis.

Attentive O&M practices are necessary in order to maximise system performance and availability

during operation, in addition to maximising the operating lifetime of the PV plant equipment, and

ensuring enforceability of manufacturer’s warranties, which may require a certain degree of

preventative maintenance to be conducted in accordance with the manufacturer’s guidelines.

The appropriate maintenance methodology depends largely on the final design of the plant. A

system layout that provides access floats between the module floats is more suitable in our view

as it allows O&M personnel easy and safe access. We would typically recommend that connection

points of the island, floats, and the anchoring system are inspected bi-annually.

O&M activities on site can be separated into preventative, corrective, and operational services.

Anticipated non-contracted maintenance expenditure should be considered separately within the

financial model; potentially large or uneven costs (such as inverter repair and replacement) are

typically accounted for within a maintenance reserve account (‘MRA’).

FPV specific activities relate to the floating platform and its mooring and anchoring system:

Visual inspections of all floats and fixings, at least annually;

Anchors and mooring lines should be inspected after the first strong wind incidence reaching

70-80% of the design wind speed, then after every stronger incident and as a minimum every

5 years;

Polyester mooring lines need to be replaced every 5 – 10 years;

Build-up of weeds and debris around floats and mooring lines should be assessed and removed

regularly, depending upon the aquatic culture and lake conditions. Where water hyacinth is a

known problem, then every two months is advisable.

Our experience on other FPV plants indicates that bird fouling can be a significant source of soiling.

Birds may use the floating platform to perch or nest. Like shading, soiling from bird fouling can have



a surprisingly large impact on generation and should be regularly assessed, considered in yield

estimates and managed as part of the O&M activities. A number of technological solutions designed

to deter birds are available. For example, there are solutions that make use of lighting, wire

deterrents and sound systems. The suitability of these solutions should be examined against their

cost. We recommend more than one system is used, preferably utilising auditory and visual

deterrents, to ensure that birds do not become accustomed to a single solution over the lifetime of

the plant. We recommend that the modules are cleaned 2 - 4 times a year.

3.3 FPV Subproject layout and electrical configuration

The configuration presented in the FPV concept design conducted for Joydia Baor is based on

bankable standard FPV technology. Hence, the technical specification of the system conceived is

based on currently available floating platforms, PV modules, and inverter stations, all of which have

been confirmed as suitable for FPV projects.

3.3.1 Site constraints

In FPV project design, the layout is relatively flexible such that multiple platform sizes can be used

to accommodate various shapes of lake. However, the simplest, most regular design options are

usually the most cost effective, therefore it is desirable to look for large, open expanses of water.

Although multiple locations have been considered initially, the final location of the platforms is

based on our desk-based review and essential inputs from local people, the national fisheries

expert and the safeguarding team. As a result, the Consultant is aware of the presence of thirteen

fishing grounds (locally known as ‘komors’). The location of the platforms is targeting a minimal

disruption to the local activities and livelihoods, therefore avoiding the aforementioned fishing areas

of the Baor. Figure 4 shows the thirteen komors as well as the ferry route across the Baor.



Figure 4: Komor locations

3.3.2 Final concept design

The concept design presented in this report features six similar FPV DC platforms. Preferably,

platform design should aim for simple shapes – regular squares or rectangles – bearing in mind

the prevailing wind direction to account for wind loads. In this case, a longer east-west axis would

enable increased mooring points to counter the effects of wind considering the south and southeast

prevailing winds of the region. Although the waterbody offers an open surface onto which locate

regular-shaped platforms, the presence of the aforementioned komors places conditions on the

available space. This represents the main constraint in terms of design. As a result, a bespoke

shape has been devised to:

Provide a longer east-west axis to allow for additional southern mooring points;

Avoid locating the platforms onto any current known komor location;

Optimise the surface usage ratio on the areas where platforms have been located; and

Maximise the system cumulative capacity given the great lake surface available while

maintaining a low total surface coverage.

It must be noted that this bespoke layout entails a downside consisting on a slightly more complex

mooring system that will feature crossing mooring lines. However, this is technically feasible and is

not expected to result into any technical challenge when the detailed design is conducted in due

course.



On the LV DC-side, the FPV array is conceived with a 9,072.0 kWp capacity, which consists of

22,680 x 400 Wp modules distributed in 840 strings of 27 modules across the six platforms. A more

detailed configuration description is provided in Table 4 below. As discussed above, location of the

platforms near to the banks of the lake does allow for onshore MVPS design. However, since all

surrounding land is privately owned and used for agricultural purposes, and in order to minimise

the impact of the FPV installation on the locals’ livelihood, the Consultant has considered floating

MVPS to be a satisfactory solution. Nonetheless, it is recommended that the alternative of placing

the MVPS onshore should be further explored in an attempt to drive down installation and

operational costs.

We note that the final concept design presented in this report assumes a system with central

inverters, however the use of central inverters is not a strict requirement and string inverters would

also be a technically acceptable solution, to be finalised within the EPC contractor detailed design.

The module row distance and tilt angle are specified in accordance with typical FPV technology

designs from a leading supplier. It is noted that the tilt angle of FPV systems is lower than normally

seen on ground-mount arrays; this design was developed to reduce wind loading on the platforms.

The typical dimensions can be seen in Figure 5 below.

Figure 5: FPV simplified diagram with module tilt and row distance

The gap between the floats carrying PV modules is unlikely to allow significant amounts of sunlight

to the water below, so it is recommended that dual glass PV modules are specified in order to

increase the light transmission. Most floating support platforms have gaps within their structural

design, such that between 40% and 75% of the water surface below the PV modules is exposed,

however the final spacing will be dependent on the choice of float manufacturer. It is considered

that the FPV layout proposed is not expected to pose a significant risk to the lake’s ecosystem as

the entire platform will cover only a fractional percentage of the lake. Examples of typical floating

platforms are shown in Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8 below.



Figure 6: Example A of FPV platform design

Figure 7: Example B of FPV platform design



Figure 8: Example C of FPV platform design

The proposed FPV design features three AC floating skids – the MVPS platforms – totalling a

cumulative AC capacity of 7,500 kVA (at 50˚C). Each of these MVPS platforms collects 3,024 kWp

of module DC cumulative power. Given that each MVPS platform features an MV turnkey station

with 2.5 MVA central inverter coupled to an MV transformer and RMU (ring main unit) the resulting

DC:AC ratio is 1.21. Subject to ensuring that the suggested electrical design is adhered to, ratios

of up to 1.30 would be considered feasible through the increase of installed capacity.

Figure 9 below presents a satellite image with the FPV array layout super-imposed. The detailed

layout drawings are included in Appendix A.



1Figure 9: Joydia proposed 9 MWp layout with satellite imagery

2

The platforms cover large areas and have been located to minimise disruption on navigation and

fishing within the lake. Particularly, platform locations have been envisaged to minimise the

disruption on the ‘inner’ half section of the Baor, where fishing activity has greater presence.

For the purposes of this assessment, the Consultant has assumed regular yearly water level

variations. The aerial view presented in Figure 9 above represents the expected water level during

what is considered to be the most unfavourable part of the year, i.e. during dry season when water

levels are lower. However, this will need to be refined during more advanced engineering design

stages, once specific studies are available to confirm water level variation.

Whereas the final location of platforms is to be confirmed upon review of the bathymetric data, and

although locating MVPS onshore would substantially reduce O&M costs, the Consultant has

located all MVPS in floating platforms near the LV cable tray of the DC platforms. Key reasons are

summarised as follows:

Shorter distances between platforms and final MVPS locations are expected to reduce LV cable

losses; and

Uncertainties pertaining to land securement/control in order to accommodate the MVPS in the

banks near the PV platforms. Due to land being privately owned, planning complexity might



significantly increase to secure the required land for the MVPS installation onshore.

Additionally, the perception of the Subproject’s impact on the local community would also be

amplified.

Therefore, based on our desk-based assessment and data gathered through our site visits, the

Consultant has considered floating MVPS to be the simplest solution from a social point of view,

thus the most likely to be feasible.

It is anticipated that in addition to the temporary structures required during the construction phase,

permanent buildings will need to be placed around the site’s vicinity. These sites are expected to

have a small footprint and will serve as office space for site security and maintenance staff, as well

as for spare parts storage. Permanent jetties will also be required at intervals to allow access to

the floating platforms.

Table 4: Summary of main characteristics of the FPV conceptual design

Detail Design

DC platforms

DC capacity (kWp) 1,512.0

No. of platforms 4 2

Dimensions (m) (120.29 x 68.31) +

(120.29 x 53.99)

(120.29 x 84.07) +

(120.29 x 36.79)

Area covered (m2) 14,732.42 14,607.22

No. of modules 3,780

No. of combiner boxes 7

No. of strings per combiner box 20

No. of modules per string 27

AC platform

AC capacity at 50°C (kVA) 2,500

Approx. dimensions (m) 10.5 x 4.9

Approx. area covered (m2) 51.45

Overall installation

Total DC capacity (kWp) 9,072.0

Total AC capacity at 50°C (kVA) 7,500.0

No. of DC platforms (FPV) 6

No. of AC platforms (MVPS) 3

Total area covered (m2) 88,298.47

The system proposed also presents a mooring/anchoring configuration, which is indicative only and

is subject to change due to findings of the final stages of geotechnical testing to be undertaken by

the developer or the EPC contractor. However, there are several assumptions that have been

considered when designing the anchoring configurations. These are as follows:

A distance of the FPV platforms to the water body contours of 20m was respected in order to

allow for certain water level variations and ensure mooring lines can be designed with certain

slack. Water level variation data was not available at the time of drafting. The operating water



level range affects the design of the mooring system and it should be considered at the final

design stage;

Our concept is designed on the basis that submerged anchors will provide additional security –

ensuring that this critical component of any FPV installation is not accessible for unauthorised

personnel. It is anticipated that the soil conditions will be more uniform if all anchors are

submerged rather than having some anchoring points on shore;

Until suitable bathymetric data is available, an average depth of 5m has been assumed for any

area of the lake distant from the banks. A configuration, therefore, was devised with uniform

mooring line lengths, which would simplify the design when possible. However, it should be

noted that decisions about length of mooring cables and size on anchors cannot be determined

with any degree of finality prior to determining the manufacturer of the floating platform and the

results of the final design tests discussed above;

The preliminary layout is design on the basis that the most unfavourable water level situation

will be similar to the one presented in Figure 9, hence assuming anchors and mooring lines will

remain submerged, avoiding any potential interference with the floating MV cable pontoons

running along the ‘outer’ bank of the Baor. This risk is to be assessed during the detailed design

stage when accurate data concerning water variation levels is expected to be available.

No detailed data was available at the time of drafting. However, the Consultant is aware of the

prevailing wind being south and southeast. Accordingly, anchoring needs to be reinforced in

the southern side of platforms.

Other environmental conditions relevant to the design of the PV plants include geology, wind

characteristics and wave characteristics. Studies to define these conditions should be conducted

and results assessed at the next stage of design.

3.3.3 Auxiliary structures

It is anticipated that in addition to the temporary structures required during the construction phase,

permanent buildings may need to be placed in the site’s vicinity. These buildings are expected to

have a small footprint and will serve as office space for site security and maintenance staff, as well

as for spare parts storage. Permanent jetties will also be required at intervals to allow access to

the floating platforms.



4 Irradiation and Yield

4.1 Introduction

An energy yield assessment was undertaken for the Subproject. The analysis is based on a

capacity of 9.1 MWp for Joydia Baor, which is considered indicative.

The Consultant has taken the following steps to establish the energy yield for the Subprojects:

Acquired and analysed Global Horizontal Irradiation (GHI) and Diffused Horizontal Irradiation

(DHI) data from a range of databases;

Calculated a GHI and DHI profile based on the available data;

Uplifted the calculated GHI and DHI profile to establish the Global Inclined Irradiation (GII) as

appropriate for the Subproject location and module orientation;

Modelled the system configuration performance ratio and resultant first year specific yield

estimate;

Calculated combined uncertainties to give long term specific yield estimates at various

probabilities of exceedance.

Each step is described in the following sections.

4.2 Irradiation

4.2.1 Global and Diffuse Horizontal Irradiation

The global irradiance is the measure of the solar electromagnetic power in watts passing through

a surface of area 1 m2, expressed in W/m2, and is composed of both direct and diffuse (scattered)

sources. Global Horizontal Irradiation (GHI) is a measure of total energy incident on a horizontal

plane, or the irradiance (W/m2) incident for a period of time and is expressed in watt hours per unit

area (Wh/m2). Diffuse Horizontal Irradiation (DHI) is a similar measure, representing the energy

that did not arrive directly from the sun but that had been scattered on its path before hitting the

plane.

The irradiation is the energy source for a solar project and as such it is important that sufficient

data is collected for the sites in question. A location at the centre of the site was selected as the

point of interest for the irradiation assessment.

There are several representative databases available for the Subproject location that use

information from either satellite (along with other observations and models) or ground

measurements in order to estimate long-term average GHI and DHI values. The Consultant has

taken GHI values from the databases included in Table 5, which are described in Appendix B.

Table 5: Annual GHI from various sources

Data source Period Spatial

resolution (km)

GHI

(kWh/m2)

Difference from

WM (%)

Meteonorm 7.3 1991-2010 8 1,719 -1.9%

SolarGIS 1999-2015 1 1,702 -2.9%

3TIER 1999-2010 3 1,752 0.0%



Data source Period Spatial

resolution (km)

GHI

(kWh/m2)

Difference from

WM (%)

PV GIS

(SARAH)

2005-2016 6 1,869 6.7%

NREL SUNY 2000-2014 10 1,832 4.6%

Weighted Mean 1,752

The Weighted Mean (WM) value above has been weighted accounting for the number of years of

data available and inversely weighted based on the spatial resolution of each source. Each

parameter contributes 50% to the weighting. Along with the weighted mean, the weighted deviation

of each dataset relative to the WM value as well as the corresponding standard deviation has been

calculated. Details on the Consultant’s approach to assess long-term GHI is given in Appendix C.

For this site, above data sources result in a weighted standard deviation of ±3.5%, which informs

the GHI uncertainty analysis in Section 4.5.3 and Appendix F.

The weighted mean value of 1,752 kWh/m2/year has been selected for the continuation of our

irradiation assessment.

DHI values have been extracted from the databases detailed in Table 5, where available, and the

ratio of DHI to GHI calculated on a monthly basis. The weighting approach as adopted for the

calculation of the Weighted Mean GHI value is utilised for DHI ratios resulting in a weighted DHI

ratio to take forward for further analysis, these figures are presented in Table 6.

4.2.2 Global Inclined Irradiation

GHI and DHI values have been uplifted to GII using the industry standard Perez model. For the site

in question, we understand modules orientation to be facing due south. Monthly and yearly inclined

irradiations shown at the relevant inclination(s) in Table 6 can be expected.

Table 6: Monthly and yearly incident irradiation for the Subproject (kWh/m²)

Tilt -

azimuth

J F M A M J J A S O N D Total7

GHI 119 135 176 184 183 148 144 146 137 139 126 114 1,752

DHI 60 60 77 87 97 90 89 89 76 69 59 57 909

GII – 11°,

0°

135 149 187 187 181 144 141 146 141 151 143 131 1,836

We would consider that an inclined irradiation of 1,836 kWh/m2/year can legitimately be applied to

the site and this figure has been carried forward in the analysis.

7 Any apparent discrepancies in the annual totals arise because the monthly values have been rounded to the

nearest integer for display purposes



4.3 System Design

4.3.1 Modelled system design and approach

There are a number of losses associated with the harvesting of sunlight for the generation of DC

power and there are further losses in the conversion of DC power from the modules to the useful

AC power that feeds to the grid, the cumulative loss of which defines a project’s Performance Ratio

(PR).

These specific losses are dependent on the system design and key plant components. For this

Subproject, the modelled system design characteristics were based on communication with and

information provided by the Client. Details are summarised in Table 48 to Table 50 in Appendix D.

Each individual loss has been modelled taking into account the information provided (and

considered sufficient) and RINA proprietary models.

Some specific losses are influenced by factors which cannot always be quantified at an early stage

of a project. However, these should be considered in order to accurately determine the performance

of the whole Subproject. Should specific information be provided regarding those losses, then this

can be reviewed, and the figures adjusted accordingly. Below is a non-exhaustive list describing

some of these factors:

Variation in performance and efficiencies under real operating conditions;

Characteristics that vary due to the manufacturing and sorting process of PV modules;

Performance measurements that are not identified on standard data sheets;

Current technology in the PV industry;

Quality of design and installation method;

Power Factor different from unity or grid maximum export limitation.

In consideration of the above, the following assumptions have been made in relation to the

expected system design and installation:

Standard quality of the executed installation method;

General design and sizing criteria in line with quality standards. Quality standards include cable

voltage drop limits, cabin heating and ventilation, control and protection settings etc.;

Final configuration of Project equipment to be completed using a standard approach;

For the purpose of this yield the Consultant has assumed a Power Factor of unity (PF=1) at the

inverter level. There is likely to be a small amount of power factor required to overcome the

inductive losses of the electrical transmission from the inverters to obtain unity at the connection

point. We have modelled the most likely occurring power factor experienced on similar sites.

The inverters are capable of operating in the range of 0.8 leading to 0.8 lagging, however

running the site constantly at a PF 0.8 will make a significant difference in the losses. It should

be noted that in the event the grid operator requires the Plant to operate within this range, the

yield should be updated. This power factor may also impact the under-sizing loss for the higher

DC:AC ratios.

Where relevant PVsyst software (v6.75) is used, calculations are performed using hour-by-hour

irradiance and ambient temperature values generated for the site. The shading has been estimated

according to a 3D model. As this system is a floating photovoltaic (‘FPV’) system, the shading

model is flat. The uncertainties associated with the shading assumptions are considered in

Appendix F.



The yield is based on the site layout design developed by the Consultant, which connects strings

comprising of 27 modules along the length of the row. This configuration has been modelled

accordingly in PVsyst.

4.3.2 String sizing

Modules are connected in strings (a number of panels connected in series). A number of strings

may then be connected in parallel to an inverter. String and panel arrangements are determined

by the following factors:

The MPP voltage range of the inverter;

The highest MPP current capacity of the inverter; and

The maximum system voltage of the panels.

For this, the electrical characteristics of the strings and array are calculated for 70°C and 5°C8

module temperature and compared against the above parameters in order to ensure that the

Subproject is suitably designed.

A summary of the string configuration, power ratio, voltage and current compatibility of the string

arrangement are detailed in Table 7.

Table 7: System configuration

Array size

(kWp)

String

configuration

No. of

inverters

Power

ratio

(AC:DC)

Module Max.

voltage

compatible

Max.

current

compatible

9,072.00 280 strings of

27 modules

per SG2500-

HV-MV-20

inverter

3 1:1.21 JKM400

M-72L-V

ü

The AC:DC ratio is based on the nominal inverter power (2,500 kVA at 50°C), which is in line with

market standard practices.

The maximum voltage and current expected to be produced by the PV array has been calculated

considering the climatic conditions at the site, and was not found to exceed the operational limits

of each inverter. As such we consider the system configuration to be suitable.

4.4 Detailed Performance Ratio Calculations

4.4.1 PR Calculations

The PR has been estimated following the process outlined in the previous section and a breakdown

can be seen in Table 8; further details explaining these losses are included in Appendix E.

8 We have reviewed long term site temperature data and consider a minimum temperature assumption of 5°C

to be appropriate for this calculation for the Project location.



Table 8: PR Calculations

Description Loss

Far shadings 0.0%

Near shadings: irradiance loss 1.2%

Spectral 0.0%

Angular / IAM 2.0%

Soiling / snow cover 1.5%

Low irradiance performance 1.1%

Light Induced Degradation (LID) 1.4%

Module quality / power tolerance -0.6%

Module temperature losses 7.2%

Near shadings: Electrical effect 0.2%

Mismatch 0.5%

Ohmics, DC wiring 1.3%

Inverter efficiency 1.2%

Undersizing of the inverter 0.0%

MPPT performance 0.4%

Ohmics, AC LV wiring 0.2%

LV-MV transformer 1.5%

Ohmics, AC MV wiring 0.5%

Self-consumption 0.4%

Module degradation 0.2%

PR at PF=1 (at 100% availability) 81.4%

All subsequent yield calculations in this report are based on the PR modelled at the export meter,

located at the onsite substation. MV line losses have been computed based on the assumption of

33kV level connection point.

The calculated PR does not include any allowance for plant or grid availability losses.

For the purpose of this yield the Consultant has assumed a power factor of unity at the inverter

level. There is likely to be a slight power factor required to overcome the inductive losses of the

electrical transmission from the inverters to obtain unity at the connection point. A detailed review

to obtain this figure is outside of the scope of this report.

The Consultant has applied a soiling loss of 1.5% to the model, based on the site location and

satellite based precipitation data (MERRA 2 satellite data). Based on our experience of FPV

projects, we recommend that the modules are cleaned 2 - 4 times a year as a minimum, depending

on lake conditions.

We have conducted a literature review on module degradation with a focus on modern commercial

c-Si products. Following this review, a degradation rate of 0.4%/year is considered to be an

appropriate assumption for inclusion in the Subproject financial model.



For year one, we take the average degradation of 0% at the starting point and 0.4% at the end of

year 1. Therefore, for the purposes of modelling first year PR numbers a value of 0.2% has been

used.

4.4.2 Availability assumptions

This energy yield study assumes 100% availability of the plant. Final achieved availability will

depend on technical characteristics of the Subproject and the contractual guarantees, however a

value of 100% is unlikely to be achievable. It is noted that the FIRR and EIRR analysis has

considered availability separately to the energy yield figure.

It is recommended that a conservative estimate of grid availability is included in the final version of

the financial model, in line with local records of grid availability.

4.4.3 Yield estimations

Specific yield is a measure of the output of a PV system per unit of installed capacity (kWh/kWp).

It is a function of the irradiance experienced by a system, and its PR. Year one specific yield

calculations for the Subproject are shown in Table 9.

Table 9: Year one energy yield for the system

PR Installed

capacity (kWp)

Probability of

exceedance

Specific yield

(kWh/kWp)

1st year

production

(kWh)

81.4% 9,072.00

P50 1,495 13,563,495

P75 1,445 13,110,536

P90 1,400 12,702,858

Plant and grid availability has been excluded from our year one specific yield figures in Table 9.

The figures in Table 9 already contain an allowance for the first year’s degradation. For future years’

output we recommend that a linear degradation of 0.4% be applied. P75, and P90 numbers are

based on an uncertainty analysis outlined in Section 4.5.

4.5 Uncertainty Analysis

The uncertainties feeding into our yield analysis can be separated into three discrete parts:

Variation in year on year irradiation

Duration of forward modelling period irradiation variability

Uncertainties in the yield modelling assumptions.

Each of these uncertainties is discussed in turn below.

4.5.1 Long-term irradiation variability

Variability of irradiation is a key driver for the income of the Subproject. Long term irradiation data

from satellite-derived data from NREL SUNY was used to assess irradiation variability and details

are shown in Table 10.



Table 10: Satellite long-term time series data

Data source Years of

data

Standard

deviation

Standard error of

the mean

NREL Suny Satellite Data,

23.445°N, 88.942°E

15 1.2% 0.3%

4.5.2 Irradiation uncertainty over multiple years

Uncertainties associated with annual irradiation over a longer period of time are dependent upon

the number of years within that period. Over a longer modelling period, the standard error would

be expected to reduce. Additional uncertainties associated with various forward modelling periods

for are shown in Table 11.

Table 11: Standard error of irradiation data over various modelling time periods

Number of years Standard error of the mean

1 1.2%

10 0.4%

20 0.3%

4.5.3 Uncertainty in yield modelling assumptions

Uncertainties in the GHI, GII and PR modelling assumptions are shown in Table 12. A detailed

breakdown of these uncertainties can be found in Appendix F.

Table 12: Yield modelling uncertainty

Description Total for site

Modelling uncertainty ± 4.8%

The overall uncertainty in the yield modelling assumptions is calculated via the standard error

approach and corresponds to a value of ± 4.8%.

4.5.4 Combined uncertainties

The three uncertainties listed above are combined using the common standard error approach.

The overall combined uncertainty which will be applied to the calculated specific yield figures in the

next section for a 1-year, 10-year and 20-year period are shown in Table 13.

Table 13: Combined uncertainties over various modelling time periods

Uncertainties

Number of years being modelled 1 10 20

Standard error historic irradiation uncertainty 0.3%

Standard error irradiation uncertainty over time 1.2% 0.4% 0.3%

Standard error PR uncertainty 4.8%

Combined uncertainty 5.0% 4.8% 4.8%



4.5.5 Probabilities of exceeding estimation

Specific yields at varying levels of probability and over varying time periods may be calculated by

applying the factors in Table 14 below to the first year P50 value found in previous sections.

Table 14: Specific yield probability adjustment factors for year 1

Modelling period 1-year 10-year 20-year

Probability Level P50 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000

P75 0.96660 0.96756 0.96761

P90 0.93655 0.93836 0.93846

4.5.6 Yield probability calculation approach

The probability of exceedance factors for the various modelling periods shown in Table 14 are

statistical parameters used for Subproject financial modelling. These factors reflect the uncertainty

associated with the solar resource and its annual variance in addition to the analysis methodology

uncertainty for the estimation of the Subproject generation for year 1; e.g. a P90 is a downside

case that provides the PV generation with a 90% probability of being exceeded over the specified

forward-looking modelling period.

The modelling period solely accounts for the impact of the inter-annual variability and is not

inclusive of any module degradation; e.g. for a 10-year period, the inter-annual solar resource

variation is spread over a 10-year sample, so that low irradiation years are statistically offset by

high irradiation years within the 10-year period. The longer the forward-looking modelling periods,

the smaller the potential variance associated with the solar resource estimate.



5 Grid Assessment

5.1 Introduction

The grid impact study analyses the impact on the Bangladeshi network resulting from the

connection of a 9.1 MWp FPV plant at Joydia Baor. The FPV plant is proposed to include 3 x

2.5 MVA inverters and transformers installed in three platforms and the installation of medium

voltage floating cables between the floating platforms and the onshore station. There are two

possible options to connect the Joydia 9.1 MWp floating PV to the Bangladeshi distribution network:

1. Connect to the 33 kV bus of the Moheshpur-2 33/11 kV substation.

2. Connect to the 33 kV bus of the Kotchandpur substation;

From the physical perspective the best option is connecting to the 33 V substation at the

Kotchandpur substation as this is nearest to the site and will be the most economic option. This

requires construction of 9.33 km of OHL from the onshore station to the Kotchandpur substation.

The proposed route of the 33 kV overhead line will run along the public highway thus negating the

complications associated with the routing through private land.

Based on the GIS maps for the region it is understood that no 33kV OHL already exists along the

proposed route. It is recommended that a detailed survey be carried out in order to identify any

potential grid connection constraints along such a route.

The network model as obtained from the PGCB indicates low voltage at the Jhenaidha 132/33 kV

grid substation. The Khulna 230/132 kV substation transformer taps and Jhenaidha 132/33 kV

transformer taps were adjusted to maintain the Jhenaidha 33 kV bus at 1 pu. The voltage at the

Jhenaidha 132 kV bus is around 0.92 pu which is still below the planning limits for Voltage.

The Jhenaidha substation transformer taps were adjusted to the extreme to maintain the Jhenaidha

33 kV bus at around 1 pu during the maximum day demand. With the taps at the extreme position

during minimum demand the 33 kV bus voltage at the Jhenaidah substation will increase to 1.08 pu

which is above the planning limit. Therefore, it is suggested to equip the Jhenaidah transformer

with the AVC.

The total Kotchandpur feeder length to the Kotchandpur substation is around 19.5 km. The

Mohespur-3 (Sarotala) substation, which is under construction, will be connected to the

Kotchandpur feeder and is expected to have an initial load of 4 MW. With the connection of the

Mohespur-3 substation, the Kotchandpur voltage will further drop to 0.91 pu during the peak

demand, which is below the planning limits for voltage.

Therefore, it is suggested to install a capacitor bank of around 6 MVAr at the Kotchandpur

substation. With the installation of the capacitor bank, the Kotchandpur 33 kV bus voltage will

increase to 0.95 pu (with the Jhenaidha transformer taps at the extreme position) during day peak

demand and 0.97 pu voltage during minimum day demand (with the Jhenaidha transformer taps at

the nominal position).

Considering the connection option-2 i.e. connecting at Mohespur-2 substation, which is also fed by

Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation, the total feeder length to the Moheshpur-2 substation is around

39.8 km and the total connected load on the feeder is around 35 MW. Therefore, the voltage at the

Moheshpur-2 substation would be even lower than the voltage at Kotchandpur substation and

hence below the planning limits.



The grid impact analysis was conducted for the preferred connection option of connecting at the

Kotchandpur 33 kV bus, which will be fed by the Jhenaidah 132/33 kV substation. The grid impact

analysis was conducted considering a 6 MVAr capacitor bank at Kotchandpur and the Jhenaidah

transformer equipped with AVC.

The grid impact analysis was checked against the Bangladesh Transmission grid code in the

absence of a Distribution grid in Bangladesh for compliance. The results of the load flow studies,

for the intact running arrangements comply with the planning limits and do not overload the

transmission lines.

The 3 x 2.5 MVA inverter design for the floating PV farm does not comply with the Bangladesh grid

code requirements for the reactive power capability at grid supply voltages from 0.94 pu to 1.06 pu

and hence reactive compensation support will be required. Reactive power compensation support

could be provided through STATCOMs, SVCs, Capacitor banks, synchronous reactors or

additional inverters. Increasing the inverter rating from 3 x 2.5 MVA to 2 x 2.75 + 1 x 3.0 MVA will

increase the reactive power capability of the PV farm and enables the floating PV to comply with

the grid code requirements.

Dynamic analysis of the Joydia floating PV plant was carried out to check its capability to remain

connected to the grid for various grid disturbances including under voltage, under/ over frequency

etc. The studies were carried out considering a generic model for the PV inverter and the protection

settings were also assumed to be in line with the proposed draft grid code requirements. From the

studies carried out, it is observed that the FPV plant is able to remain connected with the grid as

well as providing the required active/ reactive power support to the grid during the disturbances.

Furthermore, as the dynamic studies are carried out considering generic models of the PV

inverters, it is recommended that these studies are repeated during the detail design stage of the

Subproject with the actual OEM model of the PV inverters.

The sections below provide more information about each option.



5.2 Option 1

Figure 10: Grid connection at Moheshpur-2 substation

Jhenaidah

Jhenaidah 132 kV bus

132 / 33 kV 80/120 MVA transformers

Jhenaidah 33 kV bus

Other 33 kV feeders

33 kV OHL477 MCM 11.36 km

FPV

33 kV OHL12.2 km


Kaliganj


Kaliganj -1 (Patvila)

Mahespur -2 (Valipur)



Mahespur -1 (Voiroba)

FPV onshore station



5.2.1 Substation site

The Mohespur-2 33/11 kV substation is owned and operated by BREB and is located to the north-

west of the city of Jessore, and to the south of Joydia Baor.

The distance between the Mohespur-2 substation and the proposed landing site for the Joydia Baor

solar PV is approximately 12.2 km based on use of the public highway, and alternatively 9.5 km via

a straight-line path. Due to the complexity of obtaining planning permission for the use of private

land, the public highway option has been considered in all cases.

The substation site at Mohespur-2 consists of a typical outdoor busbar arrangement, being similar

to other BREB substations. With this arrangement the 11 kV and 33 kV busbars are supported from

the same structures, with overhead busbars run in parallel between the structures.

Tapping connections are then made to the transformers, with 33 kV droppers connected to an open

terminal transformer connection. The 11 kV transformer connections are connected in a similar

manner, with droppers connecting to open terminals on the transformers. There are seven

transformers located at the site; six being single phase and rated at 1.667/2083 MVA each, and

the fourth being three phase and rated at 5/6.25 MVA. It should be noted that there was no LV

supply to the fans therefore the lower transformer rating should be considered.

The transformers included a tap changer for voltage regulation; however it was noted that the

transformers required de-energisation prior to changing the tap position. Obviously, there was no

AVC available on site and therefore the majority of the voltage regulation was either undertaken

via the 11 kV system balancers or via voltage regulation of the 132/33 kV transformers at Jhenaidah

132/33 kV substation.

Protection systems were located within the 33 kV and 11 kV auto-reclosers, and therefore there is

no control room, or any outbuildings located within the site.

The site is considered to be in good condition, well maintained and clear of any vegetation. The

steel structures, busbars and switchgear were found to be in satisfactory condition, although

maintenance records were not viewed during the site visit.

5.2.2 Security of supply

The Mohespur- 2 33/11 kV substation is connected via a radial 33 kV overhead line circuit to the

Jhenaidah 132/33 kV grid substation. This overhead line is approximately 39.8 km in length, which

suffers an approximate average tripping frequency of 5.6 events per month. This value appears to

be average for the area concerned and the only real option to enhance the security of supply would

be to install ring feeder/s to the site which would increase the cost and complexity of the Subproject.

5.2.3 Physical connection

For the connection of the new 33 kV overhead line for the floating solar plant there was one spare

bay available, however due to the quantity of existing overhead lines within the site and the

congested nature of the site it would be difficult to connect a new 33 kV overhead line directly.

Therefore, it is proposed that the overhead line is terminated close to or inside the substation

boundary fence, cable sealing ends are installed, and the final section of circuit is terminated into



the substation via 33kV XLPE cable. A new auto-recloser will be installed and connected to the

busbar.

Figure 11: Proposed location of new 33 kV bay and cable sealing end

It should be noted that there was no SCADA control at the site, therefore, to ensure visibility of the

circuit breaker and ensure that the system is intact while operating the solar PV it may be necessary

to install remote monitoring and control. An alternative solution would be to have all the control

facilities at the solar PV site, with suitable islanding protection, therefore reducing the requirement

for controls at the Mohespur 2 substation site.

5.2.4 Cost

The Table 15 below shows the indicative cost of constructing the 33 kV overhead line and

connecting at the Moheshpur-2 33 kV substation. The cost of SCADA is also included in the cost,

but it is worth noting that installation of SCADA will improve the visibility and controllability of the

substation equipment and is not directly associated with the grid connection of the floating PV.

Table 15: Grid connection cost - Option 1

Items Cost (BDT)

12.2 km of 33 kV OHL (Linnet 336.MCM) 73,200,000

33 kV breaker (2 set) 6,542,000

SCADA 26,328,000

200m of 33kV Cable 1,566,000

Civils 5,600,000

Structures 3,227,000

Protection and control 2,000,000

Control cabling 500,000

Labour 2,000,000



Items Cost (BDT)

Sub total 125,963,000

Contingency 18,894,450

Prelims and design 12,596,300

Total 144,857,450



5.3 Option 2

Figure 12: Grid connection at Kotchandpur 33 kV bus

Jhenaidah



Jhenaidah 33 kV bus

Other 33 kV feeders

Kotchandpur 33/11 kV

substation


Kotchandpur 33 kV bus

FPV

33 kV OHL9.33 km


Mohespur-3 ( Sarotala) substation ( under

construction)

33 kV OHL477 MCM

12 km(Under

construction)

5.3.1 Substation site

The Kotchandpur 33/11 kV substation is owned and operated by BREB and is located to the north-

west of the city of Jessore, and to the east of Joydia Baor.

