Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 16501657

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Letter to the Editor

An overview of small hydropower plants in Colombia: Status, potential, barriers and perspectives

art ic l e i nf o
Keywords:
Colombia small hydropower
Rural electrication
Renewable energy
Distributed generation
Sustainable development

a b s t r a c t
The negative environmental impacts associated to the use of large hydropower plants have helped to
focus the attention on small-scale plants, which reduce these impacts considerably. In Colombia, there is
an important potential for the implementation of both, large and small-scale hydropower projects,
which has been exploited mostly in large plants. Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is to analyze the
present situation of small hydropower (SHP) in Colombia, including current installed capacity and
existing potential of hydro-energy resources. In addition, the paper presents the barriers that hinder the
proliferation of SHP in the country, the main perspectives for future developments and the corresponding conclusions of the analysis performed.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Hydropower is the main renewable energy source in terms of
global electricity production. It plays a key role in meeting actual
and future energy needs, offering an excellent alternative to fossil
fuels, which lead electricity generation in the world [1]. Over the
last decades, thanks to the boom in the use of renewable energy
sources, SHP plants have gained importance due to the economic,
environmental and social benets that they have over large
hydropower. They have shorter construction periods, lower capital
investment and operation costs and do not need land for dams or
reservoirs because they are, in most cases, run-of-river, in which
there is no need to store water. Therefore, they do not have the
same negative environmental impact as large hydropower plants
[2]. Besides, the operation and maintenance of SHP is very simple,
which facilitates employee training so they can be easily operated
by local personnel. Also, SHP technology is very robust and can last
up to 3050 years with little maintenance and without major
refurbishments [3]. Due to this, SHP plants are particularly
attractive to developing countries, especially as a solution for rural
off-grid communities that are not easily accessible and have water
resources that could be used for meeting their electricity needs.
There are many denitions and classications of SHP; they can
change from one country to another. The most internationally
accepted upper capacity limit is usually 10 MW [4]. In countries
like Brazil, and Russia the capacity of SHP is limited to 30 MW [5],
in U.S.A is 5100 MW of capacity and in India and China, this
changes to 25 MW and 50 MW respectively [6]. SHP plants with
smaller capacities are typically classied as Pico, Micro and Mini
hydropower plants with upper installed capacity limits of 10 KW,
100 KW and 1 MW respectively [7]. In Colombia, the limit of
installed capacity of SHP is 10 MW [8]. Some denitions of SHP
by installed capacity in some countries are shown in Table 1.
During 2010, hydropower plants provided around 16% of the
electricity consumed worldwide and its installed capacity by the
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.026
1364-0321/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

end of that year was 1010 GW [10], which makes hydropower

one of the most important renewable energy sources. Asia is the
leading continent in SHP implementation, having China as the
country with the largest installed capacity of SHP in the world,
with 33 GW and increasing by 7% annually, followed by Japan
with 4 GW and India with 2 GW [11]. In Europe, Italy and France
are the leading countries with 2.7 GW and 2.1 GW, respectively,
followed by Germany and Spain with 2 GW each one [12], while
in Africa the Democratic Republic of Congo has the highest
hydro-energy potential. In North and South America, the economic growth and the increase in energy needs are helping the
proliferation of SHP technology in some countries, especially in
U.S.A and Brazil with 3 GW and 2 GW of installed capacity
respectively [11].
In Colombia, the energy generation expansion plan from 2011
to 2025 aims to increase the installed capacity by 7914 MW, of
which 6088 MW will be attributed to hydropower plant projects
(including the Ituango power plant) and Small new Hydro in
construction [13]; there is a vast hydrological potential thanks to
its privileged geographic location. This potential has been widely
explored in Large Hydropower Projects, beneting big cities and
other important consumption centers, excluding in many cases,
rural off-grid zones. In some regions there are various SHP Projects
in exploratory phase, while others totally ignore the hydropower
potential that they have.
Taking into account this hydrological potential and the problems associated to the lack of energy service in many rural offgrid communities, SHP appears as a possible and viable solution
that could have a positive impact improving life quality and
industrial development; Table 2 shares the record of hydroelectric
generation in Colombia 2013, that came into in the coming years,
with an outstanding participation of small hydroelectric power
plants representing a percentage of participation within the
category of a hydroelectric project about 73% and with a capacity
of 916.35 MW supplied by 89 plants [13].

