01 ag dsm implementation report

AG-DSM PILOT PROJECT AT ANAND

Bureau of Energy Efficiency

Prepared For

MGVCL

Agricultural Demand Side Management (Ag- DSM) Pilot Project at Anand, Gujarat

Implementation Report

February 2011


Bureau of Energy Efficiency February 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................4 LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................................................5 ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................................................................6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................................................................7

A1: INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................12

PREAMBLE .................................................................................................................................................12 OBJECTIVE FOR PREPARATION OF DPR........................................................................................................14 OVERALL APPROACH FOR DPR PREPARATION.............................................................................................15

Step 1: Secondary Data Collection ........................................................................................................16 Step 2: Field Studies..............................................................................................................................16 Step 3: Interactions with different Stakeholders......................................................................................17 Step 4: Preparation of Best Practices Manual and Monitoring & Verification Protocol..........................17 Step 5: Cost Benefit Analysis and Financing Options .............................................................................18 Implementation Report ..........................................................................................................................18

A2: PROJECT AREA OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS........................................................................19

LOCATION AND ACCESSIBILITY OF THE PROJECT AREA ................................................................................19 CLIMATE ....................................................................................................................................................22 OVERVIEW OF EXISTING FACILITIES IN PROJECT AREA ................................................................................23

Electricity Distribution System in Study Area.........................................................................................23 Agricultural Tariff and Subsidy in the Region ........................................................................................25 Irrigation and water Sources in the Region............................................................................................27 Table 6: Source’s of Irrigation in the District ........................................................................................28 Ground Water Scenario in The State And Project Feeder Region ...........................................................29 Water Consumption and Conservation in Agriculture ............................................................................29 Site Based Data Collection and Analysis................................................................................................31 Characteristics of the Project Feeder Lines ...........................................................................................31 Power Supply & Consumption of the Project Feeder Lines.....................................................................32 Supply availability and hourly demand variation ...................................................................................32 Land Use Pattern and Cultivation Scenario in the region.......................................................................35 Socio Economic Profile of the Region ....................................................................................................36 Cropping pattern...................................................................................................................................37 Crop Calendar ......................................................................................................................................38 Crop wise irrigated area .......................................................................................................................38 Animal husbandry and fisheries.............................................................................................................39 Harvesting Cycles and Cropping Pattern of Project Feeder Areas .........................................................40 Forest resources....................................................................................................................................42 Land Holding ........................................................................................................................................42 Water Consumption Pattern ..................................................................................................................43 Average Rainfall and Watersheds in the Region.....................................................................................44 Water Level Variation in the Region ......................................................................................................46

A3: PUMP SET PERFORMANCE EVALUATION & COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS .......................47

FIELD STUDY OBJECTIVES AND OVERVIEW..................................................................................................47 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................47

Overall Approach..................................................................................................................................47 Measurement and Technical Analysis ....................................................................................................48

PUMP SET EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ...................................................................................50 Feeder Details.......................................................................................................................................50



Pump set Details and observations ........................................................................................................51 Operating Efficiency Performance Evaluation .......................................................................................53 Average Operating Efficiency and Average Power Input Estimates ........................................................55

PARAMETERS AFFECTING PUMP SET EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE .................................................................60 Energy Inefficient Pump Sets .................................................................................................................60 Improper Pump Selection and Usage .....................................................................................................60 Undersized Pipes...................................................................................................................................61 Suction Head Variations and Large Discharge Lengths .........................................................................63 Inefficient Foot Valves and Pipe Fittings ...............................................................................................63 Motor Rewinding and Low Voltage Profile ............................................................................................63 Water Table Variation...........................................................................................................................65 Other Common Causes..........................................................................................................................66

APPROPRIATE SIZING OF NEW ENERGY EFFICIENT PUMP SETS .....................................................................67 BASELINE ENERGY CONSUMPTION ..............................................................................................................67 ESTIMATES OF ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL ................................................................................................69

A4: AG-DSM PROJECT FINANCING AND BUSINESS MODEL ....................................................74

DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS MODELS .....................................................................................74 Guiding Parameters ..............................................................................................................................74 Project Risk Assessment and Mitigation.................................................................................................74 Development of Business Model ............................................................................................................76

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING PUMP SETS ........................................................77 Cost Estimates for Efficiency Improvement ............................................................................................77 Monetary Savings/ Benefit to MGVCL ...................................................................................................79

A5: MONITORING & VERIFICATION PROTOCOL ......................................................................85

Responsibilities of ESCO / Contractor...................................................................................................87 MGVCL’s Duties, Responsibilities and Obligations ...............................................................................90 Payment Terms and Conditions .............................................................................................................91



LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: AG DSM PROJECT FEEDER LOADING DETAILS ..................................................................................24 TABLE 2: AG DSM PROJECT FEEDER LOADING DETAILS ..................................................................................26 TABLE 3: FEEDER WISE SEGREGATION OF METERED AND UN-METERED CONSUMERS...........................................26 TABLE 4: STATUS OF ELECTRICITY CONNECTIONS............................................................................................27 TABLE 5: IRRIGATION POTENTIAL IN THE DISTRICT ..........................................................................................28 TABLE 6: SOURCE’S OF IRRIGATION IN THE DISTRICT .......................................................................................28 TABLE 7: IRRIGATION SOURCE WISE NUMBER OF PUMP SETS INSTALLED FOR DIFFERENT FEEDERS.......................30 TABLE 8: VILLAGES SERVED BY MGVCL’S PROJECT FEEDER LINES ..................................................................31 TABLE 9: FEEDER WISE AT&C LOSSES.............................................................................................................32 TABLE 10: FEEDER WISE MONTHLY SUPPLY AVAILABILITY HOURS FOR FY 08-09...............................................33 TABLE 11: UNITS SOLD, BILLED AMOUNT, COLLECTED AMOUNT FROM CONSUMERS, STATE SUBSIDY, ARR

REQUIREMENT AND SHARE OF AGRICULTURE REVENUE ..........................................................................33 TABLE 12: ANAND DISTRICT LAND USAGE PATTERN........................................................................................36 TABLE 13: ANAND DISTRICT POPULATION SCENARIO.......................................................................................36 TABLE 14: ANAND DISTRICT CROPPING PATTERN ............................................................................................37 TABLE 15: ANAND DISTRICT CROPPING CALENDAR .........................................................................................38 TABLE 16: AREA UNDER IRRIGATED CROPS......................................................................................................39 TABLE 17: LIVESTOCK AND OTHER OCCUPATIONS ............................................................................................39 TABLE 18: FEEDER WISE CROPPING PATTERN FOR STUDY AREA .........................................................................41 TABLE 19: OPERATIONAL HOLDINGS IN THE DISTRICT......................................................................................42 TABLE 20: AREA UNDER CULTIVATION FED BY DIFFERENT IRRIGATION SOURCES IN PROJECT BOUNDARY............43 TABLE 21: PARAMETERS AFFECTING THE WATER CONSUMPTION .......................................................................43 TABLE 22: DISTRICT RAINFALL IN MM FOR LAST FIVE YEARS ............................................................................45 TABLE 23: PARAMETERS INDICATING FEEDER DETAILS .....................................................................................51 TABLE 24: FEEDER WISE OVERALL OPERATING EFFICIENCY RANGE FOR DIFFERENT PUMP TYPES.........................55 TABLE 25: FEEDER WISE AVERAGE OPERATING EFFICIENCY FOR DIFFERENT RATINGS & TYPES OF PUMP SETS .....56 TABLE 26: PIPELINE SELECTION WITH RESPECT TO FLOW REQUIREMENT ............................................................62 TABLE 27: BASELINE ENERGY CONSUMPTION ESTIMATES BASED ON AVERAGE INPUT POWER AND OPERATING

HOURS ...................................................................................................................................................68 TABLE 28: ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL FOR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING PUMP SETS WITH ENERGY EFFICIENT

PUMP SETS .............................................................................................................................................72 TABLE 29: RISK ASSOCIATED AND MITIGATION MEASURES................................................................................74 TABLE 30: DETAILS OF COST OF ENERGY EFFICIENT PUMP SETS .........................................................................77 TABLE 31: DETAILS OF PROJECT COSTS ............................................................................................................79 TABLE 32: LIST OF ASSUMPTIONS ....................................................................................................................79 TABLE 33: CASH FLOW STATEMENTS FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH DISCOM MODE ........................81



LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1: SHARE OF AGRICULTURAL POWER TO TOTAL POWER IN DIFFERENT STATES ......................................13 FIGURE 2: STEPS INVOLVED & TIMEFRAME FOR PREPARATION OF DPR.............................................................16 FIGURE 3: LOCATION MAP FOR THE PROJECT STUDY AREA...............................................................................21 FIGURE 4: MGVCL’S EXISTING LT ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION STRUCTURE AT SOME PLACES IN ASHI FEEDER.24 FIGURE 5: MGVCL’S EXISTING HVDS ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION STRUCTURE AT MOST OF THE FEEDERS ......25 FIGURE 6: GROUND WATER CATEGORIZATION FOR STATE AND REGION............................................................29 FIGURE 8: TOTAL AREA VS PRODUCTION OF FOOD CROPS................................................................................35 FIGURE 9: CROPPING PATTERN ACROSS THE REGION BASED ON HARVESTING CYCLES ........................................40 FIGURE 10: IRRIGATION WATER SOURCE IN THE REGION ..................................................................................46 FIGURE 11: OVERALL APPROACH FOR PUMP PERFORMANCE EVALUATION..........................................................48 FIGURE 12: OPERATING EFFICIENCY RANGE FOR MONOBLOCK PUMP SETS .......................................................54 FIGURE 13: OPERATING EFFICIENCY RANGE FOR SUBMERCIBLE PUMP SETS......................................................54 FIGURE 14: OVERALL OPERATING EFFICIENCY RANGE FOR ALL PUMP SETS ......................................................55 FIGURE 15: PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR MONOBLOCK PUMPSET OPERATING AT DIFFERENT VOLTAGES ............64 FIGURE 16: VARIATION OF EFFICIENCY WITH RESPECT TO WATER TABLE ...........................................................65 FIGURE 17: EFFICIENCY VS HEAD AND FLOW FOR AN ENERGY EFFICIENT PUMPSET ..........................................66 FIGURE 19: DISCOM MODE BUSINESS MODEL .................................................................................................76



ABBREVIATIONS

AT&C : Aggregate Technical & Commercial

BEE : Bureau of Energy Efficiency

BEP : Best Efficiency Point

CER : Certified Emission Reports

CT : Current Transformer

DISCOM : Distribution Company

DPR : Detailed Project Report

DSM : Demand Side Management

DTR : Distribution Transformer

ECM : Energy conservation measures

EBDT : Earnings before Depreciation and Tax

EEPS : Energy Efficient Pump Sets

ESCO : Energy Service Company

GHG : Green House Gas

GI : Galvanised Iron

GPS : Global Positioning System

HDPE : High Density Polyethylene

HP : Horse Power

HT : High Tension

HVDS : High Voltage Distribution System

IRR : Internal Rate of Return

LD : Liquidated Damage

LMC : Load Management Charge

LT : Low Tension

M&V : Monitoring and Verification

GERC : Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission

MGVCL : Madhya Gujarat Vij Co. Limited

NGO : Non Government Organisation

PPP : Public Private Partnership

PVC : Polyvinyl Chloride

R&M : Repair & Maintenance

UNFCCC : United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Project Background

1. In order to accelerate Demand Side Management (DSM) measures in agriculture

sector, Government of India approved a scheme on Agricultural Demand Side

Management (Ag DSM) to be implemented by Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE),

Ministry of Power. The objective of the scheme is to create appropriate framework for

market based interventions in agricultural pumping sector by facilitating a conducive

policy environment to promote Public Private Partnership (PPP) to implement

projects.

2. After the initial success of the Pilot Ag DSM in Maharashtra and as a part of National

Ag DSM scheme, the second batch of Ag DSM pilot projects were launched in

Gujarat, Punjab, Rajasthan & Haryana states. The subject report covers the Ag DSM

study for Anand circle in Gujarat. This Ag DSM project covers 533 agricultural pumps connected on four feeders (Siswa, Ashi, Bharoda and Khankuwa) in Anand

circle under MGVCL, Gujarat.

3. The Detailed Project Report (DPR) was prepared by MITCON Consultancy Services

Ltd. after an exhaustive survey and detailed energy audit study for each and every pump. During the energy audit study detailed information (about all the agricultural

consumers) such as pumps specifications (number, type, make, age and rating), water

requirements / consumption, status of meter installation, number of harvesting cycles,

cropping pattern, underground water level in different seasons, power supply pattern

and socio-economic conditions etc. has been collected and analyzed.

4. This detailed project report was prepared to provide an insight to distribution utility /

Energy Service Company (ESCO) for making investments in implementing energy efficiency measures on a rural pump set feeder. The intervention would lead to lower

energy supply on the feeder, and hence, could result in lower subsidised energy sale by utilities and lesser subsidy to be paid by the State Government.

5. Subsequently, the business model was discussed with various officials from MGVCL and GUVNL and various parameters of the business model were agreed upon.

MGVCL further made a decision to implement the AgDSM Project under DISCOM

model.

6. The main aim for this pilot project is to enable and facilitate the implementation of

this project throughout the state, thus it was also decided to use the parameters

applicable to the entire state while constructing the business model. The following

were the key differences between state and the MGVCL specific parameters

Assumption MGVCL State

% of metered pumps 73% 30%

% of unmetered pumps 27% 70%

Power purchase cost, per kWh 3.37 2.96

Hours of Operation 1580 2279



Distribution losses for Ag feeder 19% 15%

7. In following sections it is discussed how Ag DSM in agriculture pumps provides an opportunity for energy savings to Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Limited (MGVCL)

and its techno-economic viability.

Site Based Data Collection and Analysis

8. Out of 533 pump sets studied, most of the pumps (81%) at the four feeders are

metered and have been charged either on the basis of energy meters consumption or

on flat HP basis.

9. As per analysis of pumpsets on the basis of irrigation water source, around 11 % (58)

pump sets are fed from open wells and balance 89 % (474) pump sets are fed from bore wells. Most of the open well pumps (40) are installed at the Khankuwa feeder.

Pump Set Efficiency Performance Evaluation

10. The overall average operating efficiency based on weighted average of HP rating for all the existing pump sets is about 42.64 %. The same is higher as compared to

other project studies due to increased awareness amongst farmers in the Gujarat region, HVDS implementation by MGVCL and continuous upgradation by farmers

from monoblock submersible pumps to bore well pumps even for open wells. The improvement in the quality of power in terms of frequency and supply voltage by

implementing HVDS has significantly improved pump set efficiency and realise energy savings for these pumps at Anand feeder.

11. To obtain maximum energy efficiency & savings margin, it is necessary to size the

proposed Energy Efficient Pump Sets (EEPS) correctly on the basis of measured head

and flow after considering water level variations.

12. Head and flow data for each consumer / pump set has been considered along with the

sites water level variation and changes in cropping pattern to select an EEPS from the

manufacturers STAR rated pump set models. This exercise has been carried out for all

the pump sets audited. The overall average operating efficiency for Energy

Efficient Pump Sets as estimated and received from a reputed manufacturer is

around 58.18 %.

Estimates of Energy Saving Potential

13. The annual average operating hours for all the pump sets connected in the state of

Gujarat have been established as 2279 hrs. Based on this estimate of operating hours

the baseline energy consumption is arrived at 13.25 MUs.



No. of Pump sets x avg. kW of each pump type x annual operating hrs.

Energy Consumption

less AT & C loss for 533

Pumps sets

=

= 13.25 MUs

14. The overall average expected operating efficiency for energy efficient pump sets is

arrived at 58.184 %, based on replacement options of STAR rated pump sets selected

alongwith leading pump suppliers.

15. The overall average operating efficiency of each pump type is used to arrive at revised

average input power rating for energy efficient pump sets as provided below,

Overall average operating efficiency for existing pump sets

* Existing average input power in kW Average input

power rating for

energy efficient

pump sets

= Overall average operating efficiency for energy efficient

pump sets .

16. The energy saving potential is estimated only for improvement in the system

efficiency due to replacement of existing pump sets with energy efficient pump

sets.Thus the Overall consumption of existing pump sets works out to 13.24 Million units, whereas with energy efficient pump sets the consumption will go down to 9.47

Million units for same average operating hours. This leads to a savings of about 3.77 Million units at pump end. This saving is equivalent to about 28.46% of existing

energy consumption.

17. To account for various risks faced by the project implementing agency, the project

feasibility was decided to be carried out at savings equivalent to about 25% of existing energy consumption i.e. (3.313 M.U.)

Project Financing and Business Models

In Gujarat, MGVCL has always been in the forefront for implementing DSM

measures in the agriculture sector as well as all other sectors. MGVCL has already

implemented HVDS for these four feeders and achieved considerable reduction in

energy losses. MGVCL has decided to implement the project under DISCOM Mode.

18. Capital Cost: The total project cost estimate for implementing the Ag DSM pilot

project at four feeders, is about Rs. 195.46 Lakh.

19. Repair and Maintenance (R&M) Cost: The annual R&M Cost (post warranty

period) for all the 533 pumps is around 15.25 Lakhs. For sustaining the savings, repair and maintenance should be provided for 4 years (after warranty period of 1 year). The

total R&M cost for 4 years after warranty is Rs. 60.98 Lakhs.

20. Overall project cost: The total project cost estimate for the Ag DSM Project in

Anand, is about Rs. 256.44 Lakhs.