The distance between the Kotchandpur substation and the proposed landing site for the Joydia

Baor solar PV is approximately 9.5 km based on use of the public highway, and alternatively 6.8 km



via a straight-line path. Due to the complexity of obtaining planning permission for the use of private

land, the public highway option has been considered in all cases.

The substation site at Kotchandpur consists of a typical outdoor busbar arrangement, being similar

to other BREB substations.

Tapping connections are made to the transformers, with 33 kV droppers connected to an open

terminal transformer connection. The 11 kV transformer connections are connected in a similar

manner, with droppers connecting to open terminals on the transformers. There are two

transformers located at the site, with both being three phase and rated at 5/6.67 MVA each. It

should be noted that there is no LV supply to the fans therefore the lower transformer rating should

be considered.

The transformers included a tap changer for voltage regulation, however there was no AVC

available on site therefore the majority of the voltage regulation is undertaken via voltage regulation

of the 132/33 kV transformers at Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation.

Protection systems were located within the 33 kV and 11 kV auto-reclosers, therefore there is no

control room, or any outbuildings located within the site.

The site is considered to be in good condition, well maintained and clear of any vegetation. The

steel structures, busbars and switchgear were found to be in satisfactory condition with some

surface rust apparent, although maintenance records were not viewed during the site visit.

5.3.2 Security of supply

The Kotchandpur 33/11 kV substation is connected via a radial 33 kV overhead line circuit to the

Jhenaidha 132/33 kV grid substation. This overhead line is approximately 24.8 km in length, which

suffers an approximate average tripping frequency of 2.8 events per month. This value appears to

be lower than average for the area concerned and the only real option to enhance the security of

supply would be to install ring feeder/s to the site which would increase the cost and complexity of

the Subproject. It was noted that an alternate circuit ran within 200 m of this overhead line and

therefore a ring circuit configuration could be easily obtained.

5.3.3 Physical connection

For the connection of the new 33 kV overhead line for the floating solar plant, there was one spare

bay available, however due to the quantity of existing overhead lines within the site and the

congested nature of the site it would be difficult to connect a new 33 kV overhead line directly.

Therefore, it is proposed that the overhead line is terminated close to or inside the substation

boundary fence, cable sealing ends are installed, and the final section of circuit is terminated into

the substation via 33 kV XLPE cable. A new auto-recloser will be installed and connected to the

busbar.



Figure 13: Proposed location of new 33 kV bay and cable sealing end

It should be noted that there was no SCADA control at the site, therefore, to ensure visibility of the

circuit breaker and ensure that the system is intact while operating the solar PV it may be necessary

to install remote monitoring and control. An alternative solution would be to have all the control

facilities at the solar PV site, with suitable islanding protection, therefore reducing the requirement

for controls at the Kotchandpur substation site.

5.3.4 Cost

The Table 16 below shows the indicative cost of constructing the 33 kV overhead line and

connecting to the 33 kV bus of Kotchandpur. The cost of SCADA is also included in the cost, but it

is worth noting that installation of SCADA will improve the visibility and controllability of the

substation and is not directly associated with the grid connection of the floating PV.

Table 16: Grid connection cost - Option 2

Items Cost (BDT)


33 kV breaker (2 set) 6,542,000

SCADA 26,328,000

200m of 33 kV Cable 1,566,000

Civils 5,600,000




Labour 2,000,000

Control room equipment 5,000,000



Items Cost (BDT)

Sub total 109,763,000



Total 126,227,450

5.4 Conclusion

In conclusion, Option 2 is the preferred option based on the following advantages:

Lower overall cost.

Shorter overall route compared to the Mohespur-2 option.

Better resilience due to lower average tripping frequency.

Possibility of obtaining a ring circuit configuration at a reasonable capital cost.

Nevertheless, it is noted that a disadvantage of this option is the lack of local control or SCADA

facilities, therefore the cost of the required SCADA upgrades have been included in the

recommendations.



6 Social Impact Assessment

6.1 Background and general socio-economic profile

Joydia Baor is situated in Jhenaidah District. The total area of the Joydia Baor is approximately 189

hectares in wet season and 150 hectares in dry season. The Baor has an approach road which

traverses though the villages. It is noted that the road is not paved and in general not in good

conditions. There are four villages within approximately 2 kilometres of the Baor, namely:

Balaramnagar (having 300 households);

Joydia (having 200 households);

Datiarkoti (having 60 households); and

Narayanpur (having 100 households).

Joydia Baor is a government-owned Baor, belonging to the district commissioner’s office and

fishing in the Baor is managed by the Department of Fisheries. Land in the surrounding area is also

government-owned and comprises mainly of agricultural use. Some of the local residents have land

in their possession but many are landless except for a small piece of land for their dwelling. Most

of the nearby dwellings are made of brick and tin and are considered semi-permanent in nature.

There are nearby schools, hospitals and there is drinking water available. Drinking water is mostly

taken from the tube wells. However, 50% of the households have their own drinking water tube

wells and the remaining 50% fetch water from their neighbours who have their own tube wells.

The Baor is primarily used for fish catching. In addition to fish catching, The district commissioner’s

office is the owner of the Baor but does not control it, the department of fisheries takes it on lease

and makes it available to the fishermen for fishing purpose, where there is a revenue sharing

mechanism among district commissioner’s office, department of fisheries and fishermen. The

annual target of fish catch is 90 metric tonnes. For the last five years, the target was achieved over

the yearly cycle. The executing agency for the Subproject is not yet known however the Subproject

is likely to be developed by the private sector.

People also use the Baor for bathing and cleaning clothes. Water from the Baor is used for

cultivation through pumping systems. The following section briefly describes the demographic and

socio-economic condition of the Subproject district as collected from secondary sources of data

(Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics).



Table 17: Area, households, population, density by residence and community

Area

[sq. km]

Total

households

Population - total

Population density

(Total population

per sq. km)

Total In household Floating

Jhenaidah 485,506 422,332 1,771,304 1,770,608 696 3.6

Sabderpur 6,584 5,313 22,321 22,307 14 3.4

Table 18: Distribution of households and population by gender, gender ratio, residence and community

Households Population Gender ratio

(Males /

Females) Total General Institutional Others Both Male Female

Jhenaidah 422,332 421,300 173 859 1,771,304 886,402 884,902 1.00

Sabderpur 5,313 5,310 2 1 22,321 11,356 10,965 1.04

Table 19: Percentage distribution of general households by size, average size, residence and community

General

households

Percentage of households comprising Average size

of

household 1 person 2 persons 3 persons 4 persons 5 persons 6 persons 7 persons 8+

persons

Jhenaidah 421,300 2.4 10.8 22.0 29.2 18.8 8.9 3.9 3.9 4.2

Sabderpur 5,310 1.8 9.3 22.9 29.7 19.8 9.2 3.9 3.4 4.2

Table 20: Percentage distribution of population by age groups, residence and community

All ages Percentage of population in the age group

0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-49 50-59 60-64 65+

Jhenaidah 1,771,304 9.0 11.0 11.1 8.3 8.8 9.7 26.8 6.9 2.9 5.4

Sabderpur 22,321.0 9.1 10.6 11.1 8.6 9.3 9.9 27.1 6.4 2.7 5.2



Table 21: Percentage distribution of population aged 10 years and above by gender, marital status, residence and community.

Total

male

% Male Total

female

% Female

Never

married

Married Widowed Divorced /

separated

Never

married

Married Widowed Divorced /

separated

Jhenaidah 706,607 34.0 65 0.5 0 709,765 21 70.2 8 0.9

Sabderpur 9,085 33.6 66 0.7 0 8,836 20 70.8 8 1.4

Table 22: Distribution of population aged 7 years and above by literacy, gender, residence and community

Literate (can write a letter) Literacy rate (%)

Both Male Female Both Male Female

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Jhenaidah 741,905 791,076 386,228 379,335 355,677 411,741 48.4 50.5 46.3

Sabderpur 9,266 9,987 4,877 4,900 4,389 5,087 48.1 49.9 46.3

Table 23: Distribution of population aged 3-14 years by age groups, school attendance, gender, residence and community

Population aged 3-5 years Population aged 6-10 years

Attending school Not attending school Attending school Not attending school

Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Jhenaidah 4,759 4,694 51,072 50,126 81,556 80,213 23,017 19,869

Sabderpur 88 93 659 593 952 918 309 258

Table 24: Distribution of population aged 15-29 years by age groups, school attendance, gender, residence and community

Population aged 15-19 years Population aged 20-24 years Population aged 25-29 years

Attending school Not attending

school


school


school

Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Jhenaidah 41,604 34,290 35,106 35,949 12,553 6,887 54,180 83,104 2,657 931 75,674 92,167

Sabderpur 497 360 509 552 123 56 773 1,116 24 6 1,046 1,138



Table 25: Percentage distribution of population by type of disability, residence and community

Total

Population

Type of disability (%)

All Speech Vision Hearing Physical Mental Autism

Jhenaidah 1,771,304 1.6 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.1

Sabderpur 22,321 1.9 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.4 0.0

Table 26: Distribution of population aged 7 years and above not attending school by employment status, gender, residence and

community

Population aged 7+ and not

attending school

Employment status

Employed Looking for work Household work Do not work

Both Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Jhenaidah 551,434 255,667.0 295,767 224,118.0 9,020 690.0 468 2,044.0 244,598 28,815.0 41,681

Sabderpur 6,258 2,993 3,265 2,607 86 7 3 17 2,690 362 486

Table 27: Distribution of population aged 7 years and above not attending school but employed by field of activity, gender,

residence and community

Population aged 7+, not attending

school and employed

Field of activity

Agriculture Industry Service

Both Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Jhenaidah 233,138 224,118 9,020 183,835 2,530 10,484 1,373 29,799 5,117

Sabderpur 2,693 2,607 86 2,075 24 55 14 477 48

Table 28: Distribution of ethnic households, population by gender, residence and community

Ethnic Ethnic population in main groups

Households Population Tripura Barmon Chakma Others

Both Male Female

Jhenaidah 704 3,108 1,528 1,580 272 102 89 2,645

Sabderpur 10 41 22 19 - - 30 11



Table 29: Distribution of population by religion, residence and community

Total Muslim Hindu Christian Buddhist Others

Jhenaidah 1,771,304 1,601,086 167,880 975 28 1,335

Sabderpur 22,321 20,229 2,091 - 1 -

Table 30: Percentage distribution of general households by type of structure, toilet facility, residence and community

Number of

households

Type of structure (%) Toilet facility (%)

Pucka Semi-pucka Kutcha Jhupri Sanitary

(water-

sealed)

Sanitary

(non water-

sealed)

Non-

sanitary

None

Jhenaidah 421,300 15 29 52 4 24 33 37 5

Sabderpur 5,310 19 28 52 1 44 35 17 4

Table 31: Distribution of general households by source of drinking water, electricity connection and housing tenancy status, by

residence and community

Number of

households

Source of drinking water (%) Electricity

connection (%)

Housing tenancy (%)

Tap Tube-well Other Owned Rented Rent free

Jhenaidah 421,300 2 95 2 59 94 3 2

Sabderpur 5,310 0 99 1 68 98 1 2



6.2 Impact

The impacts of the Subproject are primarily related to fishing activities and are therefore more

significant for fishing communities and fishing families. A summary of impacts is listed below and

details of each type of impact are provided in the following sections.

Total area of the Joydia Baor is 189 hectares in wet season and 150 hectares in dry season.

This is a government owned Baor and fishing is managed by the Department of Fisheries;

There are four villages surrounding the Baor;

No land acquisition or involuntary resettlement are required by the Subproject;

There would be no impact on indigenous peoples as there are no indigenous peoples living in

the surrounding area;

Impacts are foreseen to be restriction on fishing areas leading to lack of fish production which

will have indirect impact on the whole fishing community in terms of loss of income from fishing,

thereby impacting livelihood;

The Baor is managed by government officials from the Fisheries Department with an annual

target for fishing; once the target is achieved, then the production is stopped;

There are 186 licensed fishing families who are involved in catching large fish;

Distribution of revenue is done among three parties as follows: 40% for the fishermen, 25% for

the District Commissioner and 35% for the fisheries department;

Additionally, informal fishing also takes place in the Baor which is for small fish using small nets

and usually done by the same people. Small fish is mostly used for daily consumption and

excess is sold in the market directly;

Cost related to fish breeding, security etc. is provided by the government;

Government land is available for other Subproject related facilities such as work shed,

maintenance, jetty area and assembly point. The land is available on the bank of the Baor with

less encroachment. Therefore, no land acquisition is required for associated facilities;

There would be approximately 9.32 km of 33 kV lines to be constructed; this will not require

land acquisition, however there may be some temporary impacts on loss of crops when the line

passes over paddy fields etc. which shall be avoided or mitigated during line construction;

The evacuation of power will be connected to the existing substation at Kotchandpur which will

not require any additional land acquisition.

The Subproject is categorised as “C” or possibly “B”9 for involuntary resettlement and ‘’C” for

Indigenous Peoples as per ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS), 2009. A detailed social

impact assessment report is being prepared that includes possible mitigation measures and a

social management plan. The following subsections describe various potential social impacts of

the proposed Subproject on Joydia Baor.

6.3 Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement (permanent)

There will be no permanent land acquisition and involuntary resettlement for placement of the FPV

panels as the surface area of the existing lake will be used. The entire lake is government-owned

and belongs to Lands Department and local District Commissioner’s Office. The total surface area

9 Category B for IR is only for the temporary impacts in terms of loss of trees and crops for distribution lines and

other construction related impacts in terms of partial loss of income of the fishermen if not avoidable or else, the

Subproject will remain as C for IR category.



of the Baor in dry season is 150 hectares, of which around 88,144 m2 equivalent to 8.81 hectares

of surface water area will be used for the floating solar panel, this is about 5.88% of the total surface

area of the lake. There are no physical displacements or relocation resulting from the Subproject.

The Subproject requires small scale land for other associated facilities such as assembly area, jetty

area and security and maintenance of boat area, work shed / O&M /monitoring and security

building, storage container, cable landing point and switch gear cabin etc. All these facilities will be

built on the government-owned land. Therefore, there will be no compulsory land acquisition. The

impacts remain negligible because the land requirement is minimal; only around 138 m2 for all the

associated facilities (some only temporary) and this is not concentrated in one place. Details on the

land requirement and ownership of the associated infrastructure is provided in Table 32 below.

Table 32: Land requirements for associated facilities and infrastructure

Type of associated

infrastructure

Land area

requirement

(meter X

meter)

Type of

land

ownership

Impact on

land

acquisition

and

involuntary

resettlement

Remarks

1 Assembly area-

temporary

10 x 18 Government Nil There could be

possible

encroachment

of land use for

cultivation,

which is

minimal and in

case of such

impacts, the

losses will be

compensated

based on

direct

negotiation

prior to

construction.

2 Jetty area - security &

maintenance boat

area

1 x 5 Government Nil

3 Work shed / control,

O&M and security

building


4 Storage container 6 x 3 Government Nil

5 Cable landing points

area


6 Switch gear cabin 3 x 3 Government Nil

Note: The Work Shed, used to store tools and equipment during construction, can subsequently be used as the

O&M Building during the operation phase of the plant. The O&M Building will be required for the security and

maintenance staff. It will house the SCADA monitoring system (desk computer and monitor etc.) as well as any

tools and cleaning equipment. During construction, the storage container will be used to house daily deliveries of

the floaters, any assembly kit and PV modules.

6.4 Impacts due to grid connection / evacuation lines (temporary)

The power will be evacuated at a 33 kV voltage line. There will be a total of 9.32 kilometers of 33 kV

line that will be constructed to evacuate the power from the FPV. The 33 kV line is a pole-based

line which does not require any land acquisition. There will be approximately 40 poles which will be

constructed. There is no such right of way reserved for the 33 kV line. The line will mostly pass

through the Baor area, roads and in some places through the agricultural fields. The agriculture



field is partly government owned land which is part of Baor and some public land being used for

paddy cultivation. There could be some temporary impacts during the construction in terms of loss

of crops. There could be loss of some trees or trimming of some trees. All of these impacts are

construction-related and will be compensated, if unavoidable, during the construction phase

through consultation with the people. Furthermore, impacts can also be avoided by choosing off

season as the construction period. The evacuation line will be connected to the existing substation

at Kotchandpur where land is available for the transformers. Therefore, there will be no impact in

terms of land and resettlement for the transformer.

6.5 Indigenous Peoples

Indigenous Peoples or Upajati do not live in the vicinity of the Joydia Baor area, therefore there will

be no corresponding impacts. The population in the Subproject area is predominantly of Muslim

people and there are some Hindu communities also but no Upajatis live in the Subproject area.

6.6 Impact on fishing and livelihood

The Baor is owned by the government, belonging to the Department of Land and under the

management of the District Commissioner. The Baor is primarily used by the local people for

fishing. The water is fished intensively and provides food and income to the Baor population. The

Subproject has the potential to impact on fishing livelihood by reducing the area available for fishing

activity and restricting access to fishing grounds. However, as mentioned above, the total coverage

of the Baor for the Subproject’s solar panels is about 5.88% of the surface water. The fishing is

managed by the Department of Fisheries. Licenses are issues to fishermen. There are 186 licensed

fishermen who are eligible for catching the big fish using big nets. The license fee is BDT 460 per

year. Fish breeding and providing security is managed and handled by the department of fisheries.

There is an annual target of 92 tons of fish catching and beyond that the fishing is not allowed.

Once the target is achieved, fishing is stopped. Therefore, the income of these fishermen is limited.

The earnings and revenue from the fish selling is divided according to the following proportions:

40% for the fishermen, 25% for the District Commissioner and 35% for the Department of Fisheries.

In addition to the big fish catching, there are people who prefers to catch the small fish using small

nets where they do not have to take permission from the Department of Fisheries. They can sell

those small fish in the market and can use for their daily intake also. There is no such registered

society for the fishermen in the case of Joydia since the Baor is managed by the Department of

Fisheries. The Subproject has the potential impact of lower fish production due to the reduced size

of fishing area, and this would indirectly cause a loss of income. Fish stock of Joydia Baor is

described in the Table 33 below.

Table 33: Fish stocking in Joydia Baor

Sl. No. Local Name/English Name Scientific Name Stocked Amount

1 Rui Labeo rohita 1.50 MT

2 Catla Catla catla 1.50 MT

3 Mrigel Cirrhinus cirrhosus 1.50 MT

4 Silver Carp Hypophthalmichthys molitrix 8.00 MT



Sl. No. Local Name/English Name Scientific Name Stocked Amount

5 Common Carp Cyprinus carpio var. communis 1.50 MT

6 Mirror Carp Cyprinus carpio var. specularis

7 Black Carp Mylopharyngodon piceus 100.00 Kg

8 Grass Carp Ctenopharyngodon idella 2.00 MT

9 *Chital Chitala chitala 160 Nos.

Total 16.10 MT

*Chital is introduced for the first time to check their growth performance and production.

The average annual income from fishing, as per the socio-economic surveys is found to be

75,220 BDT per fishermen family. Placing of FPV will cause temporary restriction to the access

during construction at the water’s edge and in the Baor area when assembly of the floatation units

and solar PV panels is taking place. However, the restriction is partial and temporary and people

will still have the access to Baor for their use. During operations, with up to 5,88% coverage of the

Joydia Baor surface by PV pontoons, there is the potential for a reduction in fish habitat and fish

catches, and impacts to the fishing resource of the Baor. After the Subproject’s construction, the

solar panels may cause restriction to fishing due to fish taking shelter under the panels. Fishermen

will be negatively impacted, though the impacts are not significant and is partial loss of income due

to the Subproject.

6.7 Social, poverty and gender

The impacts are expected to be positive in terms of additional power generation and enhanced

power supply in Bangladesh in general. Subproject beneficiaries are those that will directly benefit

from the reliable power supply to be generated from the proposed floating solar which will be

harnessed in addition to the existing conventional source of power generation. The beneficiaries in

the Subproject are general and thus it will positively impact the country as a whole, with indirect

benefits to local consumers including domestic, agricultural, commercial and industrial sectors.

Additionally, the Subproject shall provide some temporary job opportunities during construction.

The Subproject will improve power sector reliability in Bangladesh. It will therefore indirectly

contribute to poverty reduction through more reliable electric services to the households. Under the

Subproject, improved and uninterrupted power supply will result in increased agricultural,

commercial and industrial activities contributing to economic growth in general, however this may

not have any direct positive impact to the local area. It is expected to have a positive impact and

improve the quality of life of the local population, including vulnerable groups, and minimise power

shortage. An adequate electrical power supply is essential for achieving sustainable economic

growth. With improved and uninterrupted power supply the Subproject will directly and indirectly

contribute to poverty reduction at local level, through: the creation of unskilled/semi-skilled

employment during the construction phase; income generation and livelihood activities associated

with the business; and minimisation of load shedding. The economic growth, particularly through

commercial and industrial activities, will contribute to the country’s gross domestic product. With

effective mitigation measures the negative impacts on the fishing communities can be minimised.

The Subproject will have a positive long-term impact on the country’s economy and living standards

of the population.



Women in the Subproject area are generally engaged in household activities. Women are equally

involved in the decision-making of the family and also contribute to family income when feasible.

Women were participants during the general consultations. Special focused group discussions

were conducted during the feasibility studies and women viewed that there are no such negative

impacts to them due to the Subproject. It is understood that there is no female labour work within

the fish landing station. Female labour mostly consists of crop cultivation and household activities.

There will be no negative impact on women due to the floating solar projects. Women may be

trained, and they may find opportunities to take part in the Subproject operation. Should any

negative impacts occur during the Subproject, they will be mitigated, and women will be given

special attention.

6.8 Other impacts

People living adjacent to Joydia Baor use the Baor water for bathing, cleaning clothes and

occasionally for cooking, though they do not use it for drinking. In addition, they use the Baor water

for their animals.

Water from the Baor is also used for agriculture through pumping. There are tube wells for water

intake. The Subproject will not cause shortage of water and there will be no such hindrance to

water use due to the Subproject. However, during construction, special attention needs to be given

to ensure water accessibility is not disturbed.

6.9 Public consultations and findings

Initial consultation was conducted informally with the villagers and the fishermen and particularly

with the fishing community in the month of December, 2019. There was participation of both men

and women in the consultation meetings. Additionally, formal consultation meetings was also held

with multi stakeholders in the month of February, 2020. The response of initial consultations from

the public are related to the fish catching of the Baor and possible loss of fish catch and loss of

income due to the proposed Subproject. Most of the people were partially aware about the

Subproject as they had witnessed various technical surveys being undertaken. The public were

generally curious about the Subproject and raised concern about their fishing activities. During the

multi stakeholders’ formal consultation, people raised concerns and was not supportive of the

Subproject and mostly opposed to the plan because of restriction to fishing and income. People

focused more on to the use of unused filled in land and dredging it to make it waterbody and placing

the panel without interfering existing Baor. However, it was clarified that dredging or excavation

has adverse environment impacts and also to the water body and this is not the scope under the

Subproject to excavate and put panels. Necessary mitigation measures were discussed. Core

findings of the consultations are presented below in Table 34.



Table 34: Findings of Consultations

Issues Discussed Views of the People/Suggestion

I. Informal Consultation with villager especially the fishermen at Joydia Baor (December, 2019)

Awareness about of the Subproject.

Baor management and dependency on Baor.

Fishing Activities.

Potential threat to the people due to Subproject.

Potential benefits.

Expectation from the Subproject.

Suggestive Measures.

Impact on livelihood and compensation expectation.

Support to the Subproject.

Suggestion and Recommendations.

Some people were not aware about the Subproject. However, the initial consultation

is perceived to be beneficial to the local community as they got to know about the

proposed Subproject.

In general, people are neutral as far as their support is concerned. Support for the

Subproject was expressed given that it is the country’s plan and government will

manage the Subproject. On the other hand, they do not see any benefit to the local

people and do not support the Subproject.

People fear that fishing activities will be disrupted if adequate mitigation is not taken.

Loss of fishing will led to loss of income and livelihood.

People suggested that there are dry areas (near Balaram Nagar village) which can be

dredged and can be used for the pontoons so that Baor is not affected. However, this

was clarified that dredging is not within the Subproject scope.

People expressed concerns that fish would be hidden under the pontoons area, which

would restrict the fishermen’s access to fish.

People also highlighted that the fishing families have small land holding or may be no

land holding and they mostly depend on the Baors.

People suggested future consultation and engagement of people during detailed

planning and construction.

People suggested that all the losses should be assessed properly and should be

mitigated with an action plan and shall be compensated.

II. Formal Consultation with multi stakeholders such as Personnel of REB, UNO Kotchandpur Upazaila, Member of Fisheries Department, Baor

Mangement, Chairman and Member of Union including local people, Fishermen of Joydia Baor. (February, 2020)

Awareness about the floating solar Subproject. 50% of the Stakeholders and aware of floating solar Subproject on the Baor.




Support to the Subproject.

Baor management and fishing pattern.

Impact on land and other assets.

Impact on crops due to evacuation line.

Socio-economic activities.

Construction related impacts and concerns.

Current electricity supply and reliability.

Potential benefits.

Potential losses.

Critical issues.

Compensation issues.

Suggestion and recommendations from the people on

Subproject implementation.

Presence of local NGO and CBO.

People strongly opposed the Subproject, as they think that the Subproject will have a

direct negative impact on the livelihoods of the fisherman. Presently, silt accumulation

declined the area of Baor. Excavation of bottom soil as well as the peripheral area is

the priority at this stage, then floating solar will be welcomed by the local people.

If excavation is done, the people will voluntarily cooperate in the implementation of

the Subproject. However, it was clarified that excavation is a separate subject which

may not be applicable to the current Subproject scope.

Availability of land for small scale Subproject activities is not a problem and people

viewed that the land belongs to the Baor.

Various economic activities as mentioned by the people are Fishing, agricultures,

business, service, cottage industries etc.

Regarding the evacuation line, people are in favour of upgrading the electrical

network. Female participants reported that there is no street light which restrict their

mobility after sunset. There is no problem if the line passes along the roadway and

along the pathway.

Regarding any loss, people expect cash compensation for small loss in terms of

crops and trees due to the evacuation line.

Participants said that they are involved in fishing form their childhood. They do not

know any other work to earn their livelihood. They said that they do not want this

Subproject to take place in the Joydia Baor.

People viewed that Putting solar panel on the Baor water will occupy an area of the

Baor. Hence, fishing area will be reduced.

While asking about the suggestion for continued fishing during and post

implementation of the Subproject, people suggested the following:

- Development of the Baor including removing deposited soil by excavation,

protecting shore from land sliding etc. is needed.

- Providing job to the fishermen or compensate by cash, during construction.

- After construction, allow the fishermen to catch fish within the solar panel area.




- There is one inlet and one outlet. Fish movement should be restricted through this

inlet and outlet, by constructing sluice gate.

- If fish production reduces due to floating solar panel, then the authority will have to

grant subsidies or compensation or alternatives to the affected fishermen.

As far as the positive impact is concerned, people viewed that no environmental

pollution as electricity will be produced using renewable energy which will meet the

local power demand.

Negative impacts are perceived to be many such as the Subproject will occupy fishing

areas. It will reduce production of captured fish. In addition, fishing activity will be

interrupted. Fishermen were concerned that fish will hide below the panel and

fishermen will have less access to fishing activities.

People further suggested that Excavation of the filled-up land is very important at this

point. Because of excessive sediment water surface of the Baor is shrinking day by

day.

The participants will welcome the Subproject and will be cooperating during the

implementation, subject to the excavation of Baor prior to the start the Subproject.

Each of the pontoon of PV panel needs security light/fog light and security tower.

Other issues suggested by the people are: every year water hyacinth covers a large

part of the Baor. Local fisherman requested to introduce new technologies to inhibit

the growth of the aquatic nuisance.



6.10 Conclusion and recommendations

The Subproject will have some negative impacts in terms of loss of income and livelihood due to

restriction of water use for fishing. However, some local employment will be generated temporarily

during construction. Based on the assessment and also suggestions from the local people, various

conclusions, suggestions and recommendations are provided. Suggestions and recommendations

are provided below and a social management plan for mitigation measures is provided in Table 35.

The Subproject planning shall avoid fishing areas and shall use the surface water where there

are no fishing activities;

The Subproject shall not take more than 10% of the surface area. If possible, dredging options

shall be explored if no adverse environment impacts. However, dredging seems to be

unlikely; and

People expect some direct benefits from the Subproject. This requires adequate mitigation

measures for uninterrupted fishing activities and any loss in the future shall be compensated

and mitigated by the Subproject.



Table 35: Social Management Plan

Predicted Impacts Intensity Mitigation Measures Responsible

Agencies

Timing

Land acquisition and involuntary

resettlement

None Negotiation with land department and

Baor authority with due consultation with

local people

No monetary compensation required

Private developer

through SREDA

Prior to construction

and during

construction

Temporary impacts due to

construction of evacuation line

Low Consultation with local people

Consultation with BREB

Line route to mostly follow along the

road and Baor area without interfering in

to agricultural land or habitat area and

also construction to commence during

off the crop season.

Cash compensation for loss of crops

and trees if damages are not avoidable

during construction

Private developer

with assistance from

SREDA and BREB


and during

construction

Impact on indigenous peoples None Not Required as no indigenous peoples

are to be impacted

Not Applicable Not Applicable

Impact on fishing and livelihood

(For the Fishing Community as a

whole consisting of 186

fishermen families)

Medium Compensation by providing 20% of

additional cash grant to their current

40% share from fish income for the

entire life of the Subproject to be borne

by the Subproject developer

Construction of two grill gates to avoid

outward fish migration which shall be @

1 million Tk per gate equivalent to a total

Private developer

through SREDA


and during

construction



Predicted Impacts Intensity Mitigation Measures Responsible

Agencies

Timing

of 2 million Tk to be borne by the

Subproject developer

Cash grant for fish feeding

Sufficient distance between each block

of panels so that fishing activities will be

continued

Avoid construction during fish breeding

Studies to identify potential in fish

growth and fish production

Continued consultation

Potential engagement of local people

during Subproject construction

Decrease in surface water due to

floating solar panel

Medium Liaise with Joydia, fishing committee

and local people and technical team

Catchment management and siltation

management

No construction work during monsoon

while fish breeding starts

Private developer

through SREDA and

Baor management

As soon as possible

based on final design

Impact on approach road None Rehabilitation of approach road Private developer

through its contractor


Others in terms of continuous use

of Baor water for various human

consumption

Low Water quality to be maintained safe and

shall not be diluted

Private developer

through its contractor

During construction

and operation



7 Environmental Assessment

7.1 General

Joydia Baor is an oxbow lake with a dry season area of 150 ha situated in Kaliganj, Jhenaidah

District. It has the typical crescent shape of an oxbow lake being 6 km long and having a width of

250-400 m. Approximately 80% of the land around the lake is developed with the lake frontage

being occupied by village housing and homestead gardens stretching down to the water’s edge.

Encroachment has occurred at the lake over a number of years as water levels have receded.

Housing is mainly of a semi-permanent nature and while some village houses are constructed in

concrete, the majority are made of tin and mud.

Agricultural land is principally given over to jute cultivation, but rice and vegetables are also grown

along with local fruit trees (guava and banana). In addition, commercial timber trees (teak and

mahogany) are also grown. Water is pumped to irrigate crops with many water pumps around the

Baor and two canals are directly connected to the Baor. Water hyacinth is present on the lake

surface, particularly in the south, which hampers movement and activity through the water.

The Baor is widely used for washing and bathing by many in the wider lakeside community; people

also use the water for cooking and washing their clothes. The Baor area is very much modified and

changed by human activity.

There is a regular boat service route connecting the communities on the east and west banks of

the Baor.

There is intensive use of the Baor for fishing, principally from three main villages located to the

north with 13 organised and registered fishing groups. Fishing provides an important source of

income and food for people living at the Baor.

The Subproject consists of floating pontoons supporting PV (photovoltaic) cells on the Joydia water

body with inverters and transformers on floating platforms and with underwater cables to bring

power ashore. The Subproject will need to have supporting infrastructure to connect to the

Bangladesh National Grid. This involves the construction of 9.325 km of 33 kV transmission line to

evacuate power to an existing substation at Kotchandpur where land will be available for the

installation of transformers and for a bay extension. Land will be required for a temporary storage

container for daily deliveries of the floatation units and PV modules prior to assembly, and land is

also required at the water’s edge for final assembly of the floating facility prior to positioning of the

panels on the lake. There will be a need to identify land for a work-shed/jetty. The work shed, used

to store tools and equipment during construction, can subsequently be used as the O&M building

during the operation phase of the plant. The O&M Building will be required for the security and

maintenance staff. It will house the SCADA monitoring system (desk computer and monitor etc.)

as well as any tools and equipment required for cleaning and de-weeding, general maintenance

and operations as well as security on the pontoon floating structures during operations. Currently

it is intended to use land on the north east shore of the Baor to accommodate temporary and

permanent Subproject activities.



The new evacuation/transmission line will follow existing roads and thereby avoid crossing private

farmlands.

The Implementing Agency for the Subproject will only be decided following the acceptance of the

Feasibility Study.

7.2 Potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures

The potential environmental impacts associated with the Subproject have been identified and are

discussed below along with potential mitigation measures and recommendations.

7.2.1 Potential land loss

There will be need to occupy land temporarilly during construction. Land will be required for such

purposes as:

Assembly of the PV panels and floatation units at the lake side – an area approximately 1000 m2

is required;

Access to establish the associated 33 kV power evacuation line between the floating solar

facility on the lake and the designated Kotchandpur substation; and

Possibly for a workers camp.

The land at the edge of the Baor is much encroached upon by land users but is government land.

The land required for panel assembly on the eastern shores of the Baor is government land and is

available for construction activities.

The power evacuation line (9.325 km) to link to Kotchandpur substation is pole based

(approximately 40 poles) and will be through some lake and road side villages with potential

temporary loss of trees and crops. These impacts are construction related and will be compensated

for if unavoidable through consultation with the public. There is space at Koatchandpur to

accommodate a 3 m x 3 m switch cabin gear to link the Subproject to the grid system.

For the operations phase some land will be required permanently for such things as the

establishment of a secure area on the lake shore for the SCADA monitoring system, a boat for de-

weeding, cleaning and security equipment (Table 32). Government land in the ownership of Lands

Department and District Commissioner’s Office is available for Subproject infrastructure. The Social

Impact Assessment study finds that there will be no permanent land acquisition or involuntary

resettlement as a result of the Subproject. The land required for the Subproject for permanent

facilities is just 58m2.

As the solar arrays, inverters and transformers are designed to be stationed over water, the overall

amount of land required for the Subproject is small by comparison with other power generating

projects and there is likely to be a relatively small land based environmental impact only. Any

temporary losses during construction (e.g. loss of income from destruction of crops and trees) will

be settled through agreement. There will be environmental impacts to the water lake system (to

human activities and to aquatic systems which are discussed below in Chapters on Potential Loss

of livelihood, food and ecosystem services and Changes to water quality at the lake.