Letter to the Editor / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 16501657

693(4.8%)

Table 1
Small-scale hydro as dened by capacity [9].
Country

Small-scale hydro as dened

by capacity (MW)

Brazil

o 30

Canada
China
European
union
India

o 50
o 50
o 20

Norway

o 10

Sweden

o 1.5

United
States

5100

57(0.4%)
Large Hydropower

Reference

Thermal Power
Brazil Gvt Law 9648 May 27,
1998
Natural Resources Canada, 2009
Jinghe (2005), Wang (2010)
Directive 2004/101/EC (Linking
Directive)
Ministry of New and Renewable
Energy, 2010
Norwegian Ministry of
Petroleum and Energy 2008
European Small Hydro
Association
US National Hydropower
Association

o 25

4426
(30.8%)
9185(64%)

57 (7.6%)

19.5 (2.6%)

Hydropower
Thermal Power

Table 2
Registered projects by installed capacity range in Colombia [13].
Capacity
Number of
range [MW] projects

Total
capacity
[MW]

Participation
by project

Participation of
global capacity

o 20
20100
4100

916.35
1535.25
1240.00

73.0%
24.5%
2.5%

24.8%
41.6%
33.6%

Therefore, this article presents an overview of SHP in Colombia,

in which current status and potential are reviewed, including the
main barriers that inhibit the expansion of SHP and the perspectives
of this technology in the country in order to increase the amount of
available information and knowledge about this topic.

2. Small hydropower plants in Colombia

2.1. Current status
As it was stated before, Colombia has a great hydrological
potential thanks to its privileged geographical location. According
to statistics of Interconexin Elctrica S.A (ISA), the country has a
global hydroelectric potential of 93,085 MW (regardless of environmental restrictions) [14], of which 9185 MW (9.86%) is installed
in large hydropower plants and 533 MW (0.57%) in small plants
(less than 20 MW).The National Interconnected System (NIS) total
installed capacity at the end of 2012 was 14,361 MW. The NIS
power generation is composed of hydropower (9185 MW), thermal power (4545 MW), small plants (635 MW) and cogeneration
systems (57 MW) as shown below in Fig. 1.
As it was observed, large hydropower plants clearly dominate
the electricity market in Colombia, followed by thermal plants. On
the other hand, small plants, which represent 4.8% of the installed
capacity (MW), are composed as shown in Fig. 2.
In Colombia, grid-connected installed capacity of small plants
consists principally of hydropower, but also some Thermal,
Cogeneration and Wind Power plants. Most of the plants are small
hydro (less than 20 MW each), most of which are between 10 MW
and 20 MW. Nevertheless, according to the Law 697 of 2001
passed by the Colombian Congress (Ofcial Diary no. 44,573,
October 5th/2001) [16], SHP is only considered renewable and
unconventional energy if it is under 10 MW. Therefore, there is
only 177.77 MW (1.93%) of total hydropower capacity installed that
is considered renewable and unconventional [17].

Small Plants
(<20MW)
Cogeneration

Fig. 1. Power plant installed capacity in Colombia.

83
(11.1%)

89
30
3

1651

591 (85.2%)

Cogeneration
Wind Power

Fig. 2. Small plant ( o 20 MW) installed capacity in Colombia.

A signicant number of SHP plants with small capacities, such

as mini and micro hydropower plants have been built across the
country in Non-Interconnected Zones (NIZ) as a practical solution
for meeting the communities' energy needs. However, energy
production of a SHP station during the year is not constant due
to substantial weather variations. In some cases, especially during
periods of drought, they have to be combined with backup fossil
fuel based generators that can ensure energy supply to the
community. Table 3 shows a list of some SHP projects
(o20 MW) in operation, including information about height, ow,
installed capacity and investment costs.
The country's regulatory framework in alternative and unconventional energy is governed by the Law 697 of 2001 passed by the
Colombian Congress (Ofcial Diary no. 44,573, October 5th/2001)
and its corresponding decrees and resolutions issued by the
National entities involved in the energy planning of the country
[16]. This Law has increased the interest in alternative and
unconventional energies (UE) over the past decade, which has
led to the implementation of different initiatives and action plans
to increase their penetration in the country, but they do not
include specic expansion goals by energy source, as it will be
mentioned later. Additionally, the regulatory framework does not
include any specic incentives for the development of SHP
projects.
However, this type of projects can apply to existing incentives
for Renewable Energy projects with less than 20 MW and the
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Also, COLCIENCIAS1 proposes an incentive to deduct 125% of the amount invested in the
taxable period in which the investment was made without
exceeding the 20% liquid income, determined before subtracting

1
COLCIENCIAS is the Administrative Department of Science, Technology and
Innovation. It promotes the public policies to encourage the production of knowledge and R & D [20].

1652

Letter to the Editor / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 16501657

Table 3
List of some SHP projects in operation [18].
Project name

Height
(m)

Flow (m3/ Power

s)
(kW)

Cost (US
$/kW)

Patico 1
Patico 2
San Francisco 1
Agua Clarita
Angostura
San Miguel 1
San Miguel 2
Pea Tigre
Coconuco Repotenciacin
Santa Ana
La Vuelta Antioquia
Neusa
CRV
CSD
PRA
PRLA
RG
SJSA
ASA
CSA
PRTB
PRTF
SJU
PRC
GUC
GASC
AU
La Celia
Quinchia

