2.1 Project goals and concepts
2.2 Biological design criteria
2.3 Facility characterization or programming
2.4 Siting
2.5 Schematic design
2.6 Financial analysis
2.7 Environmental analysis
2.8 Conclusion
The first phase of project development is bioprogramming. This involves basic project planning and assembly of the design criteria, and includes quantification of all project components which describe functions and operations. Bioprogramming can be simple or detailed, depending on the nature and purpose of the project. Although frequently overlooked, bioprogramming is the most vital phase. Thorough effort at this time makes all subsequent stages easier, and avoids future complications and disagreements.
The elements of bioprogramming include:
2.1 - Project goals and concepts,
2.2 - Biological design criteria,
2.3 - Facility characterization or programming,
2.4 - Siting,
2.5 - Schematic design,
2.6 - Financial analysis,
2.7 - Environmental analysis,
2.8 - Conclusion.
The conclusion, or end product, of the bioprogramming phase is a summary report or project notebook containing all project philosophy, background data, design criteria, site data, environmental data, and the operational programmes. It is the invaluable link between concept and reality. The bioprogramme report serves as the reference throughout the evolution and operation of the project, and will ensure continuity. It is therefore worthwhile to have the report properly assembled into a document, and reproduced with many copies.
The first step in bioprogramming is developing a statement of project intent. The statement should be as clear and concise as possible, and serve as a record of both purpose and methodology. A list of components which are usually considered at this stage is provided in Appendix II.
Each species of aquatic animals and plants has basic environmental requirements which must be fulfilled in the design of any facility, together with those for the optimum conditions under which it can be cultured. The extent to which these criteria are identified and then satisfied by the design largely determines the success of the future operations. Therefore, careful research of facts and attention to detail are highly recommended. Typically, the biological design criteria should be developed on the basis of statistics from similar facilities, research experience, and trends in culture techniques.
A combination of literature reviews and first-hand observations should be included and used in compiling the data base. A number of resources exist which will help the background search and are included in the References (section 6).
The key biological design criteria which are considered at this stage are:
- Species description
- Behavioural characteristics
- Culture techniques
- Environmental requirements, density, water exchange, water quality
- Nutritional requirements
- Growth rates
- Mortality rate
- Diseases
Further description of the needs in each of these components is given in Appendix III.
Facility characterization or programming is a dynamic process which integrates project goals, biological design criteria, and site (engineering) conditions into a functional physical and operational plan.
There may be a need for several reviews and evaluations during programming, depending upon the alternatives for site selection, the knowledge of site conditions, and financial constraints. However, by conforming to a systematic programming process, it is simple to modify both biological and facility programmes as more information becomes available. The ultimate goal is a physical and operational plan which meets project goals and is realistic in terms of biological, engineering, and financial constraints.
Programming is a valuable tool which can be used to calculate the physical requirements required to meet specific production objectives, or to determine the carrying capacity of an identified site (see Figure 3). For example, the first approach may be used by a government agency wishing to develop a regional, multi-species demonstration and training centre, the second may be used by a landowner trying to convert an existing area of agricultural land into fish production. With both approaches, the biological criteria particular to a species and culture system is the common denominator.
Figure 3 Approaches to Facility Programming
Based upon the production goals and biological criteria, a biological production schedule for the proposed facility can be developed. The production schedule outlines the inputs and outputs of the project with time. For most projects, the schedule should be developed for monthly intervals, as at most facilities significant changes can occur this frequently.
The information required by the production schedule includes (1) numerical populations of animals at all stages, (2) water requirements, and (3) space requirements.
Under Alternative I (Figure 3), the production schedule is developed by combining biological criteria and production goals. Figure 4 illustrates one useful format for presenting this information.
Figure 4 Typical Production Schedule Data Collection Sheet
|
In Production |
At Harvest |
|||||||||
|
Month |
No. |
Length (cm) |
Weight (g) |
Total Weight (kg) |
No. |
Length (cm) |
Weight (g) |
Total Weight (kg) |
||
|
January |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lot 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lot 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(continued March-December) |
||||||||||
The schedule outlines the inputs and outputs of the project over an annual cycle, calculated at monthly intervals. If annual water temperatures are known for a site, they should be used as the basis of all calculations; if not known, then average temperatures within acceptable rearing ranges are used. For individual lots of fish to be produced (or received) at a facility, either different species or age groups, the numbers and dates should be projected; also the size (length and/or weight) of individuals at stocking. The total biomass can then be calculated. Changes in population, animal size, and biomass should be calculated monthly for each lot by applying the appropriate mortality and growth rate criteria. Once the desired size is reached, the population, in whole or in part, should be designated as harvested.
