India's Power Sector

The Technology & Economic Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to Technological and Economic developments in India. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2316
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Katare » 29 Jul 2007 08:44


gashish
BRFite
Posts: 257
Joined: 23 May 2004 11:31
Location: BRF's tailgate party, aka, Nukkad thread

Postby gashish » 30 Jul 2007 22:30

Chinese Competition to BHEL for power plants

[quote]However, it could do little to overcome the problem as BHEL offers the lowest prices for plant machinery in the 250 Mw to 500 Mw plant category. But, a visit of the high power delegation led by Maharashtra energy minister Dileep Walse-Patil found Shanghai Electric Corporation’s prices to be competitive.
Speaking to Business Standard, a senior official from the energy ministry said, “We will be giving the contract for the power plant only on the basis of competitive bidding whether it is BHEL, Shanghai Electric or any other company. However, we wanted to ascertain if the Shanghai Electrical’s designs for the power plants are radically different from those used by Mahagenco and the availability of spare parts over the next 20 to 25 years.â€

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 11986
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Postby Suraj » 30 Jul 2007 23:28

Reliance Energy bags 4000MW Sasan power plant deal, to invest $5 billion
The uncertainty over the 4,000 Mw Sasan ultra mega power project is over. Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (ADAG) company Reliance Power (formerly known as Reliance Energy Generation) has bagged the project after matching the tariff of Rs 1.1962 per unit that was quoted by the orignal winning bidder, a consortium of Singapore-based Globaleq and Lanco Infratech, that was disqualified.

The decision to award the project to Reliance Power was taken by the eGoM, which met today to consider the report submitted by the board of Sasan Power after the empowered group of ministers declared Lanco's bid invalid last week.

Sasan Power is the shell company floated by Power Finance Corporation to pilot the Sasan project.

"Sasan Power had received revised offers from the three bidders that include Jai Prakash Associates, NTPC and Reliance Power and Reliance's revised bid quoting a levelised tariff of Rs 1.1962 per unit was the lowest...The eGoM has asked Sasan Power to award Reliance the letter of intent for the project," power minister Sushil Kumar Shinde, who is also heading the eGoM, said.

The bid bond of Rs 120 crore submitted by Lanco would be returned to the company after deducting some amount, Shinde added.

In an official release issued today, Anil Dhirubhai Ambani, chairman, Reliance Energy, said: "We are delighted to have won India's largest ultra mega power project through an international competitive bidding process. We look forward to building this world-class infrastructure facility.
The Rs 20,000 crore investment in the Sasan project will contribute to accelerating India's economic growth by substantially raising the current generation capacity."

Vriksh
BRFite
Posts: 406
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 11:31

Postby Vriksh » 31 Jul 2007 03:00

gashish wrote:Chinese Competition to BHEL for power plants

Shanghai Electric Corporation’s prices to be competitive.



It will be awesome if the Chinese help us kill off these blood sucking parasites . More power to Shanghai Electric perhaps this way India will actually see more "electric" power delivered to the people.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 31 Jul 2007 23:40


SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36076
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 31 Jul 2007 23:57

oil lobby at works

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 05 Aug 2007 18:50

I notice that we don't have a thread for general energy sector discussion, so I'm putting this article here:

Progress on Geothermal Energy

"Scientists say this geothermal energy, clean, quiet and virtually inexhaustible, could fill the world's annual needs 250,000 times over with nearly zero impact on the climate or the environment. A study released this year by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said if 40 percent of the heat under the United States could be tapped, it would meet demand 56,000 times over. It said an investment of $800 million to $1 billion could produce more than 100 gigawatts of electricity by 2050, equaling the combined output of all 104 nuclear power plants in the U.S."

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 05 Aug 2007 20:20

oil lobby at works


SaiK:

While it is easy to dismiss any opposition to bio-fuel as the work of the "oil lobby", it may be useful to study what are the factors that make bio-fuel feasible or infeasible as a replacement for fossil fuels. From my experience in the field, the cost of extraction of the raw material from the biological source is generally highly energy intensive (which is why bio fuels are always within $15/bbl of becoming economically viable), and its refining and converting to a source with high energy density is also highly energy intensive. This does not even address the issue of *how much* energy can be possibly obtained from bio fuel, in terms of arable land etc, and impact on food prices etc.

