**6.8 Evaluation and analysis**

The rating scales and the weighting of each criterion were discussed and agreed at a meeting between the evaluation team and CINER and Mosoj Causay. This meeting was held before the start of the collection and analysis of information to ensure maximum objectivity. From the analysis of the results of the evaluation and the defined rating scales (1 to 5), each of the components of each criterion was quantified. The resulting score of each component

of each indicator is shown in the following table (Table 4).

Figure 4 shows the results of the evaluation according to each criterion. The project achieved an overall weighted evaluation of 89.33%, which corresponds to a qualitative assessment of "functioning under optimal conditions".


Table 4. Evaluation of the external evaluation process.

4. Impact: 4.75/5 (weight: 15%)

100 Sustainable Growth and Applications in Renewable Energy Sources

In addition, the evaluation confirmed this project is not against any plan, program or policy; on the contrary, it contributes to the government's obligation to provide basic services to the

The verification of the quality of the facilities is conducted as part of the field work, making home visits to most users of both Turco and Challapata. To check the correct design and installation of the facilities, the standard guidance document IBNORCA Bolivian NB 1056 was used. All components were verified in each household, taking into account the data of the original design. Most equipment was found to be working properly and user feedback was favourable. Only minor problems were detected which were easily solved (low

The rating scales and the weighting of each criterion were discussed and agreed at a meeting between the evaluation team and CINER and Mosoj Causay. This meeting was held before the start of the collection and analysis of information to ensure maximum objectivity. From the analysis of the results of the evaluation and the defined rating scales (1 to 5), each of the components of each criterion was quantified. The resulting score of each component

Figure 4 shows the results of the evaluation according to each criterion. The project achieved an overall weighted evaluation of 89.33%, which corresponds to a qualitative assessment of

CRITERIA Total Nª COMPONENT Value

EFFECTIVENESS 4.67 8 Performance analysis of the Specific Objectives 4.63

IMPACT 4.75 <sup>10</sup> Analysis of compliance of the logical framework 5

COHERENCE 5 14 Relation with strategic public sector policies 5

1 Adequacy of the project to local needs expressed 4.33 2 Adequacy of the project to local priorities 3.57 3 Complement with other actions 5 4 Design of the intervention 4.5

activities 4.17

resources 4.33 7 Analysis of management in relation to the results 5

9 Usefulness and availability of the Specific Objectives 4.71

11 Impacts from a broad perspective 4.5

positive impacts are sustainable <sup>5</sup>

15 The design of the facilities meet the regulation 4.5 16 Facilities are in accordance with the design 4.5 17 Facilities are operating according to design 4

<sup>12</sup> Analysis of the possibility that each of the processes and their

<sup>13</sup> Factors that facilitate / impede the permanence of the positive effects and the processes <sup>3</sup>

<sup>5</sup>Analysis of the achievement of individual results from realized

<sup>6</sup>Analysis of the relationship between results and invested

batteries, bearing noises, light poles with vertical offset).

of each indicator is shown in the following table (Table 4).

Table 4. Evaluation of the external evaluation process.

population.

**6.7 Facilities** 

**6.8 Evaluation and analysis** 

"functioning under optimal conditions".

RELEVANCE 4.35

EFFICIENCY 4.50

SUSTAINABILITY 4

FACILITIES 4.33


Fig. 4. Results from the multicriteria evaluation.

### **6.9 Recommendations of use and maintenance**

The following recommendations are deduced from the evaluation and are proposed to proper use and maintenance of systems and to promote long term sustainability:


Experiences of Community Wind Electrification

Variables

Constraints

included.

several households. Demand

Microgrids

Equipment

 2 days of autonomy. Generation and accumulation

Projects in Bolivia: Evaluation and Improvements for Future Projects 103

batteries (type, cost, capacity and discharge factor).

Equipment: Inverters (type, cost and power) and meters (cost).

energy capacity in the batteries at each point of generation.

Equipment: number of each type of equipment installed at each points.

voltage distribution and voltage drop.

flow between the two points.

should be radial.

batteries, inverters, meters and conductors.

installed at points of microgrid.

**7.2 Results of the design of the projects with microgrids** 

(energy 280Wh/day, power 200W).

Regulators are incorporated into each type of turbine.

220V distribution voltage and a 5% maximum voltage drop.

3 types of conductors: cost \$4.05- 4.4 per meter.

3 types of batteries: \$240-325 and 150-250Ah capacity discharge 60%.

 Generation and accumulation: Turbines with built-in controller (type, cost, maximum operating power, and maximum power generated at one point) and

 Definition of the network: Distance between points, conductors (types, cost including the infrastructure, resistance and current carrying capacity), rated

Definition of the network: connections between two points, and energy and power

Generation and accumulation: Energy and power balances at each point, required

 Definition of the microgrid: It establishes the relationship between energy and power flows and the existence of a conductor between two points, compliance of maximum voltage drop and maximum intensity, the structure of microgrid (if any)

Equipment. Inverters are installed at the points of generation; the meters are

To specifically assess all the advantages of the microgrids, a constraint that forces to form microgrids to feed the households that were close to each other at each community is

Next, the data and parameters considered in the generation and study of alternative designs are summarized. In particular, this experiment considers the use of the equipment installed in the real projects and more power equipment for their possible use in microgrids that feed

 Two demand scenarios: the first for a basic consumption (energy 140Wh/day, power 100W) and the second to promote the development of productive activities

 4 types of turbines: Air X, Whisper 100, Whisper 200 and Whisper 500) at a cost of \$1000-\$4600 and 550W- 3300W, respectively, by South West Windpower.

Objective function: To minimize the investment cost considering wind turbines,
