21st Century Dam Design

Advances and Adaptations

31st Annual USSD Conference

San Diego, California, April 11-15, 2011

Hosted by
Black & Veatch Corporation
GEI Consultants, Inc.
Kleinfelder, Inc.
MWH Americas, Inc.
Parsons Water and Infrastructure Inc.
URS Corporation

On the Cover
Artist's rendition of San Vicente Dam after completion of the dam raise project to increase local storage and provide
a more flexible conveyance system for use during emergencies such as earthquakes that could curtail the regions
imported water supplies. The existing 220-foot-high dam, owned by the City of San Diego, will be raised by 117
feet to increase reservoir storage capacity by 152,000 acre-feet. The project will be the tallest dam raise in the
United States and tallest roller compacted concrete dam raise in the world.

U.S. Society on Dams

Vision
To be the nation's leading organization of professionals dedicated to advancing the role of dams
for the benefit of society.
Mission USSD is dedicated to:
Advancing the knowledge of dam engineering, construction, planning, operation,
performance, rehabilitation, decommissioning, maintenance, security and safety;
Fostering dam technology for socially, environmentally and financially sustainable water
resources systems;
Providing public awareness of the role of dams in the management of the nation's water
resources;
Enhancing practices to meet current and future challenges on dams; and
Representing the United States as an active member of the International Commission on
Large Dams (ICOLD).

The information contained in this publication regarding commercial projects or firms may not be used for
advertising or promotional purposes and may not be construed as an endorsement of any product or
from by the United States Society on Dams. USSD accepts no responsibility for the statements made
or the opinions expressed in this publication.
Copyright 2011 U.S. Society on Dams
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Control Number: 2011924673
ISBN 978-1-884575-52-5
U.S. Society on Dams
1616 Seventeenth Street, #483
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: 303-628-5430
Fax: 303-628-5431
E-mail: stephens@ussdams.org
Internet: www.ussdams.org

METHODOLOGY FOR HYDROPOWER CERTIFICATION IN ITALY AND

SLOVENIA
N. Smolar-Zvanut1
A. Goltara2
G. Conte3
ABSTRACT
The paper describes a technically and economically feasible certification procedure for
existing hydro power generation facilities of higher environmental standard, being
explicitly coherent with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive (WFD)
(EU, 2000) to be implemented in "green labelled" electricity products. The purpose of
this European Directive is to establish a framework for the protection of inland surface
waters, transitional waters, coastal waters and groundwater which prevents further
deterioration and protects and enhances the status of aquatic ecosystems. In order to be
certified, a given hydro power plant (HPP) has to commit to carry out appropriate
measures in order to mitigate its impacts on specified environmental objectives, in such
a way to fulfil predefined environmental objectives and prescriptions. These measures
have to be described through a specific management programme, based upon a
dedicated environmental study, supported mainly by existing data, but complemented
by ad-hoc assessment/monitoring when necessary. The realization of both the
environmental study and the management programme must be supported by public
consultation; both documents must be approved through an auditing process. In the
long run, it is expected that the certification will have a positive impact on hydro power
generation in Europe helping to focus the conception of new HPPs towards more
sustainable solutions and by simplifying the authorization procedure.
INTRODUCTION
The construction and operation of hydropower plants (HPPs) is linked to unavoidable
impacts on the rivers. Thus, besides the advantage of almost emissions-free energy
production through HPPs, there is a need to optimize HPP facilities in order to strike a
balance with the ecological needs of the affected river ecosystems, adjacent land
ecosystems and wetlands (Ecologic, 2007).
In European countries, many opportunities to build more sustainable HPPs are lost due to
the lack of targeted assessment criteria that would identify HPPs as a viable alternative.
In liberalized energy markets the opportunity arises to economically compensate for
environmental sustainability efforts, through the development of energy products
1

Ph.D., Project Manager, Researcher, Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia, Hajdrihova 28c,
1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia, natasa.smolar@izvrs.si
2
Director, CIRF - Italian Centre for River Restoration Viale Garibaldi 44/a, 30173 Mestre, Italy,
a.goltara@cirf.org
3
Member of Ambiente Italia Technical Managing Board, Ambiente Italia Srl Via Vicenza 5/a, 00186
Rome, Italy, giulio.conte@ambienteitalia.it