11
92
15
18.5
8
18
6.1
6.3

105.9

140
116
153
293
151
129
204
150
102
127
127
90
177
177
305
404
133
133

50
14
14
0.051
0.225
0.116
0.135
0.864

13.5
1.8
3.35
2.4
2.54
7.8
3.9
3.4
4.9
4.46
18.91
18.91
26
8.1
7.96
3.31
5.88
3.6
3.6

3333
1552
1949
573
1609
871
2074
741
1400

1200
1084

1500
14,500
4
20
5.5
12
4
30
2500
13,430
11,700
2000
3270
3090
6260
9910
4230
5835
4655
3825
19,950
19,950
19,680
12,058
11,850
8490
19,980
4025
4025

the value of the investment; this applies to scientic, technological

and innovative projects. These tributary exceptions and CDM
incentives apply to all types of renewable energy [19].There are
some National and International entities that nance and support
small, mini and micro hydropower projects, especially in NIZ. The
National entities are: Financial Support Fund for the Electrication
of Non-Interconnected Zones (FAZNI2), Institute of Planning and
Promotion of Energetic Solutions in the Non-Interconnected Zones
(IPSE3) and local governments. On the other hand, some of the
International entities are: United Nations Development Program
(UNDP), Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the World
Bank. It is important to mention that in this type of projects, the
main goal is to improve the life quality of the community living in
these rural areas and not an economic benet [19].
2.2. Hydropower potential
As it was previously stated, Colombia has an estimated hydropower potential of 93,085 MW (large projects) [14]. Nevertheless,
this potential cannot be fully exploited due to environmental
restrictions. In 1997, the Institute of Nuclear Sciences and Alternative Energies (INEA) estimated a hydropower potential of
25,000 MW in small projects, of which only 1% was installed in
200 SHP, generating 180 MW [23,24]. In Colombia, the concept of
SHP is presented as arbitrary by the lack of uniformity in various
documents and studies, small plant installed capacity in 2012 was
2
The FAZNI is a public institution whose objective is to nance plans, programs
and investment projects in energy infrastructure NIZ according to the law and
energizing policies by the Ministry of Mines and energy [21].
3
The IPSE is a public entity of the National Order, afliated to Ministry of
Mines and Energy whose mission is to improve the living conditions of communities, offering structural energy solutions, with environmental conservation
principles and respect for diversity [22].

Fig. 3. Small hydropower capacities in Colombia.

Fig. 4. Hydro-energy potential in Colombia by Region.

177.77 MW (up to 10 MW) and the installed capacity of plants

between 10 and 20 MW was 762.52 MW generating approximately
6% of the total electricity of the country [15]. Fig. 3 shows the
installed capacity of small hydropower in Colombia in 2012.
The Study of the Electric Energy Sector (ESEE-1979) and ISA
identied the global hydropower potential of the country by
region. For this purpose, an inventory and recognition of hydroelectric projects was made based on the cartography from Geographical Institute Agustin Codazzi (IGAC4) and eld visits. In this
work, they established six large regions of Colombia and included
projects in different states of feasibility, construction or operation
[25,26]. According to Fig. 4, the region with the highest hydroenergy potential is MagdalenaCauca, which concentrates in the
center of the country, where the principal mountain chains are
located. These mountains help in the building dams for hydroelectric projects. This potential has been widely exploited in large
plants (420 MW). Small hydropower is seen in Colombia as an
attractive potential electricity generation technology due to the
low construction investment required and its adequacy to supply
off-grid rural areas with electricity. The Colombian Government is
currently working on small hydropower implementation projects
in currently off-grid areas.The NIZ in Colombia concentrate the
most in Orinoco and Amazonia regions, which have very low
potential for large hydro projects because there are no mountains
that can be used for building big dams. Nevertheless, these regions
have important hydric sources that could be used for developing
SHP projects, exploiting the streams of the rivers without requiring a large amount of the resource. This provides a solution for NIZ
in terms of energy supply with little or none environmental
impact.

4
The Geographic Instituto Agustin Codazzi (IGAC) is a National Entity in charge
of producing the ofcial map and basic cartography of Colombia [27]

Letter to the Editor / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 16501657

This data should be used only as a rst approximation to

identify a potential location for a hydropower project and not as a
denitive decision-taking factor. For more detailed information
regarding technical and economic aspects of a project, a feasibility
study should be carried out to analyze the different alternatives
that can be implemented.
In synthesis, Colombia has a great hydropower potential for
both, large and small projects, most of which remains unexploited.
However, it is necessary to take into account the impact that
climate change conditions could have on this potential in the
long term.