Unless we face up to the reality, we will never develop a cost effective solution to replace fossil fuels.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 05 Aug 2007 20:26

Bio-fuels would also be cultivated at the expense of regular agriculture, meaning that there would be less food available for the world.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 05 Aug 2007 20:30

Here's an interesting approach:

Electric Farming: Solar-Powered Tractor

It's expensive and uneconomical now, but perhaps in the future it could be manufactured cheaply enough to make it economically competitive. Especially since Indians are increasingly hostage to the price of oil.

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 05 Aug 2007 21:01

Sanjay: What would need to change for the electric tractor to become economical?

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 05 Aug 2007 21:24

The cost of solar components. Sunlight is free, but solar panels are not.

Here was an interesting breakthrough:

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/art ... 2007-1.htm

Considering that most leading-edge solar panels on the market produce 15% efficiency today, this is a great leap forward.

These types of technology would help India immensely, because they are distributed forms of power production, and thus are not constrained by traditional power distribution bottlenecks.

It's always gratifying to see news of solar manufacturing projects announced in India, like that of Mosser-Baer, etc. It's also good to see groups like Tata and Reliance announcing their forays into semiconductor manufacturing will include solar panels, and not just microchips.

I notice that solar water heaters are taking off in India, though.

gashish
BRFite
Posts: 257
Joined: 23 May 2004 11:31
Location: BRF's tailgate party, aka, Nukkad thread

Postby gashish » 05 Aug 2007 21:39

Calvin wrote:
oil lobby at works


From my experience in the field, the cost of extraction of the raw material from the biological source is generally highly energy intensive (which is why bio fuels are always within $15/bbl of becoming economically viable), and its refining and converting to a source with high energy density is also highly energy intensive.


Calvin: can you point me to reliable studies that compare energy(not cost) consumed to make 1 unit of petrol from crude oil vis-a-vis 1 unit of ethanol from grain/cane/cellulose? Whatever I read so far on "net energy" of ethanol from different sources, appear biased and conveniently ignore or add energy inputs that make the numbers go from negative %ages to high positive %ages, really depending upon who is funding the study.

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 05 Aug 2007 22:03

I don't have any references, but in the oil and gas business, we say that 15-20% of a barrel must be expended to convert oil under the ground to a gasoline at a gas station. This is a ratio of 4-5 gallons produced per gallon consumed. I think the comparable figure for ethanol is 1.25 gallons per gallon, or something like this.

We know the net energy density per gallon of crude oil and of ethanol, so the rest must be facile.

gashish
BRFite
Posts: 257
Joined: 23 May 2004 11:31
Location: BRF's tailgate party, aka, Nukkad thread

Postby gashish » 05 Aug 2007 23:59

Calvin wrote:
We know the net energy density per gallon of crude oil and of ethanol, so the rest must be facile.


IMO, one metric doesn't capture the whole story (besides this metric doesn't capture amount of energy spent in producing the given energy density). Otherwise other fuels with high energy density would have ruled the energy markets.

bio-fuels may not replace fossil fuels but do seem to have potential to be the part of energy puzzle india is trying to solve and reduce the foreign dependency. We want energy from wherever we can get(obviously, if the net enegry is -ve, then the solution is a bummer). From Indian perspective, ethanol/bio-fuel can be produced from the "leftovers" of sugar factories and non-food raw materials, a win-win situation.

Last year I visited a sugar factory and was impressed to see that the whole factory was energy independent(no external source required) and not a single material by-product was wasted.

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 06 Aug 2007 00:09

besides this metric doesn't capture amount of energy spent in producing the given energy density


Are you talking about the amount of energy required to *create* a barrel of crude oil?

From Indian perspective, ethanol/bio-fuel can be produced from the "leftovers" of sugar factories and non-food raw materials, a win-win situation.


This is where economics become part of the puzzle.

While there may be a net positive energy ratio, unless this ratio is high enough, the operating cost of extracting this energy divided by the energy extracted will result in a *cost* that is generally higher than the market price of this energy.