No private land acquisition is required for the Subproject.



7.2.2 Impacts on Indigenous People

The Social Impact Assessment (SIA) finds that there is no impact on indigenous people as

indigenous people or “Upajati” do not live in the vicinity of the Joydia Baor area. The Subproject

area is dominated by a majority Muslim population with some Hindu population particularly around

the Baor.

7.2.3 Potential loss of livelihood, food and ecosystem services

The Subproject will cause some small loss of access during construction at the water’s edge and

in the lake area when assembly of the pontoons and solar panels is taking place and they are towed

into place on the Baor. During operations with up to 5.8% of the dry season surface area covered

by panels, there is the potential for a reduction in fish habitat and impact to aquatic systems. The

panels may interfere with fish breeding and the ability of fishermen to catch fish and access to

fishing grounds.

The Joydia Baor is fished intensively and is an important source of livelihood for local fishermen

and an important source of food for village populations around the Baor.

The Subproject, therefore, has potential to have impacts to fish production and fishing livelihood

and there is expectation by affected people and stakeholders for compensation for this loss.

Fishing is undertaken at two levels:

Organised large scale community fishing: (186 licensed fishing families) who operate a

commercial type operation using large nets to catch larger fish: they guard the Baor to prevent

illegal fishing. Members are divided into 13 groups and each group is responsible for

management of one Komor or local fishing ground;

Small scale fishing, undertaken by the same group of fishermen to catch small fish for their own

consumption and as a source of income. They catch small indigenous species and use small

mesh sized nets and handmade traps to catch small fish.

The community fishery relies heavily on regular stocking of the Baor by Department of Fisheries

which is undertaken year-round and harvesting of the fish is undertaken multiple times between

September and June (the dry season). There is a fish target of 92 tons annually and when this is

reached fishing is stopped.

Fish are introduced every year to the Baor with 16.00 MT of fish fry released in 2019/20 at an

estimated cost of BDT 2,000,000. Table 33 above indicates details of fish species stocked last

year.

The carp species used for stocking are either from other parts of the world or are species from

other parts of the region. This is the first year that Chital is stocked in the lake. Chital is a native

carnivorous species which preys on small indigenous species; the species has been intentionally

removed elsewhere from closed aquatic ecosystems to ensure the protection of smaller species

on which small scale fishing relies at the Baor.

The SIA study confirms the importance of fishing income for the people around the Baor. All the

210 households surveyed engaged in fishing for their main or as a secondary source of income

and 57.6% of families went fishing more than 22 days per year. 78.2% of households had 1 to 3

members engaged directly in fishing as their primary activity. Income from fishing contributed on



average 75,220 BDT (US$ 887) to surveyed households, or more than half the total household

income of 139,503 BDT (US$ 1644) of the people in the Baor area.

There are various ecosystems service the Baor provides to local people which may be impacted

by the Subproject. The main service, as already described, is the provision of fish as a source of

food and livelihood. The resource on which the 13 main fishing groups rely is, however, based

mainly on introduced carp species which compete with indigenous fish. Without stocking of the

Baor the Department of Fisheries organised commercial type fishery would have significantly

reduced income if it could exist at all. The indigenous species do, however, provide important

ecosystem services and the villagers rely in part on this source for food and some income.

Other ecosystem services identified at the Baor are:

Water is pumped from the lake for irrigation purposes during the dry season and provides

important input to agricultural production;

Clothes washing and bathing by the local community (the water is occasionally used for cooking

but not for drinking);

Ducks and water birds probably provide a food source to local people;

Jute Retting with farmers using the Baor to submerge, soak and clean fibres;

Recreational boating activities, ecotourism and ornithology;.

The fishermen are mainly from the Hindu faith and they use the lake side for their Puja and

Ganga Puja harvest festival and cultural services which take place on the banks of the Baor.

The Subproject has a small footprint and is not polluting and is not anticipated to have significant

impact on any of the activities and services identified above which occur mainly around the

perimeter and edges of the Baor.

It is unclear the extent of impact the Subproject will have on fish numbers available in the Baor for

local fishermen and this needs to be monitored in future as part of the Subproject monitoring

program. The Subproject will not trigger any criteria with regard to any long-term impacts to

ecosystems services and cultural values.

Although the panels can act as fish sanctuaries, the Subproject is indicated as a concern to

fishermen on the lake who fear that catches and livelihood income will be reduced. There was

particular concern that fish can hide under the platforms and evade capture and that the panels

should be screened off some way so that fish cannot shelter beneath the PV panels. It is regarded

as impractical to screen off the panels; this will just reduce potential fish habitat and may itself result

in reduced fish numbers. This should be discussed with the fishing community in conjunction with

the SIA benefits package which is intended as compensation for lost income and potential reduction

in fishing catch. The fish population will also be monitored during the Subproject life to determine

if there is impact from the panels.

Fishing activity is undertaken most of the year from August through to July and stocking takes place

most of the year. The wet season is the time of least activity. It is proposed that the Subproject is

undertaken in the six month period beginning July. The best solution to having least impact to

fishing is for the contractor to consult with the Community Fishing Groups and the Department of

Fisheries and schedule activities, particularly for the placing of any anchors, to ensure least impact

to fishing.



7.2.4 Site clearance and site preparation

During the construction phase of the Subproject, a small amount of land clearance and preparation

will be required for certain support infrastructure i.e. for a storage area, float assembly area,

associated road and drainage construction and maybe for a small workers camp. There may be

some impact to topsoil and soil quality and soil characteristics may deteriorate. There is also the

potential for oil contamination (discussed in Section 7.2.9).

The proposed assembly area identified is approximately 1,400 m2 and the site is relatively flat.

Some landfilling is required in places and fill in others to level the site for a flat assembly surface.

The Subproject does not include major excavation works during a short 6-month construction

phase, and any residual, solid soil waste will be small. Any unused excavated soil will be disposed

of in designated areas which will be stipulated in a final Waste Management Plan. Topsoil will be

removed, stored and used in restoring the site. Any revegetation will be undertaken with native

species. The Baor banks are steep and it is intended that a pulley system is used to lower the

floating platform into the Baor surface.

Site clearing and site preparation activities will also result in loss of some vegetation cover (grass

and shrubs). A small area of existing vegetation/trees may also need to be cut down or cutback

along the route of the new transmission lines, from the water body to the existing substation. A

small amount of secondary vegetation damage may occur during the stringing of transmission lines.

This will be a minor impact and losses, if any, will be assessed and compensated for by agreement.

Impacts will be minor and can be mitigated.

7.2.5 Impact to local roads and traffic

The solar cells and floating components for the Subproject are likely to be manufactured overseas

in Singapore, India or China. It is calculated that for transportation of the HDPE floats required for

the Subproject, between 18 to 29 container loads are needed to deliver 9 MW of resulting power

for the Subproject (RINA Feasibility Study). This means an increase of less than 1.5 vehicles per

day over the 6 month Subproject life. Imported components will be transported by road from

Chittagong port. There is the possibility that manufacture of the floats can take place in country but

any decision to do this would only be taken at Subproject tender time.

Access to the lake and proposed assembly area is by a herringbone brick surfaced road at one end

merging into an earth road at the Baor edge; there are some sharp turns on this road. This access

will be improved and sealed at Subproject cost. This road connects to the regional asphalt paved

road which is approximately 6 metres wide.

During construction, a temporary storage container at the lake side will be used to house daily

deliveries of the floaters, any assembly kit and PV modules. The equipment will need to be

transported to the Baor on a daily basis from the PBS BREB warehouse, at Jessore where there is

space for storage and where there is road access for large (40 ft) lorries from the port. Smaller

vehicles will then move the components to the assembly area on the Baor.

Some road crossing sites may be temporarily impacted during the process of installation and

stringing of transmission lines between new power poles. There will be some small short-term

increase in the number of vehicles in the area with increased risk of traffic accidents.



The Subproject contractor will develop a Traffic Management Plan ensuring measures, such as

moving loads out of peak hour traffic and ensuring traffic safety training for its workforce.

Procedures will be put in place informing residents in advance of the need for any temporary

closures. The Management Plan will also include navigation and water movements during

construction and operations; it will particularly define arrangements for informing local people and

authorities when the PV platforms are towed into place and secured.

Impacts are regarded as small, over a short construction period, and can be mitigated with

management measures.

During the operations phase there is negligible vehicle traffic associated with the Subproject and

the Traffic Management Plan will be in place to cover traffic movements on the water.

7.2.6 Navigation and transportation at lakeside and on the water

The Baor is 7 km long and is narrow and local people use a boat service across the lake as

communication between east and west sides. There is a regular boat service route connecting the

communities on the east and west banks of the Baor with movement of food, agricultural goods

and jute across the lake. This route is not affected by the PV panel locations.

The floating solar panels are to be erected on open water used by local people in their small boats

(dungas) around the Baor to catch fish for their own consumption or as part of registered fishing

groups. The new situation will require changes to some local boat movements.

The floating panels layout is designed to allow adequate clearance of boats during the lowest water

levels in the Baor with 20 m clearance to the shore and this will be monitored in the low water dry

season to ensure this clearance is maintained.

For safety during construction, work areas will be properly defined by marked buoys and

appropriate lighting and adequate publicity will be provided to local people of the changed situation.

Potential silting and reduction in water levels is not covered in the feasibility study and this needs

to be considered in detailed design. The impacts of siltation and on the possible removal of existing

sediments and dredging of the lake as requested by fishermen is also not part of feasibility study;

this should be considered later during Subproject operation with detailed technical studies and an

environmental assessment of potential impacts.

7.2.7 Air quality and noise quality

Air and noise quality can be affected during the six months of Subproject construction with the use

of equipment and machinery for such activities as:

Temporary and permanent road construction/improvements to existing access roads/tracks;

Site preparation work for the floatation and solar panel storage and assembly area where the

solar facility is floated out into the water;

Temporary access for transmission line pole placement and stringing of lines between

poles; and

Possible construction of a small workers camp.



Loading and unloading of any materials and components and traffic movements along unsealed

roads can generate dust and other polluting gases (e.g. CO, SOx, NOx and hydrocarbons) and

there will also be some deterioration in noise quality. There will be some road construction and

traffic movements and the need to suppress dust particularly close to homes of local residents

along the approach road to the panel assembly site.

Air quality and noise impacts will be small and manageable during the construction phase. There

will, however, be measures in place for air and noise mitigation included in the IEE mitigation plan

i.e.

All vehicles to carry valid fitness certificates issued by BRTA and renewed annually under the

Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1983, Section 48, Chapter IV and the rules thereunder;

All construction vehicles and equipment to be maintained as per manufacturer’s

recommendations and to conform to good industrial practice;

Avoid construction activity at night-time with work to be restricted to sociable hours (07.00 am

to 18.00 pm);

Site speed limits of 10 km per hour in construction areas and posted. Water to be sprayed on

roads to suppress dust in dry season and a spraying schedule to be prepared by the contractor;

Any construction vehicles carrying loose materials to be securely covered;

Temporary fencing to be installed at construction and assembly site, and any camps;

Ensure that any generators and heavy-duty equipment are insulated or placed in enclosures to

assist in minimizing noise levels;

Prepare and implement a vehicle and machine maintenance program, with construction

machinery to be kept in good condition to reduce noise generation;

Optimise scheduling of vehicles and construction equipment to reduce noise;

Monitor noise levels on site and adjoining roads; and

Develop a Noise and Dust Control Plan in consultation with community prior to the beginning

of construction.

As part of a Noise and Dust Control Plan contractors will be obliged to undertake base line sampling

for noise and air quality prior to construction at areas such as the float/panel assembly areas,

Subproject lake side activities and along the transmission line. Local noise receptors such as

houses, and school facilities will be identified and sampled. Monitoring will be required as part of

the Subproject approved IEE/EIA.

During operation of the solar facility such impacts will be negligible.

7.2.8 Changes to water quality at the Baor

Water Quality measurements were undertaken as part of the Strategic Environmental Assessment

(SEA) study in the wet and dry season 2019/2020 and this information will form the base line for

further water quality studies.

The study found there were no significant differences in water quality parameters measured at the

surface (above 2 m) compared with water quality measured below 2 m depth. However, water

quality variability between sampling locations was notable for pH, DO, Chlorophyll-a and blue-green

algae. This indicates that the water has likely been affected by surrounding land uses and terrestrial

inputs. Joydia Baor is a small water body with a maximum recorded depth of 10.3 m, with the

deepest water quality profile taken at 7 m. As expected, water temperature at the surface (above



2 m) was 2°C warmer in the afternoon compared with the morning. The water pH was neutral to

alkaline (pH 8 to 8.5) in both wet and dry seasons. The lowest pH values (below 8) were measured

below 4 m depth. Slightly higher electrical conductivity values were recorded in the wet season

compared with the dry season. This could be due to the higher inputs from runoff and storm water

and water mixing in the wet season. Overall, the conductivity at Joydia Baor was low to medium

(276 to 348 µs/cm) and TDS remained unchanged with depths and seasons. Dissolved oxygen

ranged from 6 to 10 mg/L in the surface layer but decreased to 1.3 mg/L below 5 m in the wet

season. DO was relatively evenly distributed across the water profile in the dry season (6 to

9.5 mg/L). The water column remained in an oxidizing state at most of the sampling locations. In

the case of four of the sample sites, however, reducing conditions were measured along the entire

water profile indicating that there was some degree of anthropogenic inputs present. This is

consistent with a self-cleaning process in the Baor where bacteria decompose dead tissues and

contaminants, which uses up a substantial amount of the available oxygen in the water. Medium

levels of chlorophyll (up to 22 µg/L) were measured in the wet season. These levels decreased in

the dry season (max. at 6.7 µg/L). Insignificant concentrations of blue-green algae indicated that

the Baor has good quality primary production (phytoplankton). Very low turbidity levels were

recorded (approx. 2 FNU) throughout the water column in both wet and dry seasons.

Joydia is classified as a hypereutrophic system based on its overall water quality index (TSI),

meaning that the waterbody has an overabundance of nutrients and can potentially support the

highest level of biological productivity (e.g., an abundance of algae, aquatic plants, birds, fish,

insects, and other wildlife). However, in both wet and dry seasons the biodiversity index of benthic

macroinvertebrate, phytoplankton and zooplankton in Joydia Baor were classified as medium. This

could be due to some degree of anthropogenic inputs present in the Baor particularly in the middle

section where the greatest amount of anthropological activities was observed. This area is also

near a small inflow channel that enters the waterbody on the north side and may be contributing to

the observed results. Highest Chlorophyll-a, BGA and negative ORP were detected in this area.

Cyanobacteria (Oscillatoria, Merismopedia, Microcystis and Pelonema) were detected at most

locations across the Baor in the wet season and only at one in the dry season. These results were

consistent with the high levels of Chlorophyll-a and BGA and observed dissolved oxygen conditions

of the Baor.

The hypereutrophic classification means that the Baor is likely to be susceptible to algal blooms at

certain times of the year.

The Baor is already a much-changed system with village housing and garden land down to the

water’s edge. A number of anthropogenic activities add to impacts and reduction in water quality in

what is a relatively small and shallow water body i.e.

Many of the farmers around the Baor perform jute-retting or rotting directly in the Baor water,

to more easily extract jute fibres;

Human washing and bathing, clothes washing of lake side communities directly in the Baor;

Use of agricultural chemicals with run off to the Baor;

Adding fish food to the Baor in the dry season to feed released fish fry; and

Duck and geese raising of birds in the water and at the water’s edge.

The Subproject may also further impact water quality. In the construction phase there is potential

to contaminate water and affect human welfare, as well as fish breeding and aquatic habitat and in

turn affect the fishing livelihood of local people. Such Subproject activity can include small amounts



of land clearing, backfilling and levelling with increased chance of run-off to the Baor. Soil erosion

and run off are of particular concern during the monsoon season (May to October)

During anchoring the floating platforms, there will be disturbance of lake bottom sediments. The

details of the anchoring mechanism to be adopted are the subject to further technical studies. The

anchor process can be carefully managed and complied with and anchors lowered slowly to reduce

any disturbance and the dispersal of sediments can be kept to a minimum. Normally, the position

of anchors can be determined accurately, and the anchors then slowly lowered by cranes so that

the impact force of collision between the anchor system and the lakebed is reduced. With proper

procedures the impact to water quality should be small and temporary. The contractor will be

obliged to submit a management plan with respect to final placement of any anchors to minimise

disturbance of sediments and impact to turbidity. With proper procedures the impact to water quality

should be small and temporary.

Domestic wastewater from the Subproject also has the potential to contaminate the lake from toilets

and washing facilities during construction. With a small work force and short construction period

and proper sanitary arrangements for workers, this impact can be managed and should be minor.

During construction and operations there is the possibility of contamination of water bodies and soil

from spillage of oil from equipment and from transformer oil and from potentially inadequate

containment and handling procedures where hazardous liquid materials are stored and used

including over water on the floating facilities. Impacts from these sources can be minimised by

proper mitigation, by proper containment and waste management planning. Bunded transformers

will be stipulated for use over water to avoid water contamination. A spill management plan will be

developed prior to construction to be implemented in the event of unexpected releases and a draft

spill management plan is attached in Appendix J. It is likely that oil type transformers may be

preferred for the reasons given in Section 3.1.2 of this report. It is therefore recommended that if

oil type transformers are employed that clauses should be added in the contracts that only

biodegradable natural esters are used instead of oils and that adequate bunding will be required.

Materials and metal parts on floating facilities are subject to accelerated corrosion with exposure

to water and UV radiation. FPV pontoon mounting structures are typically manufactured from HDPE

plastic or similar inert materials. Likewise, floating raft installations make use of HDPE piping and

marine grade stainless steel structural elements. The standard PV modules used are typically

aluminium framed and pose no risk of water contamination. However, the contacts for the

Subproject will state that inert materials will be used for all panel materials. Any mooring ropes will

be checked regularly and replaced to ensure that microplastics do not enter the water and food

chain.

The PV panels and the floating pontoon structure supporting the panels will shade the water body

and reduce water evaporation, reduce solar energy absorption, decrease water temperature, and

increase the dissolved oxygen concentration in the water. There will be a changed environment in

the water area beneath the panels and it is likely that this can provide favourable conditions for fish

and aquatic life to flourish and result in positive impacts. The panel areas may, therefore, function

as sanctuaries for fish.

To ensure some light penetration to the surface of the water beneath the pontoon structure, the

design will recommend the use of dual glass modules and allow for some gaps in the solar panel

layout and this provision will be included in contracts.



It is recognised that locating a floating solar PV system on large water bodies is a new concept and

there are few largescale projects worldwide that have been in existence for longer than 7 years. In

practice there may be impacts to water bodies over the Subproject life that are unforeseeable. With

little long-term research into how a lake system would be impacted by a floating solar PV system,

it is still not fully clear as to the potential environmental effects (positive and/or negative). Any

impact will likely be proportional to cover of the lake and it is wise, therefore, to be conservative

and keep the percentage of the lake coverage down. It is proposed that 5.8% of the Joydia total

lake surface will be covered by this proposal and this is a precaution against any unforeseen

impacts.

Any foreseeable negative impact of the PV panel system on the surface of the lake is considered

manageable, and there are likely to be positive impacts to water quality and possibly for fish species

and fish numbers. However, because of the water quality pressures already described, it will be

necessary to carefully monitor water quality once the PV panels are in place and assess if there

are any impacts as a result of the Subproject.

7.2.9 Construction waste and hazardous waste generation

Apart from cut and fill soil activities already discussed, the Subproject will generate various non-

hazardous waste streams mainly during the construction phase from activities at vehicle/machinery

maintenance and repair areas, any camps, working and storage areas. Waste materials will be

diverse in nature (e.g. timber, plywood, metals, concrete, gravel, stone, glass, topsoil, green waste,

plastics, PVC, mixed wastes).

Hazardous wastes will also be generated including oils (from various sources e.g. transformers and

vehicles), medical waste, sewage (from septic tanks at site, maybe also on the floating panels and

at camps), contaminated soil, vehicle batteries and oil filters, and it will be necessary to set up

procedures for separation, containment, recycling and agree final disposal of all waste streams. A

Solid and Hazardous Management Plan will be in place prior to construction activity and also for

the operations phase of the Subproject. A draft example of a Solid and Hazardous Waste

Management Plan is attached in Appendix K.

Provided the Waste Management Plan is implemented in accordance with the recommendations

therein the environmental impacts associated with waste management are expected to be

manageable.

7.2.10 Land use and land value

The land around the water body is either village land for local housing or farmland with some fruit

and other trees. There will be only a very small change in land use as a result of Subproject

development.

The Subproject has a relatively small footprint and employs few people during operations. The

Subproject will contribute to consistency of overall power availability in the country. There is

anticipated to be minimal direct impact on land values as a result of the Subproject.



7.2.11 Habitat and aquatic life impacts

There will be impacts to animal and aquatic life during construction and some impacts to aquatic

life and habitat loss during operations.

Joydia is situated within a mosaic of modified habitats. While the Baor itself is a naturally formed

oxbow lake, the plant and animals present at the lake are largely formed of deliberately introduced

species. Human activity has modified the area’s primary ecological functions and species

composition. Many non-native species are present in association with homestead vegetation which

provides habitat of limited value for bird species.

The SEA surveyed the littoral vegetation present at the Baor during the dry season, January 2020.

The survey observed that overhanging vegetation within the littoral area was rare and most mature

riparian vegetation is set back at least 1-2 m from the water’s edge owing to low water levels during

summer months. Crops frequently border the waters’ edge, however these were typically shorter

species such as red spinach or corn that provided little to no shade in the littoral zone. Vegetation

was dominated by three species. Floating water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) was typically

present up to the waterline and was also noted to be exceptionally abundant during the wet season.

The two other species, Japanese bamboo (Blyxa japonica) and hornwort (Ceratophyllum

demersum) were both submerged species and appeared in patches throughout the littoral zone

between 0.1 to approximately 4.5 m.

The SEA identified bird species listed as critically endangered and endangered which are known

or likely to occur at Joydia Baor. The Indian spotted eagle (endangered) and the common pochard

which is listed as vulnerable were considered as candidate bird species to potentially trigger IUCN

and SPS criteria. (see SEA Study). Congregatory species were also considered.

The SEA also identified 15 fish species which are critically endangered and/or endangered and are

known or likely to occur at Joydia.

Wet and dry season bird field surveys were also undertaken directly in the SIA and 37 species of

which 24 are considered riparian vegetation dependent were identified. 10 species were seen in

both seasons, while 12 species were present only in dry season and are considered as migrants.

Waterbirds were present in large numbers included cormorants and lesser whistling ducks which

were present in wet and dry seasons, suggesting it is an important roosting area. Birds were less

inclined to use the northern section of the Baor where the panels are to be located. The northern

side supported less aquatic vegetation and roosts were typically associated with fish komors in the

mid and southern parts of the Baor. Fewer ducks were noted than expected.

The SEA also undertook fish survey in wet and dry and identified a total of 35 fish species directly

observed at the Baor. 21 species were observed only in the wet season and six only in the dry. The

majority of fish species were found to be habitat generalist that readily inhabit a variety of

waterbodies such as lakes, ponds and rivers. Hotspots of fishing activity where seen in the centre

of the waterbody in association with the fish sanctuaries.

The SEA study found that there are no bird or fish species present at the Subproject site which

would trigger any critical habitat under the relevant IFC guidelines or the corresponding ADB SPS

guidelines.



With regard to terrestrial species likely to be impacted by the Subproject, there is little suitable

habitat for mammals of any size in the area of the Baor and no mammal species endangered or

critically endangered are found close to the Baor. Thirteen terrestrial species 7 of which were

amphibians were assessed as likely to be present in the wider area which might trigger IFC SBS

habitat trigger criteria for endangered species. Assessment of species likely to be present is

ongoing and will be finalised at the IEE/EIA stage of the Subproject.

The Baor provides important income and sustenance to local people from fishing and some tourism

services which has been discussed (see Potential Loss to Livelihood Food and Ecosysems

Services).

The SEA examined various aspects of potential impact to birds and fish life at the site i.e. habitat

disturbance, habitat degradation, change to aquatic systems, aquatic habitat loss and mortality.

The study indicates potential for impacts to bird and aquatic systems, some of which are potentially

long term and makes recommendations for mitigation measures which can reduce impacts to

acceptable levels.

The SEA also points out that the potential introduction of invasive species could have

consequences through loss of native species, through habitat degradation and with significant

impact to aquatic species. The susceptibility of the system to invasive species and the potential

occurrence of edge effects and disruption to riparian vegetation is considered high if there were to

be significant land clearance at the lake with alterations to runoff and erosion.

The lake side areas required for the Subproject are small and mainly required for the brief

construction period. However, the O & M contractor providing services for the Subproject who will

have responsibility for compliance during construction and will also be required:

To ensure a risk analysis for invasive species is conducted prior to the start of the Subproject;

Develop an erosion and sediment management plan to prevent runoff entering

waterbodies; and

Ensure materials that will not affect water quality are used for solar installations.

It is recommended that there should be roosting, and resting platforms installed for water birds

(cormorants, egrets and darters) in locations away from the PV panels and the main navigation

channels. This will provide alternative sites for birds to congregate and also allow the scaring away

of birds from the PV panels to avoid soiling and loss of generation capacity, as per measures

included in the Subproject feasibility study. It will also allow the installation of appropriate lighting

taking into consideration of bright lighting attracting migrating birds and the need for human safety

of navigation at night.

With the various implementation, avoidance and mitigation measures, recommended by SEA study

and included in EMP mitigation, potential impact magnitude to birds and fish and their habitat can

be reduced to acceptable levels.

7.2.12 Impacts on protected and internationally recognised areas

There are no UNESCO natural world heritage areas or RAMSAR wetlands of international

importance affected by the Subproject (Joydia is more than 50 km from the Sundarbans).



The Baor is within a general delta area recognised as globally important for the conservation of bird

populations. There is also a Wildlife Sanctuary in Narendrapor over the border in West Bengal just

to the west of Kolkata, India which is within 50 km of the Baor.

The Subproject is not located within any protected areas.

7.2.13 Social impacts associated with construction

Social impacts include potential for conflict between workers from outside the Subproject with local

people. There can be pressure on local infrastructure and services, increase in commodity prices,

conflict/tension between migrant and local people and, increased risk of infectious diseases

including sexual transmitted infections.

If workers are employed from outside the immediate Subproject area, they will be housed in a small

camp inside a designated site boundary for the length of the construction phase. However,

contractors and sub-contractors will be strongly encouraged to employ and train local labour to

reduce or eliminate any requirements for a camp.

The Subproject will be required to implement communicable disease awareness and prevention

measures targeting risk of spread of STIs and HIV. The Subproject work force is small in scale and

limited to a short construction period.

Proper health and safety plans will be in place to minimise impacts and residual impacts are

anticipated to be minor.

7.2.14 Employment opportunities and income generation

For construction, there will be need for a limited number of skilled and non-skilled jobs and some

few employment opportunities will be created for people in the immediate Subproject area i.e.

unloading parts, moving floatation parts and solar panels by forklift trucks to the final assembly

location, operating pulley system and putting together the floatation structures. The number of jobs

during construction – mainly unskilled for the six months of construction activities are few

(maximum 30) and will result in only a small increase in productivity and capital income of the

people in the area. For the operations phase for cleaning panels, removing weed and security, a

team of local workers will be employed and trained.

7.2.15 Industrial and economic development

The Subproject will contribute to electricity supply in the area and to the country as a whole and to

general industrial development. The country has been hampered by undersupply and the

Subproject will help boost supply and reliability and will encourage growth in all development

sectors. This will result in increased productivity and GDP and support the national economy.

7.2.16 Human safety

During construction and operations there will be human safety issues. During construction the

safety of workers, local villagers and land users will need to be protected. Appropriate safety

measures will be required. The Subproject contractor and sub-contractors will be required to

develop an occupational health and safety policy and plan prior to construction work to ensure



safety measures are in place and ensure employees have been trained. In particular there will be

risks in working over water and during project operations.

The cleaning of the solar panels and the removal of floating weed and other debris from the panels

will be ongoing activities for employees and these workers will be properly trained in the cleaning

and de-weeding process. For all workers including security staff, training in the use of lifejackets

and buoyance aids will be essential.

Community health/safety will also be at risk during construction and operations phases and

unauthorised entry to the general public will not be allowed. Work areas including storage and

assembly areas will be fenced off and appropriate signage will be posted at site with health and

safety aspects explained. For operations, the designated area for a boat, and buildings or

designated areas for storage of cleaning equipment and materials and any staff facilities including

toilets will be fenced. A Health and Safety plan will be in place to minimise impacts in both

construction and operations phases.

The O&M contractor providing services to the Subproject will have responsibility for compliance

during construction. To ensure the Subproject is prepared to cope with emergencies e.g. fire,

abnormal weather events, accidental oil spills etc. an emergency response plan will be developed

prior to the construction and operation phases of the Subproject. The plan will develop procedures

to define communications links for local and regional response and the relevant health authorities

and will stipulate available dedicated equipment (boats, oil spill equipment etc.).

A risk assessment will be required to inform an occupational and community health and safety

management plan is in place and health and safety plans will be developed to minimize impacts.

With respect to electromagnetic fields, the Project will conform to ICNRIP guidelines as per SPS

2009 EHS guidelines.

7.2.17 Climate change impacts

The majority of climate change projections for Bangladesh suggest that the average temperature

in the country is likely to increase by 1°C by 2030, 1.4°C by 2050 and 2.4°C by 2100 (Ramamasy

& Baas, 2007) against the baseline period (1960-1990), and there will be a significant increasing

trends in cyclone frequency and intensity over the Bay of Bengal during November and May.

The Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC from 2014 stresses that climate change-related risks

stemming from extreme events such as extreme precipitation, cyclones and flooding can already

be observed in Bangladesh. Global average tropical cyclone wind speed and rainfall is likely to

increase in the future, and the global average frequency of tropical cyclones is likely to decrease

or remain unchanged.

The main Climate change risks for the lake are those arising from an increase in extreme rainfall

events and cyclones. It is expected that these hazards will be exacerbated by changes in the

climate and the intensity of climatic disasters like tropical cyclones, droughts and floods into the

future and these need to be fully taken into account during the detailed design phase of the

Subproject; this is especially so in relation to the sensitivity of FVP infrastructure to various factors

including increasing temperature, increase in extreme hot days, increasing intensity of rainfall,



increased frequency and intensity of flood events; and increasing intensity of wind velocity and

cyclone weather conditions.

For FVP infrastructure design and construction standards it is recommended in the Climate Risk

and Vulnerability Assessment, that the effects of changing flood levels and behaviour due to climate

change be taken into account and accommodated in the Subproject design process.

FVP infrastructure placement, and alignment will be located in low risk areas to minimise system

vulnerabilities to possible climate impacts and threats from string winds, currents and debris

associated with floods.

Suitable materials will be identified for construction of infrastructure assets and structures to

minimise damage and/or deterioration of FVP infrastructure in the light of cyclonic winds and other

related climate change impacts and ensure that platforms can withstand harsh environmental

conditions for a minimum of 30 years operations.

Appropriate international standards and guidelines (IEC and ASTM guidelines) will be applied to

cover PV modules, PV inverters, system design and installation, PV system performance and

operations, floating platform and floaters as recommended in the Climate Risk and Vulnerability

Assessment undertaken for the Subproject. (see Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment for

the Subproject).

7.2.18 Objects of cultural or achaeological importance

The land requirement for the Subproject is small and there is no evidence of sites of cultural and

archaeological importance in the area though there are various tombs, temples and other sites in

the Jessore area and the country as a whole.

There is still the possibility to unearth or discover objects of a cultural nature during Subproject

activities that will need to be protected. It is, therefore, prescient to have in place some mechanism

to ensure that, if there are discoveries, that, there is a procedure to handle this. In the event that

object of cultural or archaeological nature are unearthed, work will be stopped temporarily, and the

discovery referred to the Department of Archaeology, Ministry of Cultural Affairs GOB who are the

responsible authority under the Antiquities Act 1968. Work is only to recommence with the approval

of the Department of Archaeology, Ministry of Cultural Affairs.

7.2.19 Visual intrusion and reflection issues

As with other power generation and transmission infrastructure (e.g. transmission towers, wind

farms) there will be some inevitable visual intrusion on the landscape and waterbody from the

Subproject. The solar panels sit relatively low in the water, (a few meters high) and do not dominate

the landscape in the way transmission towers and wind farms do. The new solar arrays may also

prove a source of interest to local visitors. There is potential for reflection from the large expanse

of panels and specifically to any air traffic and pilots in the area. PV panels are designed to absorb

light and not reflect it; less light is actually reflected than directly received from the sun. Studies

(e.g. General Design Procedures for Airport-Based Solar Photovoltaic Systems, Energies 2017)

conclude that reflection from panels is less intense than from water bodies i.e. modern PV panels

have less intense reflectivity than still surface water. It is likely, therefore, that aquavoltaics will

contribute to reducing water surface glare from the water body on which they are located.



There are no airports within 15 km of the Subproject site and reflection is not anticipated to be an

issue from the Subproject.

7.2.20 Subproject decommissioning

At the time of decommissioning the PV floatation modules and cells can readily be removed and

recycled. The PV modules do not contain any hazardous materials and can be sent to landfill if

necessary; contracts will, nevertheless, stipulate that the construction materials used in the

Subproject will contain no toxic materials.

At the conclusion of the 30 year project life, an economic assessment will be conducted to

determine whether the life of the Subproject will be extended and if the Subproject complies with

IFC/World Bank Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines and all other subsequently

recognised applicable standards.

7.3 Conclusions and recommendations

The key findings and recommendation of the environmental assessment are summarised as

follows:

The Subproject construction phase involves the assembly of parts (PV cells and floatation units)

and the fixing this infrastructure on the Baor surface. The construction phase will take just six

months.

Potential environmental impacts are associated with the Subproject during the construction and

operation phases, including impacts on land, water quality, wildlife, fishing, movements on the

Baor.

Placing the FPV solar panels on water means only a relatively small amount of land surface

area is required for Subproject operation in a region of high population densities; the Subproject

has only a small environmental footprint.

There may be some irreversible impacts to aquatic environment over the Subproject life, but

most environmental adverse impacts are temporary and are not likely to extend beyond the

environmental footprint of the Subproject. If eventually the panels are to be removed, most

impacts can be regarded as reversible in nature.

The Subproject is a renewable energy project which is not resource intensive and by nature is

not polluting. The FPV structures are manufactured from inert material and the PV modules

pose no risk of water contamination. The Subproject avoids the need for alternative

consumption of fossil fuels to create the equivalent amount of electric power.

The land required for the Subproject is Government land. The envelope for solar PV activities

and facilities (storage area and assembly area for construction and the PV floating platforms)

will be on government owned and controlled land. The evacuation line will follow along the

existing highway to the existing substation at Kotchandpur.

No indigenous groups are directly impacted by the Subproject.

Total panel coverage has been kept down to less than 6% of the total dry season water surface

area of the Baor, and this is a precaution against unexpected potential negative impacts which

may occur as a result of the Subproject.

The Subproject is not within any protected areas.

The Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) study identifies potential impacts to bird and

fish habitat and the potential introduction of invasive species. With the implementation of the



various, avoidance and mitigation measures recommended in the SEA and included in the IEE

and EMP for the Subproject, impact magnitude can be reduced to minor or acceptable levels.

The placing of floating panels on open water bodies anywhere in Bangladesh presents

exposure to climate risk. The climate risk analysis for the Subproject recommends that, because

of the nature of the Subproject on open waters, and because of prevailing climate and future

projected changes to climate, that the Subproject will be required to be engineered with the

best infrastructure design and construction standards and practises.

Stakeholder consultations were carried out at the Subproject location in November 2019 and

February 2020 to document any issues/concerns and to ensure that such concerns were

addressed in the Subproject design and also in the consideration of compensation measures

which have been included in a Social Management Plan (SMP) for the Subproject.

The Social Impact Assessment Study which was conducted in parallel to this Environmental

Assessment recommends a range of compensation measures as already indicated above in the

Social Chapter of this report, including:

Construction of two gates/grills at the Baor.

Paying the 186 fishing families 20% of the cost of current fishing income (based on fishing

income of households indicated in the SIA social survey) over the 30 life of the Subproject.

Assistance with a lump sum grant for fish feeding.

These measures, more detailed costing and other social mitigation measures are described in more

detail in the Social Impact Assessment Chapter above.

In addition to the proposals in the SIA the Subproject budget will also include the following:

Ongoing survey/monitoring to cover the cost of half yearly surveys for water quality, bird and

aquatic surveys, lake biology (benthic and phytoplankton), lake habitat (side-scan sonar and

field habitat assessments), aquatic species (fishing, fish nursery grounds, eDNA and

consultation with local fishermen), and fish biomass. Also, there is need for fishing catch

surveys in the Subproject area and livelihood surveys in local villages - $60,000 annually in

Subproject costs for first year and then from Subproject revenues.

For the EA to monitor the EMP implementation and monitoring programme which is likely to be

implemented by a private consultant and assist in ADB compliance monitoring and reporting -

$50,000 in the Subproject cost for the first year and then from annual Subproject revenues.

Most impacts environmental impacts identified can be reduced to acceptable levels with the

implementation of various avoidance and mitigation measures proposed in the IEE and EMP along

with those measures recommended in the SEA and SMP.

It is recommended that the Subproject should be categorised as B for ADB environmental

assessment purpose.

The major potential impact from the Subproject will be to fishing activity and the potential lost

revenues, livelihood and food source. It is important that the Sustainable and Renewable Energy

Development Authority (SREDA) work with the Lands Department, Department of Fisheries and

the Baor fishing community to implement the Social Management Plan measures. All stakeholders

need to come to agreement on future leasing arrangements for joint use of the water resource to

allow for fishing activity to continue and for the floating solar power generation Subproject to be

developed.



8 Financial Analysis

8.1 Introduction

The financial evaluation of the proposed investments was carried out in accordance with the ADB

Financial Management and Analysis of Projects.10 The financial evaluation covers the following

output of the technical assistance: Joydia Floating PV power plant.

8.2 Methodology and major assumptions

Cost streams used to determine the financial internal rate of return (FIRR) include capital costs

(excluding price contingencies), operation and maintenance (O&M) costs, and taxes and duties.

The capital costs comprised land development, civil works, equipment, engineering consulting and

Subproject management costs as applicable to the output and contingencies. Taxes and duties

were included, as were financial charges during construction. The weighted average cost of capital

(WACC) was calculated and compared with the FIRR to ascertain financial viability. The anticipated

capital mix of debt to equity was used for estimating the WACC. The sensitivity of the FIRR to

adverse changes in the underlying assumptions was also assessed.

The financial benefit of the Subproject is incremental electricity sales from the floating PV power

plant, valued at 12 BDT/kWh.11 Income tax was computed using the prevailing corporate income

tax rates,12 which were applied to profits.

8.2.1 Subproject cost estimate

The detailed cost estimates includes physical contingencies, price contingencies and interest and

other charges during construction. The estimates have been computed in domestic currency units

in nominal terms; taking into account the effect of domestic and international inflation and foreign

exchange fluctuations. A detailed breakdown of the Subproject cost estimates is included in

Appendix H.

Table 36: Project cost estimates for Joydia Subproject

Sl

No

Item Local currency (million

BDT)

Foreign currency

(million USD)

% of

base

costs Foreign

costs

Local

costs

Total Foreign

costs

Local

costs

Total

A Investment costs (Note-1)

1 Civil works 96 30 126 1.13 0.35 1.49 15%

2 Equipment 433 - 433 5.10 - 5.10 53%

10 ADB: Financial Management and Analysis of Projects, 2005

11 The tariff as applicable for ground mounted solar PV power plants (to be verified with BERC)

12 It has been assumed that the income tax rate applicable to the implementing agency would be 37.5%



Sl

No

Item Local currency (million

BDT)

Foreign currency

(million USD)

% of

base

costs Foreign

costs

Local

costs

Total Foreign

costs

Local

costs

Total

3 Engineering

consulting - design

and supervision

36 - 36 0.43 - 0.43 4%

4 Inland transport - 48 48 - 0.56 0.56 6%

5 Taxes and duties

(Note-2)

- 112 112 - 1.32 1.32 14%

Sub-total (A) 565 190 755 6.65 2.24 8.90 92%

B Other investment costs

1 Land & civil works - 3 3 - 0.04 0.04 0%

2 Environmental and

social costs (Note-3)

- 22 22 - 0.26 0.26 3%

3 Subproject

management &

construction

supervision

- 38 38 - 0.45 0.45 5%

Sub-total (B) - 64 64 - 0.76 0.76 8%

Total base costs (A)

+ (B)

565 255 819 6.65 3.00 9.65 100%

C Contingency

1 Physical (Note-4) 45 20 66 0.53 0.24 0.77 8%

2 Price (Note-5) 26 22 48 0.31 0.26 0.57 6%

Sub-total (C) 71 43 114 0.84 0.50 1.34 14%

D Financial charges during implementation (Note-6)

1 Interest during

implementation

67 5 72 0.78 0.06 0.84 9%

2 Commitment charges 0.98 - 0.98 0.01 - 0.01 0%

3 Front end fee - - - - - - -

Sub-total (D) 68 5 73 0.80 0.06 0.85 9%

Total Subproject

cost (A) + (B) + (C) +

(D)

704 302 1,006 8.29 3.56 11.85 123%

Note:

1. Base Costs are expressed in Jul-20 prices.

2. Taxes have been assumed at an average rate of 26% (tax incidence on solar modules is

11.33% (HSC 8541.40.20; Bangladesh customs/gov.bd ) and VAT Rate is 15% (NRB,

Bangladesh))



3. Environment and Social Mitigation Costs include the following:

a. Ongoing Survey / Monitoring Work to cover bird and aquatic surveys, water quality and

other measures ; US$ 60,000/y, capitalised for first year

b. Environmental monitoring (Hire a consultant to monitor IEE/ EIA compliance and to ensure

proper implementation of mitigation measures; US$ 50,000/y, capitalised for first year

c. Social Costs towards construction of two (2) grill gates, crop compensation, engagement of

social safeguard specialist for monitoring- 10.2 Million BDT (One-Time)

d. Social costs towards other compensation -2.8 Million BDT per year (capitalised for first year)

4. Physical contingencies are computed at 5% of base costs for both LC and FC

5. Price contingencies are based on domestic (for Bangladesh) and international cost escalation

factors as projected by ADB’s Economic and Research Department. Price contingencies have

been computed as per ADB’s Financial Management and Analysis of Projects, 2005:

Inflation projections 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Domestic inflation rate 5.50% 5.80% 5.80% 5.80% 5.80% 5.80%

International inflation rate 2.8% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1%

6. Financial Charges during implementation have been computed assuming financing plan as

described below (Table 37) and lending rate for external loans would be similar to ADB’s

Indicative Lending rate for loans under the LIBOR Based Loan Facility (dated 06-Jan-20). It

includes interest during construction (IDC) and commitment charges. IDC has been computed

at the 5-year forward LIBOR Rate+ a spread of 0.30%. IDC to be paid for GOB Debt has been

computed at 3% p.a.

A breakdown of the Subproject cost estimates is included in Appendix H.

8.3 Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC)

WACC, calculated in real terms is 0.8%, considering loans from external financing to be extended

to the government, which will be on-lent to the implementing agency. On-lending of external

financing will be in foreign currency (US$) for a period of 20 years with a 5-year grace period.

Government on-lending margins and lending rates have been modelled in accordance with the

GOB regulations: 4% on-lending margin to the implementing agency; and a local currency loan

interest rate of 3%.13 The domestic annual inflation rate was assumed to be 5.5% for the local

currency loans. The return on government equity and internal funds was estimated at 12.25%.14

Table 37 shows the calculation of WACC for each output.

Table 37: Weighted Average Cost of Capital

Item Amount

(million BDT)

Weight (%) Pre-tax

nominal cost

(%)

Post-tax real

cost (%)

External financing 633 63 4.0 (0.58)

Govt. loan 122 12 4.0 (3.12)

Equity 251 25 9.25 3.26

13 Ministry of Finance, GOB, Lending and re-lending terms of local/ foreign currency loans, 2011

14 Cut off yield of GOB treasury bonds (15 Year) 9.25% and sector premium of 3%



Item Amount

(million BDT)

Weight (%) Pre-tax

nominal cost

(%)

Post-tax real

cost (%)

Total 1,006 0.8

8.4 Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR)

The Subproject involves the construction of a 7.5 MW floating solar PV power plant15 which would

be able to operate at a 17% annual capacity factor, to generate 13.6 Giga-Watt-hour (GWh) per

year. Linear degradation of output has been considered at the rate of 0.4% per year.

For the purpose of financial analysis, the rate for ground mounted solar photovoltaic projects, of

12.00 BDT/kWh has been considered. The applicability of this tariff needs further assessment.

Cash flows for Joydia are summarised in Table 38. The FIRR is 8.1%.

Table 38: FIRR for Joydia project (amounts are in million BDT)

FY ending Benefits Costs Taxes New Cash

Flow Sales Capital O&M

2021 - (99) - - (99)

2022 - (365) - - (365)

2023 - (421) - - (421)

2024 163 - (23) (39) 101

2025 162 - (34) (34) 94

2026 161 - (34) (34) 93

2027 161 - (34) (34) 93

2028 160 - (34) (34) 93

2029 160 - (34) (34) 92

2030 159 - (34) (33) 92

2031 158 - (34) (33) 91

2032 158 - (33) (33) 91

2033 157 - (33) (33) 91

2034 156 - (33) (33) 90

2035 156 - (33) (32) 90

2036 155 - (33) (32) 90

2037 154 - (33) (32) 89

2038 154 - (33) (32) 89

2039 153 - (33) (31) 89

2040 152 - (33) (31) 88

15 Site rating 9,072 kWp



FY ending Benefits Costs Taxes New Cash

Flow Sales Capital O&M

2041 152 - (33) (31) 88

2042 151 - (33) (31) 88

2043 150 - (32) (31) 87

2044 150 - (32) (30) 87

2045 149 - (32) (30) 87

Net Present Value (NPV) at WACC of: 0.8% 908

Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR): 8.1%

() = negative, O&M = operation and maintenance; WACC: Weighted average cost of capital

8.4.1 Sensitivity analysis

Analyses were carried out to examine the sensitivity of the FIRR to changes in assumed values of

the key variables. Since the FIRR values easily exceed the WACC rate, only the adverse changes

were considered in the sensitivity analysis. The changes considered were 10% increase in

investment cost, 10% increase in operation and maintenance costs, and 10% decrease in benefits.

The FIRR was also computed for generation corresponding to P75 and P90. Table 39 shows the

effect of these changes on the FIRR. The financial performance of the Joydia Subproject is robust

for all the sensitivities tested.

Table 39: Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity parameter Variation (%) Joydia (%)

Base case 8.1%

1. Subproject capital costs +10 7.0%

2. Operating costs +10 7.8%

3. Reduction in benefits -10 6.8%

4. Reduction in benefits Generation P75 7.6%

5. Reduction in benefits Generation P90 7.2%

6. Reduction in benefits Tariff @ 8 BDT/kWh 3.3%

In the recent past, GOB has been availing loan in Euro, at a lower cost than foreign currency loans

available in US$, the financial performance would be better, if the external financing is in EURO

instead of US$. The IRR calculated is for the loan period of 20 years, against the Subproject lifetime

of 30 years.

8.5 Conclusion

The FIRR is expected to comfortably exceed the WACC for the Subproject. Sensitivity and risk

analysis indicate that the FIRR are robust under most conditions. As such, the investment

Subproject is concluded to be financially viable.



9 Economic Assessment

9.1 Power sector and renewable energy development

9.1.1 Renewable energy policy target

The Bangladesh power sector is under the policy oversight of the Power Division of the Ministry of

Power, Energy and Mineral Resources (MPEMR) and regulatory oversight of the Bangladesh

Energy Regulatory Commission (BERC). The power industry is unbundled into three segments:

generation, transmission and distribution, with the Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB)

acting as the single buyer of power from generation companies and seller of bulk power to

distribution utilities. Power generation is carried out by public generation companies (e.g. Ashuganj

Power Station Company, Electricity Generation Company of Bangladesh, North-West Power

Generation Company, and Rural Power Company) and independent power producers (IPPs).

Power transmission is carried out by the Power Grid Company of Bangladesh (PGCB) Limited.

Power distribution is undertaken by BPDB (most urban centres except Dhaka City); the Dhaka

Power Distribution Company and Dhaka Electric Supply Company (Dhaka City); West Zone Power

Distribution Company (Khulna); and the Bangladesh Rural Electrification Board (BREB) (rest of the

country).

The Power Division of MPEMR is responsible for the formulation of the Renewable Energy Policy.

The Sustainable Renewable Energy Development Authority (SREDA), established in 2012 under

the SREDA Act, is tasked to be the nodal agency in promoting and developing renewable energy

in the country. In addition, government owned utilities have established units to focus on renewable

energy development.

The Renewable Energy Policy was issued by the Power Division of MPEMR in 2008 with the key

objectives of i) alleviating the impact of the declining fossil fuel reserves and energy price volatility

in the international market, ii) reducing carbon dioxide emissions and mitigating climate change,

and iii) enhancing energy security. The Policy aims to increase the share of generation in the total

power demand by 5% in 2015 and 10% in 202016. With power demand projected to increase rapidly

in the next 10 to 20 years, the Power Division of MPEMR intends to extend the 10% target to

204117.

9.1.2 Macroeconomic background

Bangladesh is one of the densely populated countries in South Asia with a total population of

165.55 million in 2019, an increase of around 14.8% in the past 10 years. The country’s population

is projected to reach 202 million in 205018.

16 MPEMR, 2008. Renewable Energy Policy of Bangladesh.

17 MPEMR, 2018. Revisiting PSMP 2016.

18 UN DESA, Population Division, 2019. World Population Prospects.



In terms of economic growth, Bangladesh has recorded the fastest growth rate in South Asia during

the fiscal year 201919. The economy expanded 8.1% between 2018-2019 reaching USD 299 billion

in current prices (BDT 25,362 billion), driven mainly by robust private sector consumption and

strong exports20. In the past 10 years, the economy grew at an average annual rate of 6.7% and

had experienced rapid acceleration in the last 4 years with annual growth rate averaging at 7.6%21.

This momentum is expected to be sustained in 2020 with the economy projected to grow at 8.0%22,

though the government is more optimistic projecting a much higher expansion of 8.2%, 8.4% and

8.6% in 2020, 2021 and 2022 respectively23. The sustained rapid economic expansion would be

supported by strong exports, robust private consumption, accommodative policy on private sector

credit, institutional reforms, and stepped up investments to develop infrastructures24.

The government aims to achieve an upper middle-income status by 2031 and a high-income country by 2041. In order to achieve these targets, the economy must grow at an average rate of 8.4% from 2018 to 2031 and at around 9.0% from 2031 to 204125.

Income per capita reached USD 1,804 in current prices (BDT 153,197) in 201926 which is 3.17

times higher than that in 2009. Based on the government’s economic projections, the income per

capita would reach USD 10,993 by 204127.

9.1.3 Electricity demand

One of the determinants of electricity demand, in addition to population growth and economic

development, is the rural electrification rate. In the past 10 years, the share of population with

access to electricity services (grid and off-grid) have almost doubled from 47% in 2008 to 93% in

2019. The government aims to achieve universal access (100% of population with access to

electricity services) by 2021.

With robust economic growth, population growth and increased access to electricity services,

electricity demand has accelerated in recent years. Grid electricity sales in 2018 amounted to

55,103 GWh which is 2.43 times higher than that in 2008. During the 5-year period 2013 - 2018,

total electricity sales had grown by an average annual rate of 11% compared with an average rate

of 7.7% during the period 2008 – 201328.

19 Fiscal year (FY) 2019 ended 30 June 2019.

20 Asian Development Bank, 2019. Asian Development Bank Outlook 2019 Update. September 2019.

21 Ministry of Finance, 2019. Bangladesh Economic Review 2019. June 2019.

22 Asian Development Bank, 2019, op. cit.

23 Ministry of Finance, 2019. op. cit.

24 Asian Development Bank, 2019. op. cit.

25 Power Division MPEMR, 2018. Revising PSMP 2016. November 2018.

26 Ministry of Finance, 2019. op. cit.

27 Power Division MPEMR, 2018. op. cit.

28 Bangladesh Power Development Board, 2019. Annual Report 2017 – 2018.



Consistent with the optimistic economic growth projections, electricity consumption (sales) is also

forecast to grow rapidly in the next few decades. The Power Sector Master Plan (PSMP) 2018

Revision estimated that electricity consumption, under the baseline case, would increase annually

by 11.7% from 2020 to 2025, but would slightly decline to 9.4% annually from 2025 to 2030. In

average, electricity consumption is projected to increase at an average rate of 8.4% per year from

2020 to 2041.

The per capita grid electricity consumption has also accelerated in recent years. Per capita

consumption reached 336 kWh in 201829, an annual increase of 9.5% per year from 2013 level.

This rate is significantly faster than the annual growth rate of 6.1% during the period 2008 to 2013.

In addition, the PSMP 2018 Revision projected that electricity consumption per capita under the

baseline case would reach 437 kWh in 2020 and would further increase to 1,084 kWh in 2030 and

2,030 kWh in 2041.

Electricity peak demand has followed a similar pattern with that of electricity consumption. Peak

demand grew at a rate of almost 11% per year during the period 2013-2018 compared with 8.4%

per year during the period 2008-2013. Peak demand reached 14,014 MW in 2018.

9.1.4 Electricity supply

Until recently, shortage of power supply characterised the electric power system in Bangladesh.

Peak demand was relatively much higher than peak generation capacity due to lack of capacity

and lower availability of ageing power plants. The period 2006-2013 represents the worst period

where power shortages hover above 1,000 MW per year30.

Recent investments to increase the power supply have resulted in tapering off power supply

shortage. The total available capacity increased rapidly at annual rate of 12.5% per year during the

period 2013-2018. The total available capacity (derated capacity) reached 15,410 MW in 2018.

Since 2013, power shortages had progressively eased off. The amount of energy not served

declined from 1,070 GWh in 2013 to around 32 GWh in 2018. Power supply interruptions in the

past few years were no longer due to lack of generation capacity but mainly with inadequate

transmission and distribution facilities.

One of the goals of the PSMP 2018 revision is to eliminate power supply shortages by 2041. The

PSMP 2018 Revision aims to gradually decommission older plants during this period and outlines

an investment plan for new capacity totalling 74,524 MW between 2020 and 2041.

9.1.5 Fuel mix

Due to availability of natural gas as a domestic energy resource, fuel for power generation has

been dominated by this single fuel. Natural gas consumption for power generation has been

constantly growing since the past decades. Natural gas consumption grew at annual rate of almost

3% over a long period from 1998-2018. The total consumption in 2018 amounted to 211,342 million

cubic feet.

29 Bangladesh Power Development Board, 2019. ibid.

30 Bangladesh Power Development Board, 2015. Annual Report 2013 – 2014.



Of the total installed capacity of 15,953 MW in 2018, natural gas-based power plants accounted

61.89%. This was followed by other fossil fuel-based power generation plants: fuel oil 21.58%,

diesel oil 8.65% and coal 3.28%. Power imports accounted 4.14% while renewable-based

technologies such as hydropower and solar PV represented 1.44% and 0.02% respectively.

The PSMP 2016 (the basis for the PSMP 2018 Revision) had not considered renewable energy

integration in the power development plan. Thus, the supply scenarios reviewed in the PSMP 2018

Revision did not take into account renewable energy in the future power generation mix. In the high

demand case generation scenario, natural gas would remain the dominant fuel accounting 45.8%

of the total target capacity additions of 74,524 MW between 2020 and 2041. This is followed by

coal (30.3%), electricity imports (14.9%), liquid fuels (2.8%) and nuclear power (6.0%). Hydropower

would only account 0.1%.

9.1.6 Potential role of floating PV

One important contribution of PSMP 2018 Revision is to integrate renewable energy in power

development planning. Extending the 10% renewable energy policy target to 2041, the required

renewable energy capacity would be 2,800 MW in 2021 and 9,400 in 2041 under the high case

scenario and 2,600 MW in 2021 and 7,950 in 2041 under the low case scenario31. The policy target

is linked with power demand. The Power Division of MPEMR and SREDA consider total installed

capacity to represent power demand with reasonable reliability, thus policy targets were estimated

as percentage of the projected installed capacity.

Renewable energy resources available in Bangladesh include solar, wind, biomass, biogas and

hydropower (micro and mini-hydropower), though solar and wind have the highest potential that

can substantially contribute in meeting the renewable energy target capacities. Bangladesh, in

average, receives around 4.5 kWh/m2/day of solar irradiation. SREDA is currently undertaking wind

resource assessment in 13 locations. Solar energy is uniformly distributed throughout the country

while wind energy and other renewable energy resources are however available only in specific

locations or sites.

Utility-scale renewable energy project development has been very slow. Total renewable energy

installed capacity as of end of 2019 amounted to 606.2 MW, of which solar PV accounted 61.4%,

hydropower 37.9% and the rest 0.7%32. Also, of the total installed capacity 50.4% are grid-

connected and the rest are off-grid systems. For solar PV installations, 74.4 MW are grid-connected

while 297.9 MW are off-grid.

With total installed capacity of only 606.2 MW as of end of 2019, the 2020 renewable capacity

target of 2,500 MW would likely be missed. Similarly, a huge gap exist between the long-term target

capacities and the proposed projects from both the public utilities and the private sector. Projects

planned by government-owned utilities and private companies totalled 2,883 MW from 2018-2041

(1,883 MW from public utilities and 950 MW from IPPs). This is far below the 7,950 – 9,400 MW

target capacities for 2041.

Of the planned renewable energy projects from the public and private sector, 2,322 MW are solar

PV projects, and these are mainly utility-scale ground-mounted systems. The proposed wind power

projects amount only to 510 MW. Solar PV could however contribute in filling up the capacity gap

31 Power Division MPEMR, 2018. op. cit.

32 www.sreda.gov.db, accessed 1 January 2020.

http://www.sreda.gov.db/



since solar energy resources, as mentioned earlier, are uniformly distributed throughout the

country.

One of the main constraints of ground-mounted utility-scale solar PV projects is land availability as

these projects may compete with the utilisation of land for agriculture and forestry. One strand of

development which is currently being pursued by the government is the development of small-scale

solar PV systems such as solar rooftops and mini-grid systems. Solar PV plants could be further

scaled-up by promoting the development of floating systems in several water bodies (dams, lakes,

ponds and off-shore areas) in the country.

9.2 Economic evaluation of the proposed Subproject

9.2.1 Background

The economic evaluation of the proposed investments was carried out in accordance with ADB’s

guidelines on power sector projects appraisal33.

Joydia Baor’s proposed Subproject would have a total installed capacity of 9.072 MWp. This would

entail the use of 22,680 solar PV modules, each with nominal power of 400 Wp, and inclined at 11°

angle facing true south. The site’s specific yield at 50% probability of exceedance (P50) amounts

to 1,495 kWh/kWp. With this, the plant’s power generation in the first year is estimated to be

13,563,495 kWh. Electricity generation is expected to decline yearly at a linear degradation rate of

0.4%.

A recent World Bank34 report indicated that the energy yield of a floating solar PV plant is 10-15%

higher than that of equivalent land-based power plant (solar PV plants in ‘hot climates’). However,

it should be noted that this estimate is not supported by empirical evidence and as such was not

considered in the yield analysis (Section 4).

9.2.2 Subproject costs

The background costing study presented three price scenarios for the Subproject. This study

considered the base cost case in the analysis. The low and high cost cases were taken into

consideration in the sensitivity analysis. Under the base case, the total Subproject capital cost

(direct cost and indirect costs) would amount to US$11.85 million (cost breakdown included in

Appendix H). The technology supplier is envisaged to provide technical support during the first 2

years of operation, hence the estimated base operation and maintenance (O&M) cost during this

period is US$241,400 per year. From year 3 onwards, it is presumed that the floating solar power

plant will be mainly operated by Subproject owners. The O&M cost is estimated to increase to

US$374,302 per year.

All Subproject costs were expressed in terms of economic prices. Investment and O&M costs in

financial prices were adjusted to reflect the economic resource cost of Subproject inputs in terms

of domestic price numeraire. Costs were categorised into traded goods, non-traded goods, foreign

skilled labour, local unskilled labour, fuel and transfer payments, and were adjusted with

33 ADB (2017). Economic Analysis of Projects. Manila, Philippines.

34 IBRD/The World Bank (2018). Where Sun Meets Water: Floating Solar PV Market Report. Washington DC.



appropriate conversion factors. The shadow exchange rate factor (SERF) was used to convert

traded costs while the shadow wage rate factor (SWRF) was used for unskilled labour. Transfer

payments and price contingencies were not considered in the analysis.

The SERF was calculated as the inverse of the standard conversion factor (SCF). SERF values for

the last five years were estimated as shown in Table 40, and the 5-year average value of 1.03 was

used in the analysis. Owing to high underemployment in Bangladesh, a shadow wage rate of 0.80

was used to estimate the economic value of unskilled labour.

The exchange rate in January 2020 of BDT 84.90 = US$1.0 was used in the analysis. All costs

were expressed in 2020 prices. A discount rate of 9 percent (according to ADB benchmark) and a

Subproject lifespan of 30 years were used in the economic assessment.

The financial and economic costs are shown in Table 41.

Table 40: Shadow Exchange Rate Factor (SERF) estimation

Item FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 Average

Exports ($m)

Total exports 29,777 30,697 33,441 34,019 36,205

Export subsidy 0.02% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01% 0.01%

Imports ($m)

Total imports 36,571 37,662 39,901 43,491 54,463

Import tax 4.76% 5.16% 5.48% 6.27% 5.94%

SCF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97

SERF 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.03

SCF = (e × X + n × M)/[ e × X(1-tx) + n × M(1+tm)], where X = fob value of exports; M = cif value of

imports; e = elasticity of export supply (assumed to be unity); n = elasticity of import supply (assumed

to be unity); tx = tax on exports (%); tm = tax on imports (%).

Table 41: Financial and economic costs

Item Description Financial Economic

FC

($m)

LC

(BDT

million)

Total

(BDT

million)

FC

($m)

LC

(BDT

million)

Total

(BDT

million)

A Investment costs

1 Civil works 1.13 30.09 126.36 1.17 24.07 123.33

2 Equipment 5.10 0.00 432.63 5.25 0.00 446.04

3 Engineering consulting -

design and supervision

0.43 0.00 36.08 0.44 0.00 37.20

4 Inland transport 47.76 47.76 0.00 47.76 47.76

5 Taxes and duties 112.48 112.48 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sub-total (A) 6.65 190.33 755.31 6.86 71.83 654.33



Item Description Financial Economic

B Other investment costs

1 Land & civil works 3.44 3.44 0.00 2.75 2.75

2 Environmental and

social costs

22.34 22.34 0.00 22.34 22.34

3 Subproject management

& construction

supervision

38.40 38.40 0.00 38.40 38.40

Sub-total (B) 0.00 64.18 64.18 0.00 63.49 63.49

Total base costs (A) +

(B)

6.65 254.50 819.49 6.86 135.31 717.82

C Contingency

1 Physical 0.53 20.36 65.56 0.55 20.36 66.96

2 Price 0.31 22.40 48.33 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sub-total (C) 0.84 42.76 113.89 0.55 20.36 66.96

D Financial charges during implementation

1 Interest during

implementation

0.78 4.96 71.57 0.00 0.00 0.00

2 Commitment charges 0.01 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00

3 Front end fee 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sub-total (D) 0.80 4.96 72.55 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total Subproject cost

(A) + (B) + (C) + (D)

8.29 302.22 1,005.93 7.41 155.67 784.78

9.2.3 Subproject benefits

Various benefits have been cited in the literature for floating solar PV projects35. This includes: i)

higher level of generation compared with ground mounted systems due to the cooling effect of

water bodies; ii) no land is being used hence avoiding the potential conflict between power

generation and food production; iii) and others such as reduction of water evaporation due to the

shading which limits the evaporative effect of wind, and water quality improvement due to reduced

algae growth. In addition, some studies have indicated that floating solar PV systems could

potentially reduce fish populations which many livelihoods depend upon and could have a negative

economic impact to the local community.

Many of the above benefits (costs) are however difficult to quantify. This study however focuses

mainly on quantifiable benefits of the Subproject. In the ‘without the project’ case, electricity

generation in the Khulna District where Joydia Baor is located, would be mainly coming from fossil

fuels (natural gas, fuel oil and diesel fuel). Benefits being quantified in this study (‘with the project’

35 See for example World Bank Group, ESMAP and SERIS. 2018. Where Sun Meets Water: Floating Solar

Market Report—Executive Summary. Washington, DC: World Bank.



case) are mainly fossil fuel savings in power generation and the reduction of carbon dioxide

emissions associated with lower fossil fuel consumption.

Outputs of the Subproject are classified into incremental and non-incremental36. Incremental

outputs refer to the additional output produced by the Subproject over and above what would be

available in the without-Subproject situation. Non-incremental output is the output produced by the

Subproject that displaces high cost or unreliable supplies without the Subproject. Incremental

outputs are valued using the WTP37 methodology with adjustments made for transmission and

distribution losses, while non-incremental outputs are valued at resource cost savings.

Energy generation from the proposed 9.072 MWp Joydia Baor floating solar PV plant is expected

to displace fuel fossil generation rather than meeting Khulna Division’s incremental demand. This

study considers Joydia’s floating solar PV output to be non-incremental and valued at resource

cost savings at short-run marginal cost. Prices of displaced fossil fuels prices were derived from

the projected global spot market prices of crude oil (global average), natural gas (Japan’s LNG spot

prices) and coal (Australian coal spot prices) from the most recent World Bank Commodity Markets

Outlook38.

Similarly, the Subproject’s non-incremental output would also contribute to reducing carbon dioxide

emissions from the power sector. The ADB 2017 Economic Analysis guideline recommends to use

the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) methodology in translating the renewable

power generation into carbon dioxide equivalent reductions. The methodology for estimating the

grid emission factor is data intensive. In the case of Bangladesh, this study uses the grid emissions

factor of 0.635 tCO2 per MWh for wind and solar PV projects as recommended by the ADB

Guideline for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions39. In addition, the Guideline also suggests to

use a value of US$ 36.30 per tonne of CO2 (in 2016 prices) as a global social cost of carbon

dioxide, and to be escalated at 2% per year to represent the ‘potential of increasing marginal

damage of global warming over time’.

As an alternative analysis, the floating solar PV project could potentially displace a ground-mounted

solar PV system. One of the floating solar PV benefits is the savings of land that would have been

used for a land-based solar PV project. In valuing the land, ADB’s 2017 guideline recommended

to use the opportunity cost rather than the market prices of land. In the case of Bangladesh however

floating solar PV projects would not likely displace land-based solar PV systems, hence this level

of analysis is not being considered in the study.

9.2.4 Economic feasibility

The proposed floating solar PV project will represent as one of the first utility-scale floating solar

PV projects in Bangladesh. On its first year of operation, the Subproject is expected to generate

13,563,495 kWh of electricity (P50 value). Over its estimated lifespan of 25 years, annual electricity

36 ADB (2017). Economic Analysis of Projects. Manila, Philippines.

37 WTP - willingness-to-pay

38 World Bank (2016). Commodity Markets Outlook. January 2016 update.

39 ADB (2017). Guidelines for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions Asian Development Projects: Additional

Guidance for Clean Energy Projects. Manila, Philippines.



generation is expected to decline gradually at the rate of 0.4%. The present value generation would

amount to 129,154,630 kWh based on a discount rate of 9% (ADB benchmark).

The electricity generated from the Subproject will be injected into the Khulna Power Zone and

estimated to displace generation from fossil fuel-based power plants in the Division. As of 2018,

these conventional power units generated around 2,572 GWh of electricity. Of these, gas-fired

power plants accounted 48.9% share, diesel-fired power plants 41.2% and fuel oil-fired plants

9.9%. This study used the said fossil fuel electricity generation mix to estimate the amount of each

fuel type displaced by the Subproject. In calculating the displaced fuel consumption from electricity

generation data, the study takes into account the existing power plant efficiencies and calorific

values. From Bangladesh Power Development Board’s (BPDB) database, the study estimated the

weighted average efficiency of power plants in Khulna Division. For 2018, the weighted average

efficiency of gas-fired power plants was 38.84% while those of diesel-fired power plants and fuel

oil-fired plants were 38.73% and 38.00% respectively.

With the above, the yearly savings by fuel type was estimated. These physical savings was

converted to economic values using the projected delivered prices of diesel, fuel oil and natural

gas derived from World Bank’s Commodity Markets Outlook. Using a discount rate of 9%, the

present value of the savings throughout the Subproject’s lifetime would amount to BDT 1,074

million.

In addition to the displaced fuel, the study also estimated the corresponding reductions of carbon

dioxide emissions that would be generated by the Subproject. With the recommended grid emission

factor of 0.635 tCO2 per MWh for wind and solar PV projects in Bangladesh, the Subproject could

potentially contribute, in present value terms, a reduction of 82,013 tons of carbon dioxide

equivalent emissions for the period of 25 years.

In estimating the value of the above benefit, the study used the recommended value for global

social cost of carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere. The recommended unit value was

originally expressed in terms of 2016 prices. The adjusted value, in terms of 2019 prices, amounts

to US$ 38.67 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent. Following the ADB Guideline, the study also

escalated this value at an annual rate of 2% to reflect the rising marginal damage of climate change.

In total, the present value benefit would amount to BDT 360 million throughout the Subproject

lifetime.

The estimated benefits yield a robust investment EIRR. Considering only the displaced fuel, the

EIRR would amount to 9.31% which is just slightly higher than the benchmark rate, and including

the reduction of carbon emissions, the EIRR would increase to 14.79%.

The study also calculated EIRRs for both P75 and P90 values of electricity generation. The results

show that EIRRs would slightly decrease with higher confidence level of electricity generation. The

EIRRs for ‘without GHG savings’ would decrease to a rate marginally lower than the benchmark

rate while those for ‘with GHG savings’ would remain at robust rate. For P75, the EIRRs are 8.71%

and 14.09% for ‘without GHG savings’ and ‘with GHG savings’, respectively. Those for P90 are

8.16% (below the benchmark rate) and 13.46% (above the benchmark rate), respectively.