3. Barriers for development of SHP projects

Colombia is within the ve countries with the largest hydraulic
capacity, with an average ow in multi-year major rivers of
52.07 m3/s [28]. However, despite having a huge hydroelectric
potential, energetic matrix only has coverage in 40% of the
country, focusing particularly in urban centers and leaving out
areas that are not interconnected. The INEA estimated the potential execution of small projects in about 25,000 MW, a study of the
electric power industry (ESSE) covering over 80% of Colombian
rivers concluded that the great potential of small hydro power
plants was divided by area:
6750 MW [27%] northwest of the country.
5500 MW [22%] center of the country.
5000 MW [20%] southwest of the country.
2700 MW [11%] Atlantic coast.
Of which were installed about 180 MW ( o20 MW), equivalent
to 0.72% of the available potential in it. In spite of the great
hydrological potential of the country, there are some barriers,
which limit at some point, the development of SHP projects. On
the other hand, the Government has been working on actions that
facilitate conditions for market development of non-conventional
energies in Colombia, like the development and update of the
technical references, led by ICONTEC supported by the UPME to
prove the consolidation of the System Information of Management
and Knowledge Conventional Energy Sources that seeks to contribute to overcoming barriers of the development of these sources
in our country to consolidating information, actors and position to
coordinate actions. The National Energy Plan (PEN) 20062025,
refers to the electricity sector (wind, geothermal, SHP) and
biofuels; PEN is limited to a vague formulation of nonconventional energies and does not mention anything like strategies to strengthen the scheme institutions to promote the nonconventional energies in an appropriate way for the national
needs and the application of subsidies for rural electrication.
3.1. Legal barriers
The most important barrier is given to political and legislative
level because the country lacks an explicit policy that offers
striking and consistent incentives for the development of nonconventional energy sources, thereby facing a promising perspective to impact the country's electric generating less environmental
Law 99 of 1993 in their title VIII describes impact [29].
As regards environmental licenses, which are granted by the
ministry of environment, however when it comes to SHP is listed
as Special Case and the license is issued by the autonomous
corporations in the region [30], causing a problem since the
electrication project must be submitted to all the conditions of
the corporation without being provided by a xed decree law.

1653

Just as the federal government is concerned about spreading

development in remote areas, makes the same effort to preserve
its natural resources and habitat of each region; thus causing a
truncation of the development of technologies SHP and increased
energy solutions for isolated zones. The decree law 2811 for the
1974 [31] national code of renewable natural resources and
environmental protection established in articles: 102, 119, 120,
122, 123, 155, 169, 170, 171, 247, 312, 316, 317, 318, 319 ,320 and
321; unfavorable aspects for the execution of works in the regions
without electrication due to restrictions of powers of administration and general provisions of the modes of management of
renewable natural resources.
Another problem is that if the project runs SHP Indigenous
territory in Article 330 of the 1991 commission mentioned that the
territories ruled by only keychain formed and regulated according
to the customs of their communities tips, put in discussion within
a national council in the population.
Little concern of the government for the development of noninterconnected zones promoting the same narrow energetic
matrix considered in plans for expansion of the electricity sector
ignoring decentralized energy supply options [31].
3.2. Institutional barriers
Lack of interest of ofcials in charge of the electrical distribution in the national grid to meet the electrical protable scenarios
and isolated zones are characterized by having a sparse population
and a low level of energy consumption [32].
The wrong thinking about rural electrication projects across
SHP historical conceptualization, as had been regarded as welfare
programs and not as sustainable rural energy investments.
The Lack of entrepreneurship at the local level to manage
investments in SHP with technical, administrative, nancial and
organizational approach and limited capacity in the universities to
undertake technical training programs in the eld [32].
The administrative procedures such as gaining permissions to
occupy land and abstract water from the rivers can always delay
the implementation of SHP projects in many countries, including
Colombia. Also, these projects have to be socialized to the community so that people can be informed. This can discourage some
potential investors that would eventually choose other projects
and locations [32].
3.3. Technical and technological barriers
The lack of knowledge of the real potential of the SHP as a costefcient technology [32].
It is necessary that educational programs of engineering and
construction of SHP are developed for the KNOW-HOW rightly
applied as method guide work and avoid oversizing; within the
framework of good project development study: SHP stages,
manual feasibility and preliminary design and project management manuals that economize time and resources so that more
and more plants are sustainable [33].
SHP project is conditioned to the availability of resources such
as the height and ow of the river, usually removed from the
points of high energy demand, whereby a stable connection
system that requires transport and distribute energy with good
safety factor.
There are no standardized rules and minimum technical
specications for the design, operation, maintenance and administration of the SHP [33].
Selected for the development of SHP populations lacked training plans for their watershed management and for the prevention,
mitigation and response to natural disasters, given their high
vulnerability to extreme events [33].

1654

Letter to the Editor / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 16501657

In order to reduce oversizing with guides placed in operation

designs based on criteria such as impact factors and standards
hydroelectric projects, it would be important to structure a critical
plan review of equipment specications; install the appropriate
technology, and basic designs of civil works for the good performance of small hydraulic plant [33].
SHP plants (especially run-of river applications) do not generally provide rm capacity, due to weather variations during the
year. The typical capacity factor of a SHP plant is 50%, which means
that they generate electricity only the 50% of the total hours in a
year [34]. In many isolated areas, they have to be combined with
other energy sources to supply all the electricity needs. This can
limit their development in zones where a constant and rm
energy supply is required (i.e. small rural industries).