21. The various cost parameters are tabulated below in Table B.

Table B: Details of project costs

Particulars

Value in

Rs

Lakhs

Cost of Energy Efficient Pump Sets 191.68

Cost of dismantling existing pump set and installing EEPS 3.567

Cost of replacing foot valves for monoblock pump sets 0.205

Repair & Maintenance cost 60.98

Total Project Cost 256.44

22. Monetary savings to MGVCL: Gujarat is a power surplus state thus by

implementing the project MGVCL would avoid purchasing power. MGVCL’s

holding company GUVNL purchases power at Rs. 2.96 per kWh. Agricultural

consumers are supplied energy at a subsidised metered tariff of Rs 0.50 per kWh (plus

state subsidy share of Rs 0.96/kWh), also there is a demand charge of Rs 10/HP/month for metered consumers and Rs 160/HP/month for unmetered consumers.

The DISCOM also has an ability to collect about Rs. 0.63 per kWh from the consumers as FPPPA. Hence MGVCL will be benefited due to reduction in

agricultural energy consumption. Considering 100% subsidy continuation for the project cycle of 5 years, the detailed project financial analysis for a period of 5 years

has been carried out for project implementation through DISCOM Mode.The summary of benefits for DISCOM business model is provided in sections below.

DISCOM Mode

23. In this case the project is financed by a DISCOM. The implementation can be

contracted out to an ESCO.

24. Considering 100% continuation of subsidy, the detailed financial analysis based on

the above details shows a payback period of 4 years. The project IRR for a project

cycle of 5 years is 11.30%.

25. Over all, the project is well conceived and conceptualised, with sound commercial viability. The expected financial returns are quite satisfactory. Similar agriculture

pumping efficiency improvement projects in other states are now techno commercially proven in India. All perceived risks have adequate safe guards. The

project is recommended for equity participation and lending by financial institutions and MGVCL as well.

26. All the technical risks have been discussed and mitigated. The energy savings are

assured considering that almost all the pumps have been actually tested and efficiency

levels verified. The above facts should give MGVCL enough confidence to

implement this Ag DSM pilot project on their own.



27. As this is the first project of its kind being taken up in the state of Gujarat under the guidance of ‘Bureau of Energy Efficiency’ and with active participation of MGVCL

the farmers would be rest assured of its objective and exquisitely support for its implementation.



A1: INTRODUCTION

1. India is endowed with a rich and vast diversity of natural resources, water being one of them. Its development and management plays a vital role in agriculture production.

Integrated water management is vital for poverty reduction, environmental sustainable economic development. Irrigation is an ancient art, as old as civilization but for the

modern world, it is a science of survival. The pressure of survival and the need for additional food are necessitating a rapid expansion of irrigation in India, but in many

pats water is becoming a scare commodity.

2. The pumping of ground water to irrigate crops consumes around 50% of ground water

resources and abour 35% of the electricity generated in the country. In cities we are

now facing a daily crisis like situation in the form of long hours of load shedding and

day long water cuts every week. The situation in villages is still worse. There is an

increasing awareness that decisive action must be taken soon to avert a future

calamity. The targetted 8 % GDP growth for India, crucially hinges on the growth of

power availability at close to 15% per annum. If India is to meet this growth target for

power availability, its entire requirement cannot come solely from generation / supply

augments. A major contribution will have to come from savings through better

demand management and improvement in the end use efficiency.

3. Even though the demand of water and agricultural is going to increase from 470 BDM

in 1985 to 740 BCM in 2025, the actual availability of the water will reduce from

83% to 69%, because of the fact that priority is being given to domestic and industrial

use. Thus tremendous amount of pressure lies on suppliers and users of agricultural

sector.

Preamble

4. The agriculture sector is one of the major and inefficient power user in India and

provides immense opportunity to save energy through better demand side

management techniques. Implementing agricultural DSM is also important for

improving financial health of most of the distribution utilities in India since these

utilities sell significant amounts of power to the agricultural consumers for water

pumping at subsidised rate and barely get a revenue return. Figure 1 below indicates

the electricity sales to the agricultural sector for various states in the country.

5. Across the states, share of agriculture sector in total sales of electricity has been

significant in Gujarat. In all the states generally the difference between the percentage sales of electricity to agriculture sector and percentage realisation from agriculture

sector has increased leading to increase in electricity subsidy to agriculture over the

period. Among all the states, electricity subsidy to agriculture sector is amongst the

highest in Gujarat. Analysing the per capita consumption of electricity in agriculture,

it is observed that amongst the states, Gujarat with per capita consumption of 272 kilo

watt hour (KWH) was at the top followed by Haryana and Punjab at 249 KWH and

248 KWH respectively.



Figure 1: Share of Agricultural Power to Total Power in different States

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

And

hrapra

desh

Guja

rat

Hary

ana

Karn

ataka

Madh

yapra

desh

Maha

rashtr

a

Pan

jab

Raja

sthan

Tam

ilnadu

Utta

rpra

desh

West

Bangal

A gric ulture P ower Total P ower

6. Although 71% of the earth surface is covered with water, less than 1% of the earth’s

water is readily accessible for irrigation, drinking and house hold use indicating acute

scarcity of water. 3% of this water mainly consumed for domestic use, 14% of the

industrial use and 83% for agricultural use.

7. The problem is further compounded by the fact that of the total water used in India –

25 bcm – 83% goes for irrigation and of this amount half comes from the exploitation of the ground water resources. This not only creates stress on the water table but also

is highly energy intensive. Energy intensity of pumping is increasing further because of falling water table.

8. This has implication for the sustainable development and its impact on the persons below the poverty line. This is because even today more than 60% of the work force

in India is employed in farming activity and almost 70-80% of the poor in the country are either marginal farmers or the land-less labourers.

9. Adequate efforts have not been made so far to adopt efficient water and fertilizer use

technology. Many parts of the irrigated area where traditional methods of

flood/furrow irrigation is followed, have become water logged and affected by soil

salinity resulting in low productivity of fertile land. It is reported that 7 millions ha.

Fertile land has been affected due to soil salinity as result of indiscriminate use of

water and fertilizer inputs.

10. The ultimate irrigation potential of India is estimated in 139.95 million ha is by major

and medium projects, 17.4 million ha for surface water Minor Irrigation projects and

remaining 64.05 Million ha from ground water irrigation projects. About 65.6% of the

ultimate irrigation potential is already developed leaving a scope for bringing

additional 48.16 Million ha area under irrigation. The water use efficiency (WUE) in

India Agriculture, at about 30-40 percent, is one of the lowest in the world, against 55

percent in china. This requires paradigm shift in conservation and in agriculture



policies, which should lead to saving of water, fertilizer and energy resulting in a crop diversification and equitable distribution of resources.

11. Besides the above, the inefficient water pumping in the agriculture sector also has its impact on global warming and climate change though the emission of the green house

gases (GHG). Carbon-dioxide (CO2) constitutes almost 90% of the total GHG emitted

by burning of fossil fuel. In India, burning of coal in power plants emits nearly 50%

of the total carbon emissions. This has both global as well as local implication.

12. The irrigation pump sets used are generally very inefficient with operating efficiency

level of 30% or less is common. The pump sets are more often oversized so as to suck

water from increasingly declining depths and also to withstand large voltage

fluctuations. The energy consumption is high mainly due to

• Improper selection and installation,

• Use of high-friction piping, and

• Lack of proper maintenance.

13. Experience in India has established that the electric energy required to deliver a given quantity of water can be reduced by about 20% to 30% simply by replacing the

inefficient pump set with more efficient, right-sized pump set and installing a low-friction foot valve & piping. However, farmers are unwilling to provide for these

improvements because the present electricity tariff does not provide a financial

incentive to do so and because poor voltage conditions exclude it.

14. With this background, the Ministry of Power along with Bureau of Energy Efficiency

has taken initiative for improving agriculture pump efficiency of Anand circle in

Gujarat with a view to implement the model in other areas based on its success. Four

agricultural feeders namely Siswa, Ashi, Bharoda & Khankuwa have been selected

for preliminary study & replacement potential of inefficient pumps with energy

efficient pumps.

Objective for preparation of DPR

15. The study involves measuring the present operating efficiency of the 533 agriculture pumps identified at the four feeders at the Anand sub-division region and recommend

new energy efficient pump replacements for the same.

16. In agriculture sector, most of the irrigation pump-sets operate at poor efficiency.

There are many other parameters such as water table variation, irregular maintenance,

poor supply voltage, use of non standard pumps, improper pump sizing etc., which

could affect the efficiency of the pump-sets. The broad objective of this study is to

study the impact of those external parameters on overall average operating efficiency

and to estimate the energy saving potential. The detailed objectives of this study are

as provided below,

(i) Identifying operating efficiency of all the pumps considered in the study,



(ii) Identify the major causes of low operating efficiency and recommend improvements / better operating practices,

(iii) Study external parameters that could affect the efficiency and their impact on

operating efficiency,

(iv) Cost benefit analysis for various options for saved energy due to pump set replacement,

(v) Identify agencies to service and maintain efficiency of replacements

undertaken,

(vi) Propose a Monitoring & Verification Protocol to measure and quantify the savings incurred.

Overall Approach for DPR Preparation

17. Overall approach adopted in preparing the DPR along with detailed timeframe is

provided in Figure 2 below and activities carried out in different steps are briefed in

section below,



Figure 2: Steps involved & Timeframe for Preparation of DPR

Step 1: Secondary Data Collection

18. Secondary data required for preparation of DPR is collected from various organisations such as Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Limited (MGVCL), Gujarat

Water Resources Development Corporation, (GWRDC), Narmada Water Supply & Water Resources Department, Bore well agencies and farmers in the Region, Pump

Manufacturers etc,

19. The secondary data collected was comprised of electrical distribution system,

agriculture metering system, agriculture tariffs and subsidy details, feeder wise

electricity consumption pattern, seasonal water level variations, number of harvesting

cycles, feeder details etc.

Step 2: Field Studies

20. Detailed audit study for each and every pump set is carried out. The objective of detailed audit is to determine the existing pump set efficiency, which mainly involved

measurement of water discharge, suction and discharge heads, piping type, diameter, length and pump set input power.

21. In addition to this additional information like name plate details of existing pump sets, delivery valve position, foot valve status / condition, willingness of owners to

Workshop for Farmers

Workshop for

MGVCL Employees

Interaction with

Pump Manufacturers

MGVCL Consumer list, Feeder Consumption,

Tariff, Subsidy , water table variation, watershed maps and water sources etc.,

Detailed Audit Study of 533 Pump sets under Project

Draft DPR

Submission Cost Benefit Analysis for Different Options

Interactions with Different Stakeholders Step 3

Field Studies

Step 2

Secondary Data

Collection Step 1

M & V Plan & Best Practice Manual Step 4

Cost Benefit Analysis & Report Compilation Step 5

Oct 09 Nov 09 Dec 09 Jan 09 Feb 10

Time Frame

Final DPR

Submission

Start Date



participate in the project, other socio economic conditions and cropping pattern etc, is also collected after interviewing the individual farmers.

Step 3: Interactions with different Stakeholders

22. For awareness of Agricultural Demand Side Management the project at Anand

subdivision of Anand district, farmers’ open house meetings were organised at few

villages, where several farmers participated and discussed about the issues associated

with the project. Farmers Open House Meetings in few areas were arranged in

coordination with village heads (Sarpanch), local political heads and MGVCL

officials.

23. As a part of Ag DSM programme, workshop for farmers in Anand region was

conducted on 21st November 2009. The objective of the workshop was to make farmers aware about the BEE Ag DSM project and benefits of the scheme to them. A

Workshop for MGVCL employees was also organised on 23rd October 2009 which involved a half day presentation and around 15 to 20 MGVCL employees attended the

workshop.

24. Interaction with various pump manufacturers / suppliers were also made to understand

the selection criteria, impact of changing water levels on the pump set efficiencies,

input power and to study the pump curves. During the interaction the efficiency range

of different types of star labelled pumps along with technical details, budgetary

quotes, suppliers of spare parts etc. is also discussed.

Step 4: Preparation of Best Practices Manual and Monitoring & Verification Protocol

25. DSM and energy efficiency practices under implementation and operation and

maintenance practices in other regions are reviewed and incorporated in the Best Practices Manual. In order to provide a ready reference to the ESCO’s, manual also

provides list of pump manufacturers / suppliers of spare parts and repair companies.

26. Energy Service Companies / Distrbution utilities are being encouraged to under take

implementation of these DPRs with the help of financial institutions. The ESCO/ Utility would invest in energy efficiency measures on the agricultural pump sets and

will get paid though the revenue from sale of saved energy to other consumers at an

average tariff and part of the savings in the state government subsidy.

27. However to ensure the energy savings, appropriate monitoring and verification

protocol needs to be in place. Detailed monitoring and verification protocol is

provided to limit the uncertainties in the savings. From transparency point of view

local NGO’s and agricultural institutes might play an important role of Monitoring

and Verification.



Step 5: Cost Benefit Analysis and Financing Options

28. Replacement of existing pump sets with correctly selected, better designed energy

efficient pumps having higher efficiency for the same head range will give same

water output and consumes lesser power.

29. Cost benefit analysis for investments made in replacement of pump sets and saved

energy thereof is estimated from MGVCL point of view based on avoided power

purchase cost. In addition to this various financing options are also explored.

Implementation Report

30. After preparation of the DPR, BEE held many rounds of discussions with various

stakeholders involved in the project to ensure implementation of the project. The

discussion lead to a better understanding of the unique (power surplus state) power

situation in Gujarat.

31. MGVCL further took a decision to implement the project in DISCOM mode leading

to the implementation report.



A2: PROJECT AREA OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS

Location and Accessibility of the Project Area

1. The four feeders under study are located in Anand district under Umreth & Borasad

taluka’s. The feeders are situated at 22 & 22.35´ N latitude and 73& 72.55´ E

longitude. Anand is one of the most prominent districts of Gujarat and is known for its

milk production in the country. Anand is located near the gulf of Cambay in the

southern part of Gujarat about 35 km from Vadodra. Proximity with Ahmedabad,

Vadodara, Bharuch and Gandhinagar has made the district an important industrial

center. The district has 8 talukas, of which the major ones are Anand (district

headquarter), Umreth, Anklav, Borsad and Khambhat.

2. The four feeders under the Ag DSM project study are located in Umreth & Borasad

taluka’s. Four agricultural separated feeders namely Siswa, Ashi, Bharoda & Khankuwa selected for the Ag DSM project. The boundary of the Ag DSM project is

restricted to 36 villages. The four agricultural feeders Siswa, Ashi, Bharoda & Khankuwa are supplied from 66 KV substations located at Ras, Borsad, Ode &

Umreth respectively.



3. There are various transport modes available to reach Anand. A good rail network

connects Anand with Delhi and Mumbai, via the main western railway network. The

nearest airports are at Vadodra and Ahmedabad.

4. By road, Anand is well linked with almost all the major cities of Gujarat as well as

rest of the country. There are regular bus services connecting Anand with Vadodra,

Surat and Ahmedabad.



Figure 3: Location Map for the project Study Area

District map of Anand with Taluka’s



Climate

5. The climate of this district is characterized by a hot summer and dryness in the non

rainy seasons. The year may be divided into four seasons. The cold season from

December to February is followed by the hot season from March to May. The south west monsoon season is from June to September while the months of October and

November form post monsoon season.

a) Temperature

6. Anand district has a Meteorological observatory in city itself. The records of this

observatory may be taken as representative of the Meteorological condition prevailing

in the district as a whole. The period from March to May is one of continuous rise in

temperatures. May and June are the hottest months with the mean daily maximum

temperature and the mean daily minimum temperature reaching their peak. Mean

daily maximum and minimum temperatures start decreasing thereafter. During the

months November to January, night temperature drops rapidly and usually January is

the coldest month.

b) Winds:

7. Winds are generally light and moderate in summer and the south-west monsoon

season. They become stronger westerly to south –westerly winds prevailed in the south-west monsoon season. In October winds are from directions between west and

north east. In November and December winds are mainly from directions between north and east. In January and February winds are again from directions between west

and north-east. In the summer season the winds are pre-dominantly from directions between south-west and north-west.

c) Rainfall:

8. The annual rainfall in the district is received during the south-west monsoon season

from June to September. July is usually the month of the highest rainfall. The annual rainfall of this district is 786.3mm in the year 1998 and 463.4 mm in the year 1999.

d) Soil Type:

9. The soils of the district can be classified into two main types: the Goradu (Gravelly) and black. The Goradu type is mainly found in the charotar tract comprising Anand,

Borsad, Petlad and parts of Khambhat talukas. The black type of the Bhal tract is found in Khambhat taluka.



Overview of Existing Facilities in Project Area

Electricity Distribution System in Study Area

10. Electricity is delivered to consumers through 11kV feeders downstream of the 66 kV

substation. Each 11 kV feeder which emanates from the 66 kV substation branches

further into several subsidiary 11kV feeders to carry power close to the load points

(localities, villages, etc). At these load points, a distribution transformer (DTR) further reduces the voltage from 11 kV to 415 V to provide the last-mile connection

through 415 V lines (also called as Low Tension or LT lines) to individual customers, either at 240 V (as single-phase supply) or at 415 V (as three-phase supply).

11. All four feeders namely Siswa, Ashi, Bharoda & Khankuwa selected under the Ag DSM project are supplied with power at 11 kV from 66 / 11 kV substations under

Anand sub division of MGVCL. All the four feeders are segregated agricultural feeders with HVDS at most places, feeding power to mostly agriculture pumps under

the service areas. Table 1 below gives the feeder wise supply and loading details for

feeders considered in the Ag DSM project.



Table 1: Ag DSM Project Feeder Loading Details

Maximum Load Sr.

No.