Table 42: EIRR Calculation for 9.072 MWp Joydia Baor Floating Solar PV (for P50)

Year

Costs (million BDT) Benefits (million BDT) Net benefits (million BDT)

Capital O&M Fuel

savings

GHG

savings

Without

GHG

savings

With GHG

savings

2020 784.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 -784.78 -784.78

2021 0.00 21.13 123.23 32.19 102.10 134.28

2022 0.00 21.13 121.43 32.70 100.30 133.00

2023 0.00 32.76 119.99 33.22 87.22 120.44

2024 0.00 32.76 118.56 33.75 85.79 119.54

2025 0.00 32.76 117.15 34.28 84.39 118.67

2026 0.00 32.76 113.57 34.83 80.81 115.64

2027 0.00 32.76 110.13 35.38 77.37 112.75

2028 0.00 32.76 106.84 35.95 74.08 110.02

2029 0.00 32.76 103.68 36.52 70.92 107.44

2030 0.00 32.76 100.65 37.10 67.89 104.99

2031 0.00 32.76 100.25 37.69 67.48 105.18

2032 0.00 32.76 99.85 38.29 67.08 105.38

2033 0.00 32.76 99.45 38.90 66.68 105.59

2034 0.00 32.76 99.05 39.52 66.29 105.81

2035 0.00 32.76 98.65 40.15 65.89 106.04

2036 0.00 32.76 98.26 40.79 65.50 106.28

2037 0.00 32.76 97.87 41.44 65.10 106.54

2038 0.00 32.76 97.47 42.10 64.71 106.81

2039 0.00 32.76 97.08 42.77 64.32 107.09

2040 0.00 32.76 96.70 43.45 63.93 107.38

2041 0.00 32.76 96.31 44.14 63.55 107.69

2042 0.00 32.76 95.92 44.84 63.16 108.00

2043 0.00 32.76 95.54 45.56 62.78 108.34

2044 0.00 32.76 95.16 46.28 62.39 108.68

2045 0.00 32.76 94.78 47.02 62.01 109.03

2046 0.00 32.76 94.40 47.77 61.64 109.40

2047 0.00 32.76 94.02 48.53 61.26 109.79

2048 0.00 32.76 93.65 49.30 60.88 110.18

2049 0.00 32.76 93.27 50.09 60.51 110.59

2050 0.00 32.76 92.90 50.88 60.13 111.02

2051 0.00 32.76 92.53 51.69 59.76 111.46



Year


Capital O&M Fuel

savings

GHG

savings

Without

GHG

savings

With GHG

savings

EIRR 9.31% 14.79%


Year


Capital O&M Fuel

savings

GHG

savings

Without

GHG

savings

With GHG

savings

2020 784.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 -784.78 -784.78

2021 0.00 21.13 119.10 31.11 97.97 129.08

2022 0.00 21.13 117.36 31.60 96.23 127.83

2023 0.00 32.76 115.97 32.11 83.20 115.31

2024 0.00 32.76 114.59 32.62 81.82 114.44

2025 0.00 32.76 113.23 33.14 80.46 113.60

2026 0.00 32.76 109.76 33.66 77.00 110.66

2027 0.00 32.76 106.44 34.20 73.68 107.88

2028 0.00 32.76 103.26 34.74 70.50 105.24

2029 0.00 32.76 100.21 35.30 67.44 102.74

2030 0.00 32.76 97.28 35.86 64.51 100.37

2031 0.00 32.76 96.89 36.43 64.13 100.55

2032 0.00 32.76 96.50 37.01 63.74 100.75

2033 0.00 32.76 96.12 37.60 63.35 100.95

2034 0.00 32.76 95.73 38.20 62.97 101.16

2035 0.00 32.76 95.35 38.81 62.58 101.39

2036 0.00 32.76 94.97 39.42 62.20 101.63

2037 0.00 32.76 94.59 40.05 61.82 101.87

2038 0.00 32.76 94.21 40.69 61.45 102.13

2039 0.00 32.76 93.83 41.34 61.07 102.40

2040 0.00 32.76 93.46 41.99 60.69 102.69

2041 0.00 32.76 93.08 42.66 60.32 102.98

2042 0.00 32.76 92.71 43.34 59.95 103.29

2043 0.00 32.76 92.34 44.03 59.58 103.61

2044 0.00 32.76 91.97 44.73 59.21 103.94

2045 0.00 32.76 91.60 45.44 58.84 104.28

2046 0.00 32.76 91.24 46.17 58.47 104.64



Year


Capital O&M Fuel

savings

GHG

savings

Without

GHG

savings

With GHG

savings

2047 0.00 32.76 90.87 46.90 58.11 105.01

2048 0.00 32.76 90.51 47.65 57.74 105.39

2049 0.00 32.76 90.15 48.41 57.38 105.79

2050 0.00 32.76 89.78 49.18 57.02 106.20

2051 0.00 32.76 89.43 49.96 56.66 106.62 EIRR 8.71% 14.09%


Year


Capital O&M Fuel

savings

GHG

savings

Without

GHG

savings

With GHG

savings

2020 784.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 -784.78 -784.78

2021 0.00 21.13 115.39 30.14 94.26 124.40

2022 0.00 21.13 113.71 30.62 92.57 123.19

2023 0.00 32.76 112.36 31.11 79.59 110.70

2024 0.00 32.76 111.02 31.60 78.25 109.85

2025 0.00 32.76 109.70 32.10 76.94 109.04

2026 0.00 32.76 106.35 32.61 73.58 106.20

2027 0.00 32.76 103.13 33.13 70.36 103.50

2028 0.00 32.76 100.04 33.66 67.28 100.94

2029 0.00 32.76 97.09 34.20 64.32 98.52

2030 0.00 32.76 94.25 34.74 61.49 96.23

2031 0.00 32.76 93.87 35.29 61.11 96.40

2032 0.00 32.76 93.50 35.86 60.73 96.59

2033 0.00 32.76 93.12 36.43 60.36 96.79

2034 0.00 32.76 92.75 37.01 59.99 96.99

2035 0.00 32.76 92.38 37.60 59.62 97.21

2036 0.00 32.76 92.01 38.20 59.25 97.44

2037 0.00 32.76 91.64 38.80 58.88 97.68

2038 0.00 32.76 91.27 39.42 58.51 97.93

2039 0.00 32.76 90.91 40.05 58.15 98.19

2040 0.00 32.76 90.55 40.69 57.78 98.47

2041 0.00 32.76 90.18 41.33 57.42 98.75



Year


Capital O&M Fuel

savings

GHG

savings

Without

GHG

savings

With GHG

savings

2042 0.00 32.76 89.82 41.99 57.06 99.05

2043 0.00 32.76 89.46 42.66 56.70 99.36

2044 0.00 32.76 89.11 43.34 56.34 99.68

2045 0.00 32.76 88.75 44.03 55.99 100.02

2046 0.00 32.76 88.39 44.73 55.63 100.36

2047 0.00 32.76 88.04 45.44 55.28 100.72

2048 0.00 32.76 87.69 46.17 54.93 101.09

2049 0.00 32.76 87.34 46.90 54.57 101.48

2050 0.00 32.76 86.99 47.65 54.23 101.87

2051 0.00 32.76 86.64 48.41 53.88 102.28

EIRR 8.16% 13.46%

9.2.5 Sensitivity and risk analysis

Risks exist that these projects would not achieve the hurdle economic returns due to uncertainties

in the values of key parameters used in the analysis. These parameters include capital costs (10%

increase), O&M costs (10% increase) and energy yield (5% decrease). To investigate the impact

of the uncertainties on Subproject viability, the sensitivity of EIRR to the variation of these

parameters were analysed. The sensitivity analysis shows that the potential variation of key

Subproject parameters such as an increase in capital and O&M costs as well as the combination

of these parameters under the ‘without the GHG savings case’ would generate EIRRs below the

benchmark rate. On the other hand, considering the social impacts of climate change, even with

the combination of the changes of these parameters would still render the Subproject economically

viable.

The study also estimated the switching values for Subproject. The switching value is defined as the

percentage change in a variable required to make the Subproject EIRR equal to the benchmark

discount rate (in this case 9%). The switching value of the capital cost under the ‘with the GHG

impact case’ is relatively high. This means that it will take a high percentage increase in capital cost

to make the Subproject economically unviable.

Table 45: Sensitivity analysis (P50)40

Item EIRR41 (%) Switching Value (%)

Without GHG With GHG Without GHG With GHG

Base capital

costs

9.31% 14.79%

40 Source: ADB estimates

41 EIRR = economic internal rate of return



Item EIRR41 (%) Switching Value (%)

Without GHG With GHG Without GHG With GHG

Capital costs

increase (10%)

8.13% 13.27% 2.50% 51.60%

O&M costs

increase (10%)

8.80% 14.37%

Yield decrease

(-5%)

8.41% 13.74%

Combined 6.97% 11.91%

9.2.6 Conclusion

The economic assessment shows that the economic performance of the Subproject is robust. The

Subproject EIRR is above the benchmark rate of 9% used in the study. The sensitivity analysis

shows that even with high increase in key investment parameters under the ‘with GHG savings

case’, the proposed Subproject would remain economically viable. From an economic standpoint,

the Subproject is considered to be beneficial to the economy and should be financially supported.



10 Climate Hazard Risk Assessment for Joydia Baor

10.1 Introduction

This section provides an initial review of the future climate change hazard risk for the Joydia

Subproject. It is based on the key findings from the site visit undertaken between the 20th and 23rd

of November 2019 and the Climate Risk and Vulnerability Analysis (CRVA) currently under

preparation for this Subproject. In this context the review of climate hazard risks for the Subproject

should be considered supplementary to the full CRVA for the Subproject.

The climate risk management approach of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) aims to reduce

risks resulting from climate change to investment projects in Asia and the Pacific. ADB’s framework

identifies climate change risks to Subproject performance in the early stages of Subproject

development and incorporates adaptation measures in the design of projects at risk.

This review corresponds to the first step in this process, and involves the preliminary climate

change assessment for the Subproject to identify the potential risks that may affect the feasibility

of the Subproject, and for the evaluation and selection of climate resilience measures to include in

the Subproject design and implantation arrangements.

10.2 Biophysical context

Joydia Baor is a freshwater wetland or oxbow lake of fluvial origin located on the Ganges floodplain

in Jhenaidah District, in the southwestern part of Bangladesh. There are thousands of lakes of

varying sizes in Bangladesh, the greatest concentrations being in the main delta region covering

the districts of Rajshahi, Pabna, Khulna, Jessore, Faridpur, Comilla and Noakhali. The notable

baors of the country include Sagarkhali, Jaleshwar, Khedapara, Rampur, Pathanpara, Kathgara,

Jogini Bhagini, Ichamati, Bukbhara, Marjat, Harina and Arial. They range in size from half a square

kilometre to 13 km2. 42

Baors receive water only when the parent river is in high flood. Usually, during wet monsoon a baor

will receive local rainwater, and will be subject to periodic flooding and moderate to high levels of

sedimentation and siltation.42

10.3 Current climate

Joydia Baor lies in the path of heavily moisture-laden monsoon winds. The rainy season extends

from June through November and about 80% of the annual rainfall is concentrated in this season.

The annual rainfall in the area is estimated at 2,200 mm to 3600 mm. Humidity is 35-45% between

November and March when it increases to approximately 80% during the rainy season.

Average temperatures are 26.1⁰C, however this can vary between 15⁰C and 34⁰C throughout the

year. The warmest months coincide with the rainy season (March-September), while winter

(December-February) receives less rainfall. It is one of the wettest countries of the world, with most

areas receiving at least 1500 mm and others receiving as much as 5800 mm of rainfall per year.

42 Source: Banglapedia



Rainfall is driven by the Southwest monsoon, which originates over the Indian Ocean and carries

warm, moist, and unstable air, beginning approximately during the first week of June and ending in

the first week of October.

Figure 14 shows mean historical monthly temperature and rainfall simulated climate data-set for

Jhenaidah for the time period 1985-2014.

Figure 14: Average monthly temperature and rainfall for Jhenaidah (1985-2014)43

In Figure 14, the ‘mean daily maximum’ shows the maximum temperature of an average day for

every month for Jhenaidah. Likewise, ‘mean daily minimum’ (shown as the solid blue line) shows

the average minimum temperature. Hot days and cold nights (dashed red and blue lines) show the

average of the hottest day and coldest night of each month of the last 30 years.

Figure 15 shows the maximum temperature diagram for Jhenaidah and displays how many days

per month reach extreme temperatures (i.e. > 40oC).

43 Source: Meteoblue global NEMS weather model



Figure 15: Temperature extremes for Jhenaidah43

10.4 Observed and projected climate change

Over the past 100 years (1906-2005), the average temperature in Bangladesh has increased about

0.3°C. Average monsoon-season maximum and minimum temperatures show an increasing trend

annually at the rate of 0.05°C and 0.03°C, respectively. An increasing trend of about 1°C in May

and 0.5°C in November during the 14-year period from 1985 to 1998 has also been observed.

Annual rainfall in Bangladesh has decreased by 2 to 3 per cent across Bangladesh this century,

with most of this reduction occurring during the December-February period, the wettest season of

the year (Ramamasy & Baas, 2007).

The majority of climate change projections for Bangladesh suggest that the average temperature

in the country is likely to increase by 1°C by 2030, 1.4°C by 2050 and 2.4°C by 2100 (Ramamasy

& Baas, 2007) against the baseline period (1960-1990), and a significant increasing trends in

cyclone frequency and intensity over the Bay of Bengal during November and May.

The Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC from 2014 stresses that climate change-related risks

stemming from extreme events such as extreme precipitation, cyclones and flooding can already

be observed in Bangladesh. Global average tropical cyclone wind speed and rainfall is likely to

increase in the future, and the global average frequency of tropical cyclones is likely to decrease

or remain unchanged.

In the Bay of Bengal, it is expected that the frequency of tropical cyclones may increase and,

according to the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report, there is “evidence that the peak intensity may

increase by 5% to 10% and precipitation rates may increase by 20% to 30%” (IPCC 2001). Hence,

the present hazard level in areas currently affected by tropical cyclones may increase in the long-

term.



Figure 16 shows the historical cyclone tracks for the Bay of Bengal between 1969 and 2009.

Subprojects located in such areas should be robust to future increases in cyclone hazard. Although

most of the impacts associated with tropical storms and cyclones occur in the ocean and coastal

areas, these storms can impact inland areas such as Jhenaidah.

Figure 16: Cyclone tracks for the Bay of Bengal 1969-200944

10.5 Assessed climate change risks for Joydia

The Subproject is located on the Ganges floodplain in Jhenaidah District, which is already affected

by a range of climate-induces hazard risks, including strong winds and cyclonic events, variations

in temperature and rainfall, and flooding and sedimentation.

Table 46 provides a preliminary assessment of the climate hazards risks for the Subproject, which

should be considered in Subproject design and implementation to promote disaster and climate

resilience. The assessment highlights the likelihood of different natural hazards affecting the

Subproject components and infrastructure (i.e. these being Very Low, Low, Medium and High), and

provides an insight the opportunities and constraints that need to be considered in this Feasibility

Study.

The hazard risk ratings are derived based on the climate change analysis undertaken in the CRVA

for the Subproject and modulated based on the contextual understanding of Subproject location

and biophysical conditions assessed during the field visits.

However, it is expected that these hazards will be exacerbated by changes in the climate and the

intensity of climatic disasters like tropical cyclones, droughts and floods into the future and these

need to be fully taken into account during the detailed design phase of the Subproject, especially

in relation to the sensitivity of FVP infrastructure to:

Increasing temperatures extremes and hot days;

Increasing intensity of rainfall and associated fluctuations in water levels;

44 Source: WBG Climate Change Knowledge Portal



Increasing frequency and intensity of flood events and associated sedimentation; and

Increasing intensity of wind velocity and cyclone weather conditions.



Table 46: Preliminary climate hazard risk screening for Joydia Baor

Climate hazard risk Climate change Risk assessment Risk mitigation measures

Rising temperatures and extreme

heat hazard risk

(Hazard level: MEDIUM)

According to the Intergovernmental

panel on Climate Change (IPCC,

2013), annual mean temperatures

and extremely high daily

temperatures will continue to rise,

and warming will be large

compared to natural variability.

Temperatures in Bangladesh have

warmed and will continue to warm

with more very hot days by 2050

(Very high confidence).

Whilst the IPCC predict that the

temperature increase over the next

fifty years in Bangladesh will be

slightly lower than the worldwide

average, it will still be significant.

This increase may be as high as

1°C by 2030 and 1.4°C by 2050

under the worst cases (IPCC

2013). Extreme maximum

temperatures are also projected to

increase.

In the adjacent District of Jessore,

extreme heat hazard is classified

as MEDIUM based on modelled

heat information currently

available.

This means that prolonged

exposure to extreme heat, resulting

in heat stress, is expected to occur

at least once in the next five years.

The location of FVP infrastructure

on the Baor water surface will

reduce the impact of extreme

temperature exposure on the

Subproject (due to the localised

effects of evaporation from the

wetland surface).

Suitable risk reduction and

control measures exist to

mitigate the adverse impacts of

increasing temperatures and

extreme heat hazard risk on

FVP and associated

infrastructure and assets.

In particular, Subproject

planning decisions, Subproject

design, construction methods

and construction materials

should adhere to international

design requirements and take

account of extreme heat hazard

risks to minimise damage and/or

deterioration of energy

generation capacity.

Consideration should be given to

the vulnerability of other assets

within the Subproject's

dependency network.

Specific attention should be given

to the identification and select

selection of suitable materials for

construction of FVP infrastructure

assets.




Seasonal rainfall, rainfall intensity and flooding hazard risk

(Hazard level: MEDIUM)

Most models covering Bangladesh

predict increased average annual

and seasonal rainfall into the

future. It is likely that there will be

changes in rainfall patterns,

seasonality and drought through to

2050, with annual precipitation

projected to increase by 70mm,

which represents a 3.9% increase

over the baseline period.

IPCC forecasts for Bangladesh

suggest both increased average

monthly rainfall of between 5.0%

and 9.0% by 2050, and an

increase in extreme rainfall days

from 4 times per year to more than

6 times per year by 2050 (IPCC

2013).

Flood hazard for the Subproject is

assessed as MEDUIM based on

modelled flood information

currently available, and the actual

location of the FVP infrastructure

being on the Baor.

Flood hazard on FVP infrastructure

is likely to be low, with the

exception of areas of rapid

sedimentation and siltation.

It is highly likely that the present

hazard level from flooding and

sedimentation is likely to increase

in the future due to climate change

and the increasing incidence of

extreme rainfall events.




extreme rainfall and flooding on

FVP and associated

infrastructure and assets.

Subproject planning decisions,

Subproject design, and

construction methods should

take account of flood levels and

hazard.

The position of Subproject

components in the landscape

will be key in defining whether

there is a risk.

Cyclones, flooding and rapid

sedimentation pose the greatest

risk to Subproject infrastructure

and assets, and exposure to this

hazard should be minimised

through the appropriate siting

and location of pontoons.

Consideration should be given to

the vulnerability of assets within

the Subproject's dependency

network including transmission

lines and substations.

High wind speed and tropical cyclone hazard risk

Global average tropical cyclone wind speed and rainfall are likely to

For the Subproject, the cyclone

hazard is classified as HIGH






(Hazard level: HIGH) increase in the future, and the global average frequency of tropical cyclones is likely to decrease or remain unchanged. It is projected that the frequency of intense tropical cyclones will increase substantially in areas such as the Bay of Bengal that are currently severely affected by tropical cyclones (IPCC, 2013). Climate change modelling for the Bay of Bengal predicts an increase in the intensity of cyclones of 60% by 2030, and an increase in the intensity of cyclones of 100 % by 2050 (IPCC, 2013).

It is also likely that the average

tropical cyclone wind speed and

rainfall will increase in the future.

Cyclones are defined as storms

with winds of between 119

kilometres per hour and can reach

wind speeds of over 220 kilometres

per hour.

according to the information that is

currently available.

This means that there is more than

a 20% chance of potentially

damaging wind speeds occurring in

the Subproject area in the next 10

years.

Increasing intensity and frequency

of extreme storm events and

cyclones, accompanied by high

winds and intense rainfall can

cause extensive flooding and

damage to critical infrastructure

such as power plants and

transmission infrastructure.


high wind speed and tropical

cyclone hazard risks to FVP and

associated infrastructure and

assets.

Based on this information,

Subproject planning decisions,

Subproject design, layout and

construction methods should

take account of the level of high

wind and cyclone hazard in the

Subproject area.

Consideration should also be

given to the integration and

incorporation of the emergency

response and early warning

systems for cyclones into the

Subproject.



10.6 Potential climate proofing measures

Based on the review of literature and best practice undertaken for the CRVA, we further identified

a limited range of hazard risk mitigation measures for climate proofing infrastructure proposed

under this Subproject, including the following:

FVP infrastructure design and construction standards: It is recommended that the effects of

changing flood levels and behaviour due to climate change be taken into account and

accommodated in the Subproject design process through application of appropriate

international standards and guidelines.

Placement, design and alignment of FVP infrastructure assets. FVP infrastructure to be located

in low risk areas to minimise system vulnerabilities to possible climate impacts and threats from

string winds, currents and debris associated with floods.

Materials selection. Identify and select suitable materials for construction of infrastructure

assets and structures to minimise damage and/or deterioration of FVP infrastructure cyclonic

winds and other related climate change impacts.

It is challenging to fully mitigate extreme event risk through design, and insurance will also be

required to respond to any unexpectedly large events which may occur over the Subproject lifetime.



Appendices

A. Subproject Configuration and Layout

The CAD layout and electrical design details are provided separately to the client.

B. Irradiation Database Information

The Consultant frequently reviews database updates available on the market and considers the

datasets included in Table 47 to be the most applicable to a detailed irradiation analysis for this

site.

Table 47: Irradiation data sources

Database Description

Meteonorm 7.3 Meteonorm blends ground and satellite data for the period 1991-2010 from

a database of approximately 1,325 weather stations with global radiation and

temperature data. Where no radiation measurement is available nearer than

200 km (or 50 km in Europe) from the selected location, satellite information

is used. If the nearest site is more than 30 km away (or 10 km in Europe), a

mixture of ground and satellite information is used. In Europe the spatial

resolution is between 2-3 km and 8 km for the rest of the world. The

uncertainty of ground measurements ranges between 2% and 10%.

PVGIS (SARAH)

Photovoltaic

Geographical

Information

System

The Surface Solar Radiation Data Set - Heliosat (SARAH) is a satellite-based

climatology of the solar surface irradiance, the surface direct normalised

irradiance and the effective cloud albedo derived from observations from

geostationary Meteosat satellites. This data cover Europe, Africa, most of

Asia, and parts of South America. The time period for the data is 2005-2016.

The data have hourly time resolution and a spatial resolution of approx. 3

arc-minutes (5.5 km).

SolarGIS iMaps This dataset is calculated from satellite observations made by Meteosat,

GOES EAST and MTSAT satellite and MACC-II and GFS, CFSR

atmospheric data. The data are spatially enhance to 1 km resolution, the

averaging periods are: 1994-2015 for Europe, Africa and the Middle East,

1999-2015 for Asia, 1999-2015 for Americas and 2007-2015 for the Pacific.

3TIER Solar

Prospecting Tool

Meteosat, GOES, GMS and MTSAT satellite visible imagery for cloudiness

and other information to model the amount of solar radiation at the Earth’s

surface is used in this dataset. Available averaging period range from 1997-

2010 in the Western Hemisphere, 1998-2010 in Europe and Africa to 1999-

2010 in South Asia, Middle East, East Asia and Oceania. The spatial

resolution is globally approximately 3 km.

NREL SUNY The model uses data from Meteosat 5 and 7 geostationary meteorological

satellites and is calculated using the semi-empirical satellite model

developed by Perez et al. This dataset has a spatial resolution of 0.1 degrees

in both latitude and longitude, or nominally 10 km in size. The time period of

the data is 2000 to 2014. The dataset covers India, Bangladesh Bhutan,

Nepal, Sri Lanka and parts of Pakistan, Afghanistan and India.



C. Irradiation Methodology

In order to determine the most accurate long-term GHI estimates, RINA continuously evaluates

databases available on the market and data selection or weighting approaches. In this research,

currently 38 locations spread over the global and in all relevant climate zones are used as

benchmark locations. The benchmark data are predominantly taken from scientific radiation

networks, which aim to provide data on climate change and model validation. Monthly and annual

reference averages are based on a recent, period spanning several years.

Following RINA’s research, weighting methods have been found to provide more accurate long-

term GHI estimates and typically outperform single databases, i.e. are superior to data selection.

This can be explained by the nature of most databases, which is predominately model-reliant in

terms of spatial resolution of information and sourcing. Furthermore, input data can be incomplete

or not fully representative for a given location. Thus, location-specific estimates of single databases

vary within modelling limits or can be biased. The most accurate single database evaluated so far

comes globally with an uncertainty (RMSE) of the annual long-term GHI estimate of 2.6%.

Weighting of various datasets appears to overcome partially this deficiency, with appropriate

database selection being crucial in this context.

RINA has reviewed various approaches to combine datasets. Weighting of the databases on the

basis of the number of years contained in each dataset and based on the inverse spatial resolution

has been found globally most accurate with an uncertainty (RMSE) of the annual long-term GHI

estimate of 2.2%. In this regard, spatial resolution and its inclusion in the weighting has shown

increased significance when comparing the results obtained for locations binned into continental,

coastal and small island sites.

For monthly long-term GHI estimates, similar results have been obtained with WM numbers being

globally more accurate than single databases.

The results of RINA’s benchmarking effort have been published on 4th International Conference

Energy & Meteorology in Bari, Italy in June 2017.

Egler, M.; Rusbridge, S.; Santos, C.: Solar Resource Databases vs Weighted Means – Results Of

A Global Benchmarking Effort; 4th International Conference Energy Meteorology 2017; Bari, Italy;

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36161.76646



D. System Design

D.1. Joydia Baor

Specific losses are dependent on the system design and key Subproject components. For this

Subproject, the modelled system design characteristics in Table 48 are based on the concept

design proposed in Section 3 and the corresponding data sheets from the manufacturers.

Table 48: Summary of modelling assumptions

Description Assumptions Source

DC installed capacity

(kWp)

9,072.00 JOYDIA_RINA LAYOUT -

G002_v2.0_for check

AC nominal capacity

(kW; at 50°C)

7,500.00

AC maximum capacity

(kW; at 45°C)

8,250.00

Grid maximum export

capacity (kW)

None Client Communication

Power factor 1.00 RINA Assumption

Table configuration 1 x 27 modules in landscape JOYDIA_RINA LAYOUT -

G002_v2.0_for check Module tilt (°) 11

Pitch (m) 1.44

Site inclination Flat

Near shadings Assumed none

Metering point location Onshore substation, assumed voltage

level of 33kV

The key equipment and string configuration is summarised in Table 49 and Table 50 below.

Table 49: Equipment assumptions summary

Equipment

type

Assumptions Source

Manufacturer and

model

Nominal

power

Units Quantity

Modules Jinko Solar Eagle

JKM400M-72L-V

400 Wp 22,680 JOYDIA_RINA

LAYOUT -

G002_v2.0_for

check Inverter Sungrow SG2500-

HV-MV-20

2,500 kVA 3



Table 50: Module string layout for PVsyst simulation

Module

String

layout

Assumptions Source

Module

model

Inverter

model

No

inver-

ters

Modules

per

string

No

strings

per

inverter

String conf 1 Eagle

JKM400M-

72L-V

SG2500-

HV-MV-20

3 27 280 JOYDIA_RINA

LAYOUT -

G002_v2.0_for

check

D.2. FPV layouts

The detailed design drawings for the FPV layout are currently available in AutoCAD or PDF format

and hence supplied separately to the client. Final PDF issue will incorporate complete layout

documentation.

E. PR losses

The explanation of the PR losses and our approach is detailed in Table 51 below.

Table 51: PR losses description

Loss Description Modelling approach

Near

shadings

Loss of irradiance affecting the modules

due to obstruction of diffuse and direct

sunlight from surrounding objects, e.g.

external shading from nearby trees or

large buildings, and mutual shading

from neighbouring modules.

Modelled using PVsyst near

shading engine, according to the

system design outlined in Appendix

D.

Spectral This takes into account the effect of

operating at a different air mass and

solar spectrum than STC.

Spectral losses are considered to

be effectively zero for crystalline

silicon modules.

Angular / IAM The loss due to times when the sun is

not 90° to the module. This causes an

increase in the reflection of light from

the solar glass.

User defined profile provided by

independent laboratory model in

PVsyst.

Soiling Loss of light reaching the cells. Over its

working life the module will collect dust,

dirt, bird droppings and vegetation on its

surface.

RINA has applied a soiling loss of

1.5% to the model, based on the

site location and satellite based

rainfall data (MERRA 2 satellite

data).

Additionally, we would recommend

that soiling is monitored and limited

under O&M.




Low

irradiance

performance

This loss considers the relative

efficiency of the module when operating

at an irradiance level other than STC.

We account for this loss in the

module pan files within PVsyst

using information provided in the

module datasheets.

LID This degradation causes performance

loss and occurs during a module’s first

operating hours in outdoor conditions

and will reduce the module’s

performance when compared to the

standard values measured at STC.

This loss is estimated based on a

review of available literature on LID

effects in crystalline silicon

modules.

Module

quality /

power

tolerance

The loss / gain due to the module power

tolerance is a result of the deviation in

the average effective module efficiency

with respect to manufacturer

specifications.

This loss is estimated based on the

datasheet module tolerance

information.

Module

temperature

losses

This takes into account of the loss when

operating at a temperature other than

STC.

Modelled within PVsyst using

module datasheet information and

based on ambient temperature

information taken from Meteonorm

7.

Shading:

electrical

effect

Loss due to the current of a string of

modules / cells being reduced to the

current in the most shaded module /

cell, this loss identifies the electrical

effect due to the near shadings

described above.

Modelled using PVsyst near

shading engine, according to the

system design outlined in Appendix

D.

Mismatch Similar to the previous, this effect takes

place when combining modules with

varied characteristics, such as

variations between allowable

manufacturing tolerances, which will

again limit the current and ultimately the

power for all the modules linked in the

string.

This loss is estimated based on the

inverter type and module tolerance,

informed by RINA’s experience of

real module test data.

Ohmics, DC

wiring

Electrical loss due to the Joule Effect

proportional to the voltage drop along

the wiring between the modules and the

inverters.

A max. voltage drop of 2% at STC

has been estimated based on

RINA’s experience for this type of

project design.

Inverter

efficiency

Loss due to inverter inefficiencies in

converting DC power from the modules

to an AC power the grid can accept.

Modelled in PVsyst based on

datasheet inverter efficiency

information.




Undersizing of

the inverter

This power loss is caused when inverter

power is determined by the AC output

power rating of the inverter components

rather than available DC power at its

input from the PV system. This loss

typically occurs due to the DC field

being oversized with respect to the AC

rated output of the inverter.

This is modelled in PVsyst based

on module and inverter datasheet

information as well as the electrical

design for the site.

MPPT

performance

Loss due to accuracy of the maximum

power point tracking algorithm of the

inverter. As operating conditions

change, the inverter must determine the

maximum power available from the

modules and adjusts the operating point

as required. The accuracy of this control

algorithm incurs a loss.

RINA has developed a

methodology to estimate the MPPT

loss, based on climatic information

for the site region, and detailed

inverter efficiency information if

available.

Ohmics, AC

LV wiring



the wiring between the inverters and the

transformers.

A max. loss of 0.3% at STC has

been estimated based on RINA’s

experience for this type of project

design and site conditions.

LV to MV

transformer

Loss due to how efficiently the

transformer is able to convert the power

from LV to MV for compliance with the

connection characteristics of the grid.

Estimated based on RINA’s


design and site conditions.

More detailed analysis can be

applied if transformer datasheets

are provided for review.

Ohmics, AC

MV wiring



the wiring between the transformers and

point of connection.



design and site conditions

considering the connection point to

be at 33 kV level.

Self-

consumption

Loss due to energy consumption from

the site deducted from the generation,

which can include fans, heaters, air

conditioning, CCTV, lights, etc. This

loss does not account for the imported

energy when the plant is not producing

energy, i.e. self-consumption during

standby and night-time is excluded.



and, location.

This loss is also exclusive of any

large on site loads.

Module

degradation

Loss due to natural degradation of the

modules performance during its

operating life.

RINA has undertaken a literature

review on module degradation, and

considers a linear annual

degradation rate of 0.4% to be an

appropriate assumption for

crystalline silicon modules.



F. Uncertainty in Yield Modelling Assumptions

Uncertainties in the GHI, GII and PR modelling assumptions are shown in Table 52. Note these

figures impact the overall yield of the plant.

Table 52: Yield modelling uncertainty

Item Uncertainty

on energy

Explanation

Global Horizontal

Irradiance

± 3.4% Uncertainty associated with metrological and methodical

uncertainty of the site-specific solar resource and the

applied value in yield calculations.

Horizontal-to-

inclined calculation

± 0.8% Additional uncertainty associated with the calculation

model for the different components of inclined surface

irradiation.

Near shadings ± 1.0% Uncertainty arising from the temporal resolution and from

the approximations made in the simulation.

Spectral ± 0.5% Uncertainty due to the estimation of the effect of solar

spectrum on modules according to literature.

Angular / IAM ± 0.3% Uncertainty associated with the calculation model.

Soiling ± 2.0% Uncertainty associated with the estimation of soiling loss.

Low irradiation ± 0.4% Uncertainties of η(G) mainly arise only during periods of

low irradiance.

LID ± 0.6% Uncertainty associated with the estimation of LID loss.

Module quality /

power tolerance

± 1.5% Uncertainty (standard deviation) obtained in round-robin

tests performed at international calibration laboratories.

Module

temperature

losses

± 1.0% Uncertainty arising from uncertainties of input data.

Mismatch ± 0.4% Uncertainty coming from input data tolerances as well as

approximations made in the calculation.

Ohmics,

DC wiring

± 0.4% Uncertainty arising mainly due to the calculation of low DC

power.

Inverter efficiency ± 1.0% Uncertainty arising from uncertainties of input data as well

as approximations made in the model.

Undersizing of the

inverter

± 0.0% Uncertainty induced by temporal resolution and approxi-

mations made in the simulation.

MPPT

performance

± 0.1% Uncertainty coming from input data uncertainties and

approximations made in the calculation.

Ohmics,

AC LV wiring

± 0.1% Uncertainty arising mainly due to the calculation of low

voltage AC power.

Ohmics,

AC MV wiring

± 0.2% Uncertainty arising mainly due to the calculation of medium

voltage AC power.

LV to MV

transformer

± 0.5% Uncertainty in the calculation of transformer losses.



Item Uncertainty

on energy

Explanation

Self-consumption ± 0.3% Uncertainty in the calculation of self-consumption losses.