3.4. Economic barriers

There is High unit investment per kW installed, expensive
studies with relation to the total investment and administrative
inefciency and nancial weakness of energy companies to
develop a small hydro project [35,36].
The communities of the sites that have the water resources are not
subject to trade nance, and can cover themselves initial project costs
as a result of its high level of poverty. A mistaken view is to analyze the
SHP projects by a private company as a nancial solution; in a strong
rural electrication subsidy component is necessary.
Lack of mechanisms of non-conventional nancing at national
and/or regional with repayment periods of long-term absence of
mechanisms based on project cash ow loans.
In general terms, it is necessary to establish a strong regulatory
framework and specic incentive policies for the development of
SHP in order to attract potential investors and increase his
participation especially in the NIZ taking advantage of the enormous potential that the country has, helps to replace diesel-based
generators and create mini-grids in rural areas [35,36].

4. Perspectives of SHP in Colombia

In Colombia, the interest for SHP projects has been increasing
since the beginning of the 1990s. However, the general tendency
has been the construction of large hydropower instead of SHP
inside the NIS. In 2009, the Mining and Energy Planning Unit
(UPME5) developed the Reference Plan of Expansion in Energy
Generation: 20092023, a document which contains information
about the projects that will supply rm energy to the country
during the next 15 years inside the NIS. The SHP registered
projects found in this document are shown below in Table 4.
According to this, between 2009 and 2013 there are 97 SHP
(o20 MW) projects expected to enter the electricity market, with
a total registered capacity of 1022.9 MW [37]. In Colombia SHP is
an important energy source for rural electrication and distributed
generation and is promoted more in NIZ than inside the NIS.
The promotion of SHP technology in Colombia should not
interfere with the diversication of the energy mix because
depending too much on hydroelectricity can be harmful in terms
of energy supply, leaving the country very vulnerable to climate
change or El Nio events in the long term [14]. In NIZ, the
participation
of
unconventional
energy
sources
(solar
5

The Mining and Energy Planning Unit (UPME) is a Special Administrative Unit
of the National Order, under the Ministry of Mines and Energy, whose mission is to
develop a participatory and integrated planning and management of information of
mining and energy sectors, to contribute to the sustainable development of the
country [38].

photovoltaic, biomass and SHP) is higher compared to its participation inside the NIS, as seen in Fig. 5.
As it was previously observed, the total installed capacity in NIZ
in 2009 was 118 MW, of which 9.44 MW (8%) corresponded to
unconventional energy and the rest to diesel-based generation.
The dependence and intensive use of diesel generation has many
problems, especially in terms of environmental impact and operation costs. The Government is aware of this and created the
Rational and Efcient Use of Energy and Unconventional Sources
Program (PROURE) in order to help the promotion of energy
efciency and the participation of unconventional energy inside
the NIS and NIZ [24]. The Government does not have specic goals
in terms of installed capacity for the penetration of SHP in the
future, but the PROURE has established general goals for the
penetration of unconventional energy sources6 (including SHP)
in the NIZ and NIS, as seen below in Fig. 6.
According to this, the tendency is to increase the penetration of
unconventional energy (including SHP) mostly inside the NIZ,
increasing from 8% in 2009 to 30% in 2020. In the NIS, the
participation of unconventional energy will increase to 3.5% and
6.5% in 2015 and 2020 respectively according to the trend in
reducing technology costs and the plans and studies of the main
actors of the energy sector of the country.
In summary, it is clear that the participation of SHP will
increase in both, the NIS and NIZ but there are no specic goals
in terms of installed capacity for this energy source. However,
there are some goals for the penetration of unconventional energy
sources as a group, which include solar, biomass and SHP.
The Plan does not provide any particular mechanism to promote
compliance with these reference targets. According to the study of
support for the Plan of Action,7 non-conventional energies in the NIS
involved in 2008 were 192.4 MW, which corresponds to 1.4% of the
total installed capacity of 13.400 MW, of which 146 MW corresponds
to small hydroelectric plants under 10 MW biomass 26.9 MW, and
19.5 MW wind generation. Table 5 shows the composition of the NIS
by non-conventional energy technologies.
According to this, small hydropower systems have the highest
impact in the installed capacity with 75.9% of the global participation that express a particular common idea of the government to
bring energy at NIZ if the geography helps the technology. Table 6
shows the proposed goals of penetration of non-conventional
energy inside the NIS.
The incursion of SHP will be higher in NIZ, where diesel generators
predominate bringing the usual negative impacts associated to their
use. In consequence, it is unclear how much will Colombia increase
the participation of SHP in the National Electric System and rural offgrid zones in terms of installed capacity in the future.