Again, it is very easy to dismiss those that say that conventional biofuel (ethanol based, or vegetable oil based) is not economically feasible. But the reality is that *every* bio-fuel program anywhere in the world has (a) needed government subsidies; and (b) hasn't found a way to wean itself off the subsidies even at $70+ per barrel.

This should tell the thinking person something.

gashish
BRFite
Posts: 257
Joined: 23 May 2004 11:31
Location: BRF's tailgate party, aka, Nukkad thread

Postby gashish » 06 Aug 2007 00:59

Calvin wrote:Are you talking about the amount of energy required to *create* a barrel of crude oil?

Nope. I'm alluding to this part which is not captured by energy density:
Calvin wrote:This is a ratio of 4-5 gallons produced per gallon consumed. I think the comparable figure for ethanol is 1.25 gallons per gallon, or something like this.


As I mentioned earlier, this varies from source to source.



This is where economics become part of the puzzle.

While there may be a net positive energy ratio, unless this ratio is high enough, the operating cost of extracting this energy divided by the energy extracted will result in a *cost* that is generally higher than the market price of this energy.

Again, it is very easy to dismiss those that say that conventional biofuel (ethanol based, or vegetable oil based) is not economically feasible. But the reality is that *every* bio-fuel program anywhere in the world has (a) needed government subsidies; and (b) hasn't found a way to wean itself off the subsidies even at $70+ per barrel.

This should tell the thinking person something.


the very existence of subsidies also should tell something to thinking person. I have yet to see convincing argument that explains why extracting energy from bio-fuel is inherently more expensive than crude oil ,especially in Indian context (from sugar factories ). This would basically tell us if the biofuel industry needs further technological breakthroughs or if their case is hopelessly condemned to be subsidy-dependent forever. Hence the request for references.

One of the things that could explain the subsidy is the high-cost of competing with well-entrenched monpolistic presence of crude oil and other powerful lobbies like liquor lobby.

Pls bear in mind, I'm not advocating full replacement of oil with biofuel. Just exploring the viability of biofuel as alternative source of energy or as a fuel blending agent.

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 06 Aug 2007 01:23

I'm alluding to this part which is not captured by energy density


gashish - I don't get what you are alluding to.

I was if we say that 20% of every gallon of gasoline is required to explore, produce and refine it, we can reduce this to a Joule of fossil fuel required to explore, produce and refine per Joule of fossil fuel available for consumption (i.e, 0.2 J/J). The similar number for ethanol would be 0.8 J/J (or thereabouts, if my unit conversions are right).

I have yet to see convincing argument that explains why extracting energy from bio-fuel is inherently more expensive than crude oil ,especially in Indian context (from sugar factories ).


The simple argument, for me is the cost of boiling off all that water - for example, you need 7 - 10 lb of sugar juice from a cane to make one lb of sugar, or that 85-90% of sugar cane juice is water. Soybean is 90% water, 5% carbs and 0.2% oil.

gashish
BRFite
Posts: 257
Joined: 23 May 2004 11:31
Location: BRF's tailgate party, aka, Nukkad thread

Postby gashish » 06 Aug 2007 06:38

Energy density of fuel: Energy available per unit mass or volume of the fuel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
Gasoline: 46.9MJ/KG
Ethanol: 30MJ/KG

This is inherent chemcial property. Probably, nothing can be done about this.

Net energy: As per ur numbers, 0.2J energy is required to make 1J of energy available in the form of gasoline==>0.8J
For ethanol==>0.2J

These are two different metrics.

The computation of this second metric tends to be controversial. And the number varies from source to source. For example, fierce critics of Ethanol include the solar energy tapped by plants, energy consumed by workers and to build the machinery(!!) on the input side and ignore energy of by-products produced. While the supporters ignore subsidies. The devil really lies in the details of computation.

This metric also depends on the input source (corn,cane,cellulose) and technology used(technological improvements over the years have increased efficiencies in ethanol production). The point is to look forward to see if technological improvements can make the biofuel industry economically competitive.

