India's Power Sector

[A_Gupta]

xpost from the New Zealand thread on the Strategic Forum:

http://gisborneherald.co.nz/localnews/2 ... r-heliwing

A FORMER Gisborne father and son aviation team will take specialist techniques perfected on the East Coast to help keep India’s national electricity grid running smoothly.

Their helicopter company has been awarded a new lines maintenance contract on the sub-continent.

Ohope-based company Heliwing announced it has secured a contract with PowerGrid India for live-line electrical maintenance by helicopter.

Managing director and former East Coast rescue and air ambulance pilot Denis Hartley said he was delighted Heliwing’s expertise had been recognised against some very strong global competition.

“It is a real coup for New Zealand aviation and I am very pleased to have my son Wayne (from Gisborne) and New Zealand pilot Geoff Keighley as part of our team to undertake the work.

“As the helicopters need sometimes to precision-hover less than a metre from 750,000 live volts, I can only use highly experienced pilots”.

Mr Hartley is well well-known in the New Zealand aviation industry, having been a top-dressing pilot in Hawke’s Bay as well as a helicopter pilot in Poverty Bay and the Eastern Bay of Plenty. He was also a pioneering East Coast rescue and air ambulance pilot.

Mr Hartley said the new contract would involve employing a human-sling line technique to maintain power lines from a helicopter, a technique he first used in 1980 when he was based at Ruatoria, working for Gisborne lines company Eastland Network.

He expects to start work maintaining 3000km of power lines in about three months.

[VinodTK]

India to add 2,000 MW solar capacity in January-March, major projects in states like Andhra Pradesh and Telangana

NEW DELHI: India will add 2,000 megawatts of solar power capacity between January and March, which is equal to the capacity added during the entire 2015.

The major projects expected to be completed in these three months are in Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. These projections by solar consultancy Bridge to India indicate that the country will comfortably surpass its target of 2,000 MW of solar projects for 015-16. Already around 1,100 MW have been added in the nine months to December 2015.

The target for 2016-17 is much stiffer at 12,000 MW. In the first three quarters up to December, India is expected to add another 2,839 MW of capacity. This means that over 9,000 MW will have to be added in the last quarter if the target is to be met. The majority of projects completed during the year will be in the five southern states. India wants to achieve 1 lakh MW of solar power by 2022.

Solar tariffs fell drastically in 2015, culminating in an all-time low of Rs 4.63 per unit offered by both Sun Edison and SB Energy while bidding for separate projects - of 500 MW and 350 MW respectively - for NTPCBSE -4.58 % in Andhra Pradesh. There is disagreement over whether they will fall any further in 2016. "Maybe in the middle to long-term, a reduction might take place due to a fall in equipment pricing," said Vinay Rustagi, managing director, Bridge to India. "A 10-12 per cent drop in equipment prices is expected."

But Prashant Panda, president, solar business at ACME Solar, said a correction was likely. "I feel tariffs have bottomed out," he said. "I don't expect them to go down any further." In 2010, the price used to be Rs 17.91 per unit. Analysts are already wondering whether given the sliding prices, solar projects in India will remain attractive for foreign investors.

India is an attractive market from a volume perspective, but when it comes to margins, I don't know," said Amit Sinha, partner, Bain and Co. "The return on equity (RoE) for developers has come down from the high teens or even more to the low teens. Unless developers make sufficient RoE, which needs to risk-adjusted and currency-adjusted, they will not be too excited about investing further in this sector. They could easily divert their investments to another project or another country. It is a tight balancing act - low tariffs are very good for consumers but sometimes developers lose out as a result."

It all depends on whether Sun Edison and SB Energy manage to successfully execute their projects at the price quoted. "There are macro concerns such as forex rates and full evacuation of the power produced," said Bikesh Ogra, president, solar business at Sterling and Wilson Pvt Ltd, a major EPC player. "There will also be micro concerns once the projects are implemented." Despite the recent hike in the ministry of new and renewal energy's outlay from Rs 600 crore to Rs 5,000 crore for giving subsidy to rooftop solar projects over the next five years, there was some apprehension over whether rooftop solar targets will be met. This target was the easily achievable 200 MW in 2015-16 (included in the overall target of 2,000 MW), but has been raised 24 times to 4,800 MW in 2016-17. "Rooftop is a puzzle right now," said Rustagi. "Whether the target is met will depend upon when and how the subsidy scheme is implemented. It is unlikely that even 500 MW will be added."

[hanumadu]

Piyush Goyal ‏@PiyushGoyal 27m27 minutes ago
Congratulations to Hon'ble Raj CM @VasundharaBJP ji for achieving lowest ever Indian solar tariff of Rs. 4.34/ unit through reverse auction

[Suraj]

NPCIL, Areva strive to reach commercial deal

Ahead of French President François Hollande's visit on the occasion of Republic Day, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) and nuclear energy player Areva are striving to close the crucial commercial agreement for the 9,900-Mw Jaitapur nuclear power project in Maharashtra. Initially, Areva will supply two European pressurised reactors (EPRs) of 1,650-Mw each for the project. The contentious issue continues to be sharing of cost due to the application of additional safety measures in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear accident in March 2011.