5. Conclusions
In Colombia the theoretical potential does not support the
applicability of small hydropower in all areas of the country, since
the eld of action of the technology develops best in areas isolated
network, the government makes an effort to accelerate the growth
of the implementation of expansion plans, positively impacting
the communities where the project develops but fails to achieve
the common goal of having the most isolated areas with electric
power, all for the lack of economic resources and acceptance of
6
According to the Decree 3683/2003 of the Colombian Congress, unconventional energy sources are: solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, small hydro power and
energy from the oceans.
7
Minminas. (2010). Programa de Uso Racional y Eciente de Energa y Fuentes
No Convencionales PROURE - Plan de accin al 2015 con visin al 2025, Prias O.
Bogot, pg. 10.

Letter to the Editor / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 16501657

1655

Table 4
List of some SHP registered projects on the UPME [37].
Project

Capacity

Hydroelectric plants
Amaime
Coello 1,2,3,
Caruquia
Guanaquitas
Trasvase Guarino
Barroso
Trasvase Manso
PCH de Neusa
El Popal
La esmeralda
Aures bajo
Santa rosa
Chitaga 1
La cabrera
SJSA
Morro azul
El trapiche II
Miravalle
Paloma 4

Technology

Location

(Less than 20 MW). Registered capacity: 1022.9 MW

19.9
Francis
Palmira, Valle.
3.7
Kaplan
Chicoral, Tolima.
9.5
Francis
Santa Rosa de Osos, Antioquia.
9.5
Francis
Gmez Plata, Antioquia.

Victoria, Caldas.
19.9
Pelton
Salgar, Antioquia.

Saman, Caldas.
2.9

Cogua, Cundinamarca.
19.9
Francis
Cocom, Antioquia.
5.5
Kaplan
Caldas
13.45
Francis
Antioquia
19.9
Francis
Santander
19.9
Francis
Norte de Santander
13.06
Francis
Cauca
5.84
Francis
Risaralda
19.90
Francis
Risaralda
6.75
Francis
Antioquia
19.9
Francis
Santander
11.40
Francis
Antioquia

9.44 (8%)

Possible entry date

Promoter

Phase

dic-09
2009
dic-09
jul-10
jun-10
dic-10
jan-11

jan-13

Epsa S.A E.S.P

Energtica
HMV Ingenieros
Guanaquitas S.A E.S.P
Isagen S.A E.S.P
HMV Ingenieros
Isagen S.A E.S.P
Ingameg
HMV Ingenieros
HB S.A
KAPITAL S.A.
HMV LTDA.
KAPITAL S.A
Energas renovables del cauca S.A
Universal stream
Risaralda energa
PRAMING
Empresa promotora de proyectos de ingeniera
Emgea S.A

2
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1

Table 6
Goals proposals for new installed capacity of unconventional energy in the NIS [17].
Year

Diesel-based
Generation
108.56 (92%)

Unconventional
Energy Generation

Fig. 5. Installed capacity by source in NIZ in 2009.

35.00%
30%
30.00%
Participation of
Unconventional
Energy Sources in
the NIS

25.00%
20%
20.00%

15.00%
10.00%
5.00%

6.50%

Participation of
Unconventional
Energy Sources in
NIZ

3.50%

0.00%
2015

2020

Fig. 6. Penetration goals of unconventional energy in the NIS and NIZ in 2015
2020.

Table 5
Non-conventional energy composition in the NIS by technology [17].

SHP
Biomass
Wind
TOTAL

Installed capacity MW

Participation

146.0
26.9
19.5
192.4

75.9%
14.0%
10.1%
100.0%

solutions unconventional of energy. Hydroelectricity is the most

widely used energy technology in Colombia, especially large
hydropower plants which represent 64% of the total grid-

Installed
capacity
expectedMW

2015 16.000
2020 18.000

Goal
participation
(%)

Unc.energy Unc.energy
Total (MW) Actual
(MW)

Increase
capacity
(MW)

3.5
6.5

560.0
1.1700

367.6
977.6

192.4
192.4

connected installed capacity. However, the same does not occur

with SHP (o10 MW), which only represent 1.93% of the total
capacity; but the country have an arbitrary problem presented by
the lack of uniformity in various documents and studies, because
small capacity plants does not has an uniform patron to recognize
the dimension of an hydro project and the impact of them. The
lack of direct and specic incentives for SHP hinders the penetration of this technology in the country. Nevertheless, there are
some benets such as tax deductions and CDM incentives for
renewable energies that can apply for SHP. Most of these projects
are carried out in rural off-grid zones as a solution for the lack of
energy supply that affects the community, with the support and
funding of National and International Institutions such as FAZNI,
IPSE, UNDP, IDB and the World Bank.
SHP plants contribute to the development and improvement of
the life quality in rural communities because it is proved that the
development of a country or region is strongly linked to the
availability of energy.
Colombia has an estimated total hydropower potential of
93,085 MW (without environmental restrictions) for large projects and 25,000 MW for SHP of which 9.86% has been exploited
in large plants and slightly more than 1% in small projects (less
than 20 MW).The NIZ in Colombia concentrate the most in
Orinoco and Amazonia regions, which have very low potential
for large hydro projects because there are no mountains that
can be used for building big dams. Nevertheless, these regions
have important hydric sources that could be used for developing SHP projects, exploiting the streams of the rivers without
requiring a large amount of the resource; providing a solution
in terms of energy supply with little environmental impact.
However, most of this potential remains unexploited throughout the country.

