1. Concerns with Indian Power Sector Socio-environmental problems due to over reliance on Coal Power Plants Washington September, 2011 Shankar Sharma Power Policy Analyst, Thirthahally, Karnataka Shankar.sharma2005@gmail.com

2. PART I Overview of Indian Power Sector

3. Indian Power Scenario Total Installed Capacity (As on 30.6.2011: MoP Website) SectorMW% age of total Capacity State Sector82,59746.66 Central Sector55,57331.39 Private Sector38,82021.93 Total1,76,990

4. FuelMWPercentage Total Thermal 115,65065.4 Coal 96,74454.7 Gas 17,70610.0 Oil 1,2000.7 Hydro 38,10621.5 Nuclear 4,7802.7 Renewable 18,45510.4 Total1,76,990 Indian Power Scenario Total Installed Capacity (fuel-wise) (MOP website as on 30.6.2011)

5. Indian Power Scenario Power Supply Scenario (April 2010– March 2011: CEA) Energy Requirement (MU) Energy Availability (MU) Energy Deficit (%) Northern Region259,426238,7828.0 Western Region268,452232,83513.3 Southern Region229,853217,9295.2 Eastern Region94,51590,4584.3 N E Region9,8799,0098.8 Total for the Country 862,125789,0138.5

6. Indian Power Scenario Power Supply Scenario (April 2010– March 2011: CEA) Peak Demand (MW) Peak Demand Met (MW) Peak Deficit (%) Northern Region37,43134,1018.9 Western Region40,79834,81914.7 Southern Region33,225 31,1296.3 Eastern Region14,52813,0859.9 N E Region1,9131,56018.5 Total for the Country125,077 112,16710.3

7. Indian Power Scenario T&D losses (2009 - 10, CEA, 18 th APS Report) RegionLosses (%) Northern Region27 (Range from 20 to 64) Western Region26 (Range from 13 to 35) Southern Region19 (Range from 14 to 20) Eastern Region27 (Range from 21 to 42) N E Region34 (Range from 29 to 64) All India25

8. Country T&D Losses (%) India25 Russia12 UK8 China7 USA6 Japan4 Germany4 Typical T&D losses (Source: CEA/power Ministry)

9. Installed Power Generating Capacity in Karnataka (Approximate figures in some years) Year Installed capacity (MW) Increase over previous decade Year 194883- Year 195010729 % Year 196018977 % Year 1970888470 % Year 1980131048 % Year 19902760210 % Year 20005824211 % Year 201112,147 (Own capacity + Central sector share) 209 % (146 times of 1948) (Reference: “Belakaayitu Karnataka’ by Dr. Gajaanana Sharma)

10. Power supply in Karnataka (Source: Central Electricity Authority) Peak Demand [In Mega Watts (MW)] Annual Energy [In Million Units (MU)] Demand (MW) Supply (MW) Deficit (%) Demand (MU) Availability (MU) Deficit (%) April 2010 to Mar 20118,4307,8157.350,47446,6247.6 April 2009 to Mar 20107,9426,89713.242,55042,0417.7 April 2008 to Mar 20096,8926,5485.043,16840,5786.0 April 2007 to Mar 20086,5835,56715.440,32039,2302.7

11. Available power capacity in Karnataka as on 30.6.2011 (MW) State Sector (all types of fuels)6,615 Private Sector4,116 Share in Central Sector projects of Southern Region 1,416 Total12,147

12. Available Power capacity (MW) in Karnataka as on 30.6.2011 (Source: CEA Website) HydroThermalNuclearOthersTotal KPCL3,6002,348Nil 667 6,615 Private Generating Companies 02,167Nil1,949 4.116 State Total3,6004,515Nil2,61610,731 Central Projects share Nil1,161255 Nil 1,416 Total3,6005,6762552,61612,147

13. Karnataka’s Power Scenario Gross power availability in 2011 = about 12,147 MW; net power availability >> about 9,500 MW; but maximum power demand met = 7,815 MW Why this gap ??? Overall industry efficiency between 40 -50% Gross inefficiency leading to plan about 50% more capacity than really needed Inefficiency in managing the existing capacity is the prime reason for the power cuts each year

14. Power saga in India Between 1989 & 2009 Installed generating capacity increased from 58,012 MW to 1,52,148 MW ( + 162%) Between 2000 & 2008 Monthly generation from conventional sources increased from 43,596 MU to 65,057 MU (+50%) Between 1992 & 2006 National per capita electricity consumption increased from 283 kWH to 429 kWH ( +52%) National Per capita electricity consumption at present > 700 Units per capita consumption in Karnataka = 720 Units (in 2009) per capita consumption in Bangalore = 2,674 Units (in 2009) per capita consumption in villages << 200 Units But 44% of the households have no access to electricity even in 2009. Many villages remain unelectrified; huge power cuts throughout the year; poor quality of supply; gross inefficiency; vulgar levels of inequity continues. Multiple crises continue !!!