Hydropower Certification

1329

targeting environmentally conscious customers who are ready to pay a higher price for
greener energy.
A thorough analysis of hydropower impacts on the environment was discussed in a
recently published work carried out for the Hydropower Reform Coalition (Stillwater
Sciences, 2006). The study evaluated the impacts on water quality, hydrology and
geology, aquatic flora and fauna, wildlife, recreation, aesthetics and cultural resources.
Similar criteria are used by the Low Impact Hydropower Institute (LIHI) when certifying
a given hydropower facility as "low impact". The low impact certification means that
the hydropower facility has been found by the LIHI to meet or exceed the Institute's
certification criteria which address eight key areas: river flows, water quality, fish
passage and protection, watershed protection, threatened and endangered species
protection, cultural resource protection, recreation, and facilities recommended for
removal. The targets established for each of these areas are aligned with the most
stringent national/federal regulations and must be met.
The most comprehensive and in-depth set of best practices for hydropower sustainability
carried out at the European level is the Greenhydro procedure for hydropower
certification (Bratrich and Truffer, 2001; Bratrich et al., 2004), later adopted by the label
Naturemade. Determining the basic ecological standards for green electricity involves
estimating the direct impact of HPP on river ecosystem and its riverine landscape. In
order to determine more easily these relationships, the criteria were structured using
environmental management matrix. Five management fields describe operational issues
of construction relating to HPP and five environmental fields were selected to cover most
important aspects relevant to ensuring the ecological viability of a river ecosystem.
Within the Water Framework Directive Common Implementation Strategy (WFD CIS), a
specific activity was set up in 2004 related to hydro-morphological alterations of water
bodies and focused on those related to hydropower generation, navigation and flood
protection. A technical report published in 2006 aimed to provide guidance and good
practice examples of how to prevent, remedy or mitigate the adverse ecological effects of
human alterations to the structural and hydrological characteristics of surface water
bodies in order to achieve the environmental objectives set by the Water Framework
Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a
framework for the Community action in the field of water policy (EU, 2006). The
International Hydropower Association (IHA) has published its own Sustainability
Guidelines (IHA, 2004) and in order to assist IHA members in assessing performance
against criteria described in the IHA Sustainability Guidelines, a dedicated protocol was
developed (IHA, 2010).
The main aim of HPPs certification in Europe is giving a contribution in reducing
conflicts in the implementation of Directive 2001/77/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 27 September 2001 on the promotion of electricity produced from
renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market: RES Directive (EU, 2001)
and WFD (EU, 2000). The purpose of RES Directive (EU, 2001) is to promote an
increase in the contribution of renewable energy sources to electricity production in the
internal market for electricity and to create a basis for a future Community framework