1656

Letter to the Editor / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 16501657

Although Colombia has a vast hydropower potential, there are

some barriers that limit the development of SHP. The lack of specic
incentives and policies, complications of the administrative procedures and the perception that large hydropower and fossil fuels
provide enough diversity in the energy mix are the main barriers for
the penetration of SHP in Colombia. It is necessary to establish a
strong regulatory framework and incentive policies in order to attract
investors and exploit the enormous hydropower potential available
in the country in rural off-grid zones and encourage their development by distributed generation. National Energy Plan 20062025
does not stipulate the values of the benets or prots that leave the
implementation of unconventional energies (SHP); plus the lack of
education engineering programs that provide a certain capacity of
construction of SHP who develop the KNOW-HOW rightly applied as
method guide work and avoid oversizing; within the framework of
good project development study: SHP stages, manual feasibility and
preliminary design and project management manuals that economize time and resources so that more and more plants turns in
sustainable projects.
The perspective of SHP in Colombia is to increase its participation in both, NIS and NIZ. There are no specic goals in terms of
installed capacity for the penetration of this energy source. Nevertheless, PROURE proposes a participation of unconventional
energy sources (including SHP) to reach 30% and 6.5% in the NIZ
and NIS respectively in the year 2020. Unconventional energies are
expected to increase their participation mostly in rural off-grid
zones replacing some of the diesel-based generators, which bring
environmental problems and have high operation and maintenance costs. Although there are some SHP registered projects
expected to start operating, it is not exactly known how much will
they country increase the participation of SHP in terms of installed
capacity.

Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge to Universidad Autnoma de Bucaramanga (UNAB), the COLCIENCIAS Program Joven Investigador
activities of the Research Group GIRES and ECOPETROL for
supporting the activities of the Energetics Prospective Research
Seed-bed (Semillero de Investigacin en Prospectiva Energtica,
Colombia), which resulted on the writing of this paper.
References
[1] European Small Hydropower Association ESHA. Hydropower respects the
environment: a clean and indigenous renewable energy; 2005. Available
from: http://www.esha.be/leadmin/esha_les/documents/publications/pub
lications/sherpa/pub_sher pa_che_env_en.pdf Consulted: 15-04-2013.
[2] A.B.G.ThilakGlobal data. Global small hydro power market analysis to 2020
installed capacity, generation, investment trends; 2011. Available from: http://
www.altenergymag.com/emagazine.php?art_id=1532 Consulted: 15-042013.
[3] Paish O. Micro-hydropower: status and prospects. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.
2002;216(1):3140.
[4] International Energy Agency (IEA).2012; ANNEX IIsmall scale hydropower
IEA implementing agreement. http://www.ieahydro.org/IEA_Hydropower_
Agreement.html Consulted: 12-04-2013.
[5] World Small Hydropower Development Report 2013, Country: Brazil Page:
187. www.Smallhydroworld.orgConsulted: 12-04-2013.
[6] Paish O. Micro-hydropower: status and prospects. In: Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers.
[7] Taylor SDB, Upadhyay D. Sustainable markets for small hydro in developing
countries. Hydropower Dams 2005;3:626.
[8] Pani M, Uroev M, Milanovi A, Brankov J, Bjeljac . Small hydropower plants
in Serbia: hydropower potential, current state and perspectives. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013;23:3419.
[9] International Energy Agency (IEA) ; Technology Roadmap Hydropower. 9 rue
de la Federation 75739 Paris Cedex 15, France: 15 2012.