15. Many serious Questions to the society Electricity Supply is needed no doubt. But ……. How much? – high per capita consumption ? How?? – by any means?? At what cost??? – at any societal cost ???

16. Salient features of Indian Power Sector  Power sources /Power plants concentrated in few areas; requires massive transportation and transmission infrastructure  Gross inefficiency in all segments of the sector  Massive reliance on conventional and centralised power generation  No diligent studies of realistic future electricity requirement; Unrealistically higher projection of future demand  Complete absence of holistic approach / long term perspective  Discernible absence of attention to welfare needs of bio-diversity/ masses  Mostly new merchant power plants for profit motive; true costs and benefits to society of power plants never determined  R&R and environmental compliance has been abysmally poor; Insensitivity to civil society’s views

17. Major Issues with Fossil Fuel Power Plants (coal, gas, diesel) Economic Unsustainable pressure on natural resources such as land, water and minerals; reduced agricultural production; Social Peoples’ displacement due to large sizes of power plants; health; decay of rural India Environmental Global Warming; pollution of land, water and air; acid rains; impact on bio-diversity

18. Major Issues with Dam based Hydro Power Plants Economic Demands large tracts of forests and fertile land; water logging; affects the economy of the down stream population; deposition of silt in dams; deprivation of the same down streams Social Peoples’ displacement and health; community leadership issues Environmental Methane emission, submersion and fragmentation of forests; loss of bio- diversity; downstream areas get deprived of fertile silt

19. Major Issues with Nuclear Power Plants Economic Demands large tracts of forests and fertile land; huge Capital costs; long term waste management costs; serious shortages of nuclear fuels; impact on plant and animal food Social Peoples’ displacement and health; community leadership issues; intergenerational issues Environmental Mining related pollution; radiation emission during operations and from nuclear wastes for centuries

20. PART II Dangerous Reliance on Coal Power Plants

21. Major Issues with Coal Power Plants  Huge pollution impacts: air, water and land  About 1 acre per MW of land  Requirement of about 3.92 million cubic metres of water per 100 MW per year  Additional requirement projected = 4608 million cubic meters.  This water can irrigate about 920,000 ha of land in a year,  provide drinking water to about 84 million people or 7% of India’s population every day for a year  Demands lot of our resources; displacement of poor; fast running out reserve;  no replacement is being considered  System unable to meet the growing coal demand  requires about 2000 million tons (2 billion tons) of coal every year  More coal mines lead to destruction of forests  against forest & tree cover target of 33% it is << 20%  Low efficiency and ever increasing costs  solar power cost projected to become comparable by 2017

22. Major Issues with Coal Power P lants (contd…)  Serious concerns on health aspects; threat to bio-diversity  Report of Physicians for Social Responsibility; Asthma, lung cacer, heart disease and stroke  Sierra Club’s fight – stopping 0ver 150 plants ; Report “Human, Social, and Environmental Damages Avoided through the Retirement of the US Coal Fleet”  GreenPeace – “the true cost of coal” >> people and the planet are paying for the world’s dirtiest fuel  Coal burning – a major contributor to Global warming  US - $345 billion a year in hidden expenses (Harvard University research)  not borne by miners or utilities, including health problems in mining communities and pollution around power plants  Critically Polluted Areas in India have coal power plants  Sulphur dioxide, high ash content, Mercury, traces of radio-activity  Toxic trace elements such as arsenic (As), lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd)  Poor regulatory measures  Huge additions to coal power capacity planned (Prayas Pune Report)  700,000 MW additions (84% of all planned) against existing 115,000 MW;  Few clusters with very huge coal power capacity  heavy reliance on imported coal; mostly in private sector

23. Critically Polluted Area Proposed Capacity Addition in MW in the District Angul, Orissa >> 17,840 MW Bharuch, Gujarat >> 15,760 Singrauli, M.P. >> 15,240 Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu >> 10,140 Jharsuguda, Orissa >> 9,075 Chandrapur, Maharashtra >> 7,800 Korba, Chhatisgadh >> 7,570 Visakhapatnam, A.P. >> 4,690 Thermal Power Plants Coming Up in Critically Polluted Areas (Source: Prayas Pune Report “ THERMAL POWER PLANTS ON THE ANVIL Implications and Need for Rationalisation )

24. Dangerous reliance on coal power – huge implications Integrated energy policy has also projected a total generating capacity of about 800,000 MW by 2031-32, out of which 400,000 MW may have to be coal based. Minister of State for Coal: "There are no two opinions about the need to switch over to other modes of power generation ……. Coal-based power production has to be restricted". Future need for huge quantity of coal import;  630 million tons annual domestic capacity  More than 1000 million tons to be imported. Energy security, due to import dependence, will be serious issue At present Approximately 80 coal-based thermal power stations operating >> 90% power coal supply responsibility is catered to by Coal India Limited (CIL)

25. Large clusters of coal power plants planned  Vidarbha >> 30,000 MW  Konkan >> 40,000 MW  AP coast >> 40,000 MW  Orissa >> 50,000 MW  Singruali/Rihand region; Chattisgarh  CPPs even in states like Karnataka, Kerala and HP without coal reserve Coastal areas are targeted for ease of import and sea water  impact on fresh water bodies and fishing More coal fields are being opened More of forests are getting destroyed More of tribals being displaced Global warming and Climate Change : What is India’s commitment ? Dangerous reliance on coal power – huge implications

26. Coal power Efficiency

27. Global Warming and Electricity Industry

28. The Impact of Electricity Industry on Global Warming  About 38% of GHG emission at the national level (53% of CO 2 emissions in India); [MoEF report of 2010]  Large dams - tropical deforestation produces 20 per cent of all carbon emissions caused by humans, and destroys long-term carbon sinks  Methane from dams is highly potent GHG  Additionally – power stations consume a lot of natural resources; land, water, fossil fuel etc; displace people; atmospheric and ground water pollution;  Transmission lines need large tracts of lands / forests  Nuclear fuel cycle itself consumes horrendous amount of energy

29. Global Electricity Usage and CO 2 Emission (Year 2007) (Source: Key World Energy Statistics, IEA, 2009)

30. Implications on Global warming ? “Emissions have been, and continue to be driven, by economic growth; yet stabilization of greenhouse-gas concentrations in the atmosphere is feasible and consistent with continued growth.” “Emissions from deforestation are very significant – they are estimated to represent more than 18% of global emissions” “Curbing deforestation is a highly cost-effective way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.” What our society is doing at present is to supply inefficiently derived energy from limited conventional sources at subsidized rates for highly inefficient and / wasteful end uses, for which the real subsidy cost will be passed on to future generations.

31. Concerns about dam based hydro power and nuclear power are equally grave but of different nature

32. Extent of Inefficiency “India’s power sector is a leaking bucket; the holes deliberately crafted and the leaks carefully collected as economic rents by various stake holders that control the system. The logical thing to do would be to fix the bucket rather than to persistently emphasise shortages of power and forever make exaggerated estimates of future demand for power. Most initiatives in the power sector (IPPs and mega power projects) are nothing but ways of pouring more water into the bucket so that consistency and quantity of leaks are assured ….” Deepak S Parekh, Chairman, Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation, September 2004. As per 13 th Finance Commission, national level financial loss of ESCOMs could be > Rs. 69,000 Crores in 2010-11 and > Rs. 116,000 Crores in 2014-15

33. With this background Do we need many more large power projects? Must they be fossil fuel OR large dam based OR nuclear based? Since fossil fuel & dam based power projects contribute heavily to the global warming effect what suitable alternatives are available to us ? Since the policies since independence have largely failed to meet our requirements, is there a need for a paradigm shift?

34. PART III Towards an Integrated Energy Policy

35.  IEP’s projection  total power capacity should increase from about 160,000 MW in 2006 to about 800,000 MW in 2031.  coal power from 80,000 MW to 400,000 MW  hydro from 36,000 MW to 150,000 MW  nuclear from 4,800 MW to 20,000 MW  This scenario throws up huge problems to our society  Unsustainable demand on land, fresh water and natural resources  Unacceptable levels of pollution  Population displacements  High GHG emissions  Reduced energy security due to dependence on imports

36. Integrated Energy Policy Desirable Vision: Develop a policy to enable meeting the legitimate demand for energy of all sections of the society at realistic prices on a sustainable basis without compromising the interest of other aspects of the society such as flora, fauna and general environment.

37. Towards an Integrated Energy Policy Heavy focus on efficiency improvement, DSM and conservation  Low PLF in the existing thermal power stations; as low as 25% in some states; a major concern  Increase overall PLF from 75% to 90%; can increase availability by more than 10,000 MW  Increase load factors of hydel plants  Can provide additionally 3,000 to 5,000 MW  AT&C loss reduction from 30% to 10%  Savings of about 15,000 to 20,000 MW  Usage efficiency increase  Savings of 20,000 to 25,000 MW Existing electricity infrastructure can provide > 45,000 MW more

38. Towards an Integrated Energy Policy  Considerable scope in energy usage efficiency and conservation  DSM potential: 15% as per IEP  Huge scope in distributed type of renewable energy sources

39. N&RE Potential In India (Source: MNRE) Potential: (Grid interactive power only) Remarks 1. Wind energy> 45,000 MW 2. Small hydro15,000 MW 3. Solarover 5,000 trillion kWH/year Potential estimated to be more than the total energy needs of the country 4. Bio-mass>> 25,000 Not known

40. Energy Security for Future Can be feasible only through: –Integrated Energy Resource Management –Holistic Approach –Sustainable Practices –Concern for other Sectors of the Society

41. The road ahead Planning Commission estimates that CO 2 generated from energy use can be reduced by 35% through effective deployment of efficiency, DSM measures and renewable energy sources. Planning Commission’s main action recommendation for energy security is: “relentlessly pursue energy efficiency and energy conservation as the most important virtual source of domestic energy”. Bureau of Energy Efficiency has estimated: at the prevailing cost of additional energy generation, it costs a unit of energy about one fourth the cost to save than to produce it with new capacity.

42. How to meet the demand in future years ? Efficiency & DSM measures will meet part of the additional demand Renewable energy sources is the answer !!!

43. New & renewable energy sources Solar PV cells Solar water heaters, Solar cookers & Solar driers Solar street lights Solar water pumps Small size wind mills Bio-mass plants (eg. Gobar gas plants) Mini & micro hydel plants Hybrid of solar, wind and bio-mass

44. Major advantages of Renewable energy sources - distributed source mode as against large ones people friendly & environmentally friendly self sufficiency for rural communities and individual houses reliable supply option; no recurring charges rural employment opportunities leads to reduced urban migration; a sustainable option most suitable to rural communities accelerated rural electrification reduced burden on grid supply reduce GHG emissions will reduce the need for coal, dam and nuclear power plants

45. New & renewable energy sources European Union has a plan to meet 20% of all its energy needs by 2020 AD through N&RES Israel is reported to be targeting 50% Greenpeace has come up with plans to meet 100% & 50% of energy needs of New Zealand and India Country has a huge potential in harnessing roof top solar PVS; 10% of households @ 2 kW >>> 200,000 MW Additionally roof top surface of schools, colleges, industries, commercial, warehouse and office buildings – huge potential Bio-mass energy at community levels Combination of solar, bio-mass and wind energy Germany and Japan >> replacing nukes with RES

46. A case study An identified need to meet 400 MW of additional demand -------------------------------------------------------------- Option I : 400 MW Gundia hydel power plant in WGs COSTS: Direct Financial Cost : About 2,000 Crores Societal Costs + tax incentives  loss of about 110 hectares of thick evergreen rainfall forest  loss of fertile agricultural lands  displacement of people  perpetual loss of agricultural production and forest produce  Huge impact on local bio-diversity  A total of unknown but huge ecological cost BENEFITS : About 400 MW of power at less than 25% load factor Long term employment for about 50 people(?) Dividend to state govt. ??? Additional revenue to KPCL

47. Option II : Integrated Energy Management Approach One or more of the following options can provide much more power COSTS  T&D loss reduction - 600 MW >> 900 Crores  Utilisation loss reduction / DSM - 600 MW >> 900 Crores  Usage of CFLs - 400 MW OR A combination of  Wind energy  Biomass  Solar – Water heating  Solar –residential lighting BENEFITS  Negligible societal cost; negligible or nil land and displacement  No loss of forests & bio-diversity  Negligible or nil health or environmental costs  Perpetual benefits  Highly reduced T& D losses; reduced man power costs  Boost to agricultural and rural employment

48. Karnataka Electricity Industry – Integrated Resource Management Model for Demand and supply PART I: High level calculations of benefits: forecast for peak demand power (MW) Year 2009 onwards200920112013201520172018 A Load forecast @7% growth from 6,200 MW base in 2006 with 0.5% reduction in CAGR every year (peak hour demand)MW759580518453879190559281 B Peak demand reduction feasible through existing system improvements B1. Generation improvement through R, M & UMW16 B2. Transmission & Distribution loss reductionMW110 B3. Non-agricultural usesMW110 B4. Agricultural use (100 MW reduction during peak hours assumed)MW10 Aggregate peak demand reduction feasible through efficiency measuresMW2467381230172222142460 C Peak demand reduction feasible through solar technology C1. AEH Installations (50% reduction during evening hrs assumed)MW105 C2. Residential installationsMW30 C3. IP sets (100 MW savings during evening hrs assumed)MW10 C4. Public & commercial lightingMW444444 Aggregate peak demand reduction feasible through solar technologyMW149 D Demand reduction feasible through wind energyMW60 E Demand reduction feasible through biomassMW48 F Aggregate peak demand reduction feasible through NCE sourcesMW2577711285179923132570 G Net peak demand forecast on the grid (= A-(B+F))MW709265425938527045284251

49. PART II: High level calculations of benefits: forecast for annual energy requirement (MU) Load forecast @7% growth from 34,300 MU base in 2006 with 0.5% reduction in CAGR every year (annual energy demand )MU420194454046767486385009751349 Energy reduction feasible through existing system improvements I1. Generation improvement through R, M & UMU80 I2. Transmission & Distribution loss reductionMU700 I3. Non-agricultural useMU430 I4. Agricultural useMU250 Aggregate annual energy reduction feasible from efficiency measuresMU146043807300102201314014600 Energy reduction feasible through solar technology G1. AEH InstallationsMU110 G2. Residential installationsMU60 G3. IP setsMU320 G4. Public & commercial lightingMU64 Aggregate annual energy reduction feasible through solar technologyMU554 Energy reduction feasible through wind energyMU210 Energy reduction feasible through biomassMU200 Aggregate annual energy reduction feasible through NCE sourcesMU96428924820674886769640 Net annual energy demand forecast on the grid (= H-(I+M))MU395953726834647316702828127109

50. Break up of Projected Installed Capacity by 2031-32 (As an alternative to IEP) Capacity (MW) Share in total capacity by 2031-32 Comments Coal110,00028 % Increase from present capacity of 80,000 MW; IEP has projected 470,000 MW; gradual reduction; early peaking Hydro40,00010 % Only < 25 MW capacity R-0-R plants only after 2032; Against IEP projection of 150,000 MW Nuclear10,0003 % Only known sources of domestic nuclear fuel to be used; targeted to be replaced fully by 2050 Natural Gas25,0006 % Targeted to be replaced fully by 2050 Solar (Grid interactive large size units only) 60,00015 % National solar mission target of 20,000 MW by 2020 should be ramped up adequately Solar (Roof-top isolated and Grid interactive small size units ) 60,00015 % Huge potential to be harnessed early by policy interventions; a must for accelerated rural electrification and for T&D loss reduction Wind30,0008 % Same as projected by IEP; expected to increase share after 2032 through off-shore wind farms Bio-mass50,00013 % Same as projected by IEP; mostly community based plants Other renewables (Ocean energy and Geo-thermal) 7,0002 % Nascent technologies but huge potential; likely to get better focus after 2032 Total Capacity390,000

51. WAY FORWARD  There are credible ways of meeting our electricity needs without a large number of conventional power plants !  The society must move resolutely in this direction !!  Half measures will not suffice !!!  A holistic, responsible and highly accountable approach  People centric policies are essential and feasible.  Effective public consultations  Sustainability should be the criteria  Obligations to future generations

52. Thanks !!!