After making the production schedule, a facility programme is developed by using the relevant biocriteria again to determine the volumes of water and (container) space needed for each population each month. An example of a format for reporting this information is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5 Typical Facility Schedule Data Collection Sheet
|
Facility |
Rearing Volume Requirements (m2) |
|||||||||||||||
|
Jan |
Feb |
Mar |
Apr |
May |
Jun |
Jul |
Aug |
Sep |
Oct |
Nov |
Dec |
|||||
|
Fish, Lot 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
Lot 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Facility |
Water Requirements (l/sec) |
|||||||||||||||
|
Jan |
Feb |
Mar |
Apr |
May |
Jun |
Jul |
Aug |
Sep |
Oct |
Nov |
Dec |
|||||
|
Fish, Lot 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
Lot 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
If these requirements exceed the capacities of the site, the process must be repeated until an appropriate balance is reached.
During facility programming it is important to note that it is often undesirable to handle the stock frequently. Thus additional space requirements are often required, especially during the early months of rearing. Similarly, water requirements should be calculated empirically as well as theoretically to accommodate the additional facilities.
In Alternative II (Figure 3), that is to make the programme fit a site, the procedure is performed in reverse order. The water and/or space data are entered first and the production potential calculated from them.
The procedure can be repeated for various combinations of fish populations, sites, and culture technique alternatives to provide an objective basis for evaluating the costs and benefits of each. The schedule may also have to be adjusted if information obtained during subsequent evaluations or design phases indicates an unsatisfactory financial analysis.
The next step in the planning process is to develop programmes for infrastructure - including both the water system, and production and support spaces.
The volume of water required on a monthly basis should have been determined during the production scheduling process. It is now necessary to determine additional operating water requirements of the facility. At this stage, the system is not being engineered but rather characterized.
The factors which should be considered in preparing a written description of the water resources required are described in Appendix IV.
Depending upon the complexity of the proposed water system, it is often useful to prepare a process diagram to illustrate the complete system (see Figure 6).
Facility requirements for both production and support activities should be developed from the proposed production programme, and the operating criteria required. The criteria for the most significant infrastructure component, the production units themselves, must be specified by the system of culture to be used and the criteria which specify configuration and construction materials, etc. The remainder of the facilities are then developed from the operating goals and the availability of supporting infrastructure in the surrounding area.
Figure 7 is an example of a format for summarizing the major facility components, their specific functions, and their inter-relationships. As a supplement, individual format sheets should be prepared for building spaces requiring specialized facilities and unusual features. Figure 8 is an example of a useful Summary schedule.
Figure 6 Typical Water Process Diagram
Figure 7 Typical Facility Criteria Schedule
|
Component Use |
No. |
Size |
Water |
Light |
Elect. |
Etc. |
||
|
fresh |
salt |
|||||||
|
Units - Nursery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brood ponds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spawn tanks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarantine tanks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research - Laboratory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Office |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Library |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admin. - Staff Offices |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clerical Offices |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conference Room |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Storage - Dry |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freezer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Workshops - Automobile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Machine |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 8 Typical Building Space Criteria Sheet
|
Room No___________________ |
Room Use______________ |
|
Number of Users_____________ |
Net Area________________ |
|
Relation to Other Rooms________________________________ | |
|
Function_____________________________________________ | |
|
Architectural Characteristics | |
|
Preferred location______________________________________ | |
|
Finishes (floor)_____________(wall)_____________(ceiling) | |
|
Lighting____________________ | |
|
Mechanical Services | |
|
Illumination__________________ |
Telephone_______________ |
|
Air Conditioning______________ |
Ventilation |
|
Water Supply________________ |
Gas |
|
Compressed Air______________ |
Sinks___________________ |
|
Additional services required | |
|
Built-in Furniture | |
|
Work Benches_______________ |
Bench Height_____________ |
|
Bench Surface_______________ |
Bench Storage____________ |
|
Other installed furniture required___________________________ | |
Once the programme and the criteria are established for all the production facilities and the other related infrastructure, possible sites can be identified and evaluated.
In cases where the site has been predetermined (Alternative II), special attention must be given to assessing the economic viability of the project altogether, as there are obvious limits to production capacity and facilities imposed by site constraints.
In cases where no site has been predetermined, the need is to identify the location where most of the requirements (all the biological and physical factors) are optimized.
A list of field evaluations which should be considered for siting is given in Appendix V.
The schematic design is the first step in translating the criteria and site constraints into a workable design. Therefore it is often called the conceptual design stage. At this stage of the process, the objective is primarily to select concepts and identify and solve major design problems. It is basically a verification that there are no physical constraints which will prevent meeting the production goals and purposes of the project.
The schematic design stage identifies, assesses, and recommends design alternatives for meeting production goals. These alternatives should reflect the use of local construction techniques and materials where applicable.
The end products of the schematic design stage will be:
(i) a written report fully describing the facility design concept,(ii) a site layout, showing location of all major components on the site, which reflects topography and operational relationships,
(iii) floor plans for all major support buildings,
(iv) a schematic diagram of the hydraulics of all the water requirements for each production unit and facility, with elevations, and
(v) a topographic survey.
Sketches, such as those shown in Figures 9 and 10, are often useful to include in the schematic design report to illustrate the recommended design concepts. The schematic design also requires a site topographical survey to ensure that locations and hydraulic systems are conceptually correct. The survey should be included with the report.
Finally, it is important to undertake and include in the schematic design report an estimate of the preliminary construction and operating costs, and the project construction schedule. However, it is accepted at this time that the construction cost estimates are only an order of accuracy (see Table 1).
Figure 9 Typical Sketch of Building Concept
Figure 10 Typical Sketch of Pond Concept
Following preparation of the cost estimates, a preliminary financial analysis can be made to determine if there are financial constraints to proceeding with the project as it has been conceptualized.
The financial analysis must consider the objectives of the project, including cost/benefit requirements of the owner and financing organization.
If the project is commercial, then reference must be made back to the original market assessment and marketing strategy for the products. If a market assessment and marketing strategy have not been undertaken, then these must now be undertaken before further investment is made.
If the project is not commercial, for example, a government facility for production and research, then it is still necessary to refer to government goals and objectives, and the capital and operating budgets of the appropriate department committed to manage the project.
In developing a financially stable project, whether for the private or the public sector, it is usually prudent to consider developing the project in phases. This can reduce the initial investment risk, demonstrate feasibility of the project, and generate income to offset further capital investment and operating costs.
It is also useful at this time to consider development alternatives for raising investment capital or reducing risk. These may be 'turn-key' projects, designer equity participation, and other forms of joint venture. Financing alternatives may include capital debt, equity, government development grants, subsidized loans, international technical assistance, etc. Deferred interest loans are frequently available for the private sector for aquaculture projects.
In the event that phasing or financing does not result in a satisfactory financial analysis for the project, it is necessary to return to the programme and to modify production goals and requirements until the project is economically feasible. Alternatively, a decision can be made to proceed no further with the project.
However, if changes are made to the programme which prove to satisfy the financial analysis, and the project proceeds, then it is imperative that all the stages of Phase I - Bioprogramming are repeated, and that a new schematic design report is prepared which complies with the modified programme. This does not in fact take long as almost all of the basic work has been carried out. It is important, nonetheless, to do it in readiness for the architects and engineers to begin the design based on the modified programme, and not the original programme.
In the bioprogramming and conceptualizing of every project, consideration should be given to its relationship with the environment. This includes not only the influences of the environment on the project itself, but also positive and negative effects the project may have on the environment.
All aspects of environmental concern require thought and often particular investigation, and merit statements in the bioprogramming documentation. In some cases, the national laws and local regulations may require extensive research, particularly where a negative impact is possible. For example, projects which will be using non-native species or stocks, or alter large areas of wetland or coastal areas, are especially sensitive.
In order to minimize undesirable environmental impacts, or to comply with laws and regulations, it may be necessary to alter production goals, siting plans, or design concepts. If the programme has to be modified to comply with environmental requirements, then the process (as with the financial analysis indicated above) must be repeated.
At this point in project development it is advisable to secure financing for the site (if necessary) and construction. It is also important to obtain all necessary permits to ensure rapid construction and subsequent operations.
The project notebook, the result of all the bioprogramming and planning, becomes a useful document for securing financing. Presented to funding organizations, such as development banks and multilateral organizations, and to governmental agencies which have authority over development projects, the project notebook describes a properly evaluated and functional facility, with projections of costs, and construction and operations schedule. It enables an immediate decision to be made without further work on the part of the proposers of the project.
In addition, the project notebook is of considerable value as a true record of the project. It therefore becomes a guide for all subsequent phases of development in spite of what might occur through postponements, or changes in government administrations, or even design engineers.