The early works contract was signed between NPCIL and Areva in December 2010. Atomic Energy Commission former chairman RK Sinha two years ago had indicated that the per unit tariff of the Jaitapur project would be Rs 6.50. The project is running behind schedule for at least three-and-a-half years.

[member_29294]

Why go for foreign reactors that cost Rs 6.50 tariff for unit, if solar power is going for Rs 4.3 a unit?

Does India get to keep the byproducts and plutonium from the reactors to reuse in civilian program?

[RoyG]

Why go for foreign reactors that cost Rs 6.50 tariff for unit, if solar power is going for Rs 4.3 a unit?

Does India get to keep the byproducts and plutonium from the reactors to reuse in civilian program?

That's the idea. Much of the fuel goes unused and will be reprocessed. India is beginning to open up to molten salt reactors (breeders especially) which is very likely to make up the bulk of our nuclear reactors. Coupled with triple-reheat closed-cycle brayton turbine system we could achieve close to 50% efficiency and even produce hydrocarbon fuel for military and industrial systems. Without MSR we are looking at 500 years (conservative) of continuous bulk power based on our thorium reserves. This should buy us enough time to make the transition to fusion/renewable.

Moreover, we'll also need to ensure that we have enough fissile stockpile for nuclear deterrent.

Right now solar tech is not going to do it for us unless it becomes more efficient and moves away from rare earths. we simply don't have enough reserves to ensure base load power.

[member_29294]

Why go for foreign reactors that cost Rs 6.50 tariff for unit, if solar power is going for Rs 4.3 a unit?

Does India get to keep the byproducts and plutonium from the reactors to reuse in civilian program?

That's the idea. Much of the fuel goes unused and will be reprocessed. India is beginning to open up to molten salt reactors (breeders especially) which is very likely to make up the bulk of our nuclear reactors. Coupled with triple-reheat closed-cycle brayton turbine system we could achieve close to 50% efficiency and even produce hydrocarbon fuel for military and industrial systems. Without MSR we are looking at 500 years (conservative) of continuous bulk power based on our thorium reserves. This should buy us enough time to make the transition to fusion/renewable.

Moreover, we'll also need to ensure that we have enough fissile stockpile for nuclear deterrent.

Right now solar tech is not going to do it for us unless it becomes more efficient and moves away from rare earths. we simply don't have enough reserves to ensure base load power.

Thanks, sounds good that we get to keep the precious byproducts of the reactor that can be used for stage 2 Fast Breeders. But I don't think Solar uses any rare earths, only Wind does for the neodymium magnets in the electric generator.

[Rishirishi]

Will nuclear power ever be competative compared to PV? We now see prices down to RS 4,3 and it seems to be going down. It is clean, simple and easy.

[Kakkaji]

Energiser for power tariff policy

New Delhi, Jan. 20: The government today allowed the passing of taxes and levies affecting power generation cost to consumers and permitted producers to sell spare capacity via exchanges to improve availability.

The new power tariff policy, approved by the cabinet headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, also allowed expansion of capacity by up to 100 per cent at existing site and mandating states to buy all power generated from waste.

Power minister Piyush Goyal said the reform would help to meet the objective of making electricity available to all, reduce litigation, revive investments and protect environment.

"A holistic view of the power sector has been taken and comprehensive amendments have been made in the Tariff Policy 2006. Our aim is to achieve the objectives of Ujwal Discom Assurance Yojana (UDAY) with the focus on 4 Es: electricity for all, efficiency to ensure affordable tariffs, environment for a sustainable future, ease of doing business to attract investments and ensure financial viability," he said.

With loss-making state electricity distribution companies not buying all of the power, the generators are running plants below capacity.

Under the new plan, the profit made by power generators by selling spare electricity via exchanges will be split between them and the state discoms.

Discoms will have to raise the share of renewable energy. They will have to buy all of the power produced from waste in their state.

Goyal said the policy was aimed at round-the-clock supply to all consumers, and state governments and regulators would devise a power supply trajectory to achieve this.

Under it, micro grids will have a provision to feed electricity into the grid when the grid connection reaches remote locations.

"Small plants will be set up in coal mining areas to provide power to people living near coal mines," Goyal said.

To increase efficiency and bring down tariffs, power plants will be allowed to expand up to 100 per cent of their capacity through the automatic route at their existing locations.

Kalpana Jain, senior director, Deloitte in India, said, "The amendments cover a number of issues, which have been crying for attention for a while in the beleaguered sector. These ranges from leveraging existing power assets to expand capacity in both conventional and unconventional energy to boost generation."

[Virupaksha]

Why go for foreign reactors that cost Rs 6.50 tariff for unit, if solar power is going for Rs 4.3 a unit?

Does India get to keep the byproducts and plutonium from the reactors to reuse in civilian program?

all the renewable sources (solar, wind, tidal) which depend directly on nature without human control, do not give base power or even peak load power - i.e. ability to produce when you want (Eg: evening 6-9peak demand or say some plants enter maintainance) or even continuously.