Degradation ± 0.3% Uncertainty due to the assumption of published

degradation rates.

Total uncertainty ± 4.8%

GHI uncertainty is combined uncertainty from basic metrological calibration uncertainty (±1.6%),

RINA’s WM approach (see Appendix C) and site-specific variance of the solar resource databases

as presented in Section 4.2. Uncertainties are combined using the standard error approach.

The overall uncertainty in the yield estimations is calculated via the standard error approach and

corresponds to a value of ± 4.8%.

G. Grid Impact Study

The Grid Impact Study has been issued as a separate report to the Client.

H. Breakdown of Subproject Cost Estimates

Table 53: Subproject base cost estimates

Sl No Item Total cost –

base case

(Million US$)

A Investment Costs

1 Civil Works

Anchoring and Mooring system $0.23

Floating system $0.91

Labour cost $0.35

Subtotal $1.49

2 Equipment

PV modules $2.00 Inverters $0.53

Meteorological stations $0.01

DC & AC cables $0.41

Grid infrastructure to connect the Subproject $1.49

Launching platform, jetty, maintenance boats & water quality

sensors

$0.11

Testing, commissioning and performance test $0.01

Profit margin $0.55

Subtotal $5.10

3 Engineering Consulting - Design and Supervision




base case

(Million US$)

Grid and power system studies $0.02

Feasibility study $0.05

Yield study $0.01

Geotechnical study $0.02

Bathymetry study $0.01

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) $0.08 Detailed engineering design $0.12

Method statement, testing plan, documentation, warranty setup $0.02

Detailed engineering test $0.09

Financing cost (pre-construction through operation) - Lender's

engineer/ Independent engineer

$0.03

Subtotal $0.43

4 Inland transport

Logistics $0.56

Subtotal $0.56

5 Taxes and Duties

Total Tax Incidence: Solar Modules or Panels 11.33%

VAT Rate 15.00%

Subtotal $1.32

Subtotal (A) $8.90

B Other Investment Costs

1 Land & Civil Works

Land preparation & civil works (assembly area, site office for

security staff, monitoring and spares storage)

$0.04

Subtotal $0.04

2 Environmental and Social Costs

1) ongoing survey/monitoring work to cover bird and aquatic surveys

and water quality and other measures

$0.06

2) environmental monitoring for the IA to hire a consultant to monitor

IEE/EIA compliance and to ensure proper implementation of the

mitigation measures and the IEE/EIA monitoring program and assist

in ADB compliance monitoring and reporting

$0.05

3) environmental training for IA staff -

4) Social Management Costs $0.15

Subtotal $0.26

3 Subproject Management Construction Supervision

Formal tender for EPC + O&M - Technical $0.02




base case

(Million US$)

Formal tender for EPC + O&M - Legal $0.01

Lease - Transaction/legal $0.01

Agency fee - permitting and approval $0.01

Financing cost (pre-construction through operation) - Financial

advisor

$0.02

Financing cost (pre-construction through operation) - Legal advisor $0.04

Subproject insurance $0.14

Subproject management $0.09

Owner's engineer $0.11

Subtotal $0.45

Subtotal (B) $0.76

C Contingency

1 Physical $0.77

2 Price $0.57

Subtotal (C) $1.34

D Financial charges during implementation

1 Interest during implementation $0.84

2 Commitment charges $0.01

Subtotal (D) $0.85

Total Subproject cost (A) + (B) + (C) + (D) $11.85



I. Report of Local Livelihoods and Activities of Joydia Baor

Housing

The type of housing facilities that we have found around Joydia Baor are made of materials such

as concrete, tin and mud, and are home to a community of fishermen, who do not make much in

the way of income.

Figure 17: Types of local housing

Uses of Lake

Jute rotting –Joydia Baor is surrounded by a lot of land where jute is cultivated. Farmers do a

lot of jute-rotting in the Baor.

Figure 18: Jute rotting

Washing and bathing – Joydia is also used for household washing and bathing purposes by the

inhabitants of the region. However, a large portion of the shoreline is covered by water

hyacinths and because of that the villagers need to clear the water surface every time before

going into the water.



Figure 19: Washing and bathing

Cooking – People use water from the lake to cook their meals, and they especially prefer lake

water to water pumped from the well, the latter of which contains a lot of iron that causes their

boiled rice to turn out a slightly different colour. Someone also mentioned that the food taste

good when cooked using Baor water.

Subsistence fishing – The community mostly engages in subsistence fishing as a primary

source of income, which is not more than 300-500 BDT a day. Small mesh size fishing nets and

local handmade traps are mainly used for catching the small indigenous species. Fisherman

normally used small boats and local made ‘dunga’ to fish from the lake.

Figure 20: Subsistence fishing

Duck farming – A lot of ducks are brought to the Baor to graze. Khaki Campbell and swan were

the common types found during the visit.



Figure 21: Duck farming

Navigation – The lake is used for navigation purposes also. People use boats to traverse the

lake through the middle. Villagers living on the West side mainly use the navigation route the

cross the Baor.

Figure 22: Navigation

Adjacent farmland

Joydia Baor is surrounded by croplands where rice, jute and vegetables are cultivated. Banana and

Guava plantation is very popular in this part of the country and multiple plantation sites were found

on both sides of the shore. Commercial timber producing trees such as Teak, Mahogany are also

available close to the shoreline.



Figure 23: Adjacent farmland

Fish species

Multiple fish samples were collected each day from the local fisherman and the Fisheries expert

identified the species using the identification manual. Species identified are summarised in the

following table.

Table 54: Summary of fish species

Sl.

No.

Scientific Name English Name Local Name

1. Aplocheilus panchax Blue Panchax Tin Chokka, Kanpona, Korkuna

2. Badis badis Blue Badis Bot Koi, Koi Bandi, Napte Koi

3. Chanda nama Elongated Glass

Perchlet

Chanda, Nama Chanda

4. Channa marulius Bullseye Snakehead Gajar, Gajal, Gajori

5. Glossogobius giuris Tank Goby Bele, Baila

6. Gudusia chapra Indian River Shad Chapila, Chaipla, Suiya, Khaira

7. Heteropneustes fossilis Stinging Catfish Shing, Jiol, Shingi

8. Hyporhamphus limbatus Congaturi Halfbeak Ek Thuita, Ek Thota

9. Macrobrachium sp. Small Prawn Gura Chingri

10. Macrognathus pancalus Barred Spiny Eel Guchi, Pankal, Turi, Chirka



Sl.

No.

Scientific Name English Name Local Name

11. Mastacembelus armatus Zigzag Eel Baim, Bam, Sal Baim

12. Mystus tengara Tengara Mystus Bujuri Tengra

13. Mystus vittatus Striped Dwarf Catfish Tengra

14. Nandus nandus Mud Perch Meni, Bheda, Roina

15. Notopterus notopterus Bronze Featherback Foli, Pholoi

16. Osteobrama cotio Dhela Dhela, Mou, Moa, Keti

17. Pethia conchonius Rosy Barb Kanchan Punti, Punti, Taka

Punti

18. Pseudambassis lala Highfin Glassy Perchlet Choto Chanda, Lal Chanda

19. Pseudambassis ranga Indian Glassy Fish Lal Chanda, Ranga Chanda

20. Pseudosphromenus

cupanus

Spiketailed Paradise

Fish

Naptani

21. Puntius phutunio Pigmy Barb Phutani Punti

22. Puntius puntio Puntio Barb --

23. Puntius ticto Ticto Barb Tit Punti

24. Tetraodon cutcutia Ocellated Pufferfish Tepa, Kutkuitta, Potka

25. Trichogaster lalius Dwarf Gourami Chuchra, Buicha, Choto

Kholisa



Figure 24: Fish species

Distribution lines

Joydia Baor has REB distribution lines spanning across all sides of it. New electric poles are being

erected as renovation of the existing line is underway.



Figure 25: Distribution lines

Substation

The substation near Kotchandpur is 10 km from Joydia. It has a 33/11 kV transformer that has a

capacity of 10 MVA, with 5 active feeders. Upon visit, no oil leakages were observed. There is no

environmental audit and the transformer oil is generally sent to the store for proper disposal.

Figure 26: Substation

Road communication

The Baor is surrounded by poorly-paved brick roads and dirt roads. The conditions of the roads are

better on the South East side compared to North East and West side.



Figure 27: Road communication

Vegetation

Dhancha, a plant which makes for good fuel wood, along with water hyacinths make up the

vegetation that can be found in the Baor. The dense water hyacinth cover on the water surface is

inhibiting navigation, fishing and general uses of the lake water.

Figure 28: Vegetation



J. Project Spill Response Plan

All Subproject locations during construction and operations will be required to implement an

operation and maintenance program that includes an employee training component and has the

ultimate goal of preventing or reducing pollutant runoff from sites. Spill response plans will be

required:

During construction at the Subproject panel storage area, panel and floatation assembly area,

the existing substation site, the Subproject lakeside assembly area and while working over water

to put the panels in place and to anchor them on the lake bottom.

During operations for any area required for long term operations at the lake side, for the panel

areas on the lake and at the substation facility.

Preventing spills of materials and wastes is a significant component of compliance. Even with the

best prevention efforts, spills may still occur and when they do, it is up to facility personnel to

respond quickly and effectively to clean-up the spilled material or notify someone who can. The

Subproject will develop site specific individual Spill Response and Prevention Plan. The plan/s will

be kept in a central locations easily accessible for employees.

Responsibilities will be clearly defined with named Responsible Person or Persons who will have

primary responsibility for coordinating the response to emergencies, including chemical spills.

Supervisors should ensure that employees are familiar with these procedures and that they receive

any necessary training.

All employees should follow these procedures in the event of a spill.

Emergency Contact Numbers of personnel to be contacted in the case of a spill should be posted

in conspicuous locations and this will include

Emergency services (police, fire department, ambulance services).

The Subproject responsible officer or officers (e.g. project manager, project safety officer).

For response to spills over water, during construction and operations, the location of a boat and

name(s) of the officer/employee(s) who operate the boat and who will be trained in emergency

response.

Any other defined Government agencies.

Clean-up Procedures Spilled chemicals should be effectively and quickly contained and cleaned

up. Employees should clean up spills themselves only if properly trained and protected. Employees

who are not trained in spill clean-up procedures should report the spill to the Responsible Officer(s)

listed above, warn other employees, and leave the area.

The Maximum Clean-up Amounts that properly trained employee should clean-up will be listed in

the plan (e.g. 1 litre of liquid and ½ kg by weight unless other information is available). In the event

of spills greater than these amounts, contact the appropriate responders listed in the Emergency

Contact Numbers listed above.

The following general guidelines should be followed for evacuation, spill control, notification of

proper authorities, and general emergency procedures in the event of a chemical incident in which

there is potential for a significant release of hazardous materials.



1. Evacuation - Persons in the immediate vicinity of a spill should immediately evacuate the

premises (except for employees with training in spill response). If the spill is of “medium” or “large”

size, or if the spill seems hazardous, immediately notify emergency response personnel.

2. Spill Control Techniques - Once a spill has occurred, the employee needs to decide whether

the spill is small enough to handle without outside assistance. Only employees with training in spill

response should attempt to contain or clean up a spill. Spill control equipment should be located

wherever significant quantities of hazardous materials are received or stored. Common spill

response items include Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), absorbents, over-pack containers,

container patch kits, spill booms, shovels, acid/base neutralisers, and “caution-keep out” signs.

For overwater response, floating booms, a specific marine absorbent kit with appropriate

absorbents, booms, pads, scoops and containers for contaminated materials.

3. Spill Response and Clean-up - Chemical spills should be divided into three categories: Small,

Medium and Large. Response and clean-up procedures will vary depending on the size of the spill.

Small Spills: Any spill where the major dimension is less than ½ metre (m) in diameter or are less

than 300 millilitres (mL) in volume can generally be handled by internal personnel and usually do

not require an emergency response by police or fire department teams:

Quickly control the spill by stopping or securing the spill source. This could be as simple as up-

righting a container and using floor-dry or absorbent pads to soak up spilled material. Wear

gloves and protective clothing, if necessary.

Put spill material and absorbents in secure containers if any are available.

Consult with the Facility Responsible Person and the MSDS for spill and waste disposal

procedures.

In some instances, the area of the spill should not be washed with water. Use Dry Clean-up

Methods and never wash spills down the drain, onto a storm drain or into water bodies.

Both the spilled material and the absorbent is considered hazardous waste and must be

disposed of in compliance with Subproject solid and hazardous waste plan.

Medium Spills: Spills where the major dimension exceeds ½ m, but are less than 5m or are

between 300 mL and 5 Litre in volume. Outside emergency response personnel (police and fire

department teams) should usually be called for medium spills. Common sense, however, will

dictate when it is necessary to call them.

Immediately try to help contain the spill at its source by simple measures only. This means

quickly righting a container, or putting a lid on a container, if possible. Do not use absorbents

unless they are immediately available. Once a quick attempt has been made to contain the spill,

or once it is determined that is not possible to take any brief containment measures, leave the

area and alert Emergency Services. Give police accurate information as to the location,

chemical, and estimated amount of the spill.

Evaluate the area outside the spill. Any engines and electrical equipment near the spill area

must be turned off. Advise Emergency Responders on how to turn off engines or electrical

sources. Do not go back into the spill area once you have left. Help emergency responders by

trying to determine how to shut off any equipment, if necessary.

If emergency responders evacuate the spill area, follow their instructions in leaving the area.

After emergency responders have contained the spill, company personnel should be prepared

to assist them with any other information that may be necessary, such as MSDSs and questions

about the facility. Emergency responders or trained personnel with proper personal protective

equipment will then clean up the spill residue. Personnel should not re-enter the area until the



responder in charge gives the all clear and should be prepared to assist these persons from

outside the spill area with MSDSs, absorbents, and containers.

Reports must be filed with proper authorities. It is the responsibility of the spiller to inform both

his/her supervisor and the emergency responders as to what caused the spill. The response

for large spills is similar to the procedures for medium spills, except that the exposure danger

is greater.

Large Spills: Any spill involving flammable liquid where the major dimension exceeds 5 m or more

than 5L in volume; and any “running” spill, where the source of the spill has not been contained or

flow has not been stopped.

Leave the area and notify Emergency Responders. Give the operator the spill location, chemical

name, and approximate amount.

From a safe area, attempt to obtain MSDS information for the spilled chemical for the

emergency responders to use. Also, be prepared to advise responders as to any ignition

sources, engines, electrical power sources that may need to be shut off. Advise responders of

any absorbents, containers, or spill control equipment that may be available. Use radio or phone

to assist from a distance, if necessary.

Only emergency response personnel, in accordance with their own established procedures,

should handle spills greater than 5m in dimension. Once the emergency responders’ team is

on the job cleaning up spills or putting out fires, the area is under their control and no one may

re-enter the area until the responder in charge gives the all clear.

Provide information for reports to supervisors and responders, just as in medium spills.

Each Subproject site will detail the following and have information available:

1 Materials at Site that Require Special Clean-up in the Event of Spills

Describe any materials used at your facility that requires special materials and procedures for

clean-up. Provide details regarding hazards associated with these materials:

Material Hazards Associated with Material

1

2

2 Materials Inventory

List all materials or wastes that may require clean up. List the average and maximum amounts on

site and their storage locations. (Example materials are listed for convenience only. Ignore any that

do not apply and add any other materials of concern that are onsite.

Material Amount (avg/max} Locations

Diesel Fuel

Motor Oil

Hydraulic Oil

Used Oil

Paints

Etc



3 Maximum Clean-up Amounts

Identify the maximum volume of spill that may be cleaned up by employees or contractors based

on material (use 1 litre or ½ kg unless other information is available.). Also identify how wastes

from a spill of any material will be disposed of (for example, absorbed and placed in special

containment) and the location of the offsite facility to which clean-up wastes will be sent for

hazardous waste disposal, if applicable:

Material Maximum Volume to be cleaned Disposal Method/Location

e.g. Used Oil

4 Facility Map

Attach a map or sketch of the facility including substation site and wharf and panel locations during

operations showing:

the locations of each spill response kit,

the locations where the materials identified in the Material Inventory are normally stored or

used, and,

the location of each storm drain inlet or drainage ditch.

5 Spill Kit Inventory and labelling

List the spill response equipment that will be maintained at each site location

LOCATION ABSORBENTS

(bags of loose

absorbents, rolls of

sheet, containers of

neutralizing agents

etc). Marine

specific absorbents

for use lake

cleanup,

TOOLS (shovels,

brooms, dust pans,

waste containers,

squeegees etc).

Scoops for removal

of material on water

and containers for

temporary storage

of contaminated

material

PERSONAL

PROTECTIVE

EQUIPMENT

(gloves,

goggles,

aprons, boots,

dust masks

etc)

OTHER

SUPPLIES

(Warning

tape, labels,

markers,

MSDSs etc)

6 Label Spill Kits

Label each spill kit prominently with the words “SPILL KIT” or “ABSORBENTS” “MARINE SPILL

KIT” etc.

Label or stencil the necessary emergency telephone number(s) of persons to be contacted in case

of a spill or leak.

7 Employee Training Log



Identify the spill response training provided to each employee or contractor who is charged with

responsibility for spill response. This will include the need to show that contractors during

construction and the IA during operations have trained their staff to handle spill response over water

and this needs to include health and safety training for working over water:

NAME OF EMPLOYEE

for Contractor or

Implementing Agency

during operations)

INSTRUCTOR NAME DATE OF TRAINING

8 Spill Log

Provide information for all spills greater than I litre giving date, material, quantity, responsible

person to contact, a description of spill and if there was discharge to a water body, clean-up method

and disposal.



K. Constrcution and Operation Waste and Hazardous Waste Management Plan

General

In planning stages of the Project, it is important to understand what excess materials are likely to

be generated and then focus on how the generation of those excess materials can either be

avoided or the material can be diverted from landfill.

A construction waste and hazardous waste management plan will be developed with key objectives

to:

1. Minimise the amount of waste generated as part of the Subproject

2. Maximise the amount of material which is sent for reuse, recycling or reprocessing

3. Minimise the amount of material sent to landfill.

When developing and implementing the construction waste management plan the following key

elements should be considered:

1. Waste streams: identify which waste streams are likely to be generated and estimate the

approximate amounts of material

2. Focus on waste avoidance: instead of managing the waste once it has been generated, look at

ways to avoid the generation of that waste in the first place; use of modular component and

prefabrication of solar panels off-sit significantly reduces wastage on-site

3. Services: identify site personnel who are responsible for management of the waste streams

generated and data on waste/recycling generation

4. On-site: understand how the waste management system will work site, including bin placement

and access and ensure that non-hazardous waste and hazardous waste are properly separated

and contained

5. Clearly assign and communicate responsibilities: ensure that those involved in the construction

phase are aware of their responsibilities in relation to the construction waste management plan

6. Engage and educate personnel: be clear about how the various elements of the waste

management plan will be implemented and ensure personnel have an opportunity to provide

feedback on what is/isn’t working

7. Monitor: to ensure the plan is being implement, monitor on-site

The Waste Plan will document the following:

How will materials be stored on-site for reuse and recycling? e.g. in skip bins. Indicate

arrangements of storage of oils etc with arrangements for bunding and capacity of bunding

(see hazardous waste arrangements below)

How will site operations be managed to ensure minimal waste creation and maximum reuse

and recycling?

Indicate separate area set aside for sorted wastes,

Indicate designated waste collection points at site. Indicate that there will be sufficient collection

points with adequate capacity



Indicate any reuse and recycling of materials

indicate clear signage arrangements for waste

Indicate staff training

indicate checking procedures and designated personnel responsible

An inventory of all wastes including hazardous wastes will be compiled and will include

quantities of waste. The inventory will be kept up to date and available at site

Indicate landfill sites utilised for final disposal and arrangements for transfer of materials

For Hazardous Waste

The arrangements for any recycling and final disposal and compliance with relevant standards

will be documented and any agreements with agencies employed will be explained

For any medical waste indicate the arrangements for storage, handling, transportation and final

disposal. E.g. Incineration at approved medical facility

Indicate designated facilities for collection and temporary on-site storage and where applicable

there is appropriate fencing, signage, roofing, lighting, a means of communication in case of

emergencies and lightning protection

Demonstrate that waste storage areas and/or containers meet the risk needs for hazardous

materials (e.g. impervious floor, bunded areas with drainage/containment systems, lids to

prevent light material from blowing away or sealed containers)

Store any empty print cartridges in a designated box at specified location until removal from

site

Store any fluorescent tubes in a special labelled steel drum at designated sites e.g. any

engineering workshop.

Arrangements for collection and storage of miscellaneous hazardous waste i.e. car batteries,

batteries, oil filters, oil soaked rags until such time that the amounts can be removed from site.

Ensure that the contractor’s responsible are made aware of these procedures.

Indicate how the plan will be evaluated, and who is responsible for the evaluation? e.g.

feedback from staff collected by the site supervisor, regular reporting to implementing agency

and to ADB through monitoring reports.



Management plans will be in place to cover the construction sites (on the lake and lakeside

assembly and storage area and the transmission line construction route and at the Subproject

substation site) and during operations at the floating facility, transmission line and substation site.

The following form to be used to specify waste streams at site, volumes generated and indicating

any reuse and recycling. Disposal method and landfill destination will be indicated.

General and Hazardous Waste Streams

Reuse and Recycling Disposal

Materials Generated

Specify all non

hazardous waste

materials

e.g.

Estimated

volume (m3 ) or

Area (m2 ) or

weight (t) (refer

On-site (How

will materials

be reused

and/or recycled

on-site?)

Off-site

(Specify the

contractor and

recycling

agent)

Specify the

contractor

and/or landfill

site

Timber (specify type)

Wood waste(e.g.

MDF, plywood)

Ferrous metals (e.g.

iron and steel

Nonferrous metal (e.g.

copper wiring)

Concrete

Gravel

Gypsum board (e.g.

drywall)

Plaster

Paint

Plumbing fixtures and

fittings

Stone

Asphalt

Glass

Sand/fill

Topsoil

Green waste

Fluorescent light

tubes

Plastics

PVC

Co-mingled

recyclables

Others (specify)



Hazardous Waste Streams

Reuse and Recycling Disposal

Hazardous Materials

Generated

Specify

Estimated

volume (cu m)

or Area (sq m)

or weight (t)

On-site (How

will materials

be reused

and/or recycled

on-site?)

Off-site

(Specify the

contractor and

recycling

agent)

Specify the

contractor and

method of

disposal

Used oils from various

sources –

transformers, vehicle

use etc

Any medical waste

from first aid and

medical facilities

Miscellaneous waste

i.e. car batteries, other

batteries, oil filters, etc

Sewage from septic

tanks at site or camps

Contaminated soil

Others (specify)

All movements of waste material from site will be documented using the form below and information

will be available for inspection at site.

Documentation of Waste Materials Movement from site

Waste Material

(describe)

Volume (cu m)

or weight (t)

Destination e.g.

recycling agency,

landfill,

incineration

Signature of

responsible

person

Date



RINA Tech UK Ltd.

Huntingdon House,

20-25 North Street

Brighton, BN1 1EB,

UK

+44 (0)1273 819 429

rina.org

Joydia Baor, Bangladesh

Floating Solar PV Project 9.072 MWp

Technical Specification for Bathymetric, Geophysical and Geotechnical Survey

July 2020 Rev 1.0

Rev. 1.0

Description First Issue

Prepared by D. Bertalot / C. Constantin

Controlled by C. Shayer

Approved by A. Wilshaw

Date 10/07/2020

July 2020 Rev 1.0



Rev. Description Prepared by Controlled by Approved by Date

1.0 First Issue D. Bertalot / C.

Constantin C. Shayer A. Wilshaw 10/07/2020

All rights, including translation, reserved. No part of this document may be disclosed to any third party,

for purposes other than the original, without written consent of RINA Consulting S.p.A.



July 2020 Rev 1.0 Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 3 1.2 DEFINITIONS 4 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 4 1.4 INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 4 1.5 UNIT SYSTEM 4

2 CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITIES 5 2.1 GENERAL 5 2.2 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS 5 2.3 HEALTH, SAFETY, ENVIRONMENT 5 2.4 QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND ASSURANCE 5

2.4.1 Personnel Characteristics 5 2.5 SURVEY INSTRUMENTATION AND EQUIPMENT 6

3 POSITIONING SYSTEMS 7 3.1 SURVEY REFERENCE SYSTEMS 7

3.1.1 Unit of Measurement 7 3.1.2 Land Vertical Benchmarks 7 3.1.3 Positioning System 7 3.1.4 Underwater Positioning 7

4 BATHYMETRIC SURVEY 8 5 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY 9 6 GEOTECHNICAL SURVEY 10

6.1 LABORATORY TESTING 10 7 OVERALL APPROACH TO SURVEY DESIGN AND EXECUTION 12 8 DATA ACQUISITION AND DATA PROCESSING 13

8.1 DATA ACQUISITION 13 8.1.1 Bathymetric Data 13 8.1.2 Hydrographic Data 13 8.1.3 Geophysical Data 13 8.1.4 Geotechnical Data 13

8.2 FIELD DOCUMENTATION 14 9 DELIVERABLES - FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT 15




ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BH Borehole

CPT Cone Penetration Test

DGPS Differential Global Positioning System

DTM Digital Terrain Model

FPV Floating Photovoltaic

HSE Health, Safety, Environment

PV Photovoltaic

SPT Standard Penetration Test

u1 Pore Water Pressure on the Cone

u2 Pore Water Pressure behind the Cone




1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 SCOPE OF DOCUMENT

The present document states the minimum requirements (basic data, standards and criteria) for the bathymetric survey and the geophysical & geotechnical investigation campaign to be carried out for anchoring and mooring system design of the Floating Photovoltaic (FPV) Project at Kaptai Lake.

The area considered for the installation of the plant is shown in Figure 1.1. Purpose of the planned investigations is to define:

the underwater topography, in terms of bathymetric map with contours and digital terrain model (DTM);

hydrological data;

building a ground model via geophysical and geotechnical investigations.

Figure 1.1: Floating Solar PV – Project Area




1.2 DEFINITIONS

Client: Implementing Agency / To Be Confirmed

Client’s Representative: the personnel appointed by Client to supervise the works

Contractor: the firm in charge of the bathymetric, geophysical, and geotechnical activities at site, for laboratory works and reporting

Shall: is an absolute requirement. Noncompliance with a “shall” requirement shall be approved in writing by the Client.

Should: is a recommendation. Alternative solutions having the same functionality and quality are acceptable to the Client.

1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

All the services shall be in accordance with this document unless otherwise specified by the Client or requested by local regulations.

Data acquisition shall be performed to achieve the highest possible standard and to ensure that survey objectives will be fulfilled and will be not jeopardized by inadequate data quality.

Any exceptions from the requirements of this specification and any other contractual documents shall be clearly identified and explained.

The Contractor shall supply fully operating equipment, instruments, personnel, and labour required for execution of the surveys, laboratory tests, permits, results interpretation and preparation of reports.

The Contractor shall take responsibility to ensure that all operations are conducted safely and with full regard to human life of personnel employed in the operations and to international and local environmental considerations.

In any case, nothing in this specification shall relieve the Contractor of his responsibility to comply with good survey practice.

1.4 INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS

[1] NORSOK Standard G-001 Rev. 2, October 2004, Marine Soil Investigations

[2] ISSMGE Geotechnical & Geophysical Investigations for Offshore and Nearshore Developments

[3] ASTM Annual Book of ASTM Standards - Volume 04.08 (I): Soil and Rock

[4] ASTM Annual Book of ASTM Standards - Volume 04.09 (II): Soil and Rock/Geosynthetics

[5] ASTM ASTM D2488 “Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure)”.

[6] BSI 5930:1999 Code of Practice for Site Investigations”

[7] ISRM Suggested methods “Rock characterisation testing and monitoring”, Pergamon Press.

1.5 UNIT SYSTEM

The units of measure of the International System (SI) shall be used.




2 CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 GENERAL

The Contractor shall be responsible for the overall survey execution and for the quality of the data collected. In particular, the responsibility of the Contractor shall consist in:

satisfying the international and local safety rules applicable in the working area;

acquiring all the permits, authorisations, visas, custom clearance required to operate in the work area;

holding all necessary certification for seaworthiness in Bangladesh;

providing suitably qualified and experienced personnel to ensure the execution of the work in compliance with the technical specifications;

quality and quantity of survey works and acquired data;

procurement of most adequate barges/platforms/pontoons for survey works;

providing logistics and support for all the required activities for the execution of the work;

providing consumables, fuel, lubricants and any other item necessary for operations;

providing appropriate spare parts and back-up equipment to ensure continuous operations;

ensuring the proper functioning and calibration of instrumentation and equipment;

ensure overall quality of survey works and acquired data;

safety of personnel and equipment during activities shall never be compromised. In addition, the Contractor shall consider providing personnel for the security of the Contractor personnel and equipment;

having a contingency plan in case of a mechanical breakdown;

recording the acquired data on adequate support;

interpretation of survey results and preparation of the required technical reports.

2.2 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS

The Contractor shall be responsible to arrange all the applications and to obtain all necessary permits, licences, etc. from the appropriate Authorities with respect to materials, equipment, instruments, means and personnel to be employed for the survey work.

2.3 HEALTH, SAFETY, ENVIRONMENT

It is the Contractor’s duty to comply with the local and international regulations on health, safety and environmental (HSE) protection applicable to the work, and to proceed according to OSHAS 18001 / ISO 45001 and any Client’s HSE requirements.

Compliance with HSE requirements and regulations does not relieve the Contractor from the obligation to act in a responsible manner and to take every reasonable precaution to protect the health and safety of the involved peoples and public, and to protect the environment and the existing structures, if any.

2.4 QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND ASSURANCE

It is the Contractor’s duty to fulfil and implement the requirements for Quality Management (QM) and Quality Assurance (QA) contained in the Contractual Documents. The QM/QA system to be applied during the service shall be properly defined in a Contractor’s Quality Plan complying with ISO 9001 and any Client’s Quality Management specification.

Without prejudice to the obligations undertaken by the Contractor, Client shall have the right to perform Quality Assurance audits to verify that the Contractor meets the requirements as set forth in the Contract.

2.4.1 Personnel Characteristics

The Contractor shall propose the following key qualified personnel for the survey:

Project Manager, having at least 10 years’ experience;

Party Chief responsible for the on-board work, having at least 10 years of relevant experience;




adequate survey team, including engineers and technicians having fully documented experience in the instruments to be used, in the data acquisition and in processing activities.

The Contractor shall submit a list of the proposed key personnel and their relevant CVs, in the offer, to be approved in advance by Client. Any further modification shall be submitted to Client for approval. No change will be allowed during the survey unless due to force majeure; in that case Client shall be advised to approve the proposed substitution.

The Contractor shall have full working knowledge of the site including the prevailing climatic and environmental conditions. The Contractor shall be familiar with all necessary information, circumstances, or conditions (including assessment of contingencies) which may affect the amount or nature and/or the performance of the work.

2.5 SURVEY INSTRUMENTATION AND EQUIPMENT

The Contractor shall provide instruments and equipment meeting the following characteristics:

reliability: all instruments and equipment shall be widely proven and tested, in order to ensure adequate measurements in the environmental conditions typical of the area to be investigated;

compliance: all instruments and equipment shall be widely proven and tested, in order to ensure full compliance with all local and international regulations on health, safety and environmental protection applicable to the work;

stability: all instruments shall allow accurate measurements, to be repeated without involving drift problems;

accuracy: all instruments shall offer an adequate level of accuracy in compliance with the scope of the work;

range: instruments range shall be selected to ensure the best acquisition of data considering the environmental conditions typical of the working area;

redundancy: equipment shall have an adequate redundancy to overcome possible system errors or breakdown;

calibration: all equipment shall be calibrated. Calibration and start up testing must be performed before the beginning of any operations and, in addition, every time the equipment is changed/added to the initial configuration and in all cases that it is necessary. Calibrations and testing can be executed in port or in the operations area. For the equipment calibrated in the factory or workshop, calibration certificates shall be provided to Client before mobilisation;

maintenance: instruments to be used shall require little maintenance; the electronic components shall be checked, tested and repaired by the Contractor;

availability on the market: proposed instruments shall be easily available on the market, in order to ensure a timely replacement in case of equipment failure;

spare parts: Contractor shall have available on-board sufficient quantities of equipment, associated consumables and manufacturer’s recommended spares to perform the work described in this specification, thus avoiding excessive and unacceptable downtimes.




3 POSITIONING SYSTEMS

3.1 SURVEY REFERENCE SYSTEMS

3.1.1 Unit of Measurement

The units of measure of the International System (SI) shall be used.

3.1.2 Land Vertical Benchmarks

The Contractor shall establish minimum 4 (four) permanent benchmarks at the bank for minimum life span of five years for use in future check surveys. The minimum number of required permanent benchmarks should be reassessed proportionally to the extension of the project area.

3.1.3 Positioning System

For Land survey is recommended the use of Total Station / equivalent levelling instrument.

3.1.4 Underwater Positioning

For position fixing, the Contractor shall use DGPS. Alternatively, a position fixing system that meets with horizontal positional accuracy of + 1 m may be accepted by the Client, provided that at least 3 lines of position can be used to determine final position. The position fixing system shall be calibrated against a most accurate system or a fixed base line before deployment.

The Contractor shall use Echo-sounder equipment (having depth recording accuracy of 0.10 m, for ascertaining the depth), DGPS and suitable traversing equipment for this work. The Contractor shall clearly indicate the methodology for maintaining the horizontal control/vertical control for the survey in the proposal/write up. The desired accuracy for the survey is as below:

NAME OF WORK MINIMUM ACCURACY

Bench Mark + 0.005 m

Horizontal Control + 1m

Vertical Control + 0.1 m




4 BATHYMETRIC SURVEY

The main scope is to characterise the superficial soil up to 6 m below the seabed/riverbed relevant for design of the anchoring system that will be installed for the construction of the FPV plant. The aim is to determine the elevation of the base of the lake or water body to design this system.

The purpose of the planned investigations is to define the underwater topography, in terms of bathymetric map with contours and digital terrain model (DTM).

The geotechnical investigation shall be carried out after completion of the bathymetric survey, using the bathymetric data to define locations and depths of coring/testing.

The measured data points shall follow the below specifications:

- 0.1 m precision on elevation data

- Measurement every 5 metres

- Measurement should include the adjacent banks

- Permanent reference points: max 20 metres between the points, located on the banks, at least 1 metre back from the water’s edge, in an accessible area.

The deliverable shall be in the form of a georeferenced CAD file with the location of the measurement points and the corresponding elevation data. The following details shall be included:

- Section drawing showing the slope of the banks and the water level the day of the survey.

- If possible, the mapping should show isometric lines showing the various elevation levels, with a 0.5 metre pitch for elevation.

- Location of reference points on the map (location and coordinates in the appropriate coordinate system).

- Definition / description of the coordinate system.




5 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY

The Scope of Work (SoW) will include the acquisition, processing, interpretation and reporting of appropriate geophysical data as required to:

establish lakes topography with contours, digital terrain model (DTM) and fly-over models;

provide detailed evaluation of lakes morphology, including topographic features, unevenness, geohazards, man–made hazards and obstructions;

provide sub-bottom stratigraphic profile;

detect main metallic debris/objects which can be potentially hazardous for installation.