[10] REN21 , Renewables 2013 Global Status Report http://www.renewableenergy

world.com.
[11] Renewable energy policy network for the 21st century. Renewables global
status report year 2010. 2010. Available from: http://www.ren21.net/Portals/
0/documents/activities/gsr/REN21_GSR_2010_full_revised%20S ept2010.pdf
Consulted: 15-01-2013.
[12] European Small Hydropower Association ESHA. Small hydropower roadmap:
condensed research data for EU-27; 2009. Available from: http://streammap.
esha.be/ Consulted: 18-04-2013.
[13] UPME. Record Generation Projects November 2013 (Inscripcin segn requisitos de las Resoluciones UPME No. 0520 y No. 0638).
[14] CORPOEMA UPME. Formulation of a development plan for non-conventional
energy sources in Colombia (PDFNCE) 1. 2010.
[15] XM S.A. E.S.P. Description of the Colombian electric system. Available from:
http://www.xm.com.co/Pages/DescripciondelSistemaElectricoColombiano.
aspx Consulted: 20-04-2013.
[16] Law 697October of the Colombian congress on the promotion of rational and
efcient use of energy, promotes the use of alternative energies and other
provisions. 2001.
[17] Ministry of Mines And Energy, Mitsubishi Research Institute, Universidad
Nacional de Colombia, Interamerican Development Bank, Numark Associates
Inc. sustainable energy and biofuel strategies for Colombia. 2010.
[18] CORPOEMA UPME. Formulation of a development plan for non-conventional
energy sources in Colombia (PDFNCE) 3. 2010.
[19] CORPOEMA UPME. Formulation of a development plan for non-conventional
energy sources in Colombia (PDFNCE) 2. 2010.
[20] COLCIENCIAS. About COLCIENCIAS. Available from: http://www.colciencias.
gov.co/sobre_colciencias Consulted: 25-04-2013.
[21] IPSE. Information about nancial aids (FAZNI). Available from: http://www.
ipse.gov.co/ipseactual2013/index.php?option=com_con
tent&view=category&layou t=blog&id=135&Itemid=123&lang=es Consulted:
27-04-2013.
[22] IPSE. Information about the institution. Available from: http://www.ipse.gov.
co/ipseactual2013/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&It
emid=542&lang=en Consulted: 27-04-2013.
[23] INEA-Ministry of Mines and Energy. Design guide for small hydropower
plants. 1997.
[24] Prias O Ministry of Mines And Energy. Rational and efcient use of energy
and unconventional sources programPROURE: Action plan in 2015 with a
vision to 2025. 2010.
[25] ISAGEN. Generation of Electricity in Colombia. In: Proceedings of the International Congress of Conventional and Alternative Energies. Cartagena,
Colombia, August 2010.
[26] IDEAM-UPME.State of the evaluation of hydropower potential in Colombia.
2010.
[27] IGAC. About the IGAC. Available From: http://www.igac.gov.co/ Consulted:
03-05-2013.
[28] INEA . Guia de diseo de pequeas centrales hidroelectricas. Available from :
http://www.si3ea.gov.co/si3ea/documentos/documentacion/energias_alterna
tivas/potencialidade s/GUIA%20DE%20DISENO%20PARA%20PEQUENAS%20CEN
TRALES.pdf.
[29] Law 99 of 1993Republic of Colombianational government, Bogota, Dc,
December 22, 1993 p. 28.
[30] State forestry information in Colombia deposit documents FAO http://www.
fao.org/docrep/006/ad392s/ad392s06.htm.
[31] Decree 2811 of 1974presidency of the republic (December 18). p. 25-28-3336-50-64-65.
[32] FINAL assessment development of small hydro for productive use out of
networkNIC/02/G31 June 2009 (Small Hydroelectric Project) p. 12.
[33] INEA-Ministry of Mines and Energy. Design guide for small hydropower
plants. 1997.p. 108.
[34] Pena R, Medina A. Capacity Estimation Methods Applied to Mini Hydro Plants,
Distributed Generation. Consulted: 03-05-2013. In: Gaonkar D N, editor.
InTech; 2010 Available from.
[35] Lins C, Laguna M. Tapping small hydro potential: SHP can make headway.
Renew Energy World 2004;7:1628, JulyAugust.
[36] European Small Hydropower Association ESHA. Administrative Barriers for
SHP development in Europe. June 2007. Available from: http://www.esha.
com Consulted: 09-05-2013.
[37] UPME. Reference plan of expansion in generation and transmission: 2009
2023.(Registro de Proyectos de Generacin (Inscripcin segn requisitos de las
Resoluciones UPME No. 0520 y No. 0638).
[38] UPME. About us. Available From: http://www1.upme.gov.co/index.php/
la-upme/quienessomos. html Consulted: 03-05-2013.

Sergio Morales, Camilo lvarez, Cesar Acevedo, Carlos Diaz

Research Group in Resources, Energy and Sustainability (GIRES),
Faculty of Energy Engineering, Universidad Autnoma de Bucaramanga (UNAB), Bucaramanga 680003, Colombia
Energetics Prospective Research Seed-bed (Semillero de Investigacin
en Prospectiva Energtica, Colombia)

Letter to the Editor / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 16501657

Miguel Rodriguez,
Research Group in Resources, Energy and Sustainability (GIRES),
Faculty of Energy Engineering, Universidad Autnoma de Bucaramanga (UNAB), Bucaramanga 680003, Colombia
Leonardo Pacheco n
Research Group in Resources, Energy and Sustainability (GIRES),
Faculty of Energy Engineering, Universidad Autnoma de Bucaramanga (UNAB), Bucaramanga 680003, Colombia

n
Corresponding author at: Research Group in Resources, Energy and Sustainability (GIRES), Faculty of Energy Engineering, Universidad Autnoma de Bucaramanga (UNAB), Bucaramanga 680003, Colombia. Tel.: ( 57) 7 6436111x430.

1657

Energetics Prospective Research Seed-bed (Semillero de Investigacin

en Prospectiva Energtica, Colombia)
E-mail address: lpacheco560@unab.edu.co
Received 5 August 2013
16 January 2015
1 June 2015
Available online 2 July 2015