Name of

Substation

Name of 11

kV Feeder Ampere MVA

Connected

Load

(MVA)

LT to HT

Ratio

Total

Agricultural

Connections

1 Ras Siswa 80 1.5 1.36 0.54 88

2 Borsad Ashi 21 0.40 1.02 1.4 71

3 Ode Bharoda 85 1.6 1.73 0.31 117

4 Umreth Khankuwa 130 2.5 2.24 0.52 257

12. The Figure 4 & 5 below shows MGVCL existing LT electricity distribution structure.

MGVCL has implemented HVDS (figure 5) at most of the feeders namely Siswa,

Bharoda & Khankuwa and also at few plaves in Ashi. Older LT distribution network

has been replaced by High Voltage Distribution System (HVDS) to ensure minimum

technical losses as well as place restrictions on electricity theft. The HVDS structure

is provided in Figure 5 below. In HVDS, 11 kV line has been laid upto the consumer

point and replaces existing 63/75/100kVA transformers with smaller capacity 3-phase

DTRs serving smaller groups of agricultural consumers. This has resulted in reduction

of transmission and distribution losses. The HVDS scheme has also ensured complete

energy metering for the agriculture pump sets and will establish accurate savings post pump replacement. HVDS will be completely implemented for Ashi as well.

13. In older LT distribution system, long LT lines were put in place that caused significant line losses and voltage fluctuations. Table 1 above shows that for all the

feeders except Ashi feeder, LT to HT ratio is very low. Presently the voltage measured at various pump sets varies from 390 V to 425 V. Low Voltage drop is

experienced at the end of the HVDS.

Figure 4: MGVCL’s Existing LT Electricity Distribution Structure at some

places in Ashi feeder

14.

However, existing LT distribution network at most places has been replaced by High

Voltage Distribution System (HVDS) to ensure minimum technical losses as well as

place restrictions on electricity theft. The implemented HVDS structure is provided in



Figure 5 below. In HVDS, 11 kV line has been laid upto the consumer point and replaced older 63/75/100kVA transformers with smaller capacity 3-phase DTRs

serving smaller groups of agricultural consumers. This has resulted in reduction of transmission and distribution losses. The HVDS scheme has also ensured complete

energy metering for the agriculture pump sets and will establish accurate savings post

pump replacement.

Figure 5: MGVCL’s Existing HVDS Electricity Distribution Structure at most of

the feeders

Agricultural Tariff and Subsidy in the Region

15. MGVCL agricultural consumers are categorised into LT agricultural consumers. The LT agricultural consumers are further categorised into metered consumers and un-

metered consumers. All LT metered consumers are levied energy charges for actual metered consumption, whereas un-metered consumers are charged on connected HP

basis. The charge on HP basis is Rs. 160/BHP/month. Also, the consumption for unmetered category is arrived at 1700 kWh/HP/ annum as per norm prescribed by the

Commission. The agriculture tariff for metered consumers is 50 paise / kWh of consumption. Fixed charges are Rs. 10/BHP/month.

16. MGVCL tariff details for agricultural consumers as per tariff order for FY 2009 and

detailed tariff break up is provided in Table 2 below.



Table 2: Ag DSM Project Feeder Loading Details

Energy Charge

Fixed

Charge Energy

Charge

Additional

Charge

FAC

Charge

Total

Energy

Charge Categories

Rs /

BHP /

Month

Paise /

kWh

Paise /

kWh

Paise /

kWh

Paise /

kWh

Un-metered Tariff

For entire contracted load 160.00

Metered Tariff for lower HP pumps

50.00

0.00 0.00 50

Fixed Charge Rs. 150 for 7.5 HP, Rs. 300 for 10

HP and Rs. 600 for 30 HP

17. Most of the pump sets under the project are metered. Around 100 numbers ( ≈ 17% of pump sets out of 587 (old list as per MGVCL) at the four feeders are un-metered and

have been charged on the basis of connected HP load whereas 487 pump sets are installed with energy meters. Table 3 below indicates feeder wise metered and un-

metered number of consumers.

But it was decided to prepare the business model considering the segregation of

metered (30%) and un-metered (70%) consumers for the entire state.

Table 3: Feeder wise segregation of metered and un-metered consumers

Feeder Name Metering

Status Siswa Ashi Bharoda Khankuw

a

Total

Agricultural

Connection

Metered 88 58 109 232 487

Un-metered 30 18 0 52 100

Total 118 76 109 284 587

18. During the energy audit study it is observed that for few pumps consumers connected HP is much either less or higher than the sanctioned HP which contributes to

commercial losses for MGVCL. These commercial losses however have been avoided by installing energy meters and all agricultural consumers charged on the basis of

actual energy consumption.

19. Out of energy charge of 146 paise / kWh, state government is providing subsidy of

96 paise/ kWh for the connections and billed tariff is about 50 paise / kWh.

20. Electricity is very important for economic development of a district. All the villages

in the district are electrified. Details of status of electricity including demand for



power, number of domestic, agricultural and industrial connections are set out in below Table 4.

Table 4: Status of Electricity Connections

Sr. No Particulars Nos.

1 No. of Electrified Villages 350 (100%)

2 Number of Pump sets/ tube well energized 10694

3 Actual no. of domestic connections 308676

4 Actual no. of Agriculture connections 10594

5 Connections for Industrial, Commercial

Purposes

44844

6 All Purpose 2668

Irrigation and water Sources in the Region

21. However, at the project feeders the major crop grown has been tobacco, banana,

wheat & rice.

22. The development of agricultural economy depends on availability of adequate

irrigation facilities to farmers. Table’s below provide data on irrigation potential and

source wise irrigation in the district. It is clearly observed that 3 major and minor

irrigation schemes have created quite a considerable irrigation potential of 106400



hectares. Actual irrigation by different sources worked out of 197230 hectares in the district. The major source of irrigation is government canals which account for 75800

hectares.

Table 5: Irrigation Potential in the District

Sr.

No Name of Scheme

Ultimate Irrigation

Potential

Potential Created

up to March’ 06

Balance Irrigation

Potential

1 Mahi Stage I 100 100 0

2 Bhadar (P) 4 3.5 0.5

3 Varansi 2.4 0 2.4

4 Total 106.4 103.5 2.9

Table 6: Source’s of Irrigation in the District

Sr.

No Particulars 2004-05 2005-06

2006-07

1 Govt. Canals 75.8 75.8 75.8

2 Tanks 0.81 0.81 0.81

3 Wells 33.54 33.54 33.54

4 Wells

(Electrified)

- - -

5 Tube Wells - - -

6 Tube Wells (Electrified)

- - -

7 River Lift - - -

8 Others - - -

9 Net Irrigated

Area

197.23 197.23 197.23

10 Gross Irrigated Area

197.23 197.23 197.23



Ground Water Scenario in The State And Project Feeder Region

Figure 6: Ground Water Categorization for State and Region

As can be noted from above map the ground water scenario in project feeder region

has been classified under ‘safe’ zone.

Water Consumption and Conservation in Agriculture

23. In Anand district the total number of habitations including hamlets is 920. Out of this

the total number of villages are 358 and 562 are hamlets. Out of these, government

records indicate that 621 village/hamlet are fully covered by the regional water supply

schemes.

24. The Government of India has played a catalytic role in promotion of efficient

management of water through the use of modern methods of irrigation, leading to

coverage of around 1.6 million ha under micro irrigation.

25. Micro irrigation which allows application of water to root zone of the crops through

specially designed equipment known as emitters, has already been adopted by some countries for transforming their agriculture. India introduced this technology on a

commercial scale in the eight plan. However, the coverage so far has been minuscule in the face of the fact that almost 69 Million ha could be covered through this

improved system.



26. The recent drought again brings into sharp focus on the need for conserving our water resources. A number of initiatives have already been taken to conserve land and water

resources.

27. States like Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat have made special attempts to polarize use of

micro irrigation among the farmers. It has resulted in large coverage of area in short

duration of time. Farmers from this area realized the benefits of micro irrigation. But

these efforts have to be intensified in all other states.

28. More specific to the project area which covers 36 villages of Anand sub division, data

with regards to different irrigation sources such as open wells, bore wells and open

water sources (rivers and lakes) is provided in Table 7.

Table 7: Irrigation source wise number of pump sets installed for different feeders

Feeder Name Pump Location Pump Type

Ashi Bharoda Khankuwa Siswa Total % Share

MonoBlock 2 23 1 26

Submersible

62 93 192 81 428

Vertical Turbine

Pump

3 13 2 3 21

Borewell

Total

65 108 217 85 475 89.1

MonoBlock 15 15

Submersible

4 7 24 3 38

Vertical Turbine

Pump

2 2 1 5

Open Well

Total

6 9 40 3 58 10.9

MonoBlock

Submersible

Vertical Turbine

Pump

Open water

source/canal

Total

- - - -

MonoBlock

- 2 38 1 41 7.7

Submersible

66 100 216 84 466 87.4 Total

Vertical Turbine

Pump

5 15 3 3 26 4.9

Grand Total

71 117 257 88 533 100.0

% Share 13.3 22.0 48.2 16.5 100.0



29. As indicated in above Table, almost 11 % of pump sets are fed from open wells, 89

% pump sets are fed from bore wells. Most of the pump sets fed from open well

sources are installed on Khankuwa feeder.

Site Based Data Collection and Analysis

Characteristics of the Project Feeder Lines

30. The four feeders selected for implementation of the project are segregated agricultural

feeders supplying power to around 36 villages. The consumers at the four feeders are

almost all agriculture pump sets with an extremely small portion of household

consumers that have been living on the farms. Feeder wise number of agricultural

consumers, distribution transformers and number of irrigation pump set connections for various villages are provided in Table 8.

Table 8: Villages served by MGVCL’s project feeder lines

Sr. No Revenue Village No. of IP Set

Connections Feeder Name

1 Siswa 6 Siswa

2 Kathol 13 ‘’

3 Umlav 17 ‘’

4 Sarol 49 ‘’

5 Gajana 21 ‘’

6 Ras 10 ‘’

7 Valvod 2 ‘’

8 Ashi 16 Ashi

9 Surkuwa 12 ‘’

10 Dhundakuwa 2 ‘’

11 Dhobikui 9 ‘’

12 Dedarda 6 ‘’

13 Napa 21 ‘’

14 Borsad Town 6 ‘’

15 Bhatiel 2 ‘’

16 Dantali 2 ‘’

17 Sureli 10 Bharoda

18 Bechari 5 ‘’

19 Ode Town 51 ‘’

20 Bharoda 43 ‘’

21 Bhalej 23 Khankuwa

22 Untkhari 2 ‘’

23 Thamna 4 ‘’

24 Dagjipura 26 ‘’

25 Sardarpura 11 ‘’

26 Sanali 1 ‘’

27 Khankuwa 36 ‘’

28 Ghora 45 ‘’

29 Lingada 48 ‘’



30 Pansora 28 ‘’

31 Vansol 5 ‘’

32 Ratanpura 7 ‘’

33 Ashipura 12 ‘’

34 Kanbhaipura 3 ‘’

35 Parvata 28 ‘’

36 Gangapura 5 ‘’

Total 587

31. The project feeder lines are characterized by low voltage variations, good average

voltage levels to the tune of 410 V and very low loss levels. Feeder wise AT&C losses are provided in Table 9.

Table 9: Feeder wise AT&C losses

Sr.

No

Substation

Name

Feeder

Name

Supply

hrs.

FY 08 Annual Consumption

(MU)

Technical

losses AT & C

Losses

1 Ras Siswa 241 2.296 13.1 % 19.08%

2 Borsad Ashi 240 2.145 13.79% 16.29%

3 Ode Bhorade 241 3.289 5.96% 26.09%

4 Umreth Khankuwa 241 3.440 11.3% 3.31%

Average 10.35% 16.19%

Weighted average 15.75%

32. During the audit study it is observed that due to good voltage profile motor burning

rate due to voltage related issues is very low in the region. Due to implementation of HVDS for electricity distribution, appropriate voltage profile could be maintained at

the consumer end and thereby motor burning rates have been minimised to negligible. In addition HVDS implementation has also helped to lower the distribution loss levels

to technically minimum and lay restrictions on electricity theft.

Power Supply & Consumption of the Project Feeder Lines

Supply availability and hourly demand variation

33. The hourly demand data for the project feeder lines from April 08 to March 09

(Available on MGVCL website) is analysed to study the electricity availability hours.

It is observed that the availability of supply for different feeders is in the block of 8

hours and for different periods of time in a day. In addition for each feeder, time block

for supply availability shifts for different periods of time in rotation.

34. Monthly and annual hours of supply availability for each feeder line of the project are

provided in Table 10. As indicated in Table 10, annual power supply hours for

different feeders is around 33% of total annual hours.



Table 10: Feeder wise monthly supply availability hours for FY 08-09

Sr. no. Month Feeder name

2008 - 09 Siswa Ashi Bharoda Khankuwa

1 April 234 235 231.9 233.85

2 May 252 244.5 251.5 252

3 June 236 230 236 233

4 July 239 234 237 239

5 August 250 253 251 250

6 September 240 240 240 240

7 October 245 244 246 245

8 November 238 234 239 238

9 December 248 247 247 249

10 January 245 251 245 245

11 February 223 217 224 223

12 March 247 246 247 247

Average 241 240 241 241

Total 2897 2876 2895 2895

% of annual 33.07% 32.83% 33.05% 33.05%

35. However, hourly demand for all the feeders is continuously varying throughout the

day. These variations are mainly due to different number of pumps operating under

different hours.

Sub division electrical consumption and seasonal demand variation

36. Feeder wise sales and collection efficiency for the four feeders for last 3 years is provided in Table 11. The average collection efficiency for the four feeders is about

97.5%.

Table 11: Units Sold, Billed Amount, Collected Amount from consumers, State Subsidy,

ARR requirement and Share of Agriculture Revenue

April 06 to March 07 April 07 to March

08 April 08 to March 09

Feeder

Name Parameter Metered

Consum

ers

Unmetere

d

Consumer

s

Metered

Consume

rs

Unmeter

ed

Consum

ers

Metered

Consume

rs

Unmetered

Consumers

Units Sold (kWh) 1209290 967016 1588969 971975 1963161 936547

Billed Amount (Rs.

Lakhs) 7.480 4.619 9.769 4.608 11.671 4.565 Siswa

Collected Amount

(Rs Lakhs) 7.570 4.372 9.722 4.630 11.149 4.675

Units Sold (kWh) 1240023 1045500 1368454 1014900 1232564 683400 Ashi

Billed Amount (Rs.

Lakhs) 8.607 4.997 8.746 4.995 7.470 3.484



Collected Amount

(Rs Lakhs) 8.223 5.297 8.753 5.036 7.514 4.004

Units Sold (kWh) 763058 27271 1100521 16292 1386321 0

Billed Amount (Rs.

Lakhs) 4.798 0.144 6.693 0.063 8.233 0.000 Bharoda

Collected Amount

(Rs Lakhs) 4.464 0.138 6.656 0.060 8.301 0.000

Units Sold (kWh) 1167568 673625 1455994 797572 2099699 799000

Billed Amount (Rs.

Lakhs) 7.769 2.897 10.168 3.550 13.493 3.534

Khanku

wa

Collected Amount

(Rs Lakhs) 7.495 3.079 10.100 3.480 12.574 3.524

Share of State Subsidy

April 06 to March 07 April 07 to March 08 April 08 to March 09

Metered

Consumers

Unmetered

Consumers

Metered

Consumers

Unmetered

Consumers

Metered

Consumers

Unmetered

Consumers

MGVCL Agricultural

Sales (Million Units) 245.39 477.68 264.76 474.63 284.0 477.0

Agricultural subsidy

Amount to be received

From State Government

(Rs Crs)

29.8 58.0 27.50 49.30 27.2 45.7

Agricultural subsidy

Amount Actually

Received From State

Government (Rs Crs)

29.8 58.0 27.50 49.30 27.2 45.7

ARR requirement and Share of Agriculture Revenue

Sr. no. Particulars For the year 2008 - 09

1. Total agriculture units sold 761 MU

2. Total revenue realised from sales of agriculture

units sold

Rs. 761 x 0.50 = 38 Cr

3. Total state subsidy realised 761 MU x 0.96 = 73 Cr

4. Total agriculture sales value Rs. 111 Cr

5. Average realised Agriculture tariff Rs. 1.46/kWh

6. Total revenue of MGVCL units sold, as per MYT

order

Rs. 1996.5 Cr

7. Share of agriculture sales to overall sales value 5.55 %

8. ARR approved Rs. 2231.57 Cr

6. Share of agriculture sales to ARR approved 4.97% say 5%

37. Table 11 indicates that 761 MU i.e. around 11.5 % of total sales is attributable to all the agricultural consumers of MGVCL. The billed amount collected for the four

feeders is about Rs. 51.7 lakhs for the year 08 – 09 which is Rs. 0.50/kWh. The state



subsidy received is about Rs. 0.96/kWh. Thus, the overall recovery is about Rs. 1.46/kWh for the agriculture units supplied. The overall share of agriculture sales

revenue to overall sales is about 5.55%. The collection efficiency for agricultural consumers on the four feeders is a healthy 97.5 %.

Land Use Pattern and Cultivation Scenario in the region

38. Anand district land usage pattern is provided in Table 13. Physical features and land

use pattern of the district indicates that agriculture is the main activity of the district.

Anand covers a total area of 2951 sq. km. It is 20th largest district in terms of geographical area in the state.The total agricultural area is 500 sq. km, that is, 17

% of the total area of the district. The overall industrial and IT park area is about 6 sq.

km. The major crops in the district are banana, tobacco, papaya, potato, mango,

goosebery, onion & cabagge. Cereal, pulses and cotton are also widely grown in the

region.

Figure 7: Total Area Vs Production of Food Crops



Table 12: Anand District Land Usage pattern

Area under usage

Parameter Sq km %

Agricultural area 2910.4 88.2%

Cultivable not in use 241.1 7.3%

Non agricultural 1.2 0.0%

Grasslands and herbs 92.6 2.8%

Forest Cover 55.0 1.7%

Total 3300.3 100%

39. The total forest area in Anand district is about 55 sq. km. Out of the total forests, 19

sq. km., was protected and 36 Sq. KM. was open forest area.