Here is the presentation by Vinod Khosla ,a latest supporter of Ethanol: Think outside the Barrel
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 3&q=engEDU

He claims:
cost of production of ethanol from corn=$0.75 per gallon
cost of production of petroleum=$1.60 per gallon
( emphasizing without subsidies)
The demand for FFV(flex fuel vehicles)in Brazil increased from 4 to 70% without subsidies.

1 hour long persuasive talk. Feel free to poke holes..:)

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 06 Aug 2007 08:09

IN Brazil, Gasoline is taxed and Ethanol is subsidized. When Khosla quotes the "cost of production" of ethanol from corn, he is leaving out the cost of corn. When he counts the "Cost of production" of gasoline, he includes the cost of crude oil. At $70/bbl and 42 gal/bbl we can calculate how much of the cost of gasoline is the cost of the crude.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 06 Aug 2007 15:24

IN Brazil, Gasoline is taxed and Ethanol is subsidized. When Khosla quotes the "cost of production" of ethanol from corn, he is leaving out the cost of corn. When he counts the "Cost of production" of gasoline, he includes the cost of crude oil. At $70/bbl and 42 gal/bbl we can calculate how much of the cost of gasoline is the cost of the crude.


Equating subsidy with tax rebates is fradulent argument from the selfserving oil industy. Another cost aspect is that oil consumption should pay, for the damages that they casuse to the environemt. In actual effect Oil consumers are environmental theifs.

The point with Taxation is to reduce the money supply in the economy. As long as the sale price of fuel stayes the same, it does not matter weather the government taxes oil and gives rebate to biofuel.

If biofule can be manufactured and sold in the Indian market for approximately the same as the oil based fuel, then it makes sence. Because it will save the nation some 50 billion dollars in forigin exchange, save the environment, and make India independant of oil producers in the middle east.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 06 Aug 2007 16:02

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jatropha







Link for Jatropa.
It is possible to produce approx 190 000 litres of biodisel per sq.km. Ie. it is possible to produce 1 900 000 000 litres per year, from an area of 100kmx100 km (10 000 sq km). that is sufficient to run approx 2 million cars, consuming some 950 liters per year.

[edit] Yields of common crops
Crop kg oil/ha litres oil/ha lbs oil/acre US gal/acre
corn (maize) 145 172 129 18
cashew nut 148 176 132 19
oats 183 217 163 23
lupine 195 232 175 25
kenaf 230 273 205 29
calendula 256 305 229 33
cotton 273 325 244 35
hemp 305 363 272 39
soybean 375 446 335 48
coffee 386 459 345 49
linseed (flax) 402 478 359 51
hazelnuts 405 482 362 51
euphorbia 440 524 393 56
pumpkin seed 449 534 401 57
coriander 450 536 402 57
mustard seed 481 572 430 61
camelina 490 583 438 62
sesame 585 696 522 74
safflower 655 779 585 83
rice 696 828 622 88
tung oil tree 790 940 705 100
sunflowers 800 952 714 102
cocoa (cacao) 863 1,026 771 110
peanuts 890 1,059 795 113
opium poppy 978 1,163 873 124
rapeseed (Canola) 1,000 1,190 893 127
olives 1,019 1,212 910 129
castor beans 1,188 1,413 1,061 151
pecan nuts 1,505 1,791 1,344 191
jojoba 1,528 1,818 1,365 194
jatropha 1,590 1,892 1,420 202
macadamia nuts 1,887 2,246 1,685 240
Brazil nuts 2,010 2,392 1,795 255
avocado 2,217 2,638 1,980 282
coconut 2,260 2,689 2,018 287
oil palm 5,000 5,950 4,465 635
Chinese tallow 5,500 6,545 4,912 699
Algae* 39,916 47,500 35,613 5,000

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 07 Aug 2007 02:44

Equating subsidy with tax rebates is fradulent argument


Why do you say this?

In one case, the government pays a company money from the tax payer; and in the second case, the government selectively reduces the tax burden on the company - thereby effectively discriminating against other tax payers.