1330

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

thereof. The RES Directive (EU, 2001) concerns electricity produced from non-fossil
renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, geothermal, wave, tidal, hydroelectric,
biomass, landfill gas, sewage treatment gas and biogas energies. In fact RES Directive
(EU, 2001) required all European Union Member States to set their indicative national
targets for electricity produced from renewable energy sources by 2020 to be consistent
with the global indicative target in all Community of 22.1%, therefore impelling most
countries to increase -among other sources- also hydropower production. On the other
side the WFD (EU, 2000) requests European Union Member States to improve the
ecological status of their water bodies in order to attain a "good status" by 2015,
implying that, among others, hydro-morphological impacts related to hydropower
production must be reduced. A certification method taking explicitly into account WFD
(EU, 2000) objectives can help to achieve an increase in WFD-compliant hydro power
production, therefore giving a contribution in the implementation of both Directives.
In 2008, partner organizations from 7 countries in Europe started with the project
CH2OICE with the aim to develop a technically and economically feasible certification
procedure for HPPs of high environmental standard; the first results of this effort are
presented in this paper.
CERTIFICATION OF HYDROPOWER PLANT ON VOLUNTARY BASIS
The goal of CH2OICE is that the certification of HPPs will be on a voluntary basis. The
certification procedure would be attractive for hydropower producers for the following
reasons:
1. Certified energy could be sold at significantly higher price:
One example is the growth of the Swiss label Naturmade. The Swiss energy market
appears to be quite favourable since the price increase for labelled hydropower is around
30% of the average energy price; this situation is not typical in most European energy
markets, where the willingness to pay a higher price for green energy is around a few
percentage points of the normal price.
2. Easier access to public incentives:
Once the certification procedure is implemented and well known and recognized by EU
Members States, access to public incentives would be more open and increased.
3. Possibility to ease and speed up the licensing or re-licensing procedure:
This reason is the most interesting and possibly the most attractive since a producer who
has to be re-licensed or is looking to be licensed will most likely undergo an analysis of
the compatibility of its HPP to the environmental requirements and, consequently,
envisage an operations and management practice able to guarantee their fulfilment.
The interest of producers will depend on the objectives and prescriptions of certification.
The existing old large HPPs may not be particularly interested to get certified because the
certification will likely require significant changes in management practice. More
interest could be raised among small-medium size run-of -river plants, but considering
that recently built small plants in several countries could benefit of a guaranteed feed-in
tariff those producers could decide to certify only if the selling price they can get on the
market is higher than the fixed supported price. Every country in Europe has different

Hydropower Certification

1331

eligibility criteria and mechanism of pricing for hydropower to get the feed in tariff.
Among potential HPPs interested to, companies who are already undergoing an ISO
14001 or EMAS certification are the ones that could more easily get a CH2OICE
certification, because they are already familiar with the environmental analysis and a
management plan, aimed at improving their performance.
THE CH2OICE PROCEDURE FOR HPP CERTIFICATION
In order to be certified and gets the label, a given HPP has to commit to carry out
appropriate measures in order to mitigate its impacts on specified environmental
objectives, in such a way to fulfil predefined environmental objectives and prescriptions.
These measures have to be described through a specific management programme based
upon a dedicated environmental study supported mainly by existing data, but
complemented by ad-hoc assessment and monitoring when necessary. The realization of
both the environmental study and the management programme must be supported by
public consultation; both documents must be approved through an auditing process.
The main steps of the CH2OICE procedure are illustrated in Figure 1.
For HPPs operating in totally artificial networks (HPPs in sewage and aqueduct
networks) and not without direct or indirect impact on water related ecosystems, a
simplified procedure is foreseen, where no environmental analysis, related management
programme and stakeholders involvement are requested, but just a description of the
system and proof of fulfilment of the selected conditions, are sufficient for certification.
All other types of HPPs have to follow the standard procedure.
Public Consultation
The involvement of local stakeholders (environmental NGOs, anglers, citizens
associations, etc.) must be ensured along the whole certification procedure and, when
completed, during the lifespan of the label.
A first public consultation phase should be carried out when carrying out the preliminary
environmental study, in order to look for further information possibly not recorded in the
"official" monitoring data and literature and to verify, at the end, that the assessment is
agreed. If local stakeholders disagree on the final version of the assessment, this does not
hinder the continuation of the certification procedure. Nevertheless a report on the public
consultation will have to be provided to the auditing team; it will be up to the auditors to
evaluate if integrations/amendments are needed to address any disagreements in the
assessments.
Management procedures and especially possible environmental compensation/restoration
measures (measures compensating directly the stakeholders are not allowed) should be
decided taking into account also suggestions from local stakeholders.

1332

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

HPP
Y

SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE
1. Proof must be provided that specific
prescriptions are met
2. Audit by the labelling body (timing,
periodical check, etc. as in the standard
procedure)

STANDARD PROCEDURE

1) ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
(ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS AND ANALYSIS OF
PRESSURE FACTORS)
Further studies/
data collection/
monitoring

Is it feasible / affordable to
proceed with the certification
procedure?