40. Among the districts of the Gujarat State, Anand district is considered as the least

drought prone district.

41. The prospect of agriculture is very much linked with timely and adequate occurrence

of rainfall. The land use pattern showed that of the total geographical area nearly 17%

area was brought under cultivation. Thus, district has relatively lower proportion of the net sown area as compared to the State (52%).

Socio Economic Profile of the Region

42. According to census 2001, Anand district has a total population of 18.57 lakhs. The

total number of households being 360808, the average family size work out to 5.17,

sex wise data shows that the proportion of males in the total population is 52.35 while

that of females is 47.65. The resultant sex ratio works out to 910 females per 1000

males. Table below presents all these data and also shows that the proportion of

literates to total population is 64.27 per cent in the district. The total working

population of male in the district is 535444 which constitutes of 55.1 per cent of

males and 28.2 per cent females population. It is interesting to note that females’

workers are quite significant in this district. Female workers are found to be greater in

case of rural agricultural area. The number of Nonworkers is also greater in case of

females when compared with males. The highest percentage of work force is found in

the agricultural sector followed by agricultural labourers. The lowest number of

workers is found in HHI’s.

Table 13: Anand District Population Scenario

Sr. no. Item Numbers

1. Number of households 360808

2. Population (Total) 18,56,872

2a. Males 972000

2b. Females 884872

3. Population Density 631



4. Sex Ratio 910

5. Literacy (Total) 1193404 (64.27)

5a. Males 717909 (73.85)

5b Females 475495 (53.74)

6. Literacy (Rural) 825519 (61.20)

6a. Males 510031 (72.17)

6b. Females 315488 (49.12)

7. Literacy (Urban) 367885 (72.42)

7a. Males 207878 (78.35)

7b. Females 160007 (65.94)

43. The major components covered in economic profile of Anand district are (a) cropping pattern, (b) crop calendar, (c) crop wise irrigated area, (d) animal husbandry and

fisheries, (e) fishery resources, (f) mineral production, (g) forest resources, (h) rural

industries and (i) small scale industries. All these have been briefly detailed here

below.

Cropping pattern

44. The cropping pattern of the district is shown in below table.The cropping pattern in Anand district is sought to be analyzed with the help of available data shown in table

below. According to the table the principal crops grown in the district are Bajra and rice among cereals crops, castor seeds (0.77 %) and sesamum (0.35 %) among

oilseeds and tobacco among cash crops. There is also significant area under fruits, vegetables etc. It is encouraging to find from the data in below Table that 63.48% of

the gross cropped area in the district is irrigated.

Table 14: Anand District Cropping Pattern

Sr. No.

Cropping pattern of the District

(2006-07

Item Area (ha) % GCA

1 No. of operational holdings 140015

2 Gross cropped area 310652 100

3 Gross irrigated area 197226 63.48

4 Bajra 53406 16.9

5 Rice 91344 29.05

6 Wheat 39208 12.52

7 Total cereals 183958 58.47

8 Gram 2650 0.85

9 Tur 1044 0.34

10 Pulses 1000 0.32

11 Total pulses 4694 1.51

12 Total food grains 188652 61.49

13 Total oil seeds 7300 2.24



14 Cotton 3700 1.19

15 Tobacco 40000 12.52

16 Fruits 12000 3.86

17 Vegetables 25000 7.79

18 Fodder crops 24000 7.72

Crop Calendar

45. Timing of showing and harvesting different major crops grown in the district viz.

Rice, Bajra, and Wheat among cereals and Rabi crops of Wheat, Gram, Tur and Gram

and cash crop like cotton are shown in Table below. June and July are the months for

sowing of Kharif crops, while October and November witness sowing of Rabi crops.

These crops are generally harvested in October and Rabi in March.

Table 15: Anand District Cropping Calendar

Sr. No. Crop Calendar

Crop

Month of

sowing

Month of

harvesting

1 Rice (kharif) Jun Oct

2 Rice (summer) Feb May

3 Jowar (kharif) - -

4 Groundnut (kharif) Jun Oct

5 Sugarcane - -

6 Cotton June Jan

7 Wheat Nov March

8 Bajra June Sep

9 Tur June Feb

10 Gram Nov Feb

11 Castor Aug March

12 Til June Sep

13 Other important crop Tobacco - Aug March

Crop wise irrigated area

46. The district has gross irrigated area of 2.07 lakh hectares. Wheat and Rice account for

the largest area under irrigation 18.89 per cent and 43.07 per cent respectively. The irrigation facility has encouraged a number of non-food crops and a variety of

vegetable crops in the district.



Table 16: Area under Irrigated Crops

Sr. No. Area under Irrigated Crops

Crop Area (ha) %

1 Wheat 39208 18.89

2 Rice 89344 43.07

3 Sugarcane 0 0

4 Spices 700 0.34

5 Other food crops 1500 0.73

6 Cotton 3700 1.78

7 Fodder 11000 5.31

8 Other non food crops 40000 19.28

9 Other important crops for dist. 22000 10.60

10 Gross area under Irrigation 207452 100.00

Animal husbandry and fisheries

47. Livestock rearing is an important subsidiary occupation in this Anand district. Table

below shows that there were in the district over 21 lakh buffaloes and over 5 lakh

cows according to the data furnished by Directorate of Animal Husbandry, District

Census of Livestock & Poultry, Gandhinagar. Sizeable population of goat, sheep and

poultry is evident from these data. The total estimated milk production in the district

was nearly 3.25 lakh tones. Production of eggs was estimated at 2560 Lac no. and that

of meat at around 35 thousand tones.

Table 17: Livestock and other occupations

Sr. No. Item Number

1 Cross bred cows 2.4 lakh

2 Indigenous cows 5.4

3 Buffalo 21.6

4 Goat 4.2

5 Sheep 1.6

6 Poultry 195.4

7 Others 47

‘000 ton

8 Estimated Milk production 325

9 Estimated Egg production 2560

10 Estimated Wool production 0.0175

11 Estimated Meat production 3.5

12 Estimated Silk production 0



Harvesting Cycles and Cropping Pattern of Project Feeder Areas

48. There are two main agricultural seasons (Harvesting Cycles) in the district, viz.,

Kharif and Rabi. The Kharif season commences from the first week of June, i.e., from

the first day of the Mrug Nakshatra and continues up to November-December. The

main crops grown in the Kharif season are cotton, tobacco, banana, rice, harabhara,

pulses, oil seeds & vegetables etc. For Rabi season the land is ploughed in the months

of October-November. The main crops grown in the Rabi season are wheat, tobacco,

harabhara, vegetables, pulses and some oil seeds.

49. Besides the kharif and rabi crops, hot-weather crops are also grown in the district. These crops are taken immediately after the harvest of rabi crops. The crops like bajra

& pulses and some vegetables etc., are sown in the months of March-April as hot-weather crops.

50. Generally, farmers in these villages grow two crops in a year. Some farmers grow three crops and very few are limited to one crop only. With development of major

irrigation schemes and canals farmers in the region will improve area under cultivation. Region receives most of the annual rainfall through the south-west

monsoon and most of the areas are cropped during this season. Figure below shows

the cropping pattern across the regions based on harvesting cycles.

Figure 8: Cropping Pattern Across the region based on harvesting cycles

Share of Major Crops in the Region

Tobacco

76%

Others

2%

Harabhara

1%

Rice

5%Wheat

5%

Chilley/Capcicu

m

2%

Banana

9%

Tobacco

Banana

Wheat

Rice

Chilley/Capcicum

Harabhara

Others



51. On an overall basis, the farmers in the Anand feeder region have tobacco and banana

as the base crops with Jowar, rice, wheat and vegetables as alternative crops. Based on data collected during the audit study the detailed cropping pattern indicating area

under different crops for project feeder lines is provided in Table 18 below.

Table 18: Feeder wise cropping pattern for study area

Sr.No. Feeder Name Tobacco Banana Wheat Rice

Chilley

/Capcicum Harbhara Others Total

1 Ashi 1449.3 78.3 8.4 63.3 5.4 6.6 26 1637.3

2 Siswa 1290.5 13.2 190.8 166.2 12 43.2 25.2 1741.1

3 Bharoda 2205.9 630.9 7.8 0 143.4 3.6 18 3009.6

4 Khankuwa 1873.2 90 273.3 175.8 3 3.9 70.8 2490

TOTAL 6818.9 812.4 480.3 405.3 163.8 57.3 140 8878

Cropping

Period (Days) 180 365 135 140 90

One Time

Irrigation

Water

Requirement

(mm)

400 -

600

1200 -

2200

450 -

650

900 –

2500 500

Feeder %

share

1 Ashi 88.52% 4.78% 0.51% 3.87% 0.33% 0.40% 1.59%

2 Siswa 74.12% 0.76% 10.96% 9.55% 0.69% 2.48% 1.45%

3 Bharoda 73.30% 20.96% 0.26% 0.00% 4.76% 0.12% 0.60%

4 Khankuwa 75.23% 3.61% 10.98% 7.06% 0.12% 0.16% 2.84%

76.81% 9.15% 5.41% 4.57% 1.85% 0.65% 1.58%



52. As shown in above, area under crops like tobacco & banana is maximum with 94 %

for Ashi and Bharoda and 75 – 78% for Siswa & Khankuwa. Banana is grown

maximum in Bharoda feeder reion. Wheat and rice are grown widely in Siswa and

Khankuwa region.

53. Since the Bharoda and Ashi fedder’s are dominated by cash crops most of the farmers

in this area belong to high income group whereas for Siswa and Khankuwa feeder

project area most of the farmers belong to medium - rich income groups.

Forest resources

54. Forest is an important natural resources contributing to generation of income and

employment to working population in an economy. In Anand district tropical dry

deciduous protected forest area is 422.35 thousand hectares.

Land Holding

55. The land holding pattern in the district is presented below. As can be seen from the

data the majority are marginal and small land holders. The farming is predominantly

peasant farming in the region.

Table 19: Operational Holdings in the District

Sr.

No. Land Holding Size

Number of

Holdings % of Total

1 Marginal (< 1 ha) 78387 55.98

2 Small (1 – 2 ha) 30449 21.75

3 Medium (2 – 4 ha) 13000 9.28

4 Semi – medium (4 – 10 ha) 12000 8.57

5 Large (> 10 ha) 6179 4.41

Total 140015 100.00

56. Analysis of site based data collection for project boundary with regards to land under

cultivation fed by different irrigation sources is provided in Table 20 below,



Table 20: Area under cultivation fed by different irrigation sources in project boundary

Area Irrigated by different irrigation sources, nos & ( Acres ) Feeder

Name Open Well nos & (Acre) Bore well nos & (Acre)

Siswa 3 (80) 85 (2780)

Ashi 6 (305) 65 (2500)

Bharoda 10 (475) 107 (4620)

Khankuwa 40 (850) 217 (3350)

Total 59 (1710) 474 (13250)

57. As shown in Table above majority of the cultivated area under the project feeders i.e.

about 89% of total cultivation area is irrigated through borewell installed agricultural pumps, 11% of total cultivation area is irrigated by well mounted agricultural pumps.

58. Thus around 89 % of total cultivated land of the project is fed from ground water sources available in the region. This makes it critical from the Ag DSM project

sustainability point of view to study and analyse the cropping pattern and ground water level variation in the region.

Water Consumption Pattern

59. The water requirement for growing the crops depends on the porosity and

permeability of the soil as well as crop type. The soils of the rain fed area are found

to have moderate to high porosity as it contains coarse - grained materials.

60. Water consumption pattern for the project area is analysed based on area under

different major crops, cropping period and irrigation requirement. All these

parameters are provided in Table 22 below. The major crops in the region are Tobacco, Banana, Wheat, Rice and vagetables. The grey – brown soil of Anand dist.

coupled with the sandy nature of soil is good for tobacco production.

Table 21: Parameters affecting the water consumption

Sr.

No. Feeder Name Tobacco Banana Wheat Rice

Chilley/

Capcicum Harbhara Others Total

1 Ashi 1449.3 78.3 8.4 63.3 5.4 6.6 26 1637.3

2 Siswa 1290.5 13.2 190.8 166.2 12 43.2 25.2 1741.1

3 Bharoda 2205.9 630.9 7.8 0 143.4 3.6 18 3009.6

4 Khankuwa 1873.2 90 273.3 175.8 3 3.9 70.8 2490

TOTAL 6818.9 812.4 480.3 405.3 163.8 57.3 140 8878

Cropping Period

(Days) 180 365 135 140 90 90

One Time

Irrigation Water

Requirement

(mm)

400 -

600

1200 -

2200 450 - 650

900 -

2500 500 500



61. As indicated in Table 22, cropping period as well as one time irrigation requirement is very high for rice and banana. Since most of the banana plantation is in Bharoda,

water consumption is higher in this region. Bharoda feeder also enjoys maximum no.

of drip irrigation systems. On the other hand other feeders have tobacco and other

crops with lower cropping period and lesser one time irrigation requirement, hence

water consumption in these areas is lower. Khankuwa water demand is maximum due

to higher no. of connected pumps.

Average Rainfall and Watersheds in the Region

62. The Regional water supply in Anand district is mainly managed by three sources namely Vank Talav Regional water supply scheme, Gorad Regional water supply

scheme and Milrampura Regional water supply scheme. Vank Talav Regional water supply scheme comes under the Tarapur Taluka, from where water is treated in the

water treatment plant and then supplied to different villages. From Vank Talav Regional water supply scheme a total of 18 villages get water in the areas. The Gorad

Regional water supply scheme come under Tarapur Taluka , from this water supply

scheme a total of 20 villages get supply water. The Milrampura Regional water supply

scheme, operating for the past 30 years , covers the Khambhat and Tarapur Taluka.

Water is supplied to the different part of Khambhat and Tarapur Taluka. Regional

water supply scheme. Milrampura Regional supply water provides there services from

the last 30 years. About, 301 villages are covered with the individual water supply

supported by regional water supply. A total no of 164 village is covered by hand

pumps, and only 25 village is covered with simple well. Out of 8 Taluka of Anand

district 287 villages including 164 villages is covered by the hand pumps till 2002

(data provided by the GWSSB Anand). A total no of 1852 hand pumps was installed

by the GWSSB in these villages, with an average of 6 hand pumps in each village and

hamlet.

63. Groundwater recharge occurs in different ways: from rainfall during the monsoon, from ponds and tanks throughout the year, from canals, and from irrigation return

flow. The recharge to deeper aquifers occurs from vertical seepage minimally and from recharge zones located close to the outcrop areas of the eastern region of the

aquifer. From studies performed on the Nadiad branch canal the seepage loss from this branch was estimated as 0.492 m2 / day/m of canal length to give a net annual

seepage of 2.4 x 106 m3 per year (Rastogi and Prasad, 1992). The total canal recharge into the aquifers is estimated as 37.24 MCM/year (CGWB, 1995). The total recharge

from all sources is estimated as 920.97 MCM/year and the levels of abstraction

indicate a level of 84.63% of groundwater development.

64. Climate of this district is characterized by a hot summer and dryness in the non rainy

seasons. The year may be divided into four seasons. The cold season from December

to February is followed by the hot season from March to May. The south west

monsoon season is from June to September while the months of October and

November form post monsoon season.



65. The district rainfall data in mm (arithmatic averages of rainfall of stations under the district) as provided by Office of the Dist. Development Office Agriculture Dept. in

Table 22.

Table 222: District Rainfall in mm for last five years

Rainfall detail in mm

Taluka

Umreth

Taluka,

Borsad

Taluka

Project Feeders

Bharoda ,

Khankuwa

Siswa &

Ashi

Year Mm

2004 650 729

2005 1259 1733

2006 919 1049

2007 623 777

2008 440 737

2009 (up to October) 198 336

681.5 893.5

66. The average annual rainfall in the district is about 780 mm. The rainfall in the district varies from 200 mm to 1500 mm. Some rainfall in the form of thunder-showers

occurs during the months of April and May. The rainfall during the south-west monsoon in the months of June to September amounts to about 80% of the annual

rainfall. September is the rainiest month. About 12% of the normal annual rainfall in the district is received in the post-monsoon months of October and November. The

variation in the annual rainfall from year to year is large.

67. There are 40 rainy days (with >2.5 mm rainfall) at Anand district. The rainfall during

early kharif season is uncertain and is coupled with prolonged dry spells extending

from 2 weeks to about 13 weeks at a stretch. September rains are more sure with high

intensity (>5 cm/hr).

68. In addition to average rainfall, watersheds in the region are also studied. The

watersheds are natural hydrological entities that cover a specific aerial expanse of

land surface from which the rainfall runoff flows to a defined drain, channel, stream

or river at any particular point.



Figure 9: Irrigation Water Source in the Region

Water Level Variation in the Region

69. Compared to early years, ground water levels within the city area have increased due

to decreasing ground water abstraction due to higher reliance on surface water.

However, outside the main city limits, there is a general decline in ground water

levels due to increased utilization for irrigation.

70. As discussed with farmers, the water level declines in the summer seasons whereas

post monsoon water level moves up. For most of the feeders the water level variation

is in the range of 20 ft.



A3: PUMP SET PERFORMANCE EVALUATION & COST BENEFIT

ANALYSIS

Field Study Objectives and Overview

1. The following objectives were set to evaluate the efficiency of the 533 pump sets

connected at the four project feeder lines in Anand sub division

• Performance evaluation and approach to improve efficiency of these pump sets

• Recommendation for pump efficiency improvements and cost benefit analysis

2. Detailed field study is undertaken to collect various parameters associated with 533 pump sets connected on four project feeder lines. Field studies were undertaken by

3 teams consisting of 4 personnel each. Each team was equipped with a set of power measuring instruments, flow measuring meter, stop watch, calibrated drum,

measuring tape, GPS instrument etc.

