The future of power generation in India

The demand for energy all over the world is increasing extremely fast. According to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the world economy will be four times larger by 2050 and the energy demand will almost double. Since 60-70% of all energy usage is expected to be in the form of electricity, a huge increase in electricity production is anticipated.

    In India, electricity production has increased by 300% in the last 20 years. Even then, 30% of the households do not have access to electricity. To provide everyone access to electricity and to meet the increasing demands of an expanding economy, electricity production will have to increase at a rapid rate in the future also. According to International Energy Agency, it will increase by 300-600% by 2050.

    This raises a lot of questions such as, Do we have the necessary resources?, Do we have the necessary technology?, Is it sustainable? and What are the environmental implications?

    The existing centralized power generation based on fossil or nuclear fuels or major dams has failed to meet the basic electricity needs of most of the country's rural population and is also proving to be costly to the society from economic, social, health and environmental angles.

    Therefore, renewable energy sources are likely to be a major component of future energy production in India. Some of these sources with the generation potential in parentheses are wind energy (45,000 MW), small hydro (15,000 MW), solar (essentially unlimited) and ocean wave (potentially huge, but no estimates are available).

    In addition to centralized power generation, decentralized power generation must also be emphasized in any future electricity policy. Some decentralized power options are:
1. Rooftop solar photo-voltaic systems which can meet most of the smaller local loads, including domestic needs. Power left after meeting these needs can be exported to the grid.
2. Solar water heaters to provide hot water for houses, nursing homes, hotels, hostels, industries etc. at very economical prices.  
3. In places with good average wind speed, wind turbines can provide very cheap power locally.

    Such decentralised power systems can meet most of the rural loads when they are used in hybrid mode and can provide many other long-term benefits such as minimum transmission losses, local employment opportunities and rural development.

    Taking all these issues into account, electricity production in India in the future is likely to consist of: 
* a large number of small (rooftop and community-based) power sources,
* some medium/large size renewable power sources (solar, wind, etc.),
* few conventional energy sources,
* higher focus on cutting distribution losses, and
* higher focus on power conservation.

Shankar Sharma
(The author is a power policy analyst and can be contacted at 94482 72503.)

Borewells And The Death of Dryland Agriculture

  It was reported this week that more than 25% of the coconut trees in Chamarajanagar district have died and the others are following. This phenomenon is being attributed to severe depletion of the ground water. It has also been reported that when it rains, the ground is moist for a few days only and dries up very quickly. This lack of water is also severely affecting other crops.

    Indiscriminate borewell drilling is the most probable cause of this extreme depletion of ground water. Geologists have known for some time that the depletion of the water table in areas of high borewell density is far in excess of what is expected after taking into account the rainfall variations and the increased ground water usage (which is now more than 20 times the use in 1960). So there has to be another reason. It has been now confirmed that ground water in the tight fracture-controlled aquifers in the state has found vents in the borewells for free flow from shallow zones to deeper zones. In other words, BOREWELLS ARE DRAINING WATER INTO DEEP UNDERGROUND. The land has become a sponge which sucks rainwater and sends it directly to deep underground. As a result, the surface runoffs have also diminished limiting the flow to tanks, tributaries and rivers. This is also the reason that even a perennial river like Kaveri is getting depleted earlier and earlier.

    In such a situation, shallow ground water can not be recharged. Water directed underground by recharge pits will directly flow into deep underground and will not raise the water table. This has happened in many places in Karnataka where a large number of borewells have been sunk.

    If the drilling of borewells continues at the current pace, we will soon reach the point when all the surface water will be drained into the deep underground and we will be left with no accessible water at all. DRYLAND AGRICULTURE WILL THEN DIE AND THE LAND WILL TURN INTO A DESERT.

    To prevent such a catastrophe, we should seriously consider setting up a ground water authority consisting of experts and imposing a moratorium on private borewells except with the permission of this authority. Steps such as creation of subsurface check dams, plugging the vents (that allow water to flow from a shallow zone to a deeper zone) and recharging aquifers which are not drained to lower levels should be pursued with great urgency to undo the damage that has already been done.

V Mahesha, MGP
(The author, an expert on hydrogeology, worked in the Department of Mines and Geology for more than 35 years in all regions of Karnataka. He can be contacted at 98455 11109.)

Campa Cola Judgement and Apartment Owners

The Campa Cola Compound (Worli, Mumbai) case is a classic case of apartment buyers falling prey to the unholy alliance of greedy builders and unethical officials. In 1982, the builders were permitted to construct up to five floors, yet they built several illegal floors on each building, including two towers, without any BMC nod. Having declared the additional floors illegal and ordered for their demolition, in October the Supreme Court granted a four week stay as breathing time to the residents of Campa Cola Society to vacate their illegal flats. The apex court said residents could stay till 11 November only. Instead of complying with the decision of the Supreme Court the residents were attempting to seek the government's help to overcome the problem through an Ordinance and stall the Supreme Court ruling. It is unfortunate that having failed in that attempt the residents are now facing the eviction and demolition of the flats found to be illegal by the Supreme Court.

On 10th November 2013, the Mysore Grahakara Parishat at its monthly meeting had elaborately explained the precautions to be taken by an apartment buyer and had suggested that a copy of the CR, Completion Report issued by the competent authority is a must before a buyer takes possession of his new flat. The Campa Cola case is an example of what could happen if such legal requirements are not complied with. Very soon MGP is coming out with an folder listing Dos and Donts for apartment buyers in Mysore.

The judgement can be read here (pdf).

R Chandraprakash, President, MGP

Can We Terminate The JUSCO Contract?

In recent days some citizens and politicians have called for termination of the JUSCO contract. Is termination of the JUSCO contract beneficial to our city? We believe that the whole affair is quite messy with no simple answers.

Let us begin at the signing of the contract. The JNNURM-funded project to upgrade Mysore's water supply infrastructure was divided and two tenders were floated for the works. The first one was to build major overhead tanks all over Mysore and supply them with water from the water treatment plants through large underground pipes. Nagarjuna Construction Company won this tender for Rs. 77 crores. The second tender was for doing all the work required to make the present intermittent non-pressurized water supply system into a continuous pressurized 24x7 water supply system and maintaining the system for 6 years. Twelve companies participated in the tender process. JUSCO won the tender with the lowest bid of Rs. 162 crores. Ranhill Water Services made the second lowest bid of Rs. 256 crores, Larsen & Toubro made the third lowest bid at Rs. 305 crores and the highest bid was Rs. 882 crores by Jain Irrigations Systems. So JUSCO's bid was by far the lowest bid.

The JUSCO bid was based on the figures (117,000 connections and 911 km-long pipeline network) given by Mysore City Corporation. Within a year of the beginning of the contract, JUSCO was supposed to carry out a survey, arrive at the actual number of connections and the length of the network and submit a revised estimate based on these figures. According to JUSCO, there were 175,000 connections (an excess of 50% over the MCC figure) and 1911 kms of pipeline (an excess of 110% over the MCC figure). Based on the new numbers, JUSCO submitted a revised estimate of Rs. 212 crores. According to the terms of the contract (Sec. 3.2.7), if the government did not suggest revisions to it within a month, the revised estimate was deemed to have been approved. It appears that the government responded with changes after 3 months and the changes were not acceptable to JUSCO. That is where we stand now. Negotiations are going on between JUSCO and the government in this regard, but nothing concrete has come out. In the meanwhile, JUSCO is finishing up the work covered by the original bid amount and is not taking up any new work. This will leave about half the city without upgradation of the pipeline network and installation of new meters.

In this scenario, let us see what might happen if the JUSCO contract is cancelled. JUSCO will surely approach an arbitrator as provided in the contract (Sec. 24.2). JUSCO might have botched up many things, but the government has also messed up by not rejecting the revised estimate within the specified period and thus becoming liable for the revised estimate of Rs. 212 crores. So the arbitrator may not decide against JUSCO. Even if the decision goes against JUSCO, the remainder of the work has to be tendered again. Based on the original bids, it will be in all likelihood far more costly than the Rs. 50 crores demanded by JUSCO to finish the remaining work. Is the quality of JUSCO work so bad that it is worth paying much more money to another company to finish the work? MCC will have to make this decision. If the quality of JUSCO work is really bad, should the work already done by it be redone by another company? MCC will have to make this decision also.

There are a lot of problems with this project, which should have been anticipated but were not. Some of them are:

1. Splitting the project into two: Nagarjuna Construction Company was given the contract of building the major overhead tanks and JUSCO was given the contract for laying pipes from these tanks to the consumers. If the location of the tanks is not proper, it is not possible to supply water to all consumers at the required pressure. As a result, if water is not being supplied to all consumers at the required pressure, it could be because the design of the pipe network is defective (which would be JUSCO responsibility) or because the location of the tanks is not proper (which would be the responsibility of Nagarjuna). JUSCO and Nagarjuna would blame each other and it would be hard to pin the blame. Such non-accountability should not have been allowed. Tenders should have been called for the combined works and not separately.

2. Making bulk water supply MCC's responsibility and distribution JUSCO's responsibility: The goal of the project is to provide Mysore 24x7 water supply. Dividing the supply responsibility into two again encourages non-accountability. If 24x7 supply is not achieved, JUSCO and MCC will blame each other and it will need an arbitrator to pin the blame.

3. Competence of government: The project was given to private parties because the government felt that its agencies are not competent to do it. If government agencies are not competent to design and execute the works, can they be competent to monitor and control the quality of work done by private agencies? This seems a basic problem with PPP (Private Public Partnership) projects. We have seen in the case of ADB-funded projects a decade ago numerous badly designed and poorly executed works which were approved and passed by the same government agencies as a result of which enormous amounts of money were spent with little lasting value for the city. We routinely see in road repair contracts and irrigation canal repair contracts poor substandard work passed by government agencies. If the competence of government agencies falls below a certain level, even PPPs will not help.

4. Defects in contract: There are numerous defects in the contract. One example is the condition that JUSCO should provide the new water connection to a spot 1 meter inside the customer's property. It is the responsibility of the property owner to lay the pipes from there to the water meter. It is very difficult to get labour for such a small job. Even if labour can be found, the payment demanded is huge. It is amazing that the framers of the contract did not anticipate this problem. They could have fixed the rates for doing this job and given the option of getting the job done by JUSCO or any other contractor to the customer himself. Another example is the common complaint that roads that have been dug up for laying new pipes have not been properly repaired leading to hardship for the locals. Filling the trenches with soil, compacting and resurfacing of the road in a definite time frame could all have been.

V Mahesha, MGP