The SoW is addressed to collect information using one or more of:

multibeam echo-sounder;

side scan sonar;

shallow profiling of seabed by means of sub-bottom profiler

magnetometer




6 GEOTECHNICAL SURVEY

The geotechnical survey will provide important information with the following objectives:

Investigate the distribution, the nature, the thickness and the geotechnical properties of the shallow deposits – underwater survey;

Investigate the distribution, the nature, the thickness, the geotechnical and mechanical properties of the superficial soils;

Correlate soil description and geophysical investigation results;

Facilitate the installation and define the anchoring solutions.

The scope may include piston/gravity corers or vibrocorers to 3 m below the mudline, for the underwater survey. The piston/gravity corers are preferable in cohesive/soft soils whilst vibrocorers are necessary in granular soils to ensure sufficient penetration. At the end of the fieldwork the recovered samples will be sent to a shore-based geotechnical laboratory where a complete testing programme will be carried out including classifications. The collected soil samples shall be shipped to a geotechnical laboratory to determine soil classifications and mechanical properties.

NOTE: Geophysical and geotechnical data shall be integrated in a final report.

6.1 LABORATORY TESTING

After completion of the fieldwork, all the recovered samples, from both underwater and on-land surveys, shall be sent to an approved qualified onshore laboratory where an extensive and advanced testing programme shall be carried out.

Of the more representative samples (those that can be classified as undisturbed and of “good quality” after an accurate visual examination) proposed by the Contractor, geotechnical laboratory tests and analyses shall be performed.

The onshore laboratory testing programme shall be submitted to the Client for approval.

The final choice of type and number of laboratory tests will be established based on soil description from the previous bulk or tube sampling results. The selection shall be done by the Contractor following recognised international standards (as listed in Section 1.4) and according to the soil type.

Type and quantity of laboratory shall be suitable to allow for a good and reliable definition of the soil properties relevant for design of the planned facilities.

Samples shall be properly preserved and transported to the laboratory. The transport shall be at the Contractor care. The laboratory shall store the soil samples in a moisture and temperature-controlled room.

The laboratory program proposed by the Contractor should comprise a selection of the types of tests shown in Table 6.1, as appropriate to the samples collected and the purpose of the investigations (anchoring and mooring studies).

All the remaining samples and waste material coming from lab testing should be properly labelled and stored for possible additional test and/or inspection. The obtained samples shall be conserved at least for 1 year after completion of the onshore laboratory testing. Samples shall not be discarded until approved by Client.

Test Type of Testing Type of Sample

Visual classification (USCS) and sample description

classification testing Cohesive

Atterberg limits (LL, PL, PI)

Natural water (moisture) content

Dry, bulk and submerged density

Particle size distribution

% passing #200 sieve

Specific gravity of soil




Test Type of Testing Type of Sample

Clay fraction

Carbonate content1

Organic content

Unconsolidated undrained triaxial testing (UU) (for firm to stiff cohesive soils)

Sensitivity (e.g. by laboratory fall cone or in-situ vane tests or UU tests on remoulded samples)

Visual classification (USCS) and sample description

classification testing Non- Cohesive

Particle size distribution

% passing #200 sieve

Natural water (moisture)content

Dry, bulk and submerged density

Maximum and minimum dry density

Carbonate content

Microscopic examination

classification testing Rock Natural water (moisture)content

Unit weight

Carbonate content

Point load index

strength testing Rock Uniaxial compression. measurement of Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio to be performed on selected samples

Table 6.1: Laboratory Testing




7 OVERALL APPROACH TO SURVEY DESIGN AND EXECUTION

The abovementioned surveys represent the Client’s assessment of a reasonable strategy to survey the project site in a sufficient manner to build an appropriate ground model for design of the FPV project. These requirements should be critically assessed by the Contractor, and it should develop a survey strategy sufficient to meet its design obligations under the Contract. In particular, the Contractor shall be cognizant of the fact that surveys need to be performed on lakes in remote regions of Bangladesh and shall develop a survey strategy which meets appropriate design requirements within the context of available equipment. The final survey strategy shall be subject to Client review. Innovative solutions may be considered by the Client. The geophysical survey can be performed by means of a small boat (e.g. a pilot boat, inflatable boat, etc), which can operate with a small draft.

The execution of the geotechnical surveys requires a vessel equipped with an A-Frame or crane to be used for deployment of drop/gravity corers or vibrocorers.




8 DATA ACQUISITION AND DATA PROCESSING

8.1 DATA ACQUISITION

The information gathered during the survey shall be stored in an appropriate digital format using hardware and software systems able to manage the acquisition and processing of data coming from different instruments and historical data sources.

The following data shall be acquired during the survey:

Bathymetric data:

Hydrographic data;

Geotechnical data.

8.1.1 Bathymetric Data

Bathymetric data acquisition shall be performed to the highest possible standard to ensure that investigation objectives will not be prejudiced by inadequate data quality.

The purpose of the bathymetric survey is to locate any bed rock outcrops, any obstacles at bed level etc. and to prepare the bed contour plans at specified contour interval with reference to Datum level, collection of data for depth of water (Season wise) and water level variations under waves or similar action, water flow velocity and soil composition of the banks and bottom of the water body, etc.

8.1.2 Hydrographic Data

Hydrographic data acquisition shall be performed/supplied to the highest possible standard to ensure that investigation objectives will not be prejudiced by inadequate data quality.

In general, the Contractor will acquire:

historical detailed bank to bank hydrographic survey of the area under study in a grid of 20m x20m to get the reservoir bed levels. The soundings are to be reduced to Chart Datum (CD) / Sounding Datum (SD) to assess the bed profile. At the time execution of the survey work depending on the actual area size, the Client may change the grid spacing without changing the number of survey points;

historical data of daily & seasonal water level variations, low water level (LWL), high water level (HWL);

The Current velocity (at Surface level, half of the depth & above riverbed) Float observation (right side, centre & left side of the river) and discharge are to be observed once. Their positions & value are to be plotted on the chart and details are to be mentioned in the report;

All prominent shore features, berthing place, existing jetty, ferry ghats, approach roads and other conspicuous objects are to be fixed and indicated on the chart. A brief write-up on condition of the shore features are to be included in the report.

8.1.3 Geophysical Data

Geophysical data acquisition shall be performed to the highest possible standard to ensure that investigation objectives will not be prejudiced by inadequate data quality.

In general, the Contractor will acquire data on:

Lakes’ topography with contours;

digital terrain model (DTM) and fly-over models

lakes morphology, including topographic features, unevenness, geohazards, man–made hazards and obstructions;

detection of main metallic debris/objects which can be potentially hazardous for installation.

8.1.4 Geotechnical Data

Geotechnical data acquisition shall be performed to the highest possible standard to ensure that investigation objectives will not be prejudiced by inadequate data quality.




In general, the Contractor will acquire:

coordinates (Northing and Easting), WD and penetration associated to boring/testing locations;

CPT readings and ASCII files;

sample/cores description;

preliminary stratigraphy.

8.2 FIELD DOCUMENTATION

The Contractor shall record and maintain a complete and accurate log of field operations, including drilling, sampling, coring and testing.

The log must show:

Start and completion date;

name of the Contractor drillers and engineer;

location data, drill rig make and drilling method;

borehole number and coordinates;

water depth - the water depth shall be measured every day, before starting operations;

sampler type used;

depth, interval, type and number of each sample/core taken and sample recovery;

soil description per ASTM D2488 [5] “Description and Identification of Soils (Visual - Manual Procedure)” or, alternately, per BSI 5930:1999 [6] “Code of Practice for Site Investigations”, if requested by Client.

any other data pertinent to identification, strength and consistency of the materials (pocket penetrometer, torvane, etc.);

unusual condition such as fluid loss, hard drilling, etc. or any pertinent notes that would influence the stratification from drillers notes.




9 DELIVERABLES - FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

A Final Report is required to integrate the Bathymetric, the Geophysical and Geotechnical data collected. Following items to be included:

brief assessment of the performed survey operations; description of the operations;

boring logs;

high quality colour photos of the material recovered during drilling operations;

survey locations map;

HSE and QA-QC related registers and statistics.

equipment/tools technical characteristics and operating parameters;

software description;

detailed description of adopted procedure;

results of calibrations;

results of coring and laboratory testing;

integrated Boring/CPT logs;

list of key-personnel involved;

opinion on whether the site is suitable for an FPV project

Recommendations for future investigations

any specific deliverables resulting from bathymetric and hydrographic data e.g. DTM model.

The Draft Issue of the final report shall be submitted as digital copy to the Client within 15 days from the date of completion of each phase of the survey.

The Final Issue of the report shall be submitted to Client within 1 week from the receipt of Client comments.

RINA Consulting S.p.A. | Società soggetta a direzione e coordinamento amministrativo e finanziario del socio unico RINA S.p.A.

Via San Nazaro, 19 - 16145 GENOVA | P. +39 010 31961 | [email protected] | www.rina.org C.F./P. IVA/R.I. Genova N. 03476550102 | Cap. Soc. € 20.000.000,00 i.v.

LAKE BOUNDARY/DEVELOPMENT AREA

20m SETBACK FROM LAKE BOUNDARY

ANCHOR POINTS AND LINES

CABLE TRAY LOCATIONS ON FLOAT

LV CABLE FROM PV FLOAT TO MVPS

MV CABLE FROM MVPS TO SHORE

MVPS FLOATING PLATFORM

MVPS: 2,500kVA INVERTER + TRANSFORMER + MV SWITCHGEAR

PRELIMINARY COMBINER BOX LOCATIONS

PROPOSED ASSEMBLY AREA

FENCE LINE

KOMOR (FISHING AREA)

984 mm

456 mm

1,440 mm

11

PRELIMINARY

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION

ORIGINAL SIZE:

SHEET

H

G

F

E

D

C

B

A

87654321

RIN

A C

ON

SU

LT

IN

G

WW

W.R

IN

AG

RO

UP

.O

RG

WW

W.R

IN

AC

ON

SU

LT

IN

G.O

RG

SCALE

RE

VD

ES

CR

IP

TIO

ND

AT

EC

HK

DD

WN

01

27

/0

8/1

9IS

SU

E F

OR

C

AP

AC

IT

Y E

ST

IM

AT

IO

ND

CF

RR

02

27

/0

1/2

0U

PD

AT

E F

OR

C

AP

AC

IT

Y E

ST

IM

AT

IO

ND

CF

KK

LATTITUDE:

LONGITUDE:

AD

B - Jo

yd

ia

B

ao

r

BA

NG

LA

DE

SH

23.445 N

88.941 E

GE

NE

RA

L

CO

NC

EP

TU

AL

L

AY

OU

T

AS SHOWN

ISO A1

G002

LEGEND

N 1

SITE PLAN

SCALE: 1: 5,000 @ A1

ANCHOR: 2 MOORING

LINES PER ANCHOR.

USED ON NORTH AND

EAST AND WEST

SIDES OF PLATFORM.

ANCHOR: 4 MOORING

LINES PER ANCHOR.

USED ON SOUTH SIDE

OF PLATFORM.

3

PITCH & INCLINATION DETAIL

MODULES IN LANDSCAPE

N 2

SCALE: 1: 17,500 @ A1

AERIAL VIEW

4

SCALE: 1: 50 @ A1

DETAIL OF FLOATS

N

MVPS PLATFORMS

5

SCALE: 1: 500 @ A1

DETAIL OF PLATFORM

N

PV MODULE

MAIN FLOAT

COMBINER BOX

CABLE TRAY

SECONDARY FLOATS

LV CABLE

MV CABLES

MVPS PLATFORM

2.5MVA CENTRAL INVERTER +

TRANSFORMER + MV SWITCHGEAR

LV CABLES

SYSTEM CONFIGURATION:

3 CENTRAL INVERTERS

3 NOS. OF 2,500kVA MVPS

(1x2,500kVA INVERTER PER MVPS)

INVERTER:

MODULE:

RATED POWER 400Wp

DIMENSIONS: 1,979 x 1,002 x 40mm

No OF PLATFORMS: 6

No OF MODULES: 22,680

840 STRINGS OF 27 MODULES

No OF COMBINER BOXES: 42

20 STRINGS PER COMBINER BOX

14 COMBINER BOXES PER INVERTER

DC POWER: 9.072.0kWp

AC POWER @45C: 8,250.0kVA

AC POWER @50C: 7,500.0kVA

AC:DC RATIO: 1:1.21

LAKE SURFACE USAGE:

ESTIMATED TOTAL AVAILABLE AREA:

DRY SEASON: 1,364,810.98m²WET SEASON: 1,623,979.00m²

ESTIMATED LAKE COVERAGE:

DRY SEASON: 6.42%

WET SEASON: 5.43%

MV CABLES

DRY SEASON LAKE BOUNDARY

20m SETBACK

PROPOSED LANDING POINT

PROPOSED O&M BUILDING

PROPOSED

ASSEMBLY

AREA

PLATFORM TYPE 1

No OF PLATFORMS: 4

DC CAPACITY:1,512.0kWp



PLATFORM AREA: 14,732.42m²

PLATFORM TYPE 2

No OF PLATFORMS: 2

DC CAPACITY:1,512.0kWp



PLATFORM AREA: 14,607.22m²

FISHING AREAS

(KOMORS)

NOTES:

1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE INDICATIVE AND IN "METRES" UNLESS

OTHERWISE STATED.

2. DESIGN BASED ON SATELLITE IMAGES AND .KMZ FILES CREATED BY

RINA.

3. THE DESIGN ASSUMES THAT ALL OBSTRUCTIONS WITHIN THE

BOUNDARY OF THE LAKE AND ON THE SHORE/BANK, WHICH COULD

SHADE THE PV ARRAY, WILL BE REMOVED PRIOR TO THE

INSTALLATION.

4. A 20m SETBACK FROM BANKS HAS BEEN CONSIDERED IN LAYOUT,

WHICH IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE DURING DETAILED DESIGN PHASE

5. ANCHORING POINT LOCATIONS ARE BASED ON HIGH LEVEL

CALCULATIONS AND ARE INDICATIVE ONLY. PV ARRAY

ARRANGEMENT, MOORING LINES AND FINAL ANCHOR POINT

LOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE ONCE THE MOUNTING

STRUCTURE SYSTEM AND EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER ARE DEFINED

DURING THE DETAILED DESIGN PHASE.

6. LOCATION OF THE INVERTER SUBSTATIONS (MVPS) ARE INDICATIVE

ONLY AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE DURING THE DETAILED DESIGN

PHASE.

7. MOORING OF THE MVPS TO BE DEFINED DURING THE DETAILED

DESIGN PHASE.

8. MV CABLE ROUTING IS INDICATIVE ONLY AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE

DURING THE DETAILED DESIGN PHASE.

9. POINT OF CONNECTION NOT YET DEFINED AND LANDING POINT BASED

ON DISCUSSIONS HELD WITH LOCAL TEAM. FINAL LOCATION TO BE

DEFINED DURING THE DETAILED DESIGN PHASE.

10. NO BATHYMETRIC SURVEY OR DEPTH SEASONAL VARIATION DATA

WAS AVAILABLE WHEN THIS LAYOUT WAS PRODUCED. HENCE,

LAYOUT PROVIDES A CONSERVATIVE CAPACITY ESTIMATION BASED

ON TYPICAL PLATFORM CONFIGURATIONS AND AVAILABLE DATA.

11. APPROXIMATELY 6.5% OF THE TOTAL AVAILABLE AREA HAS BEEN

COVERED BY THE PLATFORMS CONSIDERING THE DRY SEASON LAKE

BOUNDARY. A MORE IN-DEPTH ASSESSMENT WOULD BE REQUIRED IN

ORDER TO OPTIMISE THE ACHIEVABLE CAPACITY.

12. A SOUTHERN PREVAILING WIND HAS BEEN CONSIDERED, HENCE

MOORING / ANCHORING BEING REINFORCED IN THE SOUTHERN SIDE

OF THE PLATFORMS. ANCHORAGE CONFIGURATION IS HOWEVER

INDICATIVE ONLY AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE DURING THE DETAILED

DESIGN PHASE.

ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

TA-9628-BAN

Capacity Development for Renewable Energy Investment

Programming and Implementation

1 Solar PV Power Investment Plan

Appendix G

Grid Impact Study Report Joydia Floating PV

August 2020

Prepared for:

Asian Development Bank

Submitted by:

RINA Consulting & eGen Consultants

Grid Impact Study Report - Draft

Revisions

Revision Date Comment Signatures

Originated by Checked by Approved by

1.0 24/01/2020 Draft for approval G Balamurali/ V Prakash

Michael Beech

Simon Ebdon

2.0 25/08/2020 Updated costs G Balamurali A Wilshaw S Ebdon


ABBREVIATIONS

ADB Asian Development Bank BPDB Bangladesh Power Development Board BREB Bangladesh Rural Electrification Board EMS Energy Management System FPV Floating Photovoltaics Ft Feet GW Gigawatt kV Kilo Voltage kA Kilo Ampere MVA Mega Volt Amperes MW Megawatt

MWp Megawatt peak NLDC National Load Despatch Centre OHL Overhead line PGCB Power Grid Company of Bangladesh Ltd PPC Power Plant Controller PoC Point of Connection PSS/E Power System Simulator for Engineering Pu Per unit PV Photovoltaic

PVPS Photovoltaic Power Station RE Renewable Energy RTNA Real Time Network Analysis SLD Single Line Diagram SREDA Sustainable Renewable Energy Development Authority S/S Substation TSO Transmission System Operator VRE Variable Renewable


Contents

1 SCOPE OF WORK – OUTPUT 3: GRID IMPACT ASSESMENT 1

2 DATA COLLECTION ASSUMPTIONS AND CLARIFICATION 1

2.1 Assumptions 2

3 BANGLADESH POWER SYSTEM 3

3.1 Power Demand of Bangladesh 4

3.1.1 Forecasted Demand 4

3.1.2 Daily operational reports 5

3.2 Grid network – Jhenaidha 33 kV 5

3.2.1 Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation 6

3.2.2 Kotchandpur 33/11 kV Substation 6

3.2.3 Moheshpur-2 33/11 kV Substation 7

3.2.4 Substation Loadings 7

3.2.5 Generators connected to the Jhenaidha 33 kV network 7

4 JOYDIA LAKE FLOATING PV 8

4.1 Grid Connection Options 8

4.1.1 Option 1 – Mohespur-2 33/11 kV Substation – 33 kV Connection 8

4.1.2 Option 2 - Kotchandpur 33/11 kV Substation – 33 kV Connection 11

4.2 Preferred Option 14

5 SYSTEM MODELLING 14

5.1 Bangladesh PSS/E transmission model review 14

5.2 Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation 16

5.3 Joydia FPV and the grid connection 17

5.3.1 Dynamic model 18

6 GRID IMPACT STUDY 22

6.1 Steady state analysis 22

6.1.1 Study criteria 22

6.1.2 Base case 23

6.1.3 Load flow analysis 26

6.1.4 Contingency analysis 28

6.1.5 Short circuit analysis 28


7 FLOATING PV REACTIVE CAPABILITY 29

7.1 Reactive power support through AN increased inverter capacity 30

8 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS 30

8.1 Grid code requirements 31

8.1.1 Fault ride through (Performance during Grid Disturbances) 31

8.1.2 Frequency Withstand Capability 32

8.1.3 Active Power Control 32

8.2 Fault ride through analysis 32

8.2.1 Case-1: 0.0pu voltage at grid during disturbance 32




8.3 Frequency disturbance analysis 37

8.3.1 Over frequency disturbance 37

8.3.2 Under frequency disturbance 37

9 DISCUSSION 38

APPENDIX A. SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM OF THE BANGLADESH TRANSMISSION

NETWORK 40

APPENDIX B. GEOGRAPHICAL MAP OF THE BANGLADESH TRANSMISSION

NETWORK 41

APPENDIX C. SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM OF JENAIDHA SUBSTATION 42

APPENDIX D. LAYOUT DIAGRAM OF JOYDIA FPV 44

APPENDIX E. SUB MARINE CABLES – ELECTRICAL PARAMETER 45

APPENDIX F. OHL PARAMETERS 46

APPENDIX G. INVERTER DATASHEET 47


Capacity Development for Renewable Energy Investment Programming and Implementation Solar PV Power Investment Plan

1

1 SCOPE OF WORK – OUTPUT 3: GRID IMPACT ASSESMENT

The scope of work for this report focuses on analysing the impact on the Bangladeshi transmission grid due to the connection of floating PV at Joydia Lake, which will be connected to the Jhenaidha 33 kV network.

1. Data Review and data request.

2. Identification of grid interconnection options and recommendation of the techno-

economic grid connection option.

3. Modelling of each candidate site in PSS/E – both static and dynamic models.

(generic only) for each site will be built. The model will also include the proposed

grid interconnection.

4. Preforming static studies to determine the impact on transmission or distribution

networks due to the integration of floating PV plants. Static studies will include Load

Flow analysis, Contingency analysis and short circuit analysis.

5. Performing dynamic studies to determine the stability of each proposed floating PV

site to remain connected to the grid under disturbances. The dynamic studies will

include voltage and frequency stability analysis.

6. Concept design for the grid interconnection.

7. A report detailing feasibility analysis and the grid impact assessment, and

recommendations for improvements and future works.

2 DATA COLLECTION ASSUMPTIONS AND CLARIFICATION

The RINA team undertook considerable effort to collect actual and accurate data for all the network elements pertaining to the Bangladeshi transmission and distribution network.

A significant amount of information was obtained from the Power Grid Company of Bangladesh Ltd website https://www.pgcb.org.bd including the single line diagram describing the Bangladesh Transmission network and Daily operational report.

During the initial few days of the inception mission (15-18th June 2019) the RINA team attended a number of meetings with the client (ADB) and various project stakeholders including Sustainable Renewable Energy Development Authority (SREDA), Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) and Power Grid Company of Bangladesh (PGCB). This was followed by site visits to the two candidate sites of Kaptai and Mohamaya Lakes and a number of substations near each lake (19-21st June 2019). Further meetings were attended with the few remaining project stakeholders on our return to Dhaka (22-26th June 2019) including the Bangladesh Rural Electrification Board (BREB) and the National Load Despatch Centre (NLDC). RINA team visited the candidate sites of Bhukbara, Joydia and Khajura lakes in the Jessore area and a number of substations near each lake during the second site visit in 17-25 November 2019. Further meetings were attended with the project stake holders.

1. PSS/E models: The System planning department provided PSS/E models (static only)

for the years 2019 and 2025. The models require updating as the solar PV plant

currently in operation or under construction has not been modelled. It was understood

that working dynamic PSS/E models for the Bangladesh grid are not available due to

a lack of generator data. The system planning (PGCB) Superintending Engineer (Mr

Shahabunur) clarified that although dynamic models for only a small number of

https://www.pgcb.org.bd/



2

generators are available these are of ‘generic type’ and therefore do not represent the

actual response of the generator. He further clarified that the current dynamic model

is incomplete and does not represent the actual system response. PGCB is in the

process of procuring the services of an independent consultant to collect generator

data and build a working dynamic model of the Bangladesh power system, however

this model will not be available in the near future and therefore cannot be used for the

grid impact study.

2. Transmission network data – PGCB: PGCB clarified that most of the demand and

generation data is available from their website (www.pgcb.org.bd). An SLD and

Geographic map of the compete Bangladesh transmission system is also available

from the PGCB website. The information on future development of the PGCB network

is available from the revised PSMP 2016.

• Power System Master Plan 2016, Summary.

• Revisiting Power System Master plan 2016.

• PGCB grid network – Existing 400 kV , 230 kV and 132 kV grid network of

Bangladesh.

• PGCB Geo map – 765 kV, 400 kV, 230 kV and 132 kV grid network

(Existing, U/C and planned).

• Substations under the PGCB.

• List of RE sites - RE Installation list with Evacuation IPP.

• Zonal map of 132/33 kV Grid S/S, 33/11 kV S/S and 33 kV lines under the

UREDS Project - Chittagong zone, Bangladesh rural electrification board.

• A list of generation stations currently providing frequency control from the

NLDC.

• Information on the water head and generation at Kaptai power station.

3. Renewable connection to BREB network: BREB clarified that they would only

accept a connection of the renewable plant directly into their 33 kV substation. A

computer model of the BREB network is not available. Therefore in order to conduct

the grid impact study for a connection into the BREB network this would require

building a computer model of a portion of their network and amalgamating it with the

PSS/E model obtained from the PGCB.

The locations of the substations and the overhead line routes were obtained from the

BREB’s GIS map data from their website (http://gis.brebms.com/)

2.1 ASSUMPTIONS

The following assumptions were made in the absence of data.

1. All Bangladesh network data provided is accurate and appropriate for this study.

2. The thermal ratings of the transmission line, transformers and other equipment in the PSS/E model obtained from the PGCB are assumed to be correct.

3. Since it is at a very early stage of the project and no detailed design is available for the floating PV, generic data for the inverters, transformers and submarine cables were assumed.

4. There is no reactive power compensation equipment present at the PV plant.

5. For the steady state analysis it is assumed that the floating PV does not provide any reactive power support during normal operation however the study will identify the reactive power requirements for the floating PV as per the grid code.

http://www.pgcb.org.bd/

http://gis.brebms.com/



3

6. The proposed cables and overhead lines are selected to carry the rated transformer capacity.

7. The 33 kV overhead line electrical parameters were not provided by the PGCB thus publicly available datasheets were used to obtain the electrical parameters of the overhead line based on the conductor size (datasheet attached in Appendix F).

8. The 33 kV BREB substations do not have capacitor banks installed.

3 BANGLADESH POWER SYSTEM

Bangladesh has one national grid with an installed capacity of 18.5 GW as of June 2019. The Bangladesh’s energy sector is booming and is expected to grow by approximately 10 -14 %1 in the next 10 years. At present approximately 93 % of the population has access to electricity. The power grid is composed of one HVDC substation, four 400/230 kV substations, twenty seven 230/132 kV substations and one hundred and twenty five 132/33 kV substations.

The Bangladeshi power grid imports power from India via the HVDC interconnection and the interconnection between Cumilla (south) and Tripura in India. The HVDC interconnection is a 1 GW back-to-back HVDC link between Baharampur, India and Bheramara, Bangladesh.

Figure 1: Bangladeshi power sector: at a glance

The RINA team visited the potential sites for the floating PV during their site visit to Bangladesh. During the visit RINA made the following observations regarding the Bangladesh network.

• Voltage Control – Based on the visit to the two sites and further substantiated by the

NLDC and operational discussions it was found that Automatic Voltage Control (AVC) is

not widely used on the transmission system. The usual practice was for the NLDC

Operational (Switching) Engineer to monitor the voltage profile from the Energy

Management System (EMS) via the remote SCADA system – when the voltages were

near to operating outside of the operational ranges the NLDC Operational (Switching)

Engineer would telephone the Substation Attendant Engineer to operate the tap-changer

and either increase or reduce the voltage accordingly.

• Frequency Control – The Operational (Generation Dispatch) Engineer has the

responsibility for the control of the frequency and monitors the frequency during their shift

period. During discussions it was found that many of the generators connected to the grid

1 Revisiting PSMP2016,Power Division Ministry of Power, Energy and Mineral resources



4

system do not have the capability to provide automatic frequency response, which makes

the task of frequency control more onerous. Any generation dispatch instructions were

carried out via telephone from the NLDC to the relevant generation personnel.

• Energy Management System (EMS) – the EMS provides the remote monitoring and

control of the system, and whilst much of the control can be undertaken by the Substation

Attendant Engineers via direct instruction from the NLDC the EMS can also provide further

functions including the monitoring of faults and contingency analysis. It is understood that

there is insufficient data to allow full operation of the state estimator and therefore the

Real Time Network Analysis (RTNA) tool. Having this fully operational would assist in the

operation of the system, which may prove more challenging after the adoption of further

renewable (and possibly intermittent) forms of generation.

During the Site visits, it was understood that the Bangladesh power grid also experiences low inertia which is key in restricting the rate of change of frequency during a disturbance in the grid network. Installation of PV plants, which do not have rotational parts, further reduces the system inertia by displacing the synchronous machines. This is not an isolated problem to Bangladesh, the whole world is experiencing this issue.

The separate deliverable “Output 4: Updated grid code and operational guidelines proposed” is looking into these issues and the team will deliver their recommendation in a separate report.

This report analyses the impact on the Bangladesh grid due to the connection of floating PV at the Joydia Lake and which will be connected to the Jhenaidha 33 kV network.

3.1 POWER DEMAND OF BANGLADESH

3.1.1 Forecasted Demand

The Power Division of the Ministry of Power, Energy & Mineral Resources published “Power system Master plan (PSMP) 2016” in 2016 for the years up to 2041. Since then the PSMP 2016 was revised and published “Revisiting the PSMP2016” in 2018.

The “PSMP 2016” and “Revisiting the PSMP2016” includes the forecasted demand and daily load curves for each month for the Bangladeshi network for up to 2041. The month wise daily load curve for 2019, as published in the “Revisiting the PSMP2016”, is shown in Figure 2 below. The Bangladeshi power demand reaches the highest level in April and the lowest level in December and it is evident that the maximum day peak will occur at around 19:00 in April, which equates to approximately 15 GW, while the minimum day demand will occur at around 06:00 in December and is approximately 10 GW.



5

Figure 2: Forecasted Month-wise Load curve for 20192

3.1.2 Daily operational reports

The PGCB publishes a daily operational report detailing the actual generator despatch data of the previous day and forecasted data of the day of publishing, on its website. In addition, the monthly operation report3 is also published on the PGCB website which details the maximum day peak and evening peak demand of the month and compares it with the maximum day peak and evening peak demand of the same month in the previous year. This report also states the maximum demand to-date.

The minimum demand in the last 12 months was identified as 3.366 GW, which occurred on 31st December 2018 at 05:004 . Considering this to be the minimum demand day, the generator despatch data for the generators connected to the Hathazari, Khulna and Bheramara 132 kV network was collected for the minimum daily demand (08:00) and the total generation at 08:00 was 4.7 GW5.

The maximum demand in the last 12 months occurred on the 29/05/20196, a value of 12.9 GW. Considering this to be the day with the maximum demand, the generator despatch data for the generators connected to the Hathazari, Khulna and Bheramara 132 kV network was collected for the day peak demand (19:00) and the total day peak generation was 10.36 GW7.

3.2 GRID NETWORK – JHENAIDHA 33 KV

The electricity network of the Joydia area, where the floating PV will be installed, is connected to the Jhenaidha 33 kV network. The Kotchandpur and Moheshpur-2 are the closest 33/11 kV substations to the proposed location of the Joydia floating PV.

2 Revisiting PSMP2016,Power Division Ministry of Power, Energy and Mineral resources 3 https://www.pgcb.org.bd/PGCB/?a=pages/operational_daily.php 4 Operational Monthly Report for December 2018 5 Daily report 01-01-2019 6 Operational Monthly Report for December 2018 and August 2019 7 Daily report 30-05-2019

https://www.pgcb.org.bd/PGCB/?a=pages/operational_daily.php



6

Figure 3: Geographical location of Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation, Kotchandpur 33/11 kV and Joydia lake

3.2.1 Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation

Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation is supplied from Khulna(S) 230/132 kV and Bheramara 230/132 kV grid substation. A 132 kV double circuit overhead line of Grosbeak 636 MCM (143 MVA of rated power8 each) from Khulna(S) substation connected to Jhenaidha via Khulna(C) Noapara and Jessore 132/33 kV substations. The total length of the overhead line between the Khulna(S) and Jhenaidha substation is around 107.3 km. Jhenaidha substation is equipped with 17.5 MVAr shunt capacitor.

A 132 kV double circuit line overhead line of Grosbeak 636MCM (143 MVA of rated power9 each) from Bheramara substation connected to Jhenaidha via Kushtia 132/33 kV substation. The total length of the overhead line between the Bheramara and Jhenaidha substation is 66.4 km.

The single line diagram for the Jhenaidha substation is attached in Appendix C. The Jhenaidha substation has two 80/120 MVA (ONAN/ONAF) 132/33 kV transformers with 10 x 33 kV feeders.

Conductor size and length of the overhead line for the relevant feeders was obtained from the BREB’s GIS map data10. The overhead line length between the Jhenaidha substation and the Kotchandpur is around 19.5 km.

3.2.2 Kotchandpur 33/11 kV Substation

A 19.5 km length of 33 kV overhead line of 477MCM (30 MVA of rated power) from Jhenaidha feeds the Kotchandpur 33/11 kV substation. The substation has two 5/6.67 MVA (ONAN/ONAF) 33/11 kV transformers.

8 PSS/E model for the Bangladesh transmission network 2019, as received from PGCB 9 PSS/E model for the Bangladesh transmission network 2019, as received from PGCB 10https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1RE6gr4P0xLMG47wvywwl4GHYpZo&ll=22.550909938253202%2C91.62398519986533&z=12

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1RE6gr4P0xLMG47wvywwl4GHYpZo&ll=22.550909938253202%2C91.62398519986533&z=12

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1RE6gr4P0xLMG47wvywwl4GHYpZo&ll=22.550909938253202%2C91.62398519986533&z=12



7

The maximum day demand of the substation is approximately 9.5 MW and the minimum day demand is approximately 4 MW. The Kotchandpur substation 33 kV buses are rated at 560 A with the short circuit capacity of 16 kA.

Under an N-1 contingency, when the Kotchandpur feeder is not available, the Kotchandpur substation will be transfered to the Moheshpur feeder.

At present the Kotchandpur feeder feeds only Kotchandpur substation. However the new Moheshpur -3 ( Soratola ) 33/11 kV substation which is under construction, will be connected to the Kotchanpur feeder within the next 3 months.

At the time of submitting this report, the line route or line length between the existing Kotchandpur feeder and the proposed substation were not available to RINA, and hence the line route was assumed along the roads, with the total length of the new line around 12 km.

3.2.3 Moheshpur-2 33/11 kV Substation

An overhead line of 477MCM (30 MVA of rated power) from Jhenaidha substation feeds Kaliganji-1 substation, Mohespur-2 and Moheshpur-1 substation. The total feeder length is around 45.3 km and the total length to the Moheshpur-2 substation is around 39.3 km.

The maximum day demand of the substation is approximately 12 MW and the minimum day demand is approximately 7 MW.

3.2.4 Substation Loadings

The following Table 1 shows the loading of the substations connected to the Churamonkathi feeder. It is expected the Moheshpur -3 (Soratola) 33/11 kV substation will have an initial load of 4 MW.

Table 1: Substation loadings

Day peak load Day min load

MW Mvar MW Mvar

Jhenaidha – Kotchandpur Feeder 9.50 4.75 4.00 2.00

Churamonkathi 9.50 4.75 4.00 2.00

Jhenaidha – Moheshpur Feeder

3.2.5 Generators connected to the Jhenaidha 33 kV network

There are no generators connected to the Jhenaidha 33 kV network.



8

4 JOYDIA LAKE FLOATING PV

The proposed floating PV at the Joydia Lake will consist of 3 medium voltage platforms with a 2.5 MVA inverter and transformer. The proposed layout is attached in Appendix D.