Even hydro in most cases of India(non-himalayan rivers) are not good enough for base load. When drought happens, you actually have more demand for electricity but cannot use it as you need to store whatever water remains for next season.

The only choices for reliable base and peak load are coal, oil and nuclear.

the load factors for coal plants is generally ~70-80%, whereas solar is around 15%. So when 100 MW of coal, it means around 80MW of actual output is added whereas for the renewable ones it is only 15MW with the added difficulty that solar cant be used on demand nor is it continuous. It's output comes when it comes and other plants (like coal, nuclear) have to adjust for those variations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor

Sorry unless battery tech is invented to store 50000 MW or some where in that range cheaply(that is btw only 3-4 day electricity storage of medium state), I cannot see how renewable as % of output can ever be okayed for more than 30% by sensible people, not the green loonies.

[Suraj]

Will nuclear power ever be competative compared to PV? We now see prices down to RS 4,3 and it seems to be going down. It is clean, simple and easy.

Nuclear and thermal power can be controlled to run base and peak loads. Renewables/hydel are dependent on sunshine, wild, water flow etc.

[A_Gupta]

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/mar ... 135664.ece
Kalpataru Power bags four orders for power transmission-related projects

January 21, 2016:

Kalpataru Power Transmission has bagged four orders for power transmission-related projects worth ₹1,295 crore. In a disclosure to stock exchanges, the company said the first order pertains to establishment of a transmission system for transfer of power to Bhutan from India. The 400-kV transmission line project to be constructed in West Bengal and Bihar worth ₹864 crore has been awarded to the company’s 100 per cent subsidiary Alipurduar Transmission. The second order, worth ₹238 crore, has been bagged from Nepal. This is a turnkey transmission line project. The company also got an order for construction of a 380-kV overhead transmission line in Saudi Arabia worth about ₹146 crore. The fourth order is for a transmission tower supply project, worth ₹47 crore, from Power Grid Warora Transmission (a subsidiary of Power Grid Corp). Shares of Kalpataru Power edged down 1.65 per cent at ₹188.05 on the NSE.

[disha]

Will nuclear power ever be competative compared to PV? We now see prices down to RS 4,3 and it seems to be going down. It is clean, simple and easy.

Current costs in US for commercial nuclear power plants is @4.07 rs. per unit. (0.06 dollars). Note that this is after all the extra checks & hoops they have to go through.

With proper investments the costs can come down to as much as @3 Rs. per unit.

Again, if the energy is near free, and other commodity costs are artificially inflated., it will lead to a recycle economy. For example that rusty cycle can be melted and made into a rebar for construction. Or glass bottles from your beer can go into creating glass for windows.

[Rishirishi]

Will nuclear power ever be competative compared to PV? We now see prices down to RS 4,3 and it seems to be going down. It is clean, simple and easy.

Current costs in US for commercial nuclear power plants is @4.07 rs. per unit. (0.06 dollars). Note that this is after all the extra checks & hoops they have to go through.

With proper investments the costs can come down to as much as @3 Rs. per unit.

Again, if the energy is near free, and other commodity costs are artificially inflated., it will lead to a recycle economy. For example that rusty cycle can be melted and made into a rebar for construction. Or glass bottles from your beer can go into creating glass for windows.

That price probably does not include decomissioning and other costs. In any case I think it is rather optimistic to cut corners to reach RS 3. As of now Nuclear is only 30 paise cheaper. For India it is sensible to maintain a small nuclear industry. But on largescale, i would certainly think PV is better.

[Rishirishi]

Will nuclear power ever be competative compared to PV? We now see prices down to RS 4,3 and it seems to be going down. It is clean, simple and easy.

Current costs in US for commercial nuclear power plants is @4.07 rs. per unit. (0.06 dollars). Note that this is after all the extra checks & hoops they have to go through.

With proper investments the costs can come down to as much as @3 Rs. per unit.

Again, if the energy is near free, and other commodity costs are artificially inflated., it will lead to a recycle economy. For example that rusty cycle can be melted and made into a rebar for construction. Or glass bottles from your beer can go into creating glass for windows.

That price probably does not include decomissioning and other costs. In any case I think it is rather optimistic to cut corners to reach RS 3. As of now Nuclear is only 30 paise cheaper. For India it is sensible to maintain a small nuclear industry. But on largescale, i would certainly think PV is better.

[disha]

Current costs in US for commercial nuclear power plants is @4.07 rs. per unit. (0.06 dollars). Note that this is after all the extra checks & hoops they have to go through.

With proper investments the costs can come down to as much as @3 Rs. per unit.

That price probably does not include decomissioning and other costs. In any case I think it is rather optimistic to cut corners to reach RS 3. As of now Nuclear is only 30 paise cheaper. For India it is sensible to maintain a small nuclear industry. But on largescale, i would certainly think PV is better.

Sir., the price also does not probably include going to the moon!!