Rahul Mehta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2577
Joined: 22 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Ahmedabad, India --- Bring JurySys in India
Contact:

Postby Rahul Mehta » 07 Aug 2007 07:31

SoneOne: Equating subsidy with tax rebates is fradulent argument

Calvin: Why do you say this? In one case, the government pays a company money from the tax payer; and in the second case, the government selectively reduces the tax burden on the company - thereby effectively discriminating against other tax payers.


Both, subsidies and tax rebates are bad.

But subsidies are worse.

--

When GoI says : "earn money from industry A, and instead of usual 35% tax rate, pay a lower tax rate", the industrialists will

a)invest more in A or

b)wrongfully try to show that their income was from A and not from other sources.

(b) is what I call as diversion or deliberate mis-classification of income.

But here, the person has to at least do some activity to earn income in industry A or some other area from where he can siphon money into A.

---

But when GoI says that start industry A and GoI will be give Rs X crores as subsidy, many neta-IAS-judges-elitemen etc will start A only on paper and devour all subsidies. So GoI loses money and there is no industrial activity either.

---

IOW, in tax rebates, GoI loses money but some industrial activity does happen which will benefit society. While in subsidy, the neta-IAS-judges-intellectuals-elitemen chew away all subsidies and no activity may happen.

--

Now, I am hostile to BOTH. But I am more hostile to subsidy due to above reason.

--

But most intellectuals incl. BRites, who claim themselves as anti-subsidy are in reality supporters of subsidies that subsidize rich. eg Most oppose LPG subsidies but support land/cash subsidies given to JNU, IIMA etc. as IIMA, JNU etc subsidy goes mainly to the elitekids. The concerned citizens should be aware of their selective fraudulent opposition to subsidies.

.

Raju

Postby Raju » 07 Aug 2007 08:30

Delhi is again facing a power crises with daily load-shedding of 1 hr (going on since past 1 month). Strangely enough no one is reporting it anywhere. Media is very silent on this.

Seems like BSES aka Reliance (the Delhi private power monopoly inplace) has mastered another art viz media management, without actually delivering what it was originally supposed to.

During the last crises their media management was very shoddy.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Postby vina » 07 Aug 2007 09:11

Raju wrote:Delhi is again facing a power crises with daily load-shedding of 1 hr (going on since past 1 month). Strangely enough no one is reporting it anywhere. Media is very silent on this ..


Ahemm.. To use the term New Yorkers would use for "Iowa" and if it falls off the map in to the sea.. (a New Yorker's worst nightmare is to be transported to Iowa and made to live there).. .. If Delhi falls of the map into the ocean, I don't think the rest of India would bat an eyelid or give a damn.. On the contrary , there would be whoops of joy at having got rid of an entire set of politicos, scumbag lawyers , movers, fixers , shaker, babus ,and other such distasteful critters..

Raju

Postby Raju » 07 Aug 2007 09:41

Boss, Delhi in general has very little to do with the gentlemen you are describing. They live in a cocoon of their own called NDMC otherwise aptly named 'Loot-yens' Delhi.

And they are too smart for the likes of you and me...

Look here

NDMC averse to pvt power company
29 Jul 2007, 0910hrs IST

NEW DELHI: The New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) has filed objections to the BSES’s plea seeking a licence for power distribution in the NDMC area. The objections related concern over a private player in a high security zone that has buildings like the Rashtrapati Bhawan and the Prime Minister’s residence.

The NDMC’s objections were submitted to the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) on Tuesday.

BSES had applied in October for a licence to supply electricity in the area. The Council has been responsible for its own power supply so far. This was a fallout of the new Electricity Act that came into effect in July 2003 that allows more than one company to distribute power in one area.

‘‘We supply reliable power to highly sensitive areas. Allowing a private company can risk security in VIP residences and offices,’’ a senior NDMC official said.

Moreover, NDMC buys power from Transco at a much higher rate, Rs 2.84 per unit, than BSES who buys power for Rs 1.34. NDMC has 70,000 consumers of which 47,000 are domestic connections. ‘‘If we have to compete with the company, then the purchase price should be the same. We sell power to hotels and commercial establishments for Rs 6.34 per unit and use this to cross subsidise our schools and hospitals besides our welfare projects. If the private company decides to supply power only to bulk consumers, we will lose out on revenue,’’ a NDMC official said.

