Realizing the Dream

(Hydroelectric Power on a Municipal Water System)

By Charles C. Hutton, Vice President, ECI, 5660 Greenwood Plaza Blvd, St. 500,
Englewood, Colorado 80111 and Eva June Busse, Project Manager, City of Boulder, 1739
Broadway, Boulder, Colorado 80306
ABSTRACT
The City of Boulder, Colorado recognized the hydroelectric power potential in its existing
municipal water supply system during the early 1980's. Since that time, Boulder has
obtained seven exemptions from license and has constructed six hydroelectric facilities
that are currently in operation. The Lakewood Hydroelectric Facility currently under
construction and the recently constructed Silver Lake Hydroelectric Facility will complete
the development of the economical, potential power in that portion of the municipal water
supply system which has been the subject of preliminary permits held by the City. As
with previous hydroelectric projects, Boulder retrofitted the existing Lakewood and Silver
Lake raw water transmission pipelines with hydroelectric generation equipment to
produce hydroelectric power as a byproduct of the municipal water system operations.
This paper discusses the final two high head hydroelectric facilities culminating in the
realization of a dream that started 20 years ago.
Introduction
Since the early 1900's, Boulder has developed its North Boulder Creek basin water
supplies as its primary source for a safe, reliable municipal water supply to its citizens.
Approximately 40 percent of the Citys present annual water supply originate in the Cityowned watershed at the headwaters of North Boulder Creek. This source is used year
round. It is Boulders primary winter water supply, and during the winter months, up to 90
percent of the municipal water needs may be met by this supply.
The Lakewood and Silver Lake pipelines were originally constructed in 1906 and 1919,
respectively, to protect Boulders water supply from contamination by mining, and from
pollution resulting from camping activity in the mountains west of Boulder. These pipelines
continue to fulfill this purpose, as well as to protect the water supply from contamination
resulting from development, recreation and agricultural uses of the mountain area.
In 1980, Boulder began to study the feasibility of using the excess and wasted energy in the
City of Boulders municipal water supply system for the generation of electricity. The initial
study identified five potential sites for installation of hydroelectric turbine/generators, which
could be installed with no new dam construction and no additional diversion of streams.
Boulder owned, and already used, all necessary water rights, water storage facilities and

water transmission facilities to operate the identified projects, and therefore, the overall
environmental impact to recover the then wasted energy would be minimal.
Boulder filed its first application for a Preliminary Permit with the FERC on May 3, 1982.
Boulders application included all hydroelectric potential within the water system. On
February 7, 1983, the FERC awarded the first Preliminary Permit to Boulder. The first five
hydroelectric facilities were constructed between 1985 and 1987. The process to permit
the Lakewood pipeline replacement and hydroelectric facility began in about 1986. The
application for the preliminary permit for the Silver Lake Hydroelectric Project was
submitted in May 1995.
Silver Lake Pipeline and Hydroelectric Facility
The existing 3.6-mile-long Silver Lake pipeline was in poor condition and needed to be
replaced to maintain the integrity and quality of the water supplies to the city from the
watershed. The gravity flow pipeline was replaced with a continuous welded steel
pressure pipeline during the summer and fall of 1997 and 1998. The diversion
structure and intake for the pipeline are located on North Boulder Creek approximately
1.8 miles downstream of Silver Lake Dam in the Silver Lake Watershed. The outlet
works at the dam regulates flow in the creek. Presently the dam outlet works and
pipeline intake are manually operated by the watershed manager. In the winter this
requires a 4-mile-long snowmobile ride to the intake and another 1.8 miles to the dam
to change the flow in the creek.
The Silver Lake Hydroelectric facility is
located at the end of the Silver Lake
pipeline on the north shore of the
Lakewood Reservoir, about 4 miles north
of the town of Nederland, Colorado.
Construction of the Silver Lake
Hydroelectric Facility was split into two
contracts: one for equipment procurement
and installation and one for construction of
the civil works and structures.
The Silver Lake Hydroelectric Facility
includes the powerplant and switchyard. The powerplant contains a 3.2 MW pelton
turbine (with a net design head of 1,406 feet and static head of 1,540 feet) and a 3,600
kW/4,000 KVA, 900 rpm generator. The bypass system consists of a Mokveld
multiport, sleeve type valve for energy dissipation and flow control. The valve has a
rated maximum pressure of 750 psi. A unique stainless steel basket type strainer is
located immediately upstream of the valve to catch debris in the pipeline from the
creek. Auxiliary equipment includes a turbine isolation valve, turbine bypass isolation
valve, 20 ton crane, switchgear, transformer and associated mechanical and electrical
equipment for a completely automatic remote control facility.