4.1 GRID CONNECTION OPTIONS

The following section details the possible grid connection options to connect the floating PV to the Bangladeshi grid network.

4.1.1 Option 1 – Mohespur-2 33/11 kV Substation – 33 kV Connection

4.1.1.1 Connection scheme

Jhenaidah



Jhenaidah 33 kV bus

Other 33 kV feeders


FPV

33 kV OHL12.2 km


Kaliganj


Kaliganj -1 (Patvila)

Mahespur -2 (Valipur)



Mahespur -1 (Voiroba)

FPV onshore station

Figure 4: Grid connection at Moheshpur-2r 33 kV bus



9

4.1.1.2 Substation Site

The Mohespur-2 33/11 kV substation is owned and operated by BREB, and is located to the north-west of the city of Jessore, and to the south of Joydia Baor.

The distance between the Mohespur-2 substation and the proposed landing site for the Joydia Lake solar PV is approximately 12.2km based on use of the public highway, and alternatively 9.5 km via a straight line path. Due to the complexity of obtaining planning permission for the use of private land, the public highway option has been considered in all cases.

The substation site at Mohespur-2 consists of a typical outdoor busbar arrangement, being similar to other BREB substations. With this arrangement the 11kV and 33kV busbars are supported from the same structures, with overhead busbars run in parallel between the structures.

Tapping connections are then made to the transformers, with 33 kV droppers connected to an open terminal transformer connection. The 11 kV transformer connections are connected in a similar manner, with droppers connecting to open terminals on the transformers. There are seven transformers located at the site; six being single phase and rated at 1.667/2083 MVA each, and the fourth being three phase and rated at 5/6.25MVA. It should be noted that there was no LV supply to the fans therefore the lower transformer rating should be considered.

The transformers included a tap changer for voltage regulation, however it was noted that the transformers required de-energisation prior to changing the tap position. Obviously there was no AVC available on site and therefore the majority of the voltage regulation was either undertaken via the 11kV system balancers or via voltage regulation of the 132/33kV transformers at Jhenaidha 132/33kV substation.

Protection systems were located within the 33 kV and 11 kV auto-reclosers, and therefore there is no control room or any outbuildings located within the site.

The site is considered to be in good condition, well maintained and clear of any vegetation. The steel structures, busbars and switchgear were found to be in satisfactory condition, although maintenance records were not viewed during the site visit.

4.1.1.3 Security of Supply

The Mohespur- 2 33/11kV substation is connected via a radial 33 kV overhead line circuit to the Jhenaidha 132/33kV grid substation. This overhead line is approximately 39.8km in length, which suffers an approximate average tripping frequency of 5.6 events per month. This value appears to be average for the area concerned and the only real option to enhance the security of supply would be to install ring feeder/s to the site which would increase the cost and complexity of the project.

4.1.1.4 Physical Connection

For the connection of the new 33kV overhead line for the floating solar plant there was one spare bay available, however due to the quantity of existing overhead lines within the site and the congested nature of the site it would be difficult to connect a new 33kV overhead line directly. Therefore it is proposed that the overhead line is terminated close to or inside the substation boundary fence, cable sealing ends are installed and the final section of circuit is terminated into the substation via 33kV XLPE cable. A new auto-recloser will be installed and connected to the busbar.



10

Figure 5: Proposed location of new 33kV bay and cable sealing end

It should be noted that there was no SCADA control at the site, therefore to ensure visibility of the circuit breaker and ensure that the system is intact while operating the solar PV it may be necessary to install remote monitoring and control. An alternative solution would be to have all the control facilities at the solar PV site, with suitable islanding protection, therefore reducing the requirement for controls at the Mohespur 2 substation site.

4.1.1.5 Cost

A very rough estimate for the cost associated with the grid connection option is calculated and presented in the tables below.

Table 2: Cost estimate for Grid connection option 1

Items Cost (BDT)


33 kV breaker ( 2 set) 6,542,000

SCADA 26,328,000

200m of 33kV Cable 1,566,000

Civils 5,600,000




Labour 2,000,000

Sub total 125,963,000



Total 144,857,450



11

4.1.2 Option 2 - Kotchandpur 33/11 kV Substation – 33 kV Connection

4.1.2.1 Connection Scheme

Jhenaidah



Jhenaidah 33 kV bus

Other 33 kV feeders

Kotchandpur 33/11 kV

substation


Kotchandpur 33 kV bus

FPV

33 kV OHL9.33 km


Mohespur-3 ( Sarotala) substation ( under

construction)

33 kV OHL477 MCM

12 km(Under

construction)

Figure 6: Grid connection at Kotchandpur 33 kV bus

4.1.2.2 Substation Site

The Kotchandpur 33/11 kV substation is owned and operated by BREB, and is located to the north-west of the city of Jessore, and to the east of Joydia Baor.

The distance between the Kotchandpur substation and the proposed landing site for the Joydia Lake solar PV is approximately 9.5 km based on use of the public highway, and alternatively



12

6.8km via a straight line path. Due to the complexity of obtaining planning permission for the use of private land, the public highway option has been considered in all cases.

The substation site at Kotchandpur consists of a typical outdoor busbar arrangement, being similar to other BREB substations.

Tapping connections are made to the transformers, with 33 kV droppers connected to an open terminal transformer connection. The 11 kV transformer connections are connected in a similar manner, with droppers connecting to open terminals on the transformers. There are two transformers located at the site, with both being three phase and rated at 5/6.67 MVA each. It should be noted that there is no LV supply to the fans therefore the lower transformer rating should be considered.

The transformers included a tap changer for voltage regulation, however there was no AVC available on site therefore the majority of the voltage regulation is undertaken via voltage regulation of the 132/33 kV transformers at Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation.

Protection systems were located within the 33 kV and 11 kV auto-reclosers, therefore there is no control room or any outbuildings located within the site.

The site is considered to be in good condition, well maintained and clear of any vegetation. The steel structures, busbars and switchgear were found to be in satisfactory condition with some surface rust apparent, although maintenance records were not viewed during the site visit.

4.1.2.3 Security of Supply

The Kotchandpur 33/11kV substation is connected via a radial 33 kV overhead line circuit to the Jhenaidha 132/33kV grid substation. This overhead line is approximately 24.8 km in length, which suffers an approximate average tripping frequency of 2.8 events per month. This value appears to be lower than average for the area concerned and the only real option to enhance the security of supply would be to install ring feeder/s to the site which would increase the cost and complexity of the project. It was noted that an alternate circuit ran within 200m of this overhead line and therefore a ring circuit configuration could be easily obtained.

4.1.2.4 Physical Connection

For the connection of the new 33 kV overhead line for the floating solar plant, there was one spare bay available, however due to the quantity of existing overhead lines within the site and the congested nature of the site it would be difficult to connect a new 33 kV overhead line directly. Therefore it is proposed that the overhead line is terminated close to or inside the substation boundary fence, cable sealing ends are installed and the final section of circuit is terminated into the substation via 33kV XLPE cable. A new auto-recloser will be installed and connected to the busbar.



13

Figure 7: Proposed location of new 33kV bay and cable sealing end

It should be noted that there was no SCADA control at the site, therefore to ensure visibility of the circuit breaker and ensure that the system is intact while operating the solar PV it may be necessary to install remote monitoring and control. An alternative solution would be to have all the control facilities at the solar PV site, with suitable islanding protection, therefore reducing the requirement for controls at the Kotchandpur substation site.

4.1.2.5 Cost

A very rough estimate for the cost associated with the grid connection option is calculated and presented in the tables below.

Table 3: Cost estimate for Grid connection option 2

Items Cost (BDT)


33 kV breaker/auto-recloser 6,542,000

SCADA 26,328,000

200m of 33kV Cable 1,566,000

Civils 5,600,000




Labour 2,000,000

Control room equipment 5,000,000

Sub total 109,763,000



14

Items Cost (BDT)



Total 126,227,450

4.2 PREFERRED OPTION

The preferred option is option 2: Connecting at Kotchandpur based on the following.

Advantages:

• Lower overall cost.

• Shorter overall route compared to the Mohespur-2 option.

• Better resilience due to lower average tripping frequency.

• Possibility of obtaining a ring circuit configuration at a reasonable capital cost.

Disadvantages:

• Lack of local control or SCADA facilities

5 SYSTEM MODELLING

The grid impact analysis has been conducted for the connection of a PV plant which will be in operation during the daylight time only. Therefore for the purpose of analysing the impact on the grid resulting from the PV farm connection the 2019 peak model was modified to produce day peak and day minimum demand models as per the operational data. The grid impact assessment was carried out for minimum and maximum demand according to the collected data from the daily reports.

5.1 BANGLADESH PSS/E TRANSMISSION MODEL REVIEW

The system model was constructed in PSS/E based on the PSS/E data files of the Bangladeshi transmission network (132 kV to 400 kV) for the year 2019 provided by PGCB. The model included all of the generators connected to the Bangladeshi transmission network.

Figure 8 below shows the network summary data as obtained from PSS/E, and the total connected load is 13119.7 MW. The report “Revisiting PSMP2016” states the Peak load of 2019 as 14603 MW11 .

11 Revisiting PSMP 2016



15

Figure 8: Summary of the Bangladesh network (2019) as obtained

Figure 9: Bus voltages near the Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation - 2019 model as obtained

It is noted that the voltages of the busbars near the Jhenaidha substation are below the planning voltage limits of ±6 % of nominal voltage in the network model as supplied by the PGCB. In practice, it is very unlikely to have 132 kV bus voltages below the planning limits.

Considering the minimum demand in the last 12 months, the model was fine-tuned by scaling down the generation and load to represent the minimum demand as identified in section 3.1.2. The generators connected at the Khulna and Bheramara 132 kV network were modified to dispatch the generation as in the daily report, whilst the remaining generators were scaled down appropriately. The demand for the entire Bangladesh network was also scaled down appropriately.

The same approach was followed to represent the maximum demand. The model was fine-tuned to represent the maximum day demand as identified in section 3.1.2. The generators connected to the Khulna and Bheramara 132 kV network were modified to dispatch the generation as in the daily report while the remainder of the generators were scaled up appropriately



16

Figure 10: Summary of the Bangladesh network (2019) – day peak model

Figure 11: Summary of the Bangladesh network (2019) - Minimum day load model

5.2 JHENAIDHA 132/33 KV SUBSTATION

The transmission network model was modified to include the two transformers at Jhenaidha substation and the Kotchandpur feeder. The overhead line was modelled based on the line length and conductor size collected from the BREB GIS map data. The electrical parameters



17

of the conductor were obtained from a publicly available datasheet and is attached in Appendix F

The remainder of the load on the substation was lumped at the 33 kV bus of the Jhenaidha substation.

As mentioned in section 5.1, the voltage of the Jhenaidha 132 kV bus is below the planning limit of ±6 % of nominal voltage. Therefore the Khulna substation transformer taps and Jhenaidha transformer taps were adjusted to maintain the Jhenaidha 33 kV voltage at 1 pu. It is noted that the voltage at the Jhenaidha 132 kV bus is around 0.92 pu which is still below the planning limits for Voltage.

Figure 12: Voltages around Jhenaidha substation

The Moheshpur -3 ( Soratola ) 33/11 kV substation, which is being constructed, is also modelled and the line route from Kotchandpur to Moheshpur -3 ( Soratola ) 33/11 kV substation was assumed to be constructed along the roads.

5.3 JOYDIA FPV AND THE GRID CONNECTION

The Joydia FPV was modelled based on the 2.5 MVA SMA MV power station (datasheet attached in Appendix G). The reactive power capability with the variation on the AC voltage was not available at this time for the SMA inverter, and thus it was assumed that with the AC voltage the inverter capacity will vary proportionally.

The submarine cables from the MVPS platforms to the onshore station were assumed to be 33 kV 3-core PILC cable of 70mm2 (datasheet is attached in Appendix E)

The single line diagram for the PV plant is shown in Figure 13 below:



18

Figure 13: Single line diagram for 7.5 MW floating solar PV plant

5.3.1 Dynamic model

5.3.1.1 Grid Infeed model

The grid infeed was modelled as an equivalent utility source at the PoC. An independent grid equivalent for each grid connection option was modelled considering a corresponding short circuit level.

5.3.1.2 PV plant dynamic model

For the dynamic analysis the generic dynamic model available in PSS/E v34.6 was used to simulate the dynamic response of the PV inverter. The details of the dynamic model selected are presented Figure 14 & Figure 15:



19

Figure 14: PSS/E PV converter model (REGCA1)



20

Figure 15: PSS/E Electrical Control Model for PV inverter (REECB1)

5.3.1.3 Power plant controller (PPC) model

The generic PPC model ‘PLNTBU1’ present in the PSSE is used to model the power plant controller for the PV plant. The purpose of the PPC is to control the active power as per the grid code requirements during frequency disturbances. The figure below shows the control schematics for the PPC.



21

Figure 16: Generic PPC model in PSSE

5.3.1.4 Inverter protection settings

As the dynamic analysis has been carried out considering the generic models of the PV inverter the protection settings for the inverter are assumed in line with the proposed grid code requirements of the renewable plants, and are presented in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Inverter protection settings

Voltage settings

Voltage settings in pu Time settings in seconds

1.20 0.10

1.15 3.00

0.90 3.05

0.30 0.65

0.15 0.20

Frequency settings

Frequency settings in Hz Time settings in seconds

52.05 5.0

47.45 5.0



22

6 GRID IMPACT STUDY

The grid impact study was performed to check compliance with the grid code requirements, identify any potential issues that could arise due to the connection of the floating PV and determine suitable solutions that could remedy those issues. Detailed grid compatibility studies were performed which are classified in the following categories:

• Steady-state Studies;

• Dynamic Studies.

6.1 STEADY STATE ANALYSIS

6.1.1 Study criteria

At present a grid code for the distribution network is in the process of development by the authorities. In the absence of a distribution grid code in Bangladesh, the Bangladeshi transmission grid code was referenced to check for compliance.

The Draft Grid Code 201912 for the Transmission network of Bangladesh stipulates the following system planning and security standards.

1. Voltage limits:

o Normal Operating Condition:

• ±5% for 400 kV Bus.

• ±6% for 230 kV and 132 kV Bus.

o Emergency Condition:

• ±10 % for 400 kV Bus.

• +10/-15% for 230 kV and 132 kV Bus.

2. Minimum Contingency Criteria of Transmission Line Outages:

o Single contingency of a permanent three-phase outage of any one circuit

element or transformer.

3. Voltage Withstand Capability:

o The VRE Generating Units shall be capable of generating at maximum power

output, depending on the availability of the primary resource, and the

interchange of Reactive Power at the Connection Point, as specified in

paragraph 5.9.3 of the Grid code 2019, within the voltage variations within the

standard limits for normal operating condition. Outside this range, and up to a

voltage variation within standard limits for emergency condition, a reduction on

active and/ or Reactive Power can be allowed, provided that this reduction does

not exceed 5% of the Generator’s Declared Data.

4. Reactive Power Capability and Control of Variable Renewable (VRE) Generating

Units:

o shall be capable of supplying Reactive Power output, at its Connection Point,

within the following ranges:

▪ +/- 20 % of the Generating Plant capacity, as specified in the

Generator’s Declared Data, if the Active Power output, depending on

the availability of the primary resource, is equal or above 58% of the

Generating Plant capacity;

12 ELECTRICITY GRID CODE,2019, Bangladesh Energy Regulatory Commission



23

▪ Any Reactive Power value within the limits of power factor 0.98 lagging

to 0.98 leading, if its Active Power output, depending on the availability

of the primary resource, is within 10 % and 58% of the Generating Plant

capacity;

▪ No Reactive Power interchange with the Grid if the Active Power output,

depending on the availability of the primary resource, is equal or less

than 10% of the Generating Plant capacity.

6.1.2 Base case

6.1.2.1 Maximum Demand

The maximum demand day was identified as 29/05/2019 in section 2. The PSS/E model of the Bangladesh transmission network was modified to represent the day peak demand as in 29/05/2019. The generators connected to the network fed by the Khulna and Bheramara 132 kV network were also modified as per the daily report and the rest of the generation was adjusted appropriately to represent the total generation as on 29/05/2019.

Figure 17 below shows the voltages of the Jhenaidha to Kotchandpur 33 kV feeder. All the bus voltages remain within planning limit of ±6 % with the Jhenaidha transformer taps adjusted to maintain the 33 kV bus voltage at around 1 pu. The voltage at Jhenaidha 33 kV bus at 0.99 pu drops to 0.94 pu at the Kotchandpur 33 kV bus. It could be noted that the transformers are at the extreme tap position.

The overhead line of the Kotchandpur feeder is rated at 30 MVA and the loading level of the line remains within the thermal rating.

Figure 17: Results of Load flow - peak day demand with adjusted tap at Jhenaidha substation

If the network is considered with the Mohespur-3 (Sarotala) substation, the voltage at the Kotchandpur 33 kV bus will fall to 0.91 pu, which is below the planning limits for voltage.



24

Figure 18: Results of Load flow - peak day demand with Mohespur-3 (Sarotala) substation

Therefore it is suggested to install a capacitor bank around 6 MVAr at Kotchandpur 33 kV bus to increase the Kotchandpur 33 kV bus votlage to 0.95.

Figure 19: Results of Load flow - peak day demand with 6 MVAr capacitor at Kotchandpur

The Grid impact study is conducted on the day peak model with Moheshpur-3 substation and the proposed capacitor bank.

6.1.2.2 Minimum Demand

The minimum demand day was identified as 31/12/2018 in section 2. The PSS/E model for the Bangladesh transmission network was modified to represent the minimum day demand as in 31/12/2018. The generators connected to the network fed by the Khulna and Bheramara 132 kV network were also modified as per the daily load report and the rest of the generation was adjusted appropriately to represent the generation as on 31/12/2018.

Figure 20 below shows the voltages of the Jhenaidha 33 kV feeder to Kotchandpur substation during minimum day demand. All the bus voltages remain within the planning limit of ±6 % of the nominal voltage. None of the transmission lines or the transformers were loaded above their thermal ratings.



25

Figure 20: Power flow - minimum day load

If the transformer taps were maintained at the same position as for the maximum demand case, as the transformers were not equipped with the AVC, the voltage at the Jhenaidha 33 kV busbar will increase to 1.09 pu during minimum demand, which is above the planning limits.

Figure 21: Power flow - minimum day load with Jhenaidha transformer taps as in the day peak model

Considering the Jhenaidha transformer taps at nominal, installing the capacitor bank at the Kotchandpur substation will not increase the Kotchandpur bus voltage above the planning limit.



26

Figure 22: Results of Power flow - minimum day load with capacitor bank at Kotchandpur

Therefore it is suggested to equip the Jhenaidha transformers with AVC such that the taps could be adjusted to maintain the Jhenaidha 33 kV voltage at 1 pu. For the purpose of the grid impact analysis, the transformer taps during minimum demand case was maintained at nominal.

6.1.3 Load flow analysis

The following study cases are analysed to study the impact on the 33 kV grid network as a result of connecting the Joydia floating PV at the proposed Kotchandpur 33 kV bus.

• Case 1: Maximum day demand and Maximum floating PV generation.

• Case 2: Minimum day demand and Maximum floating PV generation

6.1.3.1 Case 1: Maximum Demand and Maximum floating PV generation

Typically during the day, when the demand is high (around mid-day), floating PV is also expected to produce its maximum generation. The load flow analysis was performed on the day peak model with the maximum FPV generation of 7.5 MW. The load flow results are shown in Figure 23 below, and it is noted that the voltages remain within the planning limits. Considering the voltages of these buses prior to the connection of the floating PV, the variation on the voltage profile has slightly improved. The loadings of the transmission lines remain within their thermal rating.

The total losses from the onshore station to the proposed Kotchandpur 33 kV substation is estimated to be around 0.2 MW which is around 2.6 % of the total generating capacity of the floating PV.



27

Figure 23: Power flow - Day peak model with maximum floating PV generation

6.1.3.2 Case 2: Minimum day demand and Maximum floating PV generation

The minimum day model was modified to include the maximum generation from the Joydia floating PV. The results of the load flow studies are presented in Figure 24 below. Reverse power flow through the Jhenaidha transformers is not expected to occur as the minimum day demand is much higher than the maximum export capacity of the Joydia floating PV. The voltages remain within the planning limits.

Figure 24: Power flow - Day minimum model with maximum floating PV generation



28

6.1.4 Contingency analysis

Simulations were performed to understand the impact on power flow during carefully selected possible contingency scenarios. The contingency analysis was simulated based on the day peak model and restricted to N-1 running arrangements only.

6.1.4.1 Outage of transmission line from Jhenaidha to Kotchandpur

During a contingency operation, such as a line fault on the line from Jhenaidha to Kotchandpur, the Kotchandpur substation will be transferred to the Moheshpur feeder. At the time submitting this report, it was not possible to determine the route, in addition the arrangement of connection of the feeders to the Kotchandpur line is not known. Therefore studies were not conducted for this scenario.

6.1.4.2 Outage of Jhenaidha transformer

Simulations were performed to study the changes in the Jhenaidha 33 kV network with the Joydia FPV, for a transfomer outage at the Jhenaidha substation. The voltages at the 33 kV buses remained within the planning limit of ± 6 % of nominal voltage. Loading of the Jhenaidha transformer reamined within its rating.

Figure 25: Results of the load flow studies for Jhenaidha transformer outage

6.1.5 Short circuit analysis

Short circuit analysis was performed on the 33 kV network for the connection of the 7.5 MW Joydia floating PV. Short circuit calculations were performed based on the IEC 60909 and the results are shown in Table 5 below. From the table it is noted that the connection of the Joydia floating PV increases the short circuit currents in the circuit however remaining below the short circuit rating of the Jhenaidha 132 kV and 33 kV breakers.

Table 5: Short circuit study for 3 phase faults

Bus name Voltage Short circuit current rating (kA)

Without FPV With FPV

Short circuit MVA

I"k (kA) Short circuit MVA

I"k (kA)

Jhenaidha 132 kV 40 1998 8.74 2,007 8.78



29

Jhenaidha 33 kV 31.5 946 16.55 953 16.69

Kotchandpur 33 kV 16 165 2.89 172 3.02

7 FLOATING PV REACTIVE CAPABILITY

The following section analyses the reactive power capability of the 7.5 MW floating PV. The Reactive power capability of the FPV was checked against the transmission grid code for compliance.

The PV farm reactive power capability varies for the different in-feed voltages at the grid in-feed point. A set of simulations were performed to ascertain the floating PV suitability for the full range of operating conditions at the PoC voltages varying from 0.94 pu to 1.06 pu at the maximum rated active power export capacity for the maximum and minimum reactive power import.

Figure 26: Joydia FPV reactive power capability at the Kotchandpur 33 kV PoC with voltage at 0.94 pu

Figure 27: Joydia FPV reactive power capability at the Kotchandpur 33 kV PoC with voltage at 1 pu



30

Figure 28: Joydia FPV reactive power capability at the Kotchandpur 33 kV PoC with voltage at 1.06 pu

The 3 x 2.5 MVA inverters design for the Joydia floating PV does not comply with the grid code requirements for the reactive power capability at grid supply voltages from 0.94 pu to 1.06 pu and hence reactive compensation support will be required. Reactive power compensation support could be provided through STATCOMs, SVCs, Capacitor banks, synchronous reactors, or inverters.

7.1 REACTIVE POWER SUPPORT THROUGH AN INCREASED INVERTER CAPACITY

The PV farm inverter rating was increased from 3x2.5 MVA to 2x2.75 MVA+1x3.0 MVA. Increasing the inverter capacity provides the reactive power for dispatch by an inverter. The simulation results are shown in Figure 29 and it can be seen that with the increased inverter capacity the PV farm is able to comply with the reactive power supply requirement at the lower extreme grid voltage of 0.94 pu.

We note that the reactive capability study has been performed based on widely available SMA Inverters. During the detailed design stage careful consideration should be given in selecting the inverters and a reactive power capability study should be repeated to confirm compliance with the grid code.

Figure 29: PV farm reactive capability with increased inverter capacity

8 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS

The dynamic analysis has been undertaken to verify the capability of the FPV plant under system dynamics resulting from disturbances e.g. system faults giving rise to voltage instability



31

especially for the duration of fault clearance and thereafter, generation load imbalance or load acceptance/ rejection events giving rise to frequency swings and renewable generation vulnerability due to cloud cover and/ or dawn/ dusk events.

The following section provides the grid code requirements and results of dynamic analyses, and provides comment on the FPV plant capability to remain stable and connected to the system during the grid disturbances.

8.1 GRID CODE REQUIREMENTS

The requirements specified in section 5.9 of the draft Electricity Grid Code 2019 are considered as the basis for carrying out the analysis.

8.1.1 Fault ride through (Performance during Grid Disturbances)

The required fault ride through capability for the plant is mentioned in the draft Electricity Grid Code 2019 and the requirements are shown in Figure 30 below:

Figure 30: Fault ride through requirements for the PV plant as per the draft Electricity Grid Code 2019

As per the requirements the PV plant must remain connected to the grid for the duration of the fault clearance (under voltage durations) shown in Figure 30. Additionally the PV plant should provide the reactive current support for grid stabilisation. The grid code requirements for reactive current injection during a fault are as presented in Figure 31 below:

Figure 31: Allowed generation of Reactive current during Voltage Dips



32

8.1.2 Frequency Withstand Capability

As per the draft Electricity Grid Code 2019 the PV plant should be capable of continuous operation with any variation of the power system frequency occurring within the range of 48.0 Hz to 51.5 Hz. Additionally the PV plant shall be capable of operation for at least 5 minutes in the case of an increase in frequency within the range of 51.5 Hz to 52 Hz and for at least 30 minutes in the case of a decrease in frequency within the range of 48.0 Hz to 47.5 Hz.

8.1.3 Active Power Control

In the case where system frequency exceeds 51.0 Hz the Active Power control system should reduce the Active Power injected into the Grid previously, according to the following formula:

∆𝑃 = 33 × 𝑃𝑚 × (51.0 − 𝑓𝑛

50)

Where: ΔP: is the variation in Active Power output that should be achieved Pm: is the Active Power output before the control is activated fn: is the Grid frequency.

8.2 FAULT RIDE THROUGH ANALYSIS

The fault ride through capability of the FPV plant has been carried out for the proposed point of connection. In order to capture the worst case impact of the under voltage stability, the FRT studies assumed voltage change at all three phases simultaneously. A number of different cases are considered for the analysis and are presented in Table 6 below:

Table 6: Cases for fault ride through analysis

Sl. No. Case Grid voltage during

fault

Required time to remain connected

to the grid

1 Case-1 0.0 pu 150 ms

2 Case-2 0.25 pu 600 ms

3 Case-3 0.35 pu 800 ms

4 Case-4 0.85 pu 2.8 seconds

8.2.1 Case-1: 0.0pu voltage at grid during disturbance

Under this case, a three phase to ground fault is simulated at the 33 kV bus in Kotchandpur substation resulting in a voltage of 0.0 pu at the point of connection (PoC) for a duration of 150 ms. With the recommended voltage settings for the PV inverter, the PV plant is found to be capable of riding through the grid disturbance as per the requirements of the grid code and remain connected to the grid. The analysis indicates that due to the fault simulated at the FPV plant connection point the active current generation reduced to around 0 pu during the fault clearance time (150ms) but the plant successfully delivered approximately 1 pu reactive current as per the grid code requirements. The results obtained from the analysis are as presented in Figure 32 and Figure 33 below:



33

Figure 32: Case-1 – Voltage at PoC and inverter terminal

Figure 33: Case-1 – PV plant active and reactive current at PoC


Under this case, a three phase to ground fault is simulated at the 33 kV bus in Kotchandpur substation resulting in a voltage of 0.25 pu at the point of connection (PoC) for a duration of 600 ms. With the recommended voltage settings for the PV inverter the PV plant is found to be capable of riding through the grid disturbance as per the requirements of the grid code and remain connected to the grid. The analysis indicates that due to fault simulated at the FPV plant connection point the active current generation reduced to approximately 0 pu during the fault clearance time (600ms) but the plant successfully delivered approximately 1 pu reactive



34

current as per the grid code requirements. The results obtained from the analysis are as presented in Figure 34 and Figure 35 below:




Under this case, a three phase to ground fault is simulated at the 33 kV bus in Kotchandpur substation resulting in a voltage of 0.35 pu at the point of connection (PoC) for a duration of 3.0 s. With the recommended voltage settings for the PV inverter, the PV plant is found to be capable of riding through the grid disturbance as per the requirements of the grid code and



35

remain connected to the grid. The analysis indicates that due to the fault simulated at the FPV plant connection point the active current generation reduced to approximately 0 pu during the fault clearance time (3 s) but the plant successfully delivered approximately 1 pu reactive current as per the grid code requirements. The results obtained from the analysis are as presented in Figure 36 and Figure 37 below:




Under this case, a three phase to ground fault is simulated at the 33 kV bus in Kotchandpur substation resulting in a voltage of 0.85 pu at the point of connection (PoC) for a duration of



36

3 s. With the recommended voltage settings for the PV inverter the PV plant is found to be capable of riding through the grid disturbance as per the requirements of the grid code and remain connected to the grid. The analysis indicated that due to a fault simulated at the FPV plant connection point the active current generation remains around 1 pu with a slight increase in the reactive current injection, which is as per the grid code requirements. The results obtained from the analysis are as presented in Figure 38 and Figure 39 below:





37

8.3 FREQUENCY DISTURBANCE ANALYSIS

8.3.1 Over frequency disturbance

In this case a disturbance is simulated in the grid causing the grid frequency to increase to 51.5 Hz. From the simulation results it is observed that the PV plant is capable of remaining connected to the grid for the required duration of five (5) minutes. Additionally, under this condition the FPV delivered around 1.8 MW of active power with the active power controls modelled in the PPC as per the grid code requirements. The results obtained from the simulations are as presented in Figure 40 below:

Figure 40: Frequency and active power from the PV plant during over frequency condition

8.3.2 Under frequency disturbance

In this case a disturbance is simulated in the grid causing the grid frequency to reduce to 47.5 Hz. From the simulation results it is observed that the PV plant is capable of remaining connected to the grid for the required duration of thirty minutes. The results obtained from the simulations are as presented in Figure 41 below:



38

Figure 41: Frequency and active power from the PV plant during under frequency condition

9 DISCUSSION

The grid impact study analyses the impact on the Bangladeshi network due to the connection of a 7.5 MW Joydia floating PV. The floating PV is proposed to include 3 x 2.5 MVA inverters and transformers installed in 3 platforms and the installation of medium voltage floating cables between the floating platforms and the onshore station (see Appendix D).

There are two possible options to connect the Joydia 7.5 MW floating PV to the Bangladeshi distribution network.

• Option 1: Connect to the 33 kV bus of the Kotchandpur substation.

• Option 2: Connect to the 33 kV bus of the Moheshpur-2 33/11 kV substation.

From the physical perspective the best option is connecting to the 33 kV substation at the Kotchandpur substation as this is nearest to the site and will be the most economic option. This requires construction of 9.33 km of OHL from the onshore station to the Kotchandpur substation. The proposed route of the 33 kV overhead line will run along the public highway thus negating the complications associated with the routing through private land.

The network model as obtained from the PGCB indicates low voltage at the Jhenaidha 132/33 kV grid substation. The Khulna 230/132 kV substation transformer taps and Jhenaidha 132/33 kV transformer taps were adjusted to maintain the Jhenaidha 33 kV bus at 1 pu. The voltage at the Jhenaidha 132 kV bus is around 0.92 pu which is still below the planning limits for Voltage.

The Jhenaidha substation transformer taps were adjusted to the extreme to maintain the Jhenaidha 33 kV bus at around 1 pu during the maximum day demand. With the taps at the extreme position during minimum demand the 33 kV bus voltage at the Jhenaidha substation will increase to 1.08 pu which is above the planning limit. Therefore it is suggested to equip the Jhenaidha transformer with the AVC.

The total Kotchandpur feeder length to the Kotchandpur substation is around 19.5 km. The Mohespur-3 (Sarotala) substation, which is under construction, will be connected to the



39

Kotchandpur feeder and is expected to have an initial load of 4 MW. With the connection of the Mohespur-3 substation, the Kotchandpur voltage will further drop to 0.91 pu during the peak demand, which is below the planning limits for voltage.

Therefore it is suggested to install a capacitor bank of around 6 MVAr at the Kotchandpur substation. With the installation of the capacitor bank, the Kotchandpur 33 kV bus voltage will increase to 0.95 pu (with the Jhenaidha transformer taps at the extreme position) during day peak demand and 0.97 pu voltage during minimum day demand (with the Jhenaidha transformer taps at the nominal position).

Considering the connection option-2 i.e. connecting at Mohespur-2 substaion, which is also fed by Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation, the total feeder length to the Moheshpur-2 substation is around 39.8 km and the total connected load on the feeder is around 35 MW. Therefore the voltage at the Moheshpur-2 substation would be even lower than the voltage at Kotchandpur substation and hence below the planning limits.

The grid impact analysis was conducted for the preferred connection option of connecting at the Kotchandpur 33 kV bus, which will be fed by the Jhenaidha 132/33 kV substation. The grid impact analysis was conducted considering a 6 MVAr capacitor bank at Kotchandpur and the Jhenaidha transformer equipped with AVC.

The grid impact analysis was checked against the Bangladesh Transmission grid code in the absence of a Distribution grid in Bangladesh for compliance. The results of the load flow studies for the intact running arrangements comply with the planning limits and do not overload the transmission lines.

The 3 x 2.5 MVA inverter design for the floating PV farm does not comply with the Bangladesh grid code requirements for the reactive power capability at grid supply voltages from 0.94 pu to 1.06 pu and hence reactive compensation support will be required. Reactive power compensation support could be provided through STATCOMs, SVCs, Capacitor banks, synchronous reactors or additional inverters. Increasing the inverter rating from 3 x 2.5 MVA to 2 x 2.75 + 1 x 3.0 MVA will increase the reactive power capability of the PV farm and enables the floating PV to comply with the grid code requirements.

Dynamic analysis of the Joydia floating PV plant was carried out to check its capability to remain connected to the grid for various grid disturbances including under voltage, under/ over frequency etc. The studies were carried out considering a generic model for the PV inverter and the protection settings were also assumed to be in line with the proposed draft grid code requirements. From the studies carried out, it is observed that the FPV plant is able to remain connected with the grid as well as providing the required active/ reactive power support to the grid during the disturbances. Furthermore, as the dynamic studies are carried out considering generic models of the PV inverters, it is recommended that these studies are repeated during the detail design stage of the project with the actual OEM model of the PV inverters.



40

APPENDIX A. SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM OF THE BANGLADESH TRANSMISSION NETWORK



41

APPENDIX B. GEOGRAPHICAL MAP OF THE BANGLADESH TRANSMISSION NETWORK



42

APPENDIX C. SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM OF JENAIDHA SUBSTATION



43



44

APPENDIX D. LAYOUT DIAGRAM OF JOYDIA FPV



45

APPENDIX E. SUB MARINE CABLES – ELECTRICAL PARAMETER



46

APPENDIX F. OHL PARAMETERS



47

APPENDIX G. INVERTER DATASHEET



48