END of the
procedure

Y
Y

PUBLIC
CONSULTATION
(at local level) on
the assessment

PUBLIC
CONSULTATION
(at local level) on
the management
programme

Further studies/ data collection/

monitoring needed?
N
2) Drafting of MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME, including
mitigation and restoration measures needed to reach targets for
labelling + monitoring/reporting protocol

3) AUDIT by the labelling body

(if integrations/changes needed -> back to steps 1 or 2)

4) LABEL issuing (after the first auditing reports + possible other

conditions)

5) Full implementation of management programme and

restoration measures, including MONITORING (of management
and status of affected water bodies) and REPORTING to
labelling body.

6) Label EXPIRY and possibly new certification

Figure 1. Flow chart summarizing the steps of the general CH2OICE certification
procedure.

Hydropower Certification

1333

The results of previous participatory activities (e.g.: river contracts) may support and
make easier both the described steps (but not replace them).The public must then be
granted the possibility to comment on the fulfilment of the measures that the certified
plant operator commits to carry out.
Certification procedure
The CH2OICE hydropower certification procedure includes the following steps.
Step 1. Environmental study
The goal of this activity is to define, based mainly on available data, the present status of
the impacted ecosystems, and to compare it to set environmental objectives. Then, based
on modelling and/or expert judgment, the main pressure factors determining these
conditions will be determined in order to clarify the responsibilities related to the HPP to
be certified and to allow the identification of appropriate mitigation and/or compensation
measures to be integrated in the management programme.
The assessment must be carried out, in general, at three different scales:
at the water body scale (coherently with the WFD classification scheme: EU
Member States shall identify the location and boundaries of bodies of surface
water and shall carry out an initial characterisation of all such bodies. The surface
water bodies within the river basin district shall be identified as falling within
either one of the following surface water categories - rivers, lakes, transitional
waters or coastal waters - or as artificial surface water bodies or heavily modified
surface water bodies.
at local scale, i.e. at a scale smaller than the water body and whose size depends
on the specific impact (e.g. sediment deficit may be significant on the river stretch
between the dam and the following un-impacted tributary; low flow alterations
may concentrate between the dam and the release section only, etc.);
at basin scale (HPP may cause a significant impact at a scale larger than the water
body, e.g. significant alteration of sediment transport impacting downstream
stretches; hydropeaking or other hydrological alterations with a non negligible
effect downstream, etc.).
The impacted area of each HPP is then divided into 4 different sections (Figure 2):
river section from the end of a reservoir upstream (in the direction towards the
source of a river) or from the dam upstream if there is no reservoir (u);
river section, either natural or man-made, used for storage, regulation and control
of water resources (r);
river section from the dam downstream (in the direction of the current in a river)
to the inflow where abstracted water comes back to the river (b);
river section downstream from where the inflow of abstracted water is back to the
river or downstream of the dam if there is no abstracted channel (d).

1334

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

For each river section, the potential impacts and mitigation measures need to be
addressed regardless of the type of HPP.

Figure 2. Different river sections of impacted area of HPP

The methodology includes a predefined framework where pressure factors due to
hydropower production are related to potentially impacted environmental quality
elements. The pressure factors and environmental elements were selected according to a
literature review of HPP impacts on river and riparian ecosystem. Pressure factors related
to the presence of structures and infrastructures include: dam, intake structures, channel,
galleries and other derivation structures, power plant, transmission lines, outlet structures
and access ways. Pressure factors related to management variables include: released flow
regime, hydropeaking, reservoir water level management, bedload management, fine
sediment management, emergency measures, management of dams, intake and outlet
structures and management of fish passes.
Impacts are determined by a potential impacts matrix (Table 1), with pressure factors in
the columns and environmental quality elements in the rows presented.