Lakewood Pipeline and Hydroelectric Facility

The Lakewood Hydroelectric facility will be constructed in the existing Betasso
Hydroelectric Powerplant, located adjacent to the Betasso Water Treatment Plant, 5
miles west of Boulder, Colorado. The approximately 10-mile-long existing gravity flow
Lakewood pipeline is being replaced in the three segments. The lower 1.5-mile-long
Betasso Road Segment and the turbine bypass and energy dissipation valve were
constructed in 1995. The new pipeline intake and dam outlet works at Lakewood
Reservoir were constructed in 1996. The upper 1.5-mile-long Cold Springs Road
segment is currently under construction and should be completed in 2000. The
remaining middle segment is currently being designed and permitted and construction
is anticipated to begin in 2001 and finish in 2003.
The Lakewood Hydroelectric Facility will include a 3.2 MW pelton turbine (with a
design head of 1,400 feet and static head of 1,800 feet), 3,600 kW/4,000 KVA, 900
rpm generator, turbine shutoff valve, switchgear, transformer and other associated
mechanical and electrical equipment for a completely automatic remote control facility.
Turbine Bypass and Energy Dissipation
A unique feature of the Lakewood and Silver Lake Pipelines and Hydroelectric Facilities is
the valve system used to provide bypass flows and dissipate energy when the turbine in not
operating. The valve at each of these facilities is required to dissipate energy from a head
of about 1,400 feet for the Silver Lake pipeline and about 1,500 feet for Lakewood
pipeline. There are very few valves available that can dissipate energy from this amount of
head without discharging into the atmosphere or into a confined structure. The Mokveld
valve selected for this project achieves energy dissipation within the valve body and in a
minimal amount of physical space making it ideal for this application. The valve on the
Lakewood pipeline was installed in about 1995 and has operated continuously with minor
problems. A special fine mesh, elevated intake screen was included on the upper end of
the pipeline in the reservoir to eliminate debris, which plugged the valve and created an
unacceptable pressure upstream of the valve. The valve has since been instrumented with
a programmable logical controller and programmed to operate automatically via the
SCADA system from a remote location at the control center located in the Betasso Water
Treatment Plant control center. In the interim until the entire Lakewood pipeline is
replaced, the valve has been programmed to partially pressurize the pipeline to minimize
air entertainment.

Architectural Treatment
Another unique feature of the Silver Lake
hydroelectric facility is the architectural
treatment. The structure was recessed into
the natural terrain on the north side of the
reservoir to minimize the profile and hide the
plant from view of the nearby Peak-to-Peak
Highway (Colorado Highway 72) which is
designated as a scenic byway. In addition,
the exterior of the concrete superstructure was
covered with stained rustic cedar siding to
match nearby ranch buildings and blend into
the surrounding mountain environment.
Hydroelectric Power Generation
The table at the end of this paper summarizes the types and capacities of the turbines and
generators installed in the Boulder water system.
During the period from 1990 to 1998, Boulders hydroelectric power system generated an
average of 15,132,932 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity enough power to supply 7% of
the citys homes. This percentage is based on the consumption of an average residential
customer, who uses about 5,600 kWh per year. Boulder received annual average
revenues of $790,235 from the sale of the hydroelectric power.
When complete, Boulders hydroelectric power system will generate an average of about
51,764,732 kWh of electricity enough power to supply 24% of the citys homes.
Advantages of Hydropower
Advantages of adding hydropower to an existing municipal water supply system are:

Hydroelectric facilities adopted to existing water supply system

No new dam construction and no additional diversions
Minimal environmental impact
Minimizes cost of hydro development
Avoids consumption of coal to produce electricity
Improves water quality by pressurizing pipelines and eliminating air entrainment
Reduces wear on pressure reducing valves
Offsets cost of supplying drinking water
Partially pays for replacement of pipelines
Raises revenues and provides needed energy

Special Problems
Problems that can arise as a result of hydropower operation on a municipal water system
are:

Operators initially unfamiliar with hydropower operation

Control schemes may require experimentation for refinement
Emergency generator trips can cause high-pressure transients and dirty water
complaints unless precautions are taken
Foreign-made equipment requires a large stock of spare parts
Back pressure or head loss can reduce power output
Designs must allow for peak flow and future growth
Large difference between winter and summer water demand in dry climate
Rotating machinery and valves must be located in confined spaces requiring
appropriate precautions for potential hazards
Running units at peak power once a month to receive maximum capacity payment
can stir up sand and rust causing customer complaints
Aesthetics must be considered in residential areas

Conclusions
Developing municipal hydropower can be a lengthy process, but a water utility that is aware
of the potential problems and costs can take the necessary steps to turn unused potential
into actual working facilities, that can raise revenue and provide needed energy. In the
citys first 1982 application for a FERC permit, the FERC established some goals for what
they wanted to accomplish with the development of the hydroelectric power facilities.
FERC stated that
The project is in the public interest, in that it optimizes the utilization of
currently developed water resources. In particular, the project will adopt
hydroelectric facilities to an existing water supply system, thereby
minimizing environmental disruption, and keep costs to a minimum. The
development will affect complete utilization of a water resource which is, at
present, used for water supply purposes only.
It is gratifying to see what the city has achieved since 1982. Since submittal of the first
application, six projects have been built and the final one is under construction. The city
should be pleased with their accomplishments and Realization of the Dream.
The project was recently selected by the Colorado Consulting Engineers Council to receive
a 2000 Merit Award for Engineering Excellence. The Orodell Hydroelectric Project also
received an award for Engineering Excellence from the Colorado Consulting Engineers
Council.

Authors
Charles C. Hutton is a Vice President at ECI, the Water Resource Division of Frederic R.
Harris, Inc. He is the ECI Project Manager for the Silver Lake and Lakewood
Hydroelectric Projects responsible for directing the preparation of feasibility studies,
preliminary and final designs, construction drawings, specifications and cost estimates.
He also was responsible for management and coordination of full time construction
management for installation of the turbine, generator and bypass valve equipment and
construction of the powerhouse structure.
Eva June Busse is a Project Manager at the City of Boulder, Colorado. She is the Citys
Project Manager for the Silver Lake and Lakewood Hydroelectric Projects responsible
for management and coordination of the consultant and contractors. She also was
extensively involved in construction management during installation of the turbine,
generator and bypass valve equipment and construction of the powerhouse structure.
June also was the Citys Project Manager for the Betasso, Orodell and Sunshine
Hydroelectric Projects.

Name

Maxwell

Kohler

Orodell

Sunshine

Betasso

Silver Lake

Subtotal
Lakewood

Power
Source
Pressure
Zone 3
Treated Water
Pressure
Zone 3
Treated Water
Orodell Line
Treated
Water
Sunshine Line
Treated
Water
Barker Line
Raw
Water
Silver Lake
Raw Water
Pipeline
INSTALLED
FACILITIES
Lakewood
Raw Water
Pipeline

Total FUTURE TOTAL

Type of
Turbine

CITY OF BOULDER
HYDROELECTRIC FACILITIES FACT SHEET
Type of
Design Design Generation In-Service
Generator
Head
Flow
Pumping
Date
(feet)
(cfs)
Capacity

Reaction
(Francis)

Induction

240

5.4

Reaction
(Francis)

Induction

235

8.8

Reaction
(Francis)

Induction

260

4.8

Reaction
(Francis)

Induction

340

Impulse
(Pelton)

Synchronous

Impulse
(Pelton)

Synchronous

70 kW
150 hp

Synchronous

Construction
Cost
(4)

March
1985

513,382

20,573

110,000
(note 1)

November
1985

598,889

32,903

280,000
(note 2)

180kW

September
1987

823,022

19,507

540,000

13.2

800kW

September
1987

4,151,523

177,833

1,100,000

1,200

34

2,900 kW

December
1987

9,056,116

539,419

3,200,000

1,430

31

3,200 kW

March
2000

17,000,000

500,000

4,960,000

32,142,932

1,290,235

10,190,000

19,621,800

2,180,000

51,764,732

12,370,000

7,286 kW
Impulse
(Pelton)

Annual
Annual
Generation Revenue
(kWh)
($)

1,400

31

3,200 kW
11,086 kW

Note 1: Hydroelectric portion only; total cost of Maxwell Pump Generation Station was $300,000.
Note 2: Hydroelectric portion only; total cost of Kohler Pump Generation Station was $526,000.