There is also a severe shortage of space in the area to set up the infrastructure like laying cables, putting up transformers and substations, he claimed. The new Electricity Act exempts NDMC from ‘‘providing non-discriminatory open access on the distribution system’’ so BSES has no option but to set up a separate distribution network.

Delhi is the second state in India to have this provision where more than one licensee can function within the same area of supply.

The last day for accepting objections is Wednesday, after which public hearings will be held by DERC.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

City power-starved, NDMC sells it to UP, We Should Get Excess Power: Discoms To DERC

By Unregistered Visitors, Section Electricity
Posted on Thu Aug 02, 2007 at 01:54:10 AM EST

Here comes another jolt for the `aam admi' who's got used to paying more for getting less power. The VVIPs of Lutyens' Delhi not only get the best power supply at the lowest rates, their municipality is also raking in cash by selling its surplus to other states at higher rates.
NDMC gets 350 MW of cheap allocated power from generating units owned by the government. While its own requirement is barely 300 MW, it has been selling the balance
to Uttar Pradesh
(UP) even as other discoms like BSES are asking for tariff hikes to buy increasingly expensive power. Which means that even as the `aam admi' faces the prospect of paying more even as their discoms complain of buying expensive power, VVIPs remain a pampered lot.

Now the discoms, BSES and NDPL, have approached the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) to ensure that NDMC keeps the power it needs but the excess is distributed among the other distribution companies so that their power purchase cost remains in control and does not need to be passed on to the consumer. According to sources, if this continues, then the consequences could be seen soon in the multi-year tariff where it might go down to as low as Rs 1.50 per unit in NDMC areas and as high as Rs 4 for the rest of Delhi.

DERC chairman Berjinder Singh said: ``We are examining this issue and will pass an order in a day or two. The commission will take all steps to ensure that Delhiites get a reliable supply at reasonable rates and the discoms' demand is being examined closely.''




Sources in the power industry said government entities were getting preferential treatment and NDMC was making a neat profit by selling their surplus power to other states at a higher cost. This too, when other discoms were forced to buy costly power at the rate of Rs 7.49 per unit. ``BSES and NDPL are demanding that Delhi's power should remain within the Capital itself and any surplus power with any discom should be made available to others if required at the cost rate which is Rs 2.80 per unit,'' said a senior power department official.
NDMC admitted it had excess power and traded it. ``Any excess power we get goes in the unscheduled interchange (UI) pool where the rates for selling are decided by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC),'' said an official. This means whatever profit and loss comes out of the excess power given by a particular discom, it is borne by them. In NDMC's case, sources say they were able to sell the power they didn't require and make a good profit.

``NDMC doesn't need to buy costly power and is making extra money with its excess. BSES and NDPL are crying foul and are demanding the excess be offered to them first,'' said a DERC official.

The decision to allocate 350 MW power to NDMC was taken at a high-powered meeting chaired by the chief secretary and the home ministry about six months back. The allocation was then made by DERC to the various discoms from March 30. While NDMC gets 350 MW allocation and MES gets 50 MW, the remaining 3,100 MW was divided between BSES Yamuna, BSES Rajdhani and NDPL according to their average power consumption in the last five years. Another 299 MW unallocated power share was left to the discretion of the Delhi government to allocate according to their will. This power has been since allocated to BSES Yamuna to tide over their huge loss levels.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9882
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Postby Aditya_V » 07 Aug 2007 10:00

Media might be silent also cause with the elections coming up it may not be convinient for them to report shortcomings of a Congress Government.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 07 Aug 2007 12:26

Why do you say this?

In one case, the government pays a company money from the tax payer; and in the second case, the government selectively reduces the tax burden on the company - thereby effectively discriminating against other tax payers.


exactly:
In one case the governement is taking money from one Taxpayer and handing it over to someone, that is subsidy.
When the government gives Tax releif, they do not directly take money from anyone. They just allow someone to pay less tax, becasue of desired behavior. It may hurt the Oil industry, but it does not hurt the consumer of renewable energy. You may argue that the oil consumers are discriminated against, but I think that is a good thing.