3. All the three team members are familiarised with the procedures to be followed at site

during the measurements and provided with a standard data collection sheet attached

as an Appendix I. A senior engineer monitored all the teams and scheduling of

measurement and activities in co-ordination with MGVCL personnel and local

support.

4. The entire team was stationed at site for a period of 2 months for completing all

measurements including verification and correction of abnormal results.

5. The field studies involved noting all pump set details and other data as per standard

data collection sheet. The farmers were also interviewed for basic data like acreage of

the farm, age of pump, R & M undertaken, normal pumping hours, seasonal variation in pumping, water table, cropping pattern etc. The pump sets were started and allowed

to stabilise for few minutes before commencing flow and power measurements. The team co-ordinated the flow and power measurements.

Approach and Methodology

Overall Approach

6. The conventional method of evaluating pump set efficiency is by taking sample

measurements of water flow, electrical power consumption, total head comprised of suction and discharge head and the pipe dimensions along with number of elbows and

bends etc. The overall approach in evaluating the pump performance is indicated in flow diagram provided in Figure11 below,



Figure 10: Overall approach for pump performance evaluation

Measurement and Technical Analysis

7. Pump performance has been evaluated by undertaking water flow measurements, power consumption measurements and head & loss estimation in pipe lengths.

8. Water discharge measurement was attempted by using ultrasonic flow meter. Water discharge measurement was also attempted by means of a standardised water flow

meter installed on a distance piece. However due to site constraints it was not possible to meter and hence measurement has been carried out by volumetric flow method. A

portable power analyzer has been used for electrical parameter measurements.

Standard Data

Collection Sheet Standard data collection sheet was prepared and finalised prior to the

commencement of the study to be filled-in at site.

All pump specifications and observations were documented and

entered in the data sheet.

Pump

Specifications

Location for each pump was recorded with the help of GPRS

navigational tool carried by site personnel during the study

Measurement

Precautions

Measurements Motor input power consumption by power analyser, discharge

measurement by volumetric flow method

The suction length of open well water table was measured by

measuring tape whereas for bore well the water table depth was

recorded from farmers data and also verified from boring agency in the region

The discharge length of all piping was measured and also verified

from farmers data at site

Pipe inner diameter was measured at the suction and discharge end

with the help of measuring tape

Pump was started and flow allowed to stabilize for few minutes. The

readings were verified two to three times to minimise errors.

Minor leakages at few places were recorded. However, leakage rates

were very small and overall impact on flow was found negligible.

Power consumed by the pump was simultaneously measured during

all measurements with the help of a ‘clamp on’ energy meter to measure and record kWh, KVA, current, voltage, power factor,

frequency etc. Stakeholder

Consultation The pump curve’s were collected for few makes and efficiency

value’s compared at different water levels.

Energy efficient pumps are selected with help of pump manufacturers



Water flow measurement by ultrasonic meter

9. The ultrasonic flow meter is a non contact type online flow meter, having two sensors

which are to be mounted on the pipe periphery as per the mounting method and pipe

diameter.

10. The upstream side sensor transmits signal which is received by down stream side

sensor. The signal is converted in to velocity and based on pipe diameter; the velocity

is converted into flow. The instantaneous velocity and flow measurements were

carried out and cumulative flow recorded.

Water flow measurement by volumetric flow method

11. During initial field visits at various agricultural pumps, it was observed that most of

the water pipelines are of PVC and flexible, where ultrasonic flow meter can’t be

used. Also, many drip irrigation systems were operative which made volumetric

method the only possible means to determine flow. Hence, water flow has been

collected in a barrel of known volume of 230 litres and time required in seconds to fill

up the barrel has been measured.

12. The water flow can be calculated with help of following formula,

Volume of Barrel, m3 x 3600 Water Flow (m

3/hr) =

Time in Sec.

Actual head measurement

13. Since water pipelines are PVC & flexible, there is no provision for pressure gage /

head measurement. Hence, head estimation by suction & discharge pressure measurement was not feasible.

14. For open well, water level below ground level is measured with measuring tape whereas for bore wells depth of water levels is noted based on farmers input and same

has been verified from local boring agencies. Height of discharge from ground level and length & diameter of pipe were measured. All these constitute to actual pump

head including losses.

Frictional / Pressure losses in pipes

15. Whenever water flows in a pipe, there will be some loss of pressure due to following

factors:

16. Friction: This is affected by the roughness of the inside surface of the pipe, the pipe diameter, and the physical properties of the fluid.

17. Changes in size and shape or direction of flow.



18. Obstructions: For normal cylindrical straight pipes, the major cause of pressure loss will be due to friction. Pressure loss in a fitting or valve is greater than a straight pipe.

When fluid flows in a straight pipe, the flow pattern will be the same through out the pipe. Valve or fitting, changes the flow pattern. This causes extra pressure drops.

Pressure drop has been measured as per the following Darcy Weichbach equation.

dg

Vf

××

×××=

2

Lf4H

2

Where,

L = Length (m)

V = Flow velocity (m/s)

g = Gravitational constant (9.81 m/s²)

d = Pipe inside diameter (m)

Hf = Head loss to friction (m)

f = Friction factor (dimensionless)

Electrical Power Measurements

19. The electric parameters like current, voltage, power factor and active power for agriculture pumps were measured by online single CT portable power analyzer. The

power meter being used is “Nanovip” Elcontrol make.

Pump set efficiency calculation

20. The pump set efficiency has been calculated with the help of following formula,

(Flow, m³/hr x Head, m. x 9.81 x sp. gr., kg/m³) Efficiency, % =

(3600 x Motor Input Power, kW )

Where,

Head = (Net Static Head + Velocity Head at Suction & Discharge + Friction losses due to fittings & length), (m)

Sp. gr. = Specific gravity of water, kg/m³

Efficiency = includes efficiency of pump set i.e. pump + motor

Pump Set Efficiency Performance Evaluation

Feeder Details

21. The four feeders selected for the study are Siswa, Ashi, Bharoda and Khankuwa. The

feeder length, average hours of supply, avg. load, and no. of pumps on respective



feeders are provided in Table 23. On an average power has been available for around 8 hrs per day for each feeder.

Table 23: Parameters indicating feeder details

Sr

No Parameter Siswa Ashi Bharoda Khankuwa

1 Substation Name Ras Borsad Ode Umreth

2 Voltage, kV 11/66 11/66 11/66 11/66

3 Motor operated pump set, numbers 88 71 117 257

4 Feeder level Energy Meter Available Available Available Available

5 Average supply hrs / day, for 2008 8 8 8 8

6 Average supply hrs / month, for 2008 241 240 241 241

7 Average load for an hour, MW 0.79 0.74 1.14 1.19

Pump set Details and observations

22. Agriculture is the main source of income and livelihood for the farmers of Anand sub division. Bore wells are the primary source of water for farming in this region

followed by open wells. Well water is pumped basically by electrically operated pump sets of either monoblock or submersible types. Water from bore wells is

pumped by submersible pump sets. The capacity range of well water and submersible pump sets is 3 HP to 20 HP with a few handful of pumps of capacity greater than 20

HP.

23. Power for operating the pump sets is supplied by MGVCL at supply voltage of 415 V.

The four feeders being studied under the project are necessarily agriculture feeders

and as such the power consumed under the same are for water pumps in the region.

However, fraction of the power is also consumed by farmers living in the fields and

connected on agricultural separated feeders.

24. With reference to Table 7, out off the 533 pumps under study, 58 (11%) are open well

mounted pumps and balance 474 (89%) are bore well pumps. Of the total water

pumps operating, around 40 pumps (7.5%) are of monoblock type, 466 (87.5%) are

submersible type and balance 26 (5 %) are vertical turbine types.

25. The major pump makes are M/s Sarvodaya, M/s KSB, M/s Lubi, M/s Laxmi, M/s Kirloskar, M/s Shakti M/s CRI, M/s Jyothi, and a host of several other companies. Of

these, a major share is of locally assembled pumps. The name plate details of such pumps were not available.

26. The existing pump specifications from the name plate details available for the pump

sets were noted and provided in the pump performance evaluation sheet attached as an

Appendix II. The year of pump set installation, causes and number of motor rewinds,

any complete replacement done, overhauling frequency, maintenance costs etc,

discussed with farmers and recorded as per standard data collection sheet (Appendix

I).



27. In addition methodology of pump set selection adopted by the farmers namely criteria of varying water suction levels, stretched supply distance, pipe diameter and material,

suitability to operate at low voltages, choice of several makes in the market, etc, has also been discussed with the farmers and recorded.

28. During field study, it is observed that most of the agricultural pump sets are in the

range between 7.5 HP to 20 HP.

29. Major observations during the site study are listed below,

• Centrifugal pumps are commonly used for both surface mounted as well as

submersible pump sets.

• Monoblock pump sets are installed at wells whereas submersible pump sets are

installed in wells as well as bore wells. In case of submersible pumps, accurate

head measurement was not possible.

• Flexible P.V.C. pipes were commonly used for both suction and delivery sides.

• It is found difficult to note down the specifications of few existing pump-sets, as

the same were installed inside the wells.

• Most of the pump motors (60-70%) have been rewound a number of times.

• Good voltage levels at consumer end is observed for all feeder lines.

• No capacitors were found connected to agricultural pumps.

• Even though the power availability is for 8 hours, intermittent power failures are

observed frequently.

• Service wires and fuse protections are not appropriate size for several pump sets which has lead to frequent burning of the pump set motors.

• Most of the pump sets and distribution boxes are provided without earthing.

• A small part of the region is prone to low water tables and few of the pump set

sites are observed without water or with very low water at suction because of

which pumps tend to suck silt along with water affecting the efficiency.

30. Pumps operated at site in auto mode: The major reasons for pump set failure and

lower discharge output was erratic power supply and continuous fall in water levels

leading to incorrect selection with respect to head. Due to huge gap in the demand –

supply situation of the state power grid, the agriculture feeders are faced with severe

load shedding. Thus, whenever power is available most of the pump sets (25%) are

automatically switched ON to supply water for irrigation. The farmers have made provisions for automatic starting of pumps. This is carried out either by auto-starter or

starter is kept in ‘on’ condition, continuously during the season, defeating interlocks.



31. Actual Pump set rating higher/lower than name plate rating: It has also been observed that even though sanctioned demand is 7.5 HP or 10 HP, power rating of

most of the pump sets is higher than sanctioned demand and in some cases even lower. The reason for measured power consumption rating higher than sanctioned

demand is that most of the farmers have rewinded the pump sets suitably to draw

more power and deliver higher water discharge. Since several farmers are charged on

flat HP basis this results in potential revenue loss to MGVCL. This is the major

reason for no encouragement for deployment of more efficient pumps. It is difficult to

make the farmers agree to have their pumps replaced, as it requires repeated efforts to

make the farmers fully conversant to the objectives of the project. Hence social

opposition is expected for replacing of older pumpsets. The feeders are already with

HVDS and metering for all pumps and hence convincing the difference in energy

consumption will not be difficult.

32. The farmers have reported erratic supply and falling water level as the major cause for

motor burnouts and lower pump output. The pump set selection by farmers is mainly

driven by crop type and water level variations.

33. Pump set Installations: The pump sets installation can be improved with further guidance from suppliers. The above ground surface water pump sets are merely

placed on temporary supports and not properly anchored to the ground. The pump sets are observed with high vibration levels, which also contributes to lower operating

efficiency.

Operating Efficiency Performance Evaluation

34. Pump set operating efficiency was evaluated for all the pump sets, based on the

measurement of parameters discussed earlier. Out of total 533 pumps, all the pumps

were tested, however efficiency was established for 478 pumps. Balance pumps could

not be tested for either inaccessibility of power or water measurement. The operating

efficiency is evaluated for the pumping system as a whole and not for the pump set

alone. The entire pumping system is comprised off all the elements in between suction

inlet foot valve to the discharge end of the delivery pipe at the field.

35. Due to the site constraints like non availability of the water, inaccessible power

cables, motor burnouts or under repair, the efficiency evaluation could not be carried out for 55 number of pump sets.



36. Efficiency of Monoblock Pump sets: Of the total 533 pumps studied, 41

are monoblock type pump sets. The efficiency measured for these pumps

is in the range of 20 % to 50 %. Only

a small fraction of pump sets have

efficiency below 20 %. Pumps with

efficiency below 20% are due to a

combination of several factors like

use of frequently rewinded motors,

non standard pumps, no

maintenance, poor selection of

pump, extremely low water depth

thus leading to lower output and

higher power consumption. Pumps

with higher efficiency than 50 % are

due to good voltage level (HVDS) and good water levels. Figure 16

gives the break up of efficiency range for monoblock pump sets.

Figure 11: Operating Efficiency Range for

Monoblock Pump Sets

P erce nta g e S ha re of Overa ll E ffic ie ncy

for Monoblock P um ps

28%

25%

38%

6%

< 1%3% L es s than 10 %

B etween 10 % to 20%

B etween 20% to 30%

B etween 30% to 40%

B etween 40% to 50%

above 50 %

37. Efficiency of Submersible Pump sets:

Total number of submersible pump sets is 466. The efficiency measured

for these pumps is higher as

compared to open well pump sets

and has been in the range of 25% to

55 %. A small percentage of pumps

have efficiency below 20 %. Figure

13 gives the break up of efficiency

range for submersible pump sets.

The comparatively better efficiency

is due to changeover from

monoblock to submersible sets, good

voltage & water levels.

Figure 12: Operating Efficiency Range for

Submercible Pump Sets

P erc enta g e S ha re of Overa ll E ffc ienc y

for S ubmersible P umps

12%

32%27%

27%2%

< 1% L es s tha n 10 %


B etween 20% to 30%

B etween 30% to 40%

B etween 40% to 50%

a bove 50 %

38. The total number of pump sets lying in different range of operating efficiencies for different types of pump sets is also provided in Table 24 below. As discussed earlier

due to various site constraints, efficiency could be evaluated only for 478 pump sets.



Table 24: Feeder wise overall operating efficiency range for different pump types

Efficiency Range Siswa Ashi Bharoda KhanKuwa

Less than 10% 1 1 0 3

Between 10% to 20% 0 2 3 8

Between 20 % to 30% 7 12 8 55

Between 30% to 40% 34 15 22 130

Between 40% to 50% 22 25 28 147

Greater than 50% 16 11 32 135

Figure 13: Overall Operating Efficiency Range for all Pump Sets

Overall E ffc ienc y wis e P erc entag e

S hare

12%

27%

30%

28%

2%1%

L es s than 10 %


B etween 20% to 30%

B etween 30% to 40%

B etween 40% to 50%

above 50 %

Average Operating Efficiency and Average Power Input Estimates

39. Average operating efficiency and average power input for different types of pump sets

with different HP rating are evaluated for 478 samples (89.7 % of total) studied under

the project. The overall average operating efficiency and Power rating is also

estimated based on weighted average of HP rating for all the pump sets.

40. The operating efficiency and power input of the 55 samples (10.5 % of total) those

could not be studied due to the site constraints discussed earlier, the average operating

efficiency and power input evaluations are allotted based on average of 7.5 to 20 HP

rating pumps. Feeder wise and overall average operating efficiency evaluations for

different ratings and types of pump sets are provided in Table 26 below. Since

maximum number of pump sets are of 7.5 to 20 HP rating, for the few pump sets (55

no., 10.5%) for which HP rating is not known it is assumed that these pump sets fall within the average of 7.5 to 20 HP rating pumps.



Table 25: Feeder wise Average operating efficiency for different ratings & types of

pump sets

Feeder

Name

Pump Rating

(Hp)

No. of

Pumps Pump Type

Average

Present

Input kW

Average

Present

Pump

Efficiency

Ashi 0 Submersible - -

0 Monoblock - -

5 0 Vertical Turbine - -

Siswa 0 Submersible - -

0 Monoblock - -


Bharoda 2 Submersible 3.23 17.48

0 Monoblock - -


Khankuwa 3 Submersible 6.33 28.17

1 Monoblock 5.01 54.97

5 0 Vertical Turbine

Submersible 4.8 22.83

Monoblock 5.0 54.97

Vertical

Turbine - -

- -

- -

Overall Average 4.86 33.54

Ashi 2 Submersible 7.56 23.50

0 Monoblock - -

7.5 0 Vertical Turbine - -

Siswa 2 Submersible 6.86 41.31

0 Monoblock - -






28 Monoblock 7.20 45.00

7.5 1 Vertical Turbine 6.20 53.00


Monoblock 6.3 43.50

Vertical

Turbine 6.2 53.00



10

0 Monoblock - -



0 Vertical Turbine - -


0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -






Monoblock 8.2 44.2

Vertical

Turbine - -



0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -



1 Monoblock 11.10 33.59

12.5 0 Vertical Turbine


Monoblock 11.1 33.6

Vertical

Turbine - -



0 Monoblock - -

15 3 Vertical Turbine 11.30 47.81


0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -



15

0 Monoblock - -



2 Vertical Turbine 12.31 39.40


Monoblock -

Vertical

Turbine 11.9 45.4



0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -


Bharoda 0 Submersible - -

0 Monoblock - -


Khankuwa 0 Submersible - -

0 Monoblock - -



Monoblock - -

Vertical

Turbine - -



0 Monoblock - -



1 Monoblock 16.74 46.34



0 Monoblock



0 Monoblock - -



Monoblock 16.7 46.3

Vertical

Turbine 14.5 47.2



15.70 44.44


0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -


Bharoda 0 Submersible - -

0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -



Monoblock - -

Vertical

Turbine - -



0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -



0 Monoblock - -


Khankuwa 0 Submersible - -

0 Monoblock - -



Monoblock - -

Vertical

Turbine - -



Weighted

Average 10.38 42.64

The overall average operating efficiency for all pump sets under the project

study has been thus arrived at around 42.64 %.



Parameters Affecting Pump Set Efficiency Performance

41. There are various parameters that could affect the pump set efficiency performance.

Parameters identified that could affect the pump performance are listed below and discussed in detail in subsequent sections,

• Energy Inefficient Pump Sets

• Improper pump selection and usage.

• Undersized pipes.

• Suction head Variations and large discharge lengths.

• Inefficient foot valves and piping system.

• Motor rewinding and low voltage profile

• Water table variations

• Other common causes

Energy Inefficient Pump Sets

42. Due to lack of awareness about energy efficiency and flat HP based tariff structure for

agricultural sector, energy aspect is overlooked by the farmers while selecting the

pump sets.

43. For conventional pump sets the efficiency variation with respect to change in flow

and head is very high. At both the extreme ends of the pump curves (head Vs flow)

the efficiency of the pump set is low. However better designed Energy Efficient Pump

Sets (EEPS) have a flat top efficiency characteristic, so that any reduction in efficiency away from the ‘Best Efficiency Point’ (BEP) is small. As guaranteed by

energy efficient pump manufacturers the difference in best efficiency of a good design is marginal and at the most up to 3% to 4%. The energy efficient pump sets could be

selected to match the capacity and head requirements and to operate at BEP during the normal operating conditions. This will result in maximum energy savings, as

compared to present inefficient pumps.

Improper Pump Selection and Usage

44. The educational level of the Indian farmers is not adept in understanding the

technological aspects of pump operation. This leads to lack of awareness on pump

selection, operation & maintenance. The improper selection and operation leads to

poor efficiencies and wastage of energy.

45. Field study has indicated that average overall efficiency of the pump sets is around 42.6 %. About 50% of the total pump sets are operating at efficiency < 40%. Major

reason for pump set efficiencies lesser than the optimum efficiency is because the pump sets are not operating in the high efficiency range of flow and head. This is due

to large range of suction & discharge heads for which the pump has been selected.



46. The lower efficiency is also due to improper selection of pumps and mismatching prime movers and due to inferior quality of the pumps being marketed. The selection

of the pumps should be governed by the characteristic curves i.e. the efficiencies in the various ranges of flow and head valves and for normal operating condition, the

efficiency should be maximum.

Undersized Pipes

47. Selection of appropriate piping size plays important role in system efficiency. If pipes

of smaller diameter are used, the initial cost will be less but the frictional head loss

and the operational cost will be more. On the other hand, if pipes of larger diameter are used, the initial cost will be more but the frictional head loss and thereby the

operational cost will be less.

48. The optimum pipe diameter will have minimum total cost which comprised off initial

cost and operational cost. The farmers, while selecting the pipe size considers initial cost only without bothering about the extra operational cost which they have to pay

every year in terms of increased energy bill. It is a general practice that with 100 x 100 mm pump, the suction and discharge pipes of 100 mm diameter are used, which

is incorrect. The exit velocity at the pump discharge is generally high as compared to

velocity in the delivery pipe line. The pipe line should be sized taking into

consideration the total discharge length. As a thumb rule, the velocity in the pipe line

should not exceed 5 ft/sec.

49. The energy requirement of a pumping system operating over a period of time ‘t’ can

be expressed as,

t X Q X ∆P Ep=

Efficiency (η)

Where,

t is time in sec

Q is the volume flow rate, m3/sec

∆P is the total pressure drop,

η is the motor pump set efficiency.

50. Assuming that the only losses are due to friction, ∆P is proportional to the square of

volume flow (∆P ~ Q2). Therefore, the power required to overcome friction increases as the cube of the volume flow. This relationship can be used to quantify the effect of

diameter on energy costs.

51. For a given volume flow rate, the above expression for (∆P) indicates that pumping

energy is inversely proportional to piping diameter raised to the 5th power and directly proportional to friction factor. Since the friction factor also has a slight

dependence on diameter, the pumping energy required to overcome friction in piping

for different diameter is ,

EP1/ EP2 = (D2 / D1) 4.84



52. As per the Darcy Weichbach equation for frictional factor (Hf) estimation, for frictional loss to be minimum pipe diameter should be as large as possible. The

suction pipe length should be short, just adequate to keep the foot valve submerged and straight with minimum bends.

53. Bends wherever unavoidable, should be of long radius. The coefficient of friction is

less in case of PVC pipes. The friction loss will increase drastically in GI pipes, as

they are prone to corrosion as compared to PVC pipes. The latest low friction loss

PVC pipes will be installed in place of GI pipes, wherever applicable, to reduce the

frictional loss on a sustained basis. The problems of erosion, corrosion and resultant

clogging will also be avoided.

54. Thus, it will always be economical to select a PVC pipe and having a diameter a next

size higher than the pump discharge size so as to have lower pressure drop and pipe

resistance. The general practice is to select a pipe diameter that is able to maintain a

water velocity between 3 to 5 ft/sec. Table 26 below indicates maximum water flow

rates for a given pipe diameter so as to restrict the water velocity up to 5 ft/sec.

Table 26: Pipeline selection with respect to flow requirement

Flow Rate Sr.

No.

Pipe Diameter

Inch m³/hr Lpm

1 0.5 0.693 11.56

2 0.75 1.561 26.02

3 1 2.775 46.25

4 1.25 4.336 72.27

5 1.5 6.243 104.07

6 1.75 8.498 141.64

7 2 11.100 185.01

8 2.25 14.048 234.15

9 2.5 17.344 289.07

10 2.75 20.986 349.78

11 3 24.975 416.26

12 3.25 29.311 488.53

13 3.5 33.994 566.58

14 3.75 39.024 650.41

15 4 44.401 740.02

16 4.25 50.124 835.42

17 4.5 56.195 936.59

18 4.75 62.612 1043.55

19 5 69.377 1156.28

20 5.25 76.488 1274.80

21 5.5 83.946 1399.10

22 5.75 91.751 1529.19

23 6 99.903 1665.05



Suction Head Variations and Large Discharge Lengths

55. Some of the pumping units have extra-ordinary high delivery point. This is especially

true for well mounted pump sets with varying levels of water every season. Also,

excessive length of discharge pipe creates additional friction head and causes extra

energy consumption.

56. The pump should be installed as near as possible to the water level in the well to

reduce suction head. The scope for reducing suction head is dictated by site conditions

and the type of pump sets used. Due to seasonal water level variation and falling

water levels it is observed that most of the submersible well water pump sets in the region have been replaced with Borewell pump sets .

57. However, with present trends of installing borewell pump sets, there is no need for priming and no requirement for foot valve, thereby, leading to better efficiency of

pump and longer life. Also, since there is no suction piping, the friction loss is limited to the friction in strainer.

Inefficient Foot Valves and Pipe Fittings

58. During the site study it is observed that the fittings provided by most of the farmers

are very poor resulting in increased losses and leakages. Head losses in a poor quality

foot valves is very high. Similarly head losses in sharp bends is also high. The farmers

are mostly ignorant about the operational quality of these components.

59. A foot valve should be designed to have a frictional co-efficient of less than 0.80 and

should confirm to IS: 10805. The foot valve should have a bell-mouth profile to minimise the entrance and frictional losses substantially. To ensure the energy

savings, foot valves of surface mounted monoblock pump sets could be replaced with low resistance design confirming to IS standards.

Motor Rewinding and Low Voltage Profile

60. For better pump set efficiency, motor driving the pump should be of proper size.

Pertaining to the power supply issues in the region, it is observed that the farmers go

for higher capacity motors which run at part load pulling the pump set efficiencies

down. During the field study it is also observed that most of the pump sets have been

re-winded several times due to frequent burn-outs.

61. The efficiency of a pump set also varies with input voltage. The consumer end

voltage levels observed at project feeder lines varies from 370V to 440V. Often,

these lead to motor burnouts and several hours of downtime for maintenance & repair. Figure 15 below graph indicates variation in pump set efficiency with respect to

supply voltage. The performance curve of a monoblock pump set (rated for about 24 m head, 11 litre/sec flow & overall efficiency of 55% at 415 V) at three different

voltages is presented in Figure 18.



Figure 14: Performance Curves for Monoblock Pumpset Operating at Different

Voltages

62. Figure 15 shows that at a lower voltage level of say 350 V, there is an overall efficiency drop of 2.5%, drop in head by about 1.3 m and drop in discharge by about

1 lps, as compared to that of 415 V. Similarly, at further lower voltage levels of 280 V, the overall efficiency drops by 9%, drop in head is 3.3 m and drop in discharge by

about 2.5 lps.

63. The efficiency and life of a motor can be increased by achieving low iron loss, copper

loss, windage loss and suitability for operation at low voltage levels. Hence motors

for agricultural pumps are always designed for a wide voltage band. The improvement

in the quality of power in terms of frequency and supply voltage by implementing

HVDS has significantly improved pump set efficiency and realise energy savings for these pumps at Anand feeder. The same can be noted by the higher average levels of

efficiency.

64. The efficiency of motors in EEPS is higher due to low iron, copper & windage losses.

Better design and quality control have resulted in development of energy efficient pump sets. To overcome the issues of lower voltage operation, the new motors are

also designed for a voltage fluctuation between 350V to 440 V.

EF

FIC

IEN

CY

(%

)

HE

AD

(m

)

70.0

0 00 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0

DISCHARGE (lpa)

10.0 4.0

20.0 8.0

30.0 12.0

40.0 16.0

50.0 20.0

60.0 24.0

28.0415 VOLTS

350 VOLTS

280 VOLTSH 23.5 m

Q 1

10lp

a

DECLARED VALUES

HEAD H : 23.5 m

DISCHARGE Q : 11.0 lpaOVERALL EFFICIENCY : 53%



Water Table Variation

65. The change in water table will have a significant impact on all existing agriculture

pump sets operating efficiency. Selection of pump-sets according to water levels /

head plays an important role in the context of overall efficiency of the pump-set.

66. The Figure 16 below presents a typical head Vs efficiency range for a pump set of 3

HP. From the graph provided, it is observed that the overall efficiency of the pump-

sets is max (> 42%) at water levels / head in the range between 23 m and 27 m

approximately.

Figure 15: Variation of efficiency with respect to water table

67. It is observed that the average discharge head (for open wells) at feeders is in between

12 m and 25 m. For this head range, overall efficiency is found to be in the range of

15 % to 44 % as per the graph above.

68. From the above graph, it is seen that efficiency of the pump set varies steeply (14% to

44%) for the head range encountered. Water levels also vary widely in these villages,

hence affecting the efficiency. Therefore pump sets are preferably to operate at

efficiency above 40% for head range of approximately 10 to 20 m.

69. Thus the EEPS could be appropriately sized based on measured head and flow for maximum efficiency for maximum operating period. As has been discussed with

leading pump suppliers, the maximum water requirement period is the Rabi period during which water and energy consumption is at peak. Hence the pump set

replacement should be necessarily sized and rated for maximum efficiency and water demand during this period. Figure below gives the efficiency and head, flow range for

an energy efficient pump set. As can be noted the efficiency is higher over the same head range.

0

5

1 0

1 5

2 0

2 5

3 0

3 5

4 0

4 5

5 0

1 1 1 5 .2 1 9 .4 2 2 .8 2 4 .6 2 6 .4 2 7 .2 2 7 .6 2 7 .8H E AD (m ts )

EF

FIC

IEN

CY

(%

)



Figure 16: Efficiency Vs Head and Flow for an Energy Efficient Pumpset

Other Common Causes

70. In addition to above there are other common reason affecting the pump set efficiency

performance. Some of the more common causes of unsatisfactory performance and

their remedies are discussed below,

71. Impellers that are out of adjustment: Both pumping rates and efficiency are reduced

because water is re-circulated around the impellers instead of being pumped into the

irrigation system. This is the easiest and least expensive problem to correct. However

impeller adjustment is especially critical with semi-open impeller pumps. Impellers

may be out of adjustment because of improper initial adjustment or because of wear.

72. Pump bowls designed for a higher pumping rate than the water availability in the well

is one of the most common reasons for poor pumping efficiency. Overestimating well

yield often results from poor testing of the well after drilling. If well testing is

inadequate, the yield of the well may be less than anticipated. In other cases, the pump

supplier recommended oversize pump bowls in order to require fewer stages, thereby

reducing initial cost. Furthermore, declining water tables in some areas have reduced well yields. In this situation, a pump is forced to operate at a lower flow rate and

higher lift than that for which it is designed. If for any of these reasons the pump capacity does not fit the well characteristics, a high pumping plant efficiency can be

achieved only by replacing the bowls with new (not rebuilt) bowls that match with the well yield.

73. Damaged impellers also result in poor performance. Three common causes of impeller damage are cavitations (low temperature boiling of pumped water), sand



pumping and improper impeller adjustment. Sometimes only the impellers need to be changed, but more often the permanent solution is to replace the entire bowl

assembly. If this is done, it is likely that a different model of pump bowls should be used to fit present well conditions.

74. Failure to perform required maintenance is often a cause of low efficiency in pumping

systems. Proper check for motor and pump alignment, coupling wear out, checking

foot valves and plugging leaks should be regularly undertaken to improve overall

efficiency.

Appropriate Sizing of New Energy Efficient Pump Sets

75. As per detailed field study, the overall average operating efficiency for existing 533

pump sets under the project is around 42.6%. The present efficiency is due to a host of

reasons like average 10 years age, frequent rewinding, improper selection, local make,

lower maintenance etc. The main objective of the project is to replace existing lower

efficiency agricultural pump sets with new high energy efficient pump sets without

affecting the water discharge. To obtain maximum energy efficiency & savings

margin, it is very much necessary to size the proposed Energy Efficient Pump Sets

(EEPS) correctly on the basis of measured head and flow after considering water level

variations.

76. The existing pump set efficiencies are calculated based on actual site measurement for

all 533 samples. As discussed in chapter 2, additional information such as water level

variation, cropping pattern and harvesting cycles etc analysed to study the maximum

variation in the operating head and peak time for pump sets operation. The data has

been analysed with leading pump manufactures and a replacement arrived at based on

their most suitable / matching 4 STAR & 5 STAR pump sets model.

77. Head and flow data for each consumer / pump set has been considered along with the

sites water level variation and changes in cropping pattern to select an EEPS from the

manufacturers STAR rated pump set models. This exercise has been carried out for all

the pump sets audited. Budgetary costs for the proposed EEPS have also been

received from the pump manufacturers. Selections of EEPS along with parameters

driving the selection and improved efficiency figures are provided in Appendix III. The overall average operating efficiency for Energy Efficient Pump Sets is around

58%.

Baseline Energy Consumption

78. Baseline energy consumption of existing pump sets of Ag DSM project is estimated based on detailed audit study. The average operating efficiency and average input

power in kW, for existing pump sets of different types such as monoblock,

submersible and vertical turbine pumps and for different HP ratings are estimated

after analysing the field study measurements.

79. This average energy efficiency and average input power norms alongwith

assumptions of average operating hours has been applied to total no of pump sets



categorised as per their ratings and types to arrive at baseline energy consumption by total 533 number of pumps sets connected on project feeder lines.

80. As discussed in earlier sections, even though the supply is available for 8 hours on daily basis, not all the pump sets operate continuously as indicated in Table 10

provided in chapter 2. The reasons identified for not all the pump sets operating

continuously are, varying irrigation requirements, non availability of water in the

well, non availability of farmer to switch the pump set on and pump sets under

repairs.

81. The norm prescribed by the Commission for consumption for unmetered category is

1700 kWh/HP/ annum. Using the conversion for between HP and kW i.e. (1

HP=0.746 kW). The average hours of operation for a pump is calculated as 2279 hrs.

82. The annual average operating hours of 2279 are multiplied by the average input

power per pump set and total number of pump sets for each categorised based on

rating and type to estimate the baseline energy consumption. The detail estimates of

base line consumption by using annual average operating hours of 2279is provided in

Table 27 below,

Table 27: Baseline energy consumption estimates based on average input power and

operating hours

HP Rating Pump Type Number of

Pumpsets

Average

Existing

System

Efficiency (%)

Average Input

Power (kW)

Existing

Energy

Consumption

(kWh)

MonoBlock 1 54.97% 5.01 11420

Submersible 5 22.83% 4.78 54445 5 Vertical Turbine

Pump 0

0

MonoBlock 30 43.50% 6.27 428609

Submersible 129 37.87% 7.83 2302829 7.5 Vertical Turbine

Pump 1 53.00% 6.20

14130

MonoBlock 3 44.15% 8.20 56063

Submersible 127 40.86% 10.17 2943228 10 Vertical Turbine

Pump 0

0

MonoBlock 1 33.59% 11.10 25297

Submersible 4 49.15% 11.93 108793 12.5

Vertical Turbine

Pump 0

0

MonoBlock 0 0 15

Submersible 90 46.10% 13.26 2720677



Vertical Turbine

Pump 12 45.41% 11.94

326661

MonoBlock 0 0

Submersible 1 49.85% 15.61 35573 17.5

Vertical Turbine

Pump 0

0

MonoBlock 1 46.34% 16.74 38143

Submersible 59 41.90% 16.31 2193679 20

Vertical Turbine

Pump 8 47.20% 14.54

265118

MonoBlock 0 0

Submersible 2 35.14% 19.63 89495 25

Vertical Turbine

Pump 0

0

MonoBlock 0 0

Submersible 3 46.13% 21.12 144363 30

Vertical Turbine Pump 0

0

MonoBlock 5 41.89% 10.6 120517

Submersible 46 43.17% 11.9 1247846 Not Known

Vertical Turbine

Pump 5 48.54% 10.9

124152

Total 533 13251039

83. As per load shedding protocol electricity supply hours of MGVCL cannot be less than

8 hours per day i.e. 2920 hrs per annum. In addition analysis of historical data for past

several years with regards to water availability, seasonal variation and cropping

pattern, indicate that the water availability and seasonal variation will remain the

same in future years and will not have any impact on pump set operating hours. Hence

the assumption of 2279 annual average operating hours stands appropriately.

84. The baseline energy consumption is 13.25 MU.

Estimates of Energy Saving Potential

85. The energy could be saved by improving the overall system efficiency either by partial rectification or by complete replacement.

86. The partial rectification covers the options other than replacement of pump sets (Motor & Pump) as listed below,

• Replacement of inefficient foot valves

• Removal of unnecessary lengths



• Removal of unnecessary bends

• Reduction in height of pipe above the ground

• Replacement of GI pipes with HDPE/PVC pipes

• Installation of capacitor banks for improving power factor

87. With the partial replacement requires farmers benefit in terms of more water

discharge from the existing pumping system. However the reduction in energy requirement is marginal.

88. The complete replacement also covers the replacement of existing pump set with energy efficient pump set along with the options covered under partial rectification.

Even though the complete rectification requires huge investment it leads to significant energy savings and reduced line loadings. In this DPR the option of replacement of

exiting pump sets with energy efficient pump sets along with the replacement of foot

valves is considered.

89. The rating of energy efficient pump sets for the replacement of existing pump sets is

arrived at after analysing the maximum possible head and current water discharge

requirement. With the help of pump set manufacturers each pump set data is analysed

to propose energy efficient pump set along with its efficiency value. The energy

efficient pump sets are selected in a way so as to operate in the range where the pump

set efficiency curve is almost flat. As per the pump manufacturers, the maximum

variation in the efficiency of these new pump sets will not be more than 4% to 5 %.

90. The overall average operating efficiency for energy efficient pump sets is arrived at

about 58%. However, overall annual operating hours have been estimated

conservatively to estimate the energy saving potential by replacement of all 533 pump

sets.

91. The estimated average operating efficiency of each pump type is used to arrive at

revised average input power rating for energy efficient pump sets as provided below,

Overall average operating efficiency for existing pump sets

* Existing average input power in kW, for each category Average input

power rating for

energy efficient

pump sets, for each

category

=

Overall average operating efficiency for energy efficient pump sets, for each category

92. The energy saving potential is estimated only for improvement in the system

efficiency due to replacement of existing pump sets with energy efficient pump sets.

The detail estimates of energy saving potential are provided in below Table. As

indicated in below the overall consumption of existing pump sets works out to 11.35 MU units, whereas with energy efficient pump sets the consumption will reduce to



9.48 MU for same average operating hours. This leads to savings of 3.77 MU at pump end.

93. The replacement of existing pump sets with energy efficient pump sets would lead to energy savings. The percentage energy saving is calculated based on estimates

provided in Table 28. The calculations are provided below,

(Energy Consumption by Existing Pump sets – Energy

Consumption by Energy Efficient Pump Sets ) * 100 Percentage Energy

Savings =

Energy Consumption by Existing Pump sets

(11.35 MU – 9.48 MW ) * 100 Percentage Energy Savings at Pump

end

=

11.35 MU = 28.46 %



Table 28: Energy Saving Potential for replacement of existing pump sets with energy efficient pump sets

HP

Rating Type of Pump

Initial no. of

Pumps

Investment for

purchase of new

pumps, in lakhs

R& M Cost, in

lakhs

Revenue from sale

of old pump scrap,

in lakhs

Existing Energy

Consumption, in

LUs

Energy

Consumption of

EEPS, in LUs

Energy

Saving in LU

A i=d*a/ 100000 o= a*e/100000 l=a*y*h/100000

5 Mono Block 1 0.1621 0.00 0 0.12 0.12 0.00

Submersible 5 1.2753 0.00 0 0.55 0.23 0.30

Submersible in

place of VTP 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

7.5 Mono Block 30 5.9944 0.00 0 4.28 3.13 1.15

Submersible 129 39.7602 0.00 0 23.04 15.06 7.96

Submersible in

place of VTP 1 0.3082 0.00 0 0.14 0.13 0.01

10 Mono Block 3 0.7935 0.00 0 0.56 0.43 0.13

Submersible 127 40.2590 0.00 0 29.43 20.73 8.70

Submersible in

place of VTP 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

12.5 Mono Block 1 0.3163 0.00 0 0.26 0.14 0.12

Submersible 4 1.4480 0.00 0 1.08 0.91 0.17

Submersible in

place of VTP 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

15 Mono Block 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

Submersible 90 37.0800 0.00 0 27.20 21.43 5.77

Submersible in

place of VTP 12 0.0840 0.00 0 3.26 2.52 0.75

17.5 Mono Block 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

Submersible 1 0.4120 0.00 0 0.36 0.30 0.06

Submersible in

place of VTP 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

20 Mono Block 1 0.0080 0.00 0 0.38 0.30 0.09

Submersible 59 27.2580 0.00 0 21.94 14.60 7.34



Submersible in

place of VTP 8 0.0560 0.00 0 2.65 2.11 0.53

25 Mono Block 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

Submersible 2 1.0180 0.00 0 0.89 0.52 0.38

Submersible in

place of VTP 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

30 Mono Block 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

Submersible 3 3.4710 0.00 0 1.44 1.11 0.33

Submersible in

place of VTP 0 0.0000 0.00 0 0.00 0.00

Unkown Mono Block 5 0.0400 0.00 0 1.21 0.87 0.35

Submersible 46 21.2808 0.00 0 12.48 9.10 3.38

Submersible in

place of VTP 5 0.0350 0.00 0 1.24 1.02 0.22

TOTAL 533.00 181.06 0.00 0.00 132.51 94.77 37.73

94. Energy consumption by the pump sets after replacement is estimated at 9.48 MU, leading to savings of 3.77 MU at pump end.

95. To account for various risks faced by the project implementing agency, the project feasibility was decided to be carried out at

savings equivalent to about 25% of existing energy consumption i.e. (3.313 M.U.)



A4: AG-DSM PROJECT FINANCING AND BUSINESS MODEL

1. The purpose of the exhaustive study on agricultural demand side management is to

develop investment grade DPR. The term bankable DPR stands in the context of developing the business models to enable the financing of Ag DSM projects.

2. On preparing the Business models, MGVCL decided to implement the project in DISCOM mode and the model is further discussed below.

Design and Development of Business Models

Guiding Parameters

3. To capitalise Ag DSM potential savings, it requires to develop effective financing and

business models to create benefits and incentives for all stakeholders which includes distribution utilities, farmers, private sector participants (ESCOS) investing for

implementation of Ag DSM projects, state governments etc.

4. Hence an effective business model must meet the objectives of all key parties which

include distribution utilities, regulatory commission, ESCO or contractor, investor,

farmers and local communities etc.

5. To develop an effective business model, it is necessary to identify the clear roles and

responsibilities and the risks associated with the project development. This is useful to

develop appropriate structure and plan for project financing and risk mitigation

mechanism for ring fencing the risks of project investors.

Project Risk Assessment and Mitigation

6. Project risks can be categorized as project development risks, project competition

risks, equipment / system operations and performance risks, financial; contractual, and political / regulatory risks. The various risks and risk mitigation options are

summarized in Table 29 below,

Table 29: Risk associated and mitigation measures

Sr. No.

Risks Identified Mitigation Strategies

1 Project development risks

� BEE to provide resources for DPR development,

awareness generation, training of local specialists and

development of contract documents associated with the

project.

� BEE to undertake step-wise project development;

beginning with thorough feasibility report; developing a

business model to implement the project



Sr.

No. Risks Identified Mitigation Strategies

2 Project completion risks

� On time

� According to specifications

� Contractor or ESCO selected for the project will have

capability to implement the project

� Turnkey contract with normal commercial protections will

be used.

� Contract will include provisions with respect to

installation schedule, complete equipment specifications, and commissioning and acceptance testing procedures

3 Resistance from farmers

� Open house sessions are being conducted to create

awareness about the program

� An NGO will be employed to educate farmers on project

benefits during the project implementation.

� New pump set to provide the same or more water

discharge ESCO to provide after sales service

4 Theft / Replacement of Energy

Efficient pump set

� Farmer will not get free repair and maintenance service for

the remaining period

5 Regulatory risks � Brain storming session to be organized with regulator and

other stakeholders to identify key concerns and provide

the information needed for an affirmative decision � Third Party monitoring and verification through local

NGO

6 Pump set performance associated

risks

� Minimum efficiency of pump-sets will be included in the

contract

� Pump sets with 4 star and above will be installed

� ESCO will have to demonstrate the minimum efficiency

level based on the accepted testing protocols

� Penalty clause will be included in case efficiency levels

are below the minimum ones

7 Low voltage may damage the new

pump sets

� Feeder converted to HVDS have been selected so that

power quality is good

� Pump sets capable of operating at low voltage could be

installed

8 Measurement & Verification risks � Savings will be estimated based on the Deemed Savings

Approach

� ESCO will demonstrate efficiency of pump sets

periodically during the course of the contract period

� Savings to be monitored based on the actual consumption by installing energy meters for each pump set

9 Water table declines, rainfall,

weather; all affecting water

quantity pumped and head and

hence energy consumption

� Savings estimates based on conservative approach so that

if/when these risks manifest, the project will still generate

net benefits

10 Payment risks to ESCO � ESCROW account as a payment security mechanism

11 Contractual risks (parties fail to

honor contractual commitments)

� Contract to be provided with appropriate commercial/

contractual provisions

12 Political risks � Project inaugurations through Local influential Politicians



Development of Business Model

7. In line with BEE’s objective “To create appropriate framework for market based

interventions in agricultural pumping sector through Public Private Partnership (PPP)

mode”, the Ag DSM project funding has to be from ESCO mode with repayment over

time from the stream of project benefits.

8. In Gujarat, MGVCL has always been in the forefront for implementing DSM

measures in the agriculture sector as well as all other sectors. MGVCL has already

implemented HVDS for these four feeders and achieved considerable reduction in

energy losses. MGVCL can also take up the implementation of this pump set efficiency improvement project with direct funding from financial institutions & due

approval from Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC). MGVCL decided to move ahead with this project in DISCOM mode

9. The business model for DISCOM Mode is provided in the Figure 19.

In DISCOM Mode business model, MGVCL will fund the Ag DSM project either by

utilizing through internal accruals or though borrowings and contract out the certain aspects of the project works and implementation.

Figure 17: DISCOM Mode business model

Consumers

Farmer

Government / Regulatory Commission

• Reduction in Subsidy payments

• Policy Guidelines and Approvals

• Inclusion in Annual Revenue

• Sale of saved energy to other consumers

• Free Energy Efficient Pump set

• Reduced Energy Bills

• Free Maintenance

• Quality Power Supply

Third Party Testing

Utility / Discom

• Capital for Installation of new pumps

• Improved Collection efficiency

• Reduced Losses and Peak Load

• Subsidy Reduction due to saved energy

Contractor

• Design / Installation / Commissioning & R&M

• Demonstrate the energy savings

• Repair and Maintenance

Payment Security Package

Pump

Policy guidelines & Approvals

Electricity sales

Monitoring Agency

Regulator



Cost Benefit Analysis for Replacement of Existing Pump Sets

10. For successful implementation of Ag DSM projects it is necessary to carry out cost

benefit analysis based on thorough assessment of project economics. Detailed

financial model has been developed separately to implement the project through

DISCOM Mode e. The financial model is designed to allow for sensitivity analysis of

key project variables/assumptions.

Cost Estimates for Efficiency Improvement

11. Each item of the total project investment has been categorised as capital cost and

operating cost. Various cost components of the project are elaborated in subsequent

sections.

Capital Costs

12. Each item of the total project investment has been arrived at based on budgetary

offers from reputed suppliers and possible negotiation margins. The break-up of total project cost is discussed in detail under sections below.

13. Cost of Energy Efficient Pump Sets: The cost of pumps has been received from the pump set manufacturers and has been arrived at after identifying the appropriate pump

set for the replacement of existing pump set. The total investment and details about the cost of the pump set for different types such as monoblock & submersible and for

different HP ratings is provide in the table below:

Table 30: Details of cost of energy efficient pump sets

HP Rating Type of Pump No. of pumps

Cost, Rs/ Pump VAT

Cost Per Pump Including Vat (Rs.)

Total Cost of Energy Efficient Pump Sets (Rs. Lakhs)

b

5 Mono Block 15 13700 12.50% 15413 2.312

Submersible 5 22050 12.50% 24806 1.240

Submersible in place of VTP 0 22050 12.50% 24806 0.000

7.5 Mono Block 13 17050 12.50% 19181 2.494

Submersible 87 26775 12.50% 30122 26.206


10 Mono Block 4 22800 12.50% 25650 1.026

Submersible 121 31000 12.50% 31000 37.510


12.5 Mono Block 2 27400 12.50% 30825 0.617

Submersible 25 35500 12.50% 35500 8.875

Submersible in place of VTP 0 35500 0 0 0.000



15 Mono Block 1 29150 0 0 0.000

Submersible 111 40500 12.50% 40500 44.955


17.5 Mono Block 1 30000 0 0 0.000

Submersible 40 41000 12.50% 40500 16.200


20 Mono Block 0 42900 0 0 0.000

Submersible 23 45500 12.50% 45500 10.465


25 Mono Block 0 55200 0 0 0.000

Submersible 27 65000 12.50% 50200 13.554


30 Mono Block 0 68200 0 0 0.000

Submersible 3 80000 12.50% 115000 3.450


Unkown Mono Block 5 29150 0 0 0.000

Submersible 50 40500 12.50% 45563 22.781


Total 533 191.68

14. Cost of dismantling existing pump set and installing EEPS: The cost of

dismantling existing 41 nos. monoblock and 492 nos. submersible pump sets has been estimated at Rs. 300 per monoblock pump set and Rs. 700 per submersible pump set,

cumulating to Rs. 3.567 Lakh towards dismantling and installation.

15. Cost of replacing foot valves for monoblock pump sets: During the site study it is

observed that the foot valves of monoblock and flexible coupling type pump set are

either inefficient due to locally made brands and have also become old. Hence it is

beneficial to replace the same so as to not affect the performance of EEPS. The total

no of foot valve replacements are around 41, costing at Rs. 0.205 Lakh (@ Rs. 500

per piece. including installation cost).

Operating Costs

16. Repair and Maintenance Cost: The per pump R & M cost to ensure rated efficiency levels and sustaining the savings is estimated at about 8% of per pump set cost per

year. The total R & M cost per year is around Rs.15.25 Lakh. During the first year the R&M is covered under the warranty by pump manufacturers, however the ESCO has

to carry out R&M for next for post warranty period. The total cost for R&M four years is estimated at Rs 60.98 lakhs



17. Overall Project Cost: The total project cost estimated for the implementation of Ag DSM Pilot Project at four feeders in Anand District of Gujarat, is Rs 256.44 Crores.

18. All the cost parameters discussed are tabulated below,

Table 31: Details of project costs

Particulars Value in

Rs Lakhs

Cost of Energy Efficient Pump Sets 191.68

Cost of dismantling existing pump set and installing EEPS 3.567

Cost of replacing foot valves for monoblock pump sets 0.205

Repair & Maintenance cost 60.98

Total Project Cost 256.44

Monetary Savings/ Benefit to MGVCL

19. The major benefit of pump set efficiency improvement is to farmers by way of either

increased water discharge output per unit of power consumed or same water discharge

with lower power consumption.

20. Replacement of existing pump sets with correctly selected, better designed energy

efficient pumps having higher efficiency for the same head range will give higher

water output and at the same time consumes lesser power. Benefits to MGVCL due to lower power consumption by energy efficient agricultsure pumps are estimated power

purchase costs.

21. List of assumptions made in financial model developed for IRR estimation for all

three business models has been provided below in Table 32. The financial Model is attached as Appendix V.

Table 32: List of Assumptions

Assumptions: Unit Value

Project Scope and Unit Capital Costs:

Savings Calculation Assumptions:

Model Prepared for State

Saving Achieved 25.00%

Project Duration years 5

Number of Pumps to be replaced

Total capital Cost Mil Rs. 19.546

Cost of Pumps Mil Rs. 19.058

% of metered pumps 30%

% of unmetered pumps 70%

kW per HP, conversion factor 0.7462

Annual deterioration in efficiency for new pumps % 0%

Tariff (for metered consumers) Rs 0.50

Demand charges(for metered consumers) Rs/HP/month 10.00



Tariff (for unmetered consumers) Rs/HP/month 160.00

FPPPA Rs/unit 0.63

Per unit subsidy by state govt to agricultural Rs 0.96

DISCOM's power purchase cost, per kWh Rs 2.96

Collection efficiency of subsidy from govt. % 100.0%

Collection efficiency from farmers % 100.0%

Distribution losses for Ag feeder % 15%

Repair and maintenance cost as a % of pump cost % 8%

No of average operating hours 2279

Average cost of supply, (average tariff) Rs/ Unit 4.19

Capital Costs:

VAT % 12.5%

Interest Rate % 0%

Equity as a % of total costs % 100%

Corporate tax rate %

Depreciation rate % 25%

Tariff Escalation Rate % 0%

Project Savings:

Total savings at Pump MU 3.313325053

DISCOM Mode

22. In this case the project is financed by a DISCOM. The implementation can be contracted out to an ESCO. Considering 100% continuation of subsidy, the detailed

financial analysis based on the above details shows a payback period of 4 years. The

project IRR for a project cycle of 5 years is 11.30%.

23. Table 33 shows the cash flow statements developed for implementation of this pilot project through DISCOM Mode.



Table 33: Cash flow Statements for project implementation through Discom Mode

Financial Calculations

No. of years for debt

5.00

Initial Investment on Equipment, in Mn Rs.

19.55

Equity as a % of total costs 100%

Total Equity, in Mn Rs

19.55

Total Debt, in Mn Rs

-

Percentage of subsidy willing to be continued 100%

Scrap value

Years

0 1 2 3 4 5

Initial investment, in Mn Rs

(19.55)

Cost of Power saved, Rs/ Unit

2.96

2.96

2.96

2.96

2.96

2.96

Units saved by deemed approach, in MUs (at pump level)

3.31

3.31

3.31

3.31

3.31

Units saved in Mil. Units for metered Consumers

0.99

0.99

0.99

0.99

0.99

Units saved in Mil. Units for unmetered Consumers

2.32

2.32

2.32

2.32

2.32

Units avoided being purchased, in Mus

3.90

3.90

3.90

3.90

3.90

Avoided cost of purchase to DISCOM, in Rs

11.54

11.54

11.54

11.54

11.54

Revenue from scrap of old pumps, in Mn Rs

0.98

Total Cash Inflow to DISCOM



11.54 12.52 11.54 11.54 11.54

Loss of sale to DISCOM (metered consumers), in Mn Rs

0.57

0.57

0.57

0.57

0.57

Loss of revenue due to non collection of tariff, in Mn Rs

0.50

0.50

0.50

0.50

0.50

Loss of revenue due to non collection of demand charges, in Mn Rs

0.07

0.07

0.07

0.07

0.07

Drop in connected HP

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Demand charge per HP per annum, in Rs

120.00

120.00

120.00

120.00

120.00

Loss of sale to DISCOM (unmetered consumers), in Mn Rs

2.62

2.62

2.62

2.62

2.62

Using loss per unit approach

2.62

2.62

2.62

2.62

2.62

Total units consumed per HP/year

1,701

1,701

1,701

1,701

1,701

Total loss of revenue per HP/year, in Rs

1,920

1,920

1,920

1,920

1,920

Loss of revenue per unit of unmetered consumer

1.13

1.13

1.13

1.13

1.13

Using reduction in HP approach

2.62

2.62

2.62

2.62

2.62

Drop in HP/unit

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Total drop in HP

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Total loss of revenue per HP/year, in Rs

1,920

1,920

1,920

1,920

1,920

Loss of revenue to Discom due to loss in FPPPA, in Mn Rs

2.09

2.09

2.09

2.09

2.09

Total subsidy to discom from saved units (metered), in Mn Rs

0.95

0.95

0.95

0.95

0.95

Loss of subsidy to discom, in Mn Rs



- - - - -

Total loss to discom, in Mn Rs

5.27

5.27

5.27

5.27

5.27

Net Revenue Saved in Mn Rs.

6.27

7.24

6.27

6.27

6.27

Total Cash inflow to DISCOM

6.27

7.24

6.27

6.27

6.27

R & M Cost, in Rs Mn

-

1.52

1.52

1.52

1.52

Total Revenue expenditure, in Mn Rs.

-

(1.52)

(1.52)

(1.52)

(1.52)

Interest on debt, in Mn Rs

-

-

-

-

-

EBDT, in Rs Mn

6.27

5.72

4.74

4.74

4.74

Depreciation, in Rs Mn

(4.89)

(3.66)

(2.75)

(2.06)

(1.55)

EBT, in Rs Mn

1.38

2.05

1.99

2.68

3.19

Tax in Mn Rs

-

-

-

-

-

Profit After Tax, in Mn Rs

(19.55)

6.27

5.72

4.74

4.74

4.74

Debt Repayment, in Mn Rs

-

-

-

-

-

-

Project Cash Flow, in Mn Rs

(19.55)

6.27

5.72

4.74

4.74

4.74

Cummulative cashflow in Mn Rs

(19.55)

(13.28)

(7.56)

(2.82)

1.92

6.66

Project IRR 11.30%

Payback

4.00



(a) Over all, the project is well conceived and conceptualised, with sound

commercial viability. The expected financial returns are quite satisfactory.

Similar agriculture pumping efficiency improvement projects in other states

are now techno commercially proven in India. All perceived risks have

adequate safe guards. The project is recommended for equity participation and

lending by financial institutions and MGVCL as well.

(b) All the technical risks have been discussed and mitigated. The energy savings

are assured considering that almost all the pumps have been actually tested

and efficiency levels verified. The above facts should give MGVCL enough

confidence to implement this Ag DSM pilot project on their own.



A5: MONITORING & VERIFICATION PROTOCOL

(a) In the context of the agricultural DSM project, energy consumption in the

baseline and project scenarios and consequently energy savings can be

determined under two different approaches:

(b) One is the project monitoring and verification (M&V) approach that determines energy savings based on monitored values of efficiency parameters

like head, flow and energy consumption.

(c) Other approach uses standard values of pumping efficiency (baseline and

project pumps) and usage hours to arrive at energy savings called the deemed

savings approach

(d) Measurement and Verification (M&V) is the process of using measurement to reliably determine actual saving created within an individual facility/project

by an energy management program. M&V activities include site surveys, metering of energy and independent variables, engineering calculations, and

reporting. How these activities are applied to determine energy savings depends on the characteristics of the energy conservation measures (ECMs)

being implemented and balancing accuracy in energy savings estimates with

the cost of conducting M&V.

(e) As the energy consumption of a pump depends on multiple factors like head,

flow, efficiency, hours of operation and type and make of pump-set,

monitoring all the parameters is likely to be impossible given the constraints of implementing such programs with farmers (particularly measurements

involving electricity consumption) and is likely to be extremely expensive on account of number of pumps of different types covering vast geographical

areas having different underground water levels and efforts and time required for head measurement.

(f) In addition to the problems of monitoring the parameters, there are number of

risks which are outside the ESCO’s control. It includes farmer behavior, the

amount of land under irrigation, cropping patterns, water table declines

(potentially affected by adjacent farmers), weather and rainfall. All these

factors can affect the quantity of water pumped and the head, which will cause

energy loads to vary, even if the technical performance of the ESCO’s

installed systems perform as specified. Variations in power quality can also affect pump performance, useful life and maintenance and replacement costs.

ESCOs and their lenders may not be able to accept full exposure to such

uncontrollable risks.



(g) The basis of successful energy efficiency and demand side management projects rest on the fact that electricity reductions can be determined to a

degree of accuracy and trust that is acceptable to all stakeholders. The objectives of M&V are to provide an impartial, credible and transparent

process that can be used to quantify and assess the impacts and sustainability

of DSM and energy efficiency projects.

(h) Contractually, ESCOs must stand behind technical performance and specific

efficiency of the systems and equipment they install. These are key values in

the M&V savings calculation. Other values in the savings equation, i.e., operating hours can be estimated using baseline energy consumption data and

then stipulated in the project contract. In this way, the ESCO is not exposed to uncontrollable risks, but does assume responsibility for system efficiency. The

Discom and State Government in effect, assume the uncontrollable risks. If the ESCO is paid based on the agreed value of its capital investment and delivered

services, this formulation can produce equitable results.

(i) For this reason, from the point of view of the ESCO and its lender, a Deemed

savings approach may be appropriate. This would involve pre- and post

performance demonstration of a sample of pumps by a third-party firm to

estimate savings per pump set basis. This information is then be used to

stipulate savings based on the operating hours estimated using baseline energy

consumption data for the entire project area. Periodic sampling of pump set efficiencies during the course of the contract period is important to account for

any deterioration of savings and to confirm that the ESCO is meeting its warranty obligations. Even if a Deemed savings approach is used to determine

payments to the ESCO, the Discom can implement a monitoring and verification savings approach for all feeders and pump sets to gather the most

accurate information.

(j) Under this Ag DSM project all the 533 pumps connected on the four feeders

would be replaced with EEPS. MGVCL or An Energy Service Company

(ESCO) invests for the project or takes a loan for the investment from a

financial institution and repays the loan and profits out of reimbursements

from the revenue realised by sale of saved energy. Because pump set

specifications need to be designed in association with the pump set manufacturer, it will be great if investments are made by pump manufacture

and ESCO. Under this scenario, MGVCL would undertake the necessary network upgrades to ensure quality of power necessary to support the STAR

rated EEPS.

(k) The ESCO would be responsible for project investments and undertaking

maintenance of the EEPS over the project payback period. The ESCO would

also be responsible to train the farmers for minimum servicing requirements

and also establish a local site office for attending major / emergency repairs

and servicing. The ESCO would be responsible to ensure that the EEPS

operate at the best efficiency point for maximum season duration.



(l) All payments due to the ESCO would be made by MGVCL. To ensure project viability considering varying (increased) power availability hours, varying

water levels, future addition of pump sets / consumers, the project entails a higher investment risk.

Responsibilities of ESCO / Contractor

(m) The primary responsibility of the ESCO are listed below,

• Procurement of EEPS as per the minimum specifications .

• Replace old pump sets, Install & commission the EEPS, provide O&M services for the project. O&M services shall include maintenance and repair or

replacement of pumps, customer support to farmers to ensure optimum

performance of pumps, monitoring of pump operation and efficiency and on-call

emergency service.

• The ESCO will be responsible for planning EEPS procurement, installation, maintenance and repair/replacement. ESCO shall also be responsible for

financing, implementing and operating the project. The ESCO shall procure ISI

mark EEPS conforming to the guidelines of BEE and install them with the

following minimum specifications;-

i. Wide-voltage centrifugal, submersible pump and efficient delivery

system. The discharge rate of the EEPS shall not be lower than the existing pumps of the farmers.

ii. Low-friction foot valve and piping, conforming to relevant IS Standards

specifications.

• After installation of the EEPS, services to be offered by the ESCO shall include maintenance of the installed systems over the contract period.

• The scrap value of the old pump removed shall be credited to ESCO/MGVCL as

farmer’s contribution against the cost-sharing payment.

• Training & Educating Farmers Regarding the Proper Use and Maintenance of

EEPS

i. The ESCO shall organize continuous periodical process of training, education

and motivation of farmers / consumers for proper use and maintenance of the new pump sets, during the term of the project.

ii. The ESCO shall obtain regular feedback regarding operation of the EEPS.

iii. The ESCO shall send monthly reports to MGVCL with feedback and

remedial action, if any, to be taken as also suggestions / recommendations.

• Removal and Disposal of Existing / Old Pump Sets

• The ESCO shall enter into an agreement with Farmers / Consumers, for

replacement of existing pump sets with new ones and shall then ensure timely

removal and disposal of old pump sets as per agreed time schedules with

MGVCL.



i. The ESCO shall remove the existing old pump sets.

ii. The ESCO shall dismantle and dispose off the old pump sets to prevent their

use or installation anywhere in India.

iii. The ESCO shall ensure that the disposed off pumps or any other old pump

sets are not reinstalled / used by the participating farmers/customers.

iv. The ESCO shall give written assurance and report to MGVCL describing the

manner of disposal of old pump sets.

v. The ESCO shall assist MGVCL’s representative / appointed auditor to

conduct audit to confirm the appropriate disposal of all old pumps and steps

to ensure that they are not re-installed.

• Installation & Commissioning of Energy Efficient Pump Sets- The ESCO shall ensure that:

i. The work will have to be executed as per the specifications at the locations

identified by MGVCL.

ii. The EEPS installed should be capable of pumping the same quantity of water as compared to the existing ones.

iii. The branded EEPS should be installed with a power factor correction device

(capacitor).

iv. Ensure replacement by and installation of all the 533 new pump sets (plus

additional as agreed), after execution of individual agreements, as per agreed time schedule and ensure that they are in proper working order and properly

handed over to the concerned customer/farmer, and receipt obtained.

• Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Program / Services: O&M services by ESCO

shall include the following,

i. The ESCO shall set up & maintain an office at the site to provide O&M

services with posted hours of opening along with posted procedures and phone numbers to obtain off-hours support.

ii. Undertake maintenance and repair or replacement of defective pump sets;

maintenance of records regarding replacements; return of defective pump sets

to the suppliers.

iii. Provide customer support to farmers to ensure optimum performance of

pumps.

iv. Undertake monitoring of pump operation and efficiency.

v. Undertake on-call emergency service.

vi. Maintain inventory of spare pumps to be installed in the event of pump

failure.

vii. Manage an ongoing communication and education program to encourage

correct behaviours from farmers.

viii. Develop, obtain consent / approval from MGVCL and farmers and manage a

protocol to ensure that the initial efficiency gains are sustained.



• Procedure for Replacement under Warranty: The ESCO shall provide warranty for installed EEPS as well extend necessary warranty for replacements. An

agreed procedure and format will need to be incorporated in the agreement letter

between MGVCL / farmer and ESCO regarding the replacements, if any. The

procedures for EEPS replacement are as follows:

i. In case of failure of any EEPS, the customer shall be required to return the

failed EEPS to the ESCO, providing the reason of failure and submit the

proof of installation as made under the above scheme. A copy of the

agreement between ESCO and farmer shall be considered as a valid proof

of installation.

ii. The ESCO shall replace the EEPS and shall mark in the original letter

confirming the issue of the replaced EEPS number and the date.

iii. The ESCO shall keep a record of the EEPS and provide this information to

the MGVCL program administrator / Project Manager monthly as per

agreed report proforma and procedure.

• Monthly Progress Reports: A monthly project report as per agreed format will have to be submitted by the ESCO for the entire duration of the project. Any

additional project brief will also be prepared including barriers faced and

resolved during and after installation of EEPS.

• Inspection and Tests: MGVCL and BEE or their representatives can inspect

any or all of the installations during the project term either independently or

along with ESCO representative. In order to ensure that the replacements

operate as per desired specifications and standards. The ESCO will be required

to carry out tests on a quarterly / seasonal basis (as per different water levels) or in a manner specified by BEE / MGVCL and submit the results. The results

would be compared by BEE/MGVCL and any difference or discrepancies detailed as compared to the specified standards so as to suitable correct the

savings and payments due to ESCO. The reports will be prepared and submitted within reasonable time frame say about a week from conducting such tests. The

ESCO shall incorporate comments as per the report and rectify defects and carry out remedial measures, if any, as given in the report and submit report to

BEE/MGVCL in this behalf.

• Bank Guarantee

i. The MGVCL shall require a Bank Guarantee from the ESCO as security

against warranty obligations. Under such warranty obligations, the ESCO

is required to promptly replace any EEPS that fails during the project

period and inform MGVCL accordingly.

ii. Provide information on the progress of installation and, after

implementation, of the operational performance of EEPS every month to

MGVCL.

• Carbon Credit Benefits



i. The responsibility of registering the project for availing carbon credits will be with the MGVCL.

ii. The MGVCL shall prepare the Project Design Document and obtain

required approval from the United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC).

iii. All required and relevant data, technical support and necessary documents

will be provided to the MGVCL by ESCO on a timely basis to support the

ESCO’s application for carbon credit.

• Equipment Procurement / Purchase of New Pump Sets

i. The ESCO has to purchase & install minimum 533 EEPS after finalizing

terms and conditions with MGVCL including the terms for the warranty.

ii. The ESCO has to check each of the pump sets received to ensure they are

as per specifications and working.

iii. The ESCO has to ensure that the EEPS meet the mandatory specifications.

iv. The ESCO has to ensure that the warranty period is for minimum 12 months after installation of pump sets or longer as agreed by the ESCO

and provided by the pump manufacturer, which is extendable upto a further period of 2 years at the option of the farmer/consumer.

v. The ESCO has to assign separate serial numbers and markings in the pump

casting and record and maintain the same.

vi. The ESCO has to ensure that all EEPS installed have a unique serial

number on the name-plate in addition to the marking in the castings for identification with the program and for warranty obligations. Such

markings shall be readily visible above ground and duplicated if necessary.

vii. The ESCO has to provide the customer/farmer with a letter indicating the

date of installation, service, serial number, capacity, make and the program

under which it is installed. A copy of the letter shall be provided to BEE

MGVCL.

MGVCL’s Duties, Responsibilities and Obligations

• Project Commencement

i. MGVCL shall ensure good power quality and load management system in

project area. MGVCL shall provide minimum 3000 hrs power supply to each feeder.

ii. MGVCL shall provide ESCO the data and support necessary for

implementing the tasks as above.

iii. MGVCL shall be responsible for operation, maintenance and

repair/replacement of power supply system (including energy meters) to EEPS.

• On Field Support : MGVCL shall provide necessary support to the ESCO at the field level, as may be required by ESCO from time to time, including, amongst



others, regarding access to consumer premises, replacement of existing pump sets, recovering old pump sets and signing agreement with the farmer/consumer.

• Maintenance of Power Supply System (line, transformer, capacitor, meter etc)

i. MGVCL shall be responsible for operation and maintenance of power

supply system.

ii. MGVCL shall promptly attend to any break down including repair or

replace or replacement of any equipment used/needed for maintaining

electricity supply.

• Payment: MGVCL will make payments on a monthly basis to the ESCO based on the savings formula derived from competitive bidding and any related

negotiations.

Payment Terms and Conditions

• The payments will be made on a monthly basis to ESCO after the replacement of old sets / installation of EEPS as per agreed savings and its certification by

Third Party Agency. The ESCO shall ensure successful installation of all EEPS within agreed time frame subject to which Liquidated Damage (LD) charges

will be made applicable as per agreed contract.

• The typical terms could involve ;

i. Contract period years.

ii. Name of feeders and its substation.

iii. No .of pump sets to be replaced. Total no. of pump sets at the start of the

project. Estimated no. of pump sets to be added after project inception

date.

iv. Estimate & confirm baseline energy consumption for present plus

additional pump sets as per DPR.

v. The ESCO and MGVCL can commence measurement of power consumed on the feeders under study and fix the baseline demand.

vi. Quantum of energy savings to be certified between ESCO and MGVCL.

vii. Share of energy savings between ESCO and MGVCL as per project

agreement.

T

01 ag dsm implementation report

Documents