The price I quoted includes decommissioning and other costs (the other costs being operating the reactor & maintaining the nuclear waste)., so please do not assume and please do not add your assumptive costs.

One more assumption that you are making is ' - but on largescale, I would certainly think PV is better -'. How so?

I have seen fanboys of PV on this forum and other threads painting unicorns out of PV. Trust me, I am also a fanboy of PV., particularly when this year - I am hoping to commission a $20k solar panel on my roof top (a 8 Kw, 32 panel with micro inverters). So I know a bit or two about solar panels.

One assumes without any cross-checking that PV is better. How is PV better when the process entails spending huge amount of energy to clean sand, melt sand, using coal to convert silica to silicon and drawing out a crystal, then cutting it into wafers, which are than photo-etched by chemicals (acids) and washed. The entire process is energy intensive and actually generates pollutants. [read this up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czochralski_process]

So how is PV better?

And then it does not produce electricity 1/3rd of the time (or 1/4th in my area) (check out the word 'solation').

Bottomline is, nuclear energy is very attractive - low pollution and low waste power source for base loads.

Fortunately India is pursuing nuclear power to Third/Fourth Gen reactors and hopefully by 2050 will replace 80% of coal based power plants with nuclear plants ensuring energy security for the next 400 years.

[chetak]

Piyush Goyal ‏@PiyushGoyal Jan 21

Reduced peak demand of ~1600 MW through LED bulbs. Imagine alternative of setting up four 400 MW plants & associated pollution & land needed

346 retweets 243 likes

[A_Gupta]

http://www.thehansindia.com/posts/index ... MPP/202893

The Anil Ambani group firm Reliance Power has said the Krishnapatnam UMPP, which was awarded to it in 2007, could not be taken forward due to escalated coal cost from Indonesia, among other factors. The Krishnapatnam Ultra Mega Power Project (KUMMP) is located in Andhra Pradesh while Tilaiya plant was in Jharkhand.

Reliance Power has informed the Andhra Pradesh government the procurers of Tilaiya UMPP -- which was stalled for over five years -- have accepted the termination of power purchase agreement and decided to purchase the entire shareholding in the project Special Purpose Vehicle from the company by way of mutual discussion with the developers.

[member_29172]

Will nuclear power ever be competative compared to PV? We now see prices down to RS 4,3 and it seems to be going down. It is clean, simple and easy.

right, because those green tinsheds are as efficient as nuclear energy...

[Rishirishi]

Will nuclear power ever be competative compared to PV? We now see prices down to RS 4,3 and it seems to be going down. It is clean, simple and easy.

right, because those green tinsheds are as efficient as nuclear energy...

?? did not get your ponit. Do you want to say that there is a difference in the energy ??

[Rishirishi]

That price probably does not include decomissioning and other costs. In any case I think it is rather optimistic to cut corners to reach RS 3. As of now Nuclear is only 30 paise cheaper. For India it is sensible to maintain a small nuclear industry. But on largescale, i would certainly think PV is better.[/quote]

Sir., the price also does not probably include going to the moon!!

The price I quoted includes decommissioning and other costs (the other costs being operating the reactor & maintaining the nuclear waste)., so please do not assume and please do not add your assumptive costs.

One more assumption that you are making is ' - but on largescale, I would certainly think PV is better -'. How so?

I have seen fanboys of PV on this forum and other threads painting unicorns out of PV. Trust me, I am also a fanboy of PV., particularly when this year - I am hoping to commission a $20k solar panel on my roof top (a 8 Kw, 32 panel with micro inverters). So I know a bit or two about solar panels.

One assumes without any cross-checking that PV is better. How is PV better when the process entails spending huge amount of energy to clean sand, melt sand, using coal to convert silica to silicon and drawing out a crystal, then cutting it into wafers, which are than photo-etched by chemicals (acids) and washed. The entire process is energy intensive and actually generates pollutants. [read this up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czochralski_process]

So how is PV better?

And then it does not produce electricity 1/3rd of the time (or 1/4th in my area) (check out the word 'solation').

Bottomline is, nuclear energy is very attractive - low pollution and low waste power source for base loads.

Fortunately India is pursuing nuclear power to Third/Fourth Gen reactors and hopefully by 2050 will replace 80% of coal based power plants with nuclear plants ensuring energy security for the next 400 years.[/quote]

However, safety aside, a leading Solar energy think tank, Bridge to India (BTI), said that just from an economic viability standpoint, solar seems to make so much more sense than nuclear. According to BTI, the cost per unit at the 9,900 MW Jaitapur Nuclear Power Plant is around 9 rupees ($0.15) per kWh, while those from the 6,000 MW Mithi Virdhi Nuclear Power Plant may even be as high as 12 rupees per unit ($0.20). Cost of power per unit from coal-based plants are around 4.5 rupees ($0.07) today.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/solar-bett ... a-experts/

Capital costs in India are very high, due to the high interest rates. The article above is 2 years old and we know what has happened to the PV prices.
Would not surprise me if all breaks are put on new Nuclear plants. There are vast underutilised areas in Rajaistan and TN that has a lot of sun. The areas are not very far off from the large population centers.

[disha]

However, safety aside, a leading Solar energy think tank, Bridge to India (BTI), said that just from an economic viability standpoint, solar seems to make so much more sense than nuclear. According to BTI, the cost per unit at the 9,900 MW Jaitapur Nuclear Power Plant is around 9 rupees ($0.15) per kWh, while those from the 6,000 MW Mithi Virdhi Nuclear Power Plant may even be as high as 12 rupees per unit ($0.20). Cost of power per unit from coal-based plants are around 4.5 rupees ($0.07) today.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/solar-bett ... a-experts/

Capital costs in India are very high, due to the high interest rates. The article above is 2 years old and we know what has happened to the PV prices.
Would not surprise me if all breaks are put on new Nuclear plants. There are vast underutilised areas in Rajaistan and TN that has a lot of sun. The areas are not very far off from the large population centers.

Sir, I am a leading solar think-tanki. Further, I am self-certified, self-awarded and self-congratulated very eminent think-tanki.

The bolded part first creates a FUD ('safety aside') and then positions itself (the underlined part).

Now coming to the 'mithi virdhi power plant' - the cost "maybe as high as" statement., it is a statement which is neither here or there. It is a classic - "according to my ultrasound the woman may be pregnant and as high as 3rd trimester". .

Either you quote me a real figure on cost per kwh in India or do not. Do not give me a two year old biased article from a solar consultancy group!!!

You asked for a price., I quoted it and was specific that it is in US. Now here is my source (I read this some year back or two when a person known to me was writing a paper on energy for his MBA and I was helping him out):

http://www.nei.org/Knowledge-Center/Nuc ... Life-Cycle

Here is the cost per KWh:

Fuel: 0.76 cents
Operation & Maintenance: 1.64 Cents
Waste management: 0.01 Cents (including interest)
Decommissioning: $300-500 Million per 1000 MWe BWR/PWR (assuming 50 year period life and the higher cost, it is 0.01 cents/KWh)

Total: 2.6 Cents/KWh

Since land is costly in India than in US., add 20% more. Since there is a political cost for nuclear energy, add in 20% more. Since all the typing requires 10% more cost., add that too and seeing a *50%* cost escalation, we are looking at 3.9 cents/Kwh. Let us be generous and round it to 4 cents/KWh.

That translates to 2.72 Rs/KWh. That is 6x more efficient than solar (you do the math) (note the land price for solar will be high, even if you put your panels in Raj and then you still have to dispose it 25 years from now).

So what the BTI told you is all farce. You have the data in the above link for nuclear since 1995.

[Rishirishi]

Your NEI site is a nuclear lobby site.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_e ... _by_source. Nuclear is expensiver then PV. But do present a good and trustworthy source.

[Rishirishi]

When PV is reaching coal level in India, it must be a better option then Nuclear.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_e ... _costs.png

[disha]

Your NEI site is a nuclear lobby site.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_e ... _by_source.

They have the data., if you have better data do quote that. Not unicorn statements from a consultancy group. Which is similar to below:

Nuclear is expensiver then PV.

How?

You then post an image that compares nuclear to coal and then gas and that too in different countries and for a single year with different agencies (house of lords from UK and MIT from US for example!) and for different years., the picture does not convey any information other than - nuclear is costly than coal and gas in the year 2004 (or whichever year when the study was made).

And then you proceed to make this profound and grand statement:

When PV is reaching coal level in India, it must be a better option then Nuclear.

The above statements are in the same bucket as following:

1. When pigs are reaching for wings, it must be a better option for them to fly
2. When Bakis are reaching for brains, it must be a better option for them to be a peaceful nation.
3. If my aunt had a mustache, it must be a better option then to call her uncle.

Please do not make such unicorn, airy-fairy statement. And then go and make a selective quote.

----

So coming back to your own link., from wikipedia (since NEI's data is now biased in your view - yeah they are a nuclear lobby, but they do have data stretching back for decades, so let us junk all that data of past and use a forecast for the future 30 years as basis ...)., let us take the EIA's forecasts itself (on which the wiki is based) and its report for 2015 for a forecast into 2020:

Projected LCOE in the U.S. by 2020 (as of 2015)
Power generating technology Minimum Average Maximum

Advanced Nuclear 91.8 95.2 101
Solar PV 97.8 125.3 193.3
Solar Thermal 174.4 239.7 382.5

Take the average., for utility scale - Solar PV is coming out 30% costly.

Okay that is your own estimates from your own wiki and AEI forecasts (AEI projects into future what is called 'Levelized Cost of Energy' or LCOE).

from the same wiki., let us take this future estimates from California Energy commission :

Type Year 2013 (Nominal $$) ($/MWh) Year 2024( Nominal $$) ($/MWh)
Name Merchant IOU POU Merchant IOU POU

Solar Photovoltaic (Thin Film) 100MW 111.07 170.00 121.30
Solar Photovoltaic (Single-Axis) 100MW 109.00 165.22 116.57 98.49 146.20 105.56
Solar Photovoltaic (Thin Film) 20MW 121.31 186.51 132.42 93.11 138.54 101.99
Solar Photovoltaic (Single-Axis) 20MW 117.74 179.16 125.86 108.81 162.68 116.56

Now if you notice one thing., the Solar PV (Solar thermal is a different beast., that is a technology which I have been following since 1980s )., the solar PV does not exceed 100 MW. It does *NOT* mention nuclear., since it is comparing grapes to water melons.

There is a reason for that., when it comes to small size - like 20 MW here and 30 MW there - anything other than nuclear will be efficient.

However beyond a certain scale., coal, gas and nuclear become viable. And on humongous scale with concomitant reduction in GHGs (or rather efficiencies) the advanced nuclear is the ONLY viable option.

This is because of scaling. You cannot pile a stack of PVs and expect a rise in output., you have to have newer and more advanced chips that are efficient in converting light to electricity. There is a upper limit for that at a given cost and production volume (note solyndra went down not because their idea was wrong, but they could not curve their chips at a large capacity at a reasonable cost)

A nuclear pile does not suffer from that. A nuclear pile can be scaled, the capital expenditure to add another nuclear pile into the mix is negligible. Take a look at KNPP-3/4 in the works.

Yes., Solar PVs will help for small rooftops, individual use - for distributed utility to the scale of 100/200 MWs - but can never scale to the base load requirements. It can only be met by Nuclear (or Gas/Coal if you are not worried about GHGs).

And yes., nuclear is cleaner than PV. (:eek: when did that happen).

What should India do? India should be and must be pragmatic. Build rooftop solar, use coal efficiently (check the latest from Nitin Gadkari) and build nuclear power stations as if there is no tomorrow.

PS: Edited to clarify the issue with 'data' and 'forecasts'. LCOE etc are good forecasts., but they make assumptions on several factors and variables - and without a complete understanding of those factors and variables that go into making a forecast, comparing those estimates IMHO is a good basis but pales in comparison to the actual data compiled over years.

[SaiK]

Will nuclear power ever be competative compared to PV? We now see prices down to RS 4,3 and it seems to be going down. It is clean, simple and easy.

Nuclear and thermal power can be controlled to run base and peak loads. Renewables/hydel are dependent on sunshine, wild, water flow etc.

Yes.. we need most residential day-time use driven outta alternative energies... unless there is consistent and sustained wind/water flow available.

nukes are riskier, but long-term and have increased availability. certain sectors like railways and industries can have dedicated nuke power source., with them supplying power during night time for residential use. [assuming not all work during night, and loads come down by at least 30% depending on the type of power consumption].. essentially, we have a scratch-back arrangement between these two power supply grids.

industrial and residential, keep aside the essential service grids separate(transportation : rail, airports, roadways, waterways... support utilities and service industries - water, data, telecom, ...)

[Rishirishi]

Disha
your post is too long, sarcastic and frankly not very impressive. We know for a fact that price of solar PV will be RS 4,3 per unit, and it is likely to come down as the technology is maturing.

What are the current price for nuclear energy in India and for the future plants. Please refrain from speculative fantasy prices. Stick to the facts.

[Yagnasri]

Mango post alert

I do not know much about solar or Nuclear power. But involved in these projects in a big way indirectly and know a bit about infra companies in India. So wish to flag out some points

1. The quotes of Rs 4 plus etc in PPAs may or may not be viable and infra companies here tend to make all kinds of estimates. They do it just to get the business and care for nothing else at the initial stage.

2. Most of the Electricity Boards do not pay money to power producers on the regular basis or even with a reasonable delay. This is a serious issue. GOI is trying to solve it and unless it is done the future is going to be very bad.

3. Most of the infra companies do all kinds of things like diversion of funds etc and are already in deep problems. This is going to affect the power production sooner than later.

4. Since nuclear power is largely held in PSUs the cost and production figures may be more reliable. I am just saying that their estimates may be more careful and not overoptimistic.

So finances may end up creating a big mess in near future.

One mango question - Do we have salt based nuclear reactors in India now producing power??? I thought we do not have them.

[member_29172]

Mango post alert

I do not know much about solar or Nuclear power. But involved in these projects in a big way indirectly and know a bit about infra companies in India. So wish to flag out some points

1. The quotes of Rs 4 plus etc in PPAs may or may not be viable and infra companies here tend to make all kinds of estimates. They do it just to get the business and care for nothing else at the initial stage.

2. Most of the Electricity Boards do not pay money to power producers on the regular basis or even with a reasonable delay. This is a serious issue. GOI is trying to solve it and unless it is done the future is going to be very bad.

3. Most of the infra companies do all kinds of things like diversion of funds etc and are already in deep problems. This is going to affect the power production sooner than later.

4. Since nuclear power is largely held in PSUs the cost and production figures may be more reliable. I am just saying that their estimates may be more careful and not overoptimistic.

So finances may end up creating a big mess in near future.

One mango question - Do we have salt based nuclear reactors in India now producing power??? I thought we do not have them.

I am not an eggspurt either but I generally do follow these developments, have been doing it for a while now.

1. the entire solar industry is a speculative mess. They have to bid for the projects so they don't mind bidding the lowest, getting the job and then raising the costs. Media, the retards that they are, run with the numbers to promote the green agenda. It has nothing to do with logic everything to do with feel good drama. Being green is cool and hip so everyone wants to be an environmentalist green fundoo and cover everything from their rooftops to their t-shirts with solar cells. Its a cute gesture but the efficiency (bang for buck so to speak) is fairly pathetic. Last I checked it was in the range of 20%, add to that the fact that solar energy can't be stored in huge capacity (yes yes I know batteries are being invented and someday thousands of megawatts of energy would be stored in them, they have been saying it for the last 30 years. )

2. Discom debt is a major issue that has recently been tackled with restructuring the debt and making the state pay over several years. The Uday Scheme passed recently is aimed at reducing the debt and making the state electricity boards functional again. The glorious welfare/subsidy schemes of the previous sickular government has done massive financial damage to almost every institution. Just take Railways for example.

3. That's a common theme among many companies around the world. companies divert funds for paying off debts and buying new products etc.

4. PSUs go through a lot of regulatory checks. Given that nuclear power requires high level safety standards and thorough research in it's cost effectiveness.Data from PSUs is certainly more reliable than some dubious solar think tank/green fundoo organisation. Those cartoons seriously believe that coal,oil, natural gas can be replaced by planting hundreds of windmills and solar plants. I wonder how the cars will run, how the trains will run, how heavy engineering companies will run. Obviously logic and reality doesnt matter to these idiots. That being said, solar is not bad for remote villages with 300-1000 people, where setting huge power infrastructure doesn't justify the cost. Solar units are relatively easier to repair, a few villagers are taught some basics in repairing their power distribution box, changing fuse and so on. It's quite simple and once you get the ball rolling they adapt easily to it. Naturally the Ladakh area which is quite high and remote uses extensive solar for the villagers living there. Similarly remote villages in Rajasthan are also using solar. It's also a good alternative to warm your bathwater or have a somewhat reliable addition to your home electricity infrastructure. Even then solar plants don't always cover all energy needs of individual homes.

5. Salt based reactors are functional, but right now they are checking how affordable and efficient they are and so on. It's not something most Indians need to worry about for a while. You know how preliminary research and testing happens, it takes time.


@rishirishi - all your arguments begin and end with the "Rs. 4" figure which is nice, it's good to know solar is cheap, but so is pedaling a bicycle to light up a 60W bulb, I bet that is cheaper, maybe we should shut down coal and start pedaling bikes? That'd be even better no?

They just don't get it for some reason, the energy produced by solar panels is not enough to run an entire city let alone an entire country. It's massive waste of land and resources, which a land starved India needs for other projects. Renewable energy has it's own place, but it won't be replacing coal and oil anytime soon. It's not corporate greed, it's not corruption, it's common logic.. the energy you get from a kg of coal far outweighs the energy you'd collect from an hour of solar light on a solar panel.

[disha]

Disha
your post is too long, sarcastic and frankly not very impressive. We know for a fact that price of solar PV will be RS 4,3 per unit, and it is likely to come down as the technology is maturing.

What are the current price for nuclear energy in India and for the future plants. Please refrain from speculative fantasy prices. Stick to the facts.

Are you trolling Rishirishi? Please read the post. I am using your data. You asked for figures & I gave you. You do not like it & pull LCOE from wiki & when I quote you your own wiki you call it fantasy figures.

You cannot try to invent figures to match your bias.

[disha]

Yagnasri'ji and Alka'ji - thanks for your informative posts.

Yagnasri'ji - I think PSU's also go through CAG. So not just that their figures are better, they go through the grinder of the CAG as well. Of course power utilities in US are also regulated (and audited) (link : http://www.raponline.org/docs/RAP_Lazar ... 011_03.pdf).

The wiki which rishirishi quoted used LCOE (or future estimates) and I have pointed out issues with using LCOE and even after using that, nuclear comes out cheaper. Of course, PV Solar size as Alka'ji pointed out barely crosses 100 MW. Good for small villages/towns which are not connected to the grid (there is still the problem of storing the power at a affordable price) but cannot scale as a base load to Nuclear power.

[Gyan]

Nobody can claim that Solar will solve all problems but in regard to India the use of Solar, Windmill, Hydro and Nuclear will play "increasingly" important role. Just like LED use will increase saving of electricity but that does not mean that "total" electricity consumption will fall.

[JTull]

http://www.thehansindia.com/posts/index ... MPP/202893

The Anil Ambani group firm Reliance Power has said the Krishnapatnam UMPP, which was awarded to it in 2007, could not be taken forward due to escalated coal cost from Indonesia, among other factors. The Krishnapatnam Ultra Mega Power Project (KUMMP) is located in Andhra Pradesh while Tilaiya plant was in Jharkhand.

Reliance Power has informed the Andhra Pradesh government the procurers of Tilaiya UMPP -- which was stalled for over five years -- have accepted the termination of power purchase agreement and decided to purchase the entire shareholding in the project Special Purpose Vehicle from the company by way of mutual discussion with the developers.

As expected. Anil basically stopped other bidders from setting up the plant and India is the loser.

[member_29172]

As expected. Anil basically stopped other bidders from setting up the plant and India is the loser.

Not really one plant was closed and another two were opened. I don't blame Anil really, go to skyscrapercity India and look at the project updates, the red tape, the spanners thrown in during the rule of congress would make anyone go crazy. Out of some 40 major power, transportation and infrastructure projects, only 1 or 2 got clearance and even then their progress was slow. Most were stuck in green tribunal cases, NGO cases, this law, that law, public litigations.. you'd be crazy to keep wasting your money on land which was supposed to house a power plant or a manufacturing plant 10 years ago. You'd be so frustrated you'd either shoot yourself or someone else.

Even now, the project clearance rate hasn't gone up yet. Land bill reforms were really important that the morons of aap and khangress have managed to strangle and kill successfully.

[Rishirishi]

Yagnasri'ji and Alka'ji - thanks for your informative posts.

Yagnasri'ji - I think PSU's also go through CAG. So not just that their figures are better, they go through the grinder of the CAG as well. Of course power utilities in US are also regulated (and audited) (link : http://www.raponline.org/docs/RAP_Lazar ... 011_03.pdf).

The wiki which rishirishi quoted used LCOE (or future estimates) and I have pointed out issues with using LCOE and even after using that, nuclear comes out cheaper. Of course, PV Solar size as Alka'ji pointed out barely crosses 100 MW. Good for small villages/towns which are not connected to the grid (there is still the problem of storing the power at a affordable price) but cannot scale as a base load to Nuclear power.

You claim to be a professionl within the field. So what is the cost of generating electricity in India from a Nuclear source? Your Rs 3 claim should be backed with some source.

[disha]

Rishirishi., if you have data - please post.

I posted mine with source and pointed out

That translates to 2.72 Rs/KWh. That is 6x more efficient than solar (you do the math) (note the land price for solar will be high, even if you put your panels in Raj and then you still have to dispose it 25 years from now).*

*The calculations are provided in other posts. All disclaimers apply.

Agreed that is NOT Rs. 3/KWh. It is some 10% less than that. Happy?

Please do not think I am some professional., unless you are assuming that a restaurant kitchen hand or a gas station attendant is a profession.

Again you cannot like or dislike data., particularly "unlike data" if it does not meet your preconceived notions.

[disha]

Nobody can claim that Solar will solve all problems but in regard to India the use of Solar, Windmill, Hydro and Nuclear will play "increasingly" important role. Just like LED use will increase saving of electricity but that does not mean that "total" electricity consumption will fall.

Here is my prediction in the next year., per capita consumption of electricity will fall, still the total consumption of electricity will go up!

If the growth trajectory is maintained, after a point the per capita consumption of electricity will continue to rise with a concomitant rise in total consumption of electricity till it approaches ~2 KWh/day/person

[member_29172]

Nobody can claim that Solar will solve all problems but in regard to India the use of Solar, Windmill, Hydro and Nuclear will play "increasingly" important role. Just like LED use will increase saving of electricity but that does not mean that "total" electricity consumption will fall.

Given that India is an industrializing country with millions of people getting out of poverty over the next decade, it's a given fact that energy consumption would increase, no?

The green loonies here on brf and other sites, from oirope to their green fanbois in India have been saying that coal and oil and nuclear should be completely abandoned and replaced with "thousands" of solar panels and windmills. India is a sunny country and all, basic logic and economics be damned.

Crores of rupees invested in a solar park will still give pathetic results compared to crores invested in a nuclear powerplant. If you have 1000 crores and you can invest it in a 400 MW solar park or a 2000 MW nuclear plant, which one do you think a sane person should invest in?

[disha]

^^ The green loonies will stack their solar panels vertically and then blame sun and after that the solar cell manufacturer. In the meantime they will light candles at night.

PV Solar can barely go beyond 200 MWs. Here is one of the largest PV farm http://energy.gov/articles/agua-calient ... icas-solar and it is all of 290 MW and here is another solar NON-PV plant (all of 400 MW) http://www.energy.gov/articles/celebrat ... ower-plant. BTW, the later one is producing erratic power - some days more and some days less. And the solar concentrate power plant uses gas to actually operate!!! I am posting the above PV plants since

a. They are one of the largest plants operating in world. To point out that two such plant in Rajasthan will produce at most 600 MW.
b. The cost structure of the plant. From initial setup to maintenance to daily operational cost (check the amount of gas used by the solar concentrator!)

I will let RishiRishi comment on how much area the Ivanpah or the agua-caliente occupy. And compare it with KNPP (you can use the entire exclusion zone for KNPP but only the project area for the solar to skew data in favour of solar ) . Also post ratio of power generated to area used.

[disha]

Here is a must-watch clip from Swarajyamag:

http://swarajyamag.com/technology/why-i ... -reactors/