The oil industry is using the word Subsidy, because it wants to discredit and stop any attempts to develop alternatives.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 07 Aug 2007 12:40

Both, subsidies and tax rebates are bad.


Why don't you go and pay 100% tax to the government.
Is it bad to give tax releif to home loans, medical care, saving for college education, gifts to charity, losses etc etc??

Stating that subsidies and Tax rebates are generically bad is a very strange argument. Is it bad to subsidise education, hospitals, infrastructure in rural areas? public toilets? police services?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 07 Aug 2007 13:04

350MW for just 70,000 connections is astonishing. nowhere else in India is there so much for so few. and except for a hotel or two, the area doesnt have highrises and the bulk of Govt offices shut down at dusk. bulk of diplomatic offices on pubic side only operate in day.

with 25 mil souls, Assam has a installed capacity of around 1000 MW

and one wonders why people in many parts of country are angry with dilli for lack of investment ?

Raju

Postby Raju » 07 Aug 2007 13:26

ha .. I read a newspaper article just a few days ago, wherein the main objection that the 'Loot-yens' authorities had towards BSES power supply was that it was highly erratic and overpriced.

According to them there was a lot of unscheduled supply disruptions and tariff was on the higher side. However now I am not able to find that particular article online. (But they would happily let the rest of the unwashed enjoy this erratic)

Anyways NDMC has a dedicated power plant by name of Pragati Gas Fired PP which was established exclusively for their use, so that they can be 'islanded'. The 350 MW being mentioned herein is over and above that as backup. Then there are other backups like priority withdrawal from central pool if supply from these sources are also disrupted.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 07 Aug 2007 14:03

I have to wonder what else is buried beneath Lootyens to draw so much power. AC/TV/Fridge just wont take that much, population is limited to the elite and their hangers on get chased out as dusk falls and peace reigns in the leafy boulevards and lanes.

I think we are developing have a secret CERN type facility beneath Lootyens and test facility for energy weapons.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 07 Aug 2007 14:28

350MW for just 70,000 connections is astonishing. nowhere else in India is there so much for so few. and except for a hotel or two, the area doesnt have highrises and the bulk of Govt offices shut down at dusk. bulk of diplomatic offices on pubic side only operate in day.

with 25 mil souls, Assam has a installed capacity of around 1000 MW

and one wonders why people in many parts of country are angry with dilli for lack of investment ?


It may be high by Indian standards, but is in line with global standards. We need to have at least pockets, where things are working. Then we must have build new capacity.

It would be interesting to find out if the dilliwhallas were paying for all of the electricity?

If the 350MW for 70 000 connections will become the norm, then India needs a lot lot of electricity. 210 million connections will alone require over 1000 000MW. on top of that will come the demand from Industry.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63631
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 07 Aug 2007 14:34

none of the govt offices or colonial bungalow types need to pay I expect. their massive perks and estate dept budgets take care of it. taking advantage of the general free-for-all, all sorts of central Govt orgs like RBI, SBI et al went ahead and got prime land in the periphery of central dilli to build their colonies too...areas like moti bagh, r k puram have vast number of central
housing colonies, wide roads, immaculate interior roads....

its a concentric system of priviledges...and poor Raju out in west dilli is no closer than the third ring :(

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 07 Aug 2007 14:47

It may be high by Indian standards, but is in line with global standards. We need to have at least pockets, where things are working. Then we must have build new capacity.


This is where the problem lies. New capacity is not allowed to be created. Power scarcity is artificially organised by the govt. in Delhi. It is the time tested Babu dictum of "First create monopoly, then create shortage."

Reliance and Tata and other companies have been pressing Delhi govt to allow them to set up gas-based power plants in remote corners of Delhi so that they can generate and distribute power independently. They say this way Delhi will become a self-sufficient power island and its share of power from the national grid can be diverted to other parts of the country.

All such proposals have been rejected and no power plant in Delhi is allowed to come up as a matter of policy. It seems govt. babus are sadists who deliberately inflict pain on people. If govt. allows supply to increase to match demand, all problems will be solved. But politicians know that if supply exceeds demand in any industry, their role in the larger scheme of things becomes irrelevant. They derive their power and relevance from creating deliberate shortages.
Last edited by sanjaychoudhry on 07 Aug 2007 14:54, edited 1 time in total.