Hydropower Certification

1335

Table 1. The Potential impacts matrix with pressure factors and their impacts on
environmental quality elements
PRESSURE
FACTORS
RELATED TO
THE PRESENCE
OF
STRUCTURES/
INFRASTRUCTU
RES

Biological
elements

River section

Hydromorphological
elements

PRESSURE
FACTORS
RELATED TO
MANAGEMENT
VARIABLES

Environmental Elements
Phytobenthos
Aquatic flora
Macrophytes
Fish
Aquatic fauna
Benthic
invertebrates
Water velocity,
Hydrological
water depth,
regime
groundwater
Ecomorphological
type
Structure and
substrate of the
Morphological
riverbed
structures
Riverbed width
Longitudinal
profile
River continuum
Geomorphological
equlibrium
Aquatic habitat
Structure of the
riparian zone

Chemical and
physicochemical
elements
Semi-aquatic
environment

Biological
elements

General conditions

Nutrients and
dissolved oxygen

Specific pollutants
Wetlands
Riparian
vegetation
Terrestrial fauna

Terrestrial
environment

Biological
elements

Bird fauna
Zonal vegetation

Priority
Habitat types
Habitat
Types and
Species (sensu Priority species
Dir 92/43/CE)

The impacts of pressure factors on environmental quality elements are evaluated by fivepoint scale (Table 2) on the basis of achieving environmental goals. A rating of 0-3
1336

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

implies that environmental objectives are achieved. If there is a significant impact (rating
4), environmental goals will be achieved only with mitigation measures.
Table 2. Five-point scale to assess the impacts of HPP on the environmental quality
elements
RATING

0
1
2
3
4

DESCRIPTIVE
RATING

INTERPRETATION OF THE RATING

No impact

State of the environment will remain unchanged.

Identification of the
impact is not
possible
Negligible impact main pressure not
related to HPP
Negligible impact

There are no data or insufficient data, the impact can not be

determined.

Significant impact impact to be

mitigated

State of the environment will be changed, but not because of HPP

operation.
HPP pressure factors will not affect the achievement of environmental
goals.
State of the environment will be significant changed, but taking into
account the proposed mitigation measures environmental goals will
be reached.

Often HPPs are included in a cascade system managed in an interconnected fashion (not
necessarily by the same operator). Such HPPs can in general be certified independently.
Nevertheless it is necessary to describe the whole system, the impact of the single HPP
on the system and to justify that the improvement in the certified HPP is not compensated
by worsening the impact of the others. In specific cases where the level of
interconnection is estimated by the auditors to be too high, it can be decided that the
single HPP cannot be certified alone and only the whole system can be certified.
The environmental study must provide (quantitative wherever possible) data on present
values for the indicators representing all environmental criteria and indicate estimated
pressure factors for all criteria not already fulfilling the stated objectives. Cause-effect
relationships on which further data/monitoring/specific studies are needed should be
highlighted. In general, to proceed in the labelling procedure these have to be carried out
at the expense of the proponent, at least at local scale. Also, at this stage a preliminary
cost estimate for labelling should be carried out. The outcomes of the preliminary public
consultation process have to be explicitly included in the study.
Step 2. Drafting of a management programme
Based upon the previously described environmental assessment (step 1), a coherent set of
management and/or restoration measures have to be defined, estimated appropriate to
fulfill the objectives for label compliance. The management programme must also define
a monitoring plan, in order to follow the implementation of the measures and their
effects.
Only measures on the affected water bodies have to be considered (compensation on
other water bodies is not allowed). Measures have to be defined as quantitatively as

Hydropower Certification

1337

possible and in such a way that their implementation can be objectively monitored.
These measures are selected taking into account:
the results of the preliminary environmental assessment (the programme focuses
only on structural/management aspects/variables estimated to have a significant
impact on at least one environmental criterion);
possible mitigation measures, guidelines and, in general, sound and scientifically
backed good practices, to be critically adapted to the specific situation;
modelling and expert judgement in order to support the assumption that the
proposed measures are expected to reach the targets;
public consultation (possibly supported by previous action plans, e.g. defined in
the framework of a river/basin/lake contract).
Step 3. Auditing by national labelling body
The documents produced in steps 1 and 2 must be verified by the Technical Committee
of the national CH2OICE Label Management Body or by external auditors selected by
the same Committee. Representation of Technical Committee, Label Management Body
and auditors is defined in each country separately. The final judgment on the fulfillment
of environmental criteria by the applicant is upon the Technical Committee. In case
deficiencies are highlighted, previous steps must be followed again or integrated.
The final decision is up to the National CH2OICE Label Management Body.
Step 4. Label issuing
The certification can be issued after the first auditing report and possibly when further
conditions are fulfilled (e.g. first monitoring campaign, structural measures completed,
etc.).
Labelling fees must be defined in order to support the labelling body. The general
methodology does not envisage a fixed restoration fund; however, a country can
specifically require obligatory participation to such a fund. Obligatory participation to a
common fund, managed by a public body (directly or through NGOs) could be required
also in specific river basins where restoration is required and participatory processes
aimed at river restoration are ongoing (a restoration fund could possibly include also
contributions from other water users).
Therefore, while developing the CH2OICE certification methodology, it is necessary to
analyse carefully how existing labels work, trying to predict how CH2OICE certified
energy could be put on the market by each label. In other words, when possible, it would
be reasonable to check directly with existing bodies issuing green energy labels if they
can integrate the CH2OICE certification in their procedures and then put CH2OICE
certified energy on the market rather than creating a new label.
Step 5. Monitoring of the actual implementation of the management programme and of
resulting ecological improvements

1338

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

Monitoring and periodical reporting to the labelling body must be carried out following
the protocols and schedule defined in the management programme. Local stakeholders
must have the possibility to comment on the actual implementation of the management
programme and on possible new impacts.
Step 6. Label expiry and possible new certification
The proposed duration of the label is 6 years, after which a new certification procedure
has to be followed to keep the label. In case of non-compliance with the agreed
management programme (check on annual basis) the label can be withdrawn by
CH2OICE Labelling Management Body.
OBJECTIVES AND PRESCRIPTIONS FOR HPPs
Objectives for HPPs were defined at the river basin scale, water body scale and at the
local scale. HPPs operation should not be reason that downstream water bodies do not
achieve good ecological status (GES) defined according to WFD (if downstream is
natural water body) or good ecological potential (GEP) defined according to WFD (if
downstream is heavily modified or artificial water body) at the river basin scale.
At the water body scale the objectives set for biological and hydromorphological
elements are as follows: assuming that all pressures not related to the target HPP are
removed, the HPP impacts must not impede the achievement of GES. If the target HPP is
the main significant pressure factor, the present status or the status foreseen after the
implementation of the management programme must correspond at least to GES. The
indicators to be used are those determined by national regulations for the classification of
ecological status, as required by the WFD implementation (f.e. phytobenthos, fish,
invertebrates ...).
Objectives for the local scale are prescribed for every environmental element separately.
For example, the objective for fish is to maintain the integrity of habitats for fish as much
as possible in its natural state and to conserve rare, vulnerable or endangered species.
Objectives are separately defined for HPPs located on heavily modified water bodies and
for HPPs on small streams without WFD objectives.
Among prescriptions for HPP certification it is necessary to mention the following
requirements:
It is obligatory to prepare a specific protocol for the emptying procedure of the
reservoir, taking account of impacts and mitigation measures.
It is obligatory to determine a specific protocol for the responses to emergency
situations, taking account of impacts and mitigation measures. The protocol must
precisely define the implementation measures/operations in emergencies and
under what circumstances they are carried out for a particular site/facility on the
basis of quantitative thresholds. In addition, the protocol must include specific
and, as far as possible, quantitative directions for the operation and measures
(turbidity and other parameters) carried out simultaneously. The values and

Hydropower Certification

1339

indications may derive from similar measures under normal conditions, for
example in carrying out the emptying procedure, by regular measuring of
turbidity, in correlation with the measurement of flow rates and the degree of
sluice opening.
Although the quantitative objectives of environmental quality elements for
terrestrial environment, habitat types and priority species are not defined, it is
necessary to determine appropriate mitigation and/or compensation measures for
significant impacts for which the protection level must not be inferior to the ones
required by relevant EU Directives. Particularly in the case of facilities that affect
protected areas (Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora), it is mandatory to
determine mitigation measures in accordance with the guidelines of EU Member
States.
Specific requirements for reservoirs were also defined:
Structures of HPP and management practices for the regulation of reservoir water
levels must ensure the connection with tributaries.
In the event of sudden changes in water level, they must be addressed so that
animals can reach suitable refuge habitats in the reservoir.
When it is not possible to ensure natural sediment transport below the dam, the
sediment from the reservoir must be removed where possible and transported
downstream to maintain habitats suitable for aquatic and terrestrial fauna and
flora.
Reservoir management should maintain maximum potential habitats for
autochthonous flora and fauna.
CONCLUSION
The CH2OICE certification procedure developed by the project partners took into
account national specifics in terms of energy markets, river characteristics, level of
implementation of the WFD and of the RES Directive and is primarily applicable to
existing HPPs. In order to evaluate the feasibility of the certification methodology
developed for Italy and for Slovenia, the entire set of procedures are currently being
applied at real-scale in both countries. The pilot applications are carried out for different
types of HPPs and contexts, to highlight possible differences that may influence
procedure feasibility and changes needed. In the near future a set of guidelines will be
produced, to be used by decision makers during planning and authorization procedures
and by HPP proposers in their Environmental Impact Assessment studies.
In the long run, it is expected that the certification will have a positive impact on hydro
power generation in Europe, will help focusing the conception of new HPPs towards
more sustainable solutions, and will simplify the authorization procedure.

1340

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The project was financed by Intelligent Energy Agency, Europe. The authors are grateful
to all members of the project teams from 7 countries in Europe (Italy, Slovenia, Slovakia,
France, Spain, Belgium, and Switzerland) that participated in the CH2OICE project.
REFERENCES
Bratrich, C., Truffer, B., Jorde, K., Markard, J., Meier, E., Peter, A., Schneider, M., and
B. Wehrli B. 2004. Green hydropower: a newassessment procedure for river
management. River Research and Applications. 20: 865882.
Bratrich, C., and B. Truffer. 2001. Green Electricity Certification for Hydropower Plants.
Concept, procedure, criteria. EAWAG Green Power Publications, issue 7, Switzerland.
Communication from the Commission (Brussels, 10.1.2007) to the European Council and
the European Parliament - An energy policy for Europe {SEC(2007) 12}.
Ecologic. 2007. Issues Paper, Water Framework Directive & Hydropower. Common
Implementation Strategy Workshop, Berlin, 4-5 June 2007.
EU. 2006. Good practice in managing the ecological impacts of hydropower schemes,
flood protection works, and works designed to facilitate navigation under the Water
Framework Directive. Available at: http://www.sednet.org/library/library.htm. Accessed
29 April 2010.
IHA. 2004. Sustainability Guidelines, UK. Available on IHA site:
http://www.hydropower.org/sustainable_hydropower/sustainability_guidelines.html.
Accessed 29 April 2010.
IHA. 2010. Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol (SAP), UK. Available on
IHA site:
http://www.hydropower.org/sustainable_hydropower/sustainability_guidelines.html.
Accessed 1 February 2010.
Stillwater Sciences. 2006. Scientific approaches for evaluating hydroelectric project
effects. Arcata, California for Hydropower Reform Coalition, Washington, D. C.
Available on Hydroreform site:
http://www.hydroreform.org/hydroguide/science/scientific-approaches-for-evaluatinghydroelectric-project-effects. Accessed 11 October 2010.
The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, 2000. Water
Framework Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy, 2000.
Official Journal L 327 , 22/12/2000 P. 0001 0073. Available on European Union site at:
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/index_en.html

Hydropower Certification

1341

The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, 2001. Directive
2001/77/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2001 on the
promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal
electricity market. Official Journal L 283, 27/10/2001 P. 0033 0040. Available on
European Union site at:
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/energy/renewable_energy/l27035_en.htm
The council of European Communities, 1992. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May
1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Official Journal
L 206 , 22/07/1992 P. 0007 0050. Available on European Union site
at:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/habitatsdirective/index_en.htm

1342

21st Century Dam Design Advances and Adaptations