Raju

Postby Raju » 07 Aug 2007 14:48

All the building in that zone are energy inefficient, being of vintage design and yet almost all are airconditioned the traditional way. A lot of 5-star/7* hotels also co-exist in this zone are huge energy guzzlers. Then there also are hundreds of mainframes of NIC and other sarkari daftars guzzling energy all around the clock. Diplomatic missions have residences in them in many cases and use more than their share of power.

When you have power @ Rs. 1.50 who gives a damn how many a/c's you use ?

Singha, i am a man of the masses. I will reject such privileges at every step. Possibly I am a professional whiner, but who cares. Warrior instincts are not honed by living in the lap of luxury. :mrgreen:

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 08 Aug 2007 08:33

Is it bad to give tax relief to home loans, medical care, saving for college education, gifts to charity, losses etc etc??


Governments need tax money to run. If they give tax relief in one area, you can be sure that they are forcibly taxing in another area, or running up a deficit. In any event, the citizenry is harmed.

For many people, this is a theoretical argument. Perhaps reality will help.

Landfill gas is 50/50 CO2/CH4. This natural gas can be converted into methanol, dimethylether or even diesel for somewhere in the range of $2 - 2.50 per gallon. No one is doing this. In most cases the gas is being "flared." And in exchange for wasting this gas, the landfill owners get "alternative tax credits" because they claim that they are "working on" developing ways of using this gas cost-effectively. Millions of tax payer money has been subverted by canny operators.

Today, the bio-diesel program runs on "alternative energy tax credits". It costs about $1/gal to convert soybean oil into gasoline. So, with gasoline at $2.50/gal, guess what it costs for soybean - $1.50/gal, and the $1/gal tax credit is gravy that is pushing up the price of soybean and keeping the biodiesel producers from reducing their operating costs. There is technology out there to reduce the operating costs by $0.10 - 0.20 per gallon. Do you think any of the producers are interested in this at all? Of course not, they are *all* expending their capital and other resources in increasing their "throughput" so they can get more tax credits. Come 2008 year end, if the credits are not extended, expect to see the mother of all consolidations happen as millions of investors find their investments vaporize because of unscrupulous operators.

You might, personally, agree with these tax-reliefs - but the reality is that the governments have been notoriously bad at spotting innovations. 40 years of pushing ethanol in Brazil haven't made ethanol manufacture any more competitive with regard to gasoline on the international market. Perhaps you remember the Synthetic Fuels Corporation from the Carter years? The sooner government bureaucrats should get out of the business of business, the better we will be.

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1017
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Postby Rishirishi » 08 Aug 2007 14:23

but the reality is that the governments have been notoriously bad at spotting innovations


I generally agree, and governemnts should generally stay away from those activities.

However it must be said that government of all developed countries including US and Japan, channel billions of dollars into basic reaserch, via universities and other agencies. Take the space programme for example, would it be possible to have saterlites, moon missions, etc, had it not been for a strong and comitted govenment backing. NASA is one of the major contributers to technological advancement, and have developed numerous life changing technologies.
Without this government sponsored eco system, any country becomes like Bukino Faso. Even the Indian IT industy is grown out of the investments made i IIT's and PSUs.

Thus the government must pave the way for alternative solutions of energy. Giving tax relief is one mesure, another can be to fund reserch projects, give soft loans, etc.

If market economy always solves the problems and government intervention is always bad, then how come Angola is not the worlds richest country. There is no government there and the people pay no tax.

Calvin
BRFite
Posts: 623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Calvin » 08 Aug 2007 16:22

angola is probably a bad example to make your case, but it does highllight some of the factors that affect wealth creation.

regulation chokes business, investment is basically unwelcome, government size is excessive, corruption is crippling, and political influence mars the judiciary. Commercial regulations are a major hindrance to opening and closing a business, and inconsistent, confusing regulations make operating a successful company difficult.


http://www.heritage.org/research/featur ... ?id=Angola


Return to “Technology & Economic Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests