*********************************
NEWS UPDATE 6 JUNE 2017
********
Comments on Niti Aayog's National Energy Policy
NITI Aayog
National Energy Policy (NEP) - July 2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Shankar Sharma
Power Policy Analyst, Mysore
-------------------------------------------
Draft NEP
(DNEP) has many good points. It looks for the scenario for 2040 whereas Integrated
Energy Policy (IEP) of 2008 had done so for year 2031-32. But the general approach of NEP gives rise to
serious concerns. The issues impacting the demand and supply of energy have not
been considered from social and environmental (Climate Change) perspective.
True objectives of National Energy Policy (NEP)
George
Monbiot says: “We cannot hope to address our predicament without a new
worldview. We cannot use the models that caused our crises to solve them. We
need to reframe the problem.”
Our
energy sector, which is a major contributor to GHG emissions, will need a
paradigm shift in the way we view it.
True
objectives of a NEP can be stated as follows.
(A) To laydown clear policies/directions in choosing a set of most
appropriate energy technologies to meet the legitimate demand of energy of all
sections of our society on a sustainable basis at the lowest overall cost to
the society; (B) this has to be done keeping the twin goals of ensuring
equitable welfare requirements of all sections and the proper upkeep of our
natural environment in the context of the looming threats of Climate Change; (C)
it should fully comply in letter & spirit with all the relevant Acts of our
Parliament and the associated rules/polices, including International
obligations.
In analysing the draft NEP the primary
approach needed in the formulation of such a policy can be of help. In this
context the following five issues should have been considered.
1. Rational approach
to projecting a realistic energy demand and the associated issues
2. Correct
approach in the choice of suitable technologies and the global experience
3. Diligent
analysis of costs and benefits of each of these technologies
4. Social
and environmental impact analysis
5. Compliance check with the associated Acts,
rules, and policies
The analysis
of the DNEP is best done considering the highlights of its projection by 2040. The summary of DNEP projections for year 2040
can be seen in the tables 4 to 12.
Some of the key implications projected by DNEP by
2040 (DNEP, page 98) are:
·
Share of non-fossil fuel based capacity in
electricity: 57% - 66%
·
Per capita energy demand: 503
kgoe/capita in 2012 to 1055-1184 kgoe/capita in 2040.
·
Energy related Emissions per capita: 1.2 tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent/capita in 2012 to 2.7-3.5 tons
of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent/capita in 2040
·
Per capita electricity consumption2: 887
kWh in 2012 to 2911-2924 kWh in 2040
·
CAGR of electricity supply (Ambitious
scenario): 5.5% between 2012-2040
·
CAGR of primary energy supply (Ambitious
scenario): 3.6% between 2012-2040
·
Overall Import dependence (including
non-commercial energy): 31% in 2012 to 36%-55% in
2040.
·
Reduction in emissions intensity: 45%-53% by 2030 from 2005 levels
From these bullet points two issues
stand out as clear indicators of all the major concerns for the future, if our
energy sector were to proceed as projected in NEP.
a). Nearly
3 times increase in per capita energy related emission by 2040, as projected in
NEP, is a very poor reflection of our national priorities as far as human
health and the upkeep of our natural resources are concerned. For a much
increased population by 2040, such a high per capita emission not only means
huge health implications, but also vastly increased exploitation of our natural
resources, which are already a concern as in 2017, and as reflected by the
unacceptable pollution levels of air, water and land.
b).
If our energy resource import dependence can be as high as 55% by 2040, the
foreign exchange bill will be enormously high, and the energy security can
remain as a niche term in books.
It is
amazing that DNEP, as a critical national policy, has not considered the
implications of such vast increases in GHG emissions and the import bill from
social, environmental and economic perspective.
·
Critical elements of our natural
resources will be vastly degraded; probably reaching a point of no return much
before 2030;
·
With so much fossil fuel burning (as
indicated by 3 times increase in GHG emissions) what will be the status of air
quality, and the contamination of land and fresh water bodies; similarly how
much of our natural forests will be left by 2040?
·
While the growth in population,
urbanisation and industrialisation are already putting extreme pressure on the
population density parameters, can the land diversion for all these additional
power/energy plants improve the scenario?
Energy Demand Concerns
Whereas the
total energy demand between 2012 (as the reference year) and 2040 is projected
to grow between 2.7 and 3.2 times, the draft projects that only 17% energy
savings is feasible by 2040 between the BAU and ambitious scenario (Table 4 of DNEP). When we consider the gross
inefficiency prevailing in our energy transportation/transmission and
utilisation in different sectors of our economy, the potential to conserve
energy through measures such as efficiency, demand side management and
conservation can be seen as huge. Hence the savings feasible between the BAU
and ambitious scenario could be much higher; likely to be much more than 25%.
The
electricity sector alone is known to have the potential to reduce its demand by
as high as 40% through efficiency improvement measures. But sadly, the DNEP has
assumed only 6.5% reduction in demand by 2040 (DNEP table 6). Additionally, the share of electricity in
total energy demand by 2040 is assumed as only 26% by DNEP (DNEP table 7),
whereas the global projections say that by 2050 more than 60% of global energy
consumption is likely to be in the form of electricity. Keeping the convenience of using electricity,
the zero pollution at the point of usage, and the fact that much of electricity
can be obtained by REs, it is highly desirable to have a high percentage of
electricity in the energy basket. Similarly, the sectors such as transport,
pumps & tractors and buildings also have huge potential in energy demand
reduction. Hence, all possible efforts
should be put into reducing the total energy demand by much more than 25% of
the BAU scenario in 2040.
Projected Energy Demand (Table 4 of DNEP)
|
TWH
|
2012
|
2022
|
2040
|
||
|
|
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
|
Buildings
|
238
|
568
|
525
|
1769
|
1460
|
|
Industry
|
2367
|
4010
|
3600
|
8764
|
7266
|
|
Transport
|
929
|
1736
|
1628
|
3828
|
3243
|
|
Pumps & Tractors
|
237
|
423
|
388
|
728
|
592
|
|
Telecom
|
83
|
131
|
124
|
207
|
164
|
|
Cooking
|
1072
|
829
|
684
|
524
|
467
|
|
Total
|
4926
|
7697
|
6949
|
15820
|
13192
|
|
% reduction in energy demand in 2040
|
17%
|
||||
DNEP also indicates
that the demand for coal may go up by 2.5 times. DEEP indicates that the overall Import
dependence (including non-commercial energy) will go up from 31% in 2012 to 36%-55% in 2040. The combined effect
of burning all these hydro carbons (in solid, liquid and gaseous forms) in
increased quantities by 2040 will lead to a tremendous addition to GHG emissions,
which will be a disaster from the Climate Change perspective. This scenario will negate the letter and
spirit of India’s INDC to UNFCCC. The
continued dependence on the import of hydro carbons, which in India’s case already
has huge concerns w.r.t the foreign exchange considerations, will have increased
economic and security implications (Table
5 of DNEP).
Segregation of Energy Demand by fuel (Table 5 of DNEP)
|
Mtoe
|
2012
|
2022
|
2040
|
||
|
|
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
|
Solid Hydrocarbons
|
174
|
225
|
191
|
438
|
314
|
|
Liquid Hydrocarbons
|
150
|
244
|
224
|
492
|
415
|
|
Gaseous Hydrocarbons
|
30
|
66
|
62
|
115
|
104
|
Whereas the nuclear power
has not enjoyed the confidence of our population, its low percentage in the
national electricity capacity basket (about 2%), the enormous capital cost, the
need to depend on imported fuel/technology, and the cost/risks associated with
nuclear accident/spent fuel, cannot make it a suitable technology in Indian
scenario.
Similarly dam based hydro
power have many issues of concern to our densely populated society, such as the
forced displacement, loss of forests & agricultural lands, and the
degradation of river ecology. The REs too,
if not managed properly, have the issues of ecology and land diversion.
Electricity Demand (Table 6 of DNEP)
|
TWh
|
2012
|
2022
|
2040
|
||
|
|
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
BAU
|
A Ambitious
|
|
Industry
|
336
|
492
|
457
|
1103
|
1278
|
|
Buildings
|
239
|
607
|
562
|
1819
|
1494
|
|
Transport
|
79
|
128
|
134
|
220
|
244
|
|
Agriculture
|
136
|
245
|
217
|
442
|
324
|
|
Others
|
14
|
38
|
50
|
94
|
99
|
|
Total
|
804
|
1511
|
1420
|
3678
|
3439
|
|
% reduction in electricity demand in
2040
|
6.5%
|
||||
Share of Electricity in Energy Demand (Table 7 of DNEP)
|
2012
|
2022
|
2040
|
||
|
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
|
16%
|
19.6%
|
20.4%
|
23.2%
|
26.1%
|
Additionally, the unlimited demand growth
has huge economic and natural resource implications, such as forest felling,
mining related issues; land diversion, enormous costs of transmission systems
etc.
Considering all these electricity production
technologies in a holistic manner, it has to be said that there are definitive
limits to how much the nature can provide to meet our escalating demands. Hence energy demand management should have
been a major consideration in NEP, which unfortunately has not been given the
due importance.
Energy Supply Technologies
Keeping in
view the continued growth of the huge population base; unmet demand of about
25% of the population; the socio-environmental impacts of vast energy demand;
and the Climate Change considerations, the primary approach should be to
determine the minimum quantum of energy required by our society to eliminate
poverty on a sustainable basis. Hence
the objective should not be to meet the unlimited amount of energy demanded by
few sections of the society, but to find a manageable limit to the overall
energy demand.
The country
cannot afford to increase the hydro carbon demand to increase by vast margins
(table 5 of DNEP), which is projected to lead to overall energy import dependence
to 36% -55% in 2040. One of the most feasible options in this
regard is the fuel switching for transport sector, which has been discussed in
the DNEP. Whereas the deployment of
electric vehicles is passingly mentioned, this option should have been supported
by a concerted action plan to minimise the liquid and gaseous hydro carbon
import dependence. The maturity of this technology can be gauged by the fact
that France has decided to ban the sale of
Gas and Diesel Vehicles by 2040, and many countries have plans to massive
introduction of EV vehicles by 2030. Energy storage technology, led by vehicle
battery technology, is going through unprecedented progress and has provided confidence
to transport industry to aspire for EV technology as the mainstay by 2030. Keeping in view of the pollution impacts and
foreign exchange burden of liquid and gaseous hydro carbon, India should plan
for massive induction of EV vehicles by 2040.
Many of the heating and cooling applications in
industries have the potential to be supplied by solar and bio-energy. Adequate
encouragement is needed.
Similarly, the usage of coal, diesel and
gas in electricity generation can and must be minimised by 2040. Coal usage has been on a steep downward slope
across the globe since 2010, and many countries have plans to completely stop
its usage before 2040. India, with a
vast potential of renewable energy sources (REs), and a low per capita energy
need is uniquely placed to make an early move a coal dependent scenario to an
RE dependent scenario.
Whereas the fossil fuels have the concerns
associated with GHG emissions, pollution of land, air and water, liquid and
gaseous fuels also have the import dependence issues. The TAPI gas pipeline and other similar proposals
to import gas from gas rich regions have many difficult issues to contend with
and may not be resolved in the near future.
Similarly, the dam based hydro
power from Nepal and Bhutan has some limitations, and is also constrained by
domestic considerations. Our experience of imported nuclear power technology
has not been very encouraging.
Additionally, all these conventional technologies are dependent on large
unit sizes and complex grid, which has known to be against the principle of
energy justice.
Whereas complete elimination of fossil
fuel use in Indian scenario may be extremely difficult in the foreseeable
future because of multiple reasons, a high percentage of REs is considered techno-economically
feasible by 2040/50.
A number of reports from
around the world have shown the techno-economic feasibility of very high
percentage of REs in the electricity grid.
(i) A famous one among these
is a simulation report by Prof. Mark Z. Jacobson
and others of Stanford University, which says that it is feasible to
meet all energy needs (not just the electricity) in a WWS scenario (Wind, Water
and Solar). The fact that he was invited to make
a Written Testimony to the United States House of Representatives Committee on
Energy and Commerce Democratic Forum on Climate Change is a clear testimony to
the importance of this study to the global community.
(“Roadmaps for 139 Countries and
the 50 United States to Transition to 100% Clean, Renewable Wind, Water, and
Solar (WWS) Power for all Purposes by 2050 and 80% by 2030”.
(ii) A Greenpeace Germany report released on the
eve of recent G20 meet says that wind energy and solar power will be the
cheapest form of power generation in every G20 country, including India, by the
year 2030.
(“Comparing electricity
production costs of renewables to fossil and nuclear power plants in G20
countries”, https://www.greenpeace.de/sites/www.greenpeace.de/files/publications/20170705_greenpeace_studie_comparing_electricity_costs_engl.pdf)
(iii) A recent modelling
from Australia says: The more ambitious a clean energy target is, the lower
Australian wholesale electricity prices will be, according to new modelling by
energy analysis firm RepuTex.
(iv) A recent
study report by the Ministry of Power, GoI has established that the system
balancing with 100 GW of solar and 60 GW of wind is achievable at 15-minute
operational timescales with minimal RE curtailment. With the suitable
modification to the grid parameters, operational philosophy and the
introduction of adequate energy storage facilities, small size hydro/pumped
storage, and real time demand response techniques it should be able to have
more than 75% RE in our electiricty grid, as the experience from other parts of
the world indicate.
(“Pathways to
Integrate 175 Gigawatts of Renewable Energy into India’s Electric Grid”
Many
such reports/experiences are listed in two publications as below:
(I) “Power Sector Road Map for Tamil Nadu –
2050”; April 2016
(ii) “Integrated Power Policy”, Sept. 2012
(http://freebookculture.com/?p=172)
In order to move towards a very high percentage
of REs in the energy sector, including that in electricity sector, the govt.
should come up with a definitive
and much more ambitious target of GHG emission reduction by 2040/50 backed by
clear targets at 5 years interval. This
will go a long way not only in improving our energy scenario but also in
drastically reducing the pollution of our natural resources.
Such a policy will help to
change the electricity generation capacity scenario in the country by a
considerable margin, with coal, gas and nuclear power capacity at very low levels,
if not eliminated completely. The
objective of NEP should be to advocate major changes to the data provided in Table 10 and 11 of
DNEP, and these tables should look clearly dominated by REs, and not by any of
the conventional energy sources.
Electricity Capacity (Table 10 of DNEP)
|
|
2012
|
2022
|
2040
|
||
|
|
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
|
Gas Power Stations
|
24
|
34
|
39
|
46
|
70
|
|
Coal power stations
|
125
|
266
|
251
|
441
|
330
|
|
Carbon Capture Storage (CCS)
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
26
|
26
|
|
Nuclear power
|
5
|
12
|
12
|
23
|
34
|
|
Hydro Power Generation
|
41
|
61
|
61
|
71
|
92
|
|
Solar
PV
|
1
|
59
|
59
|
237
|
275
|
|
Solar
CSP
|
0
|
4
|
5
|
28
|
48
|
|
Onshore
Wind
|
17
|
62
|
62
|
168
|
181
|
|
Offshore
Wind
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
19
|
29
|
|
Distributed
Solar PV
|
0
|
36
|
36
|
102
|
120
|
|
Other
Renewable Sources
|
8
|
18
|
20
|
43
|
56
|
|
Total
|
221
|
555
|
548
|
1204
|
1261
|
Primary Energy Supply (Table 11 of DNEP)
|
TWh
|
2012
|
2022
|
2040
|
||
|
|
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
BAU
|
Ambitious
|
|
Renewable &
Clean Energy
|
266
|
797
|
823
|
2010
|
2602
|
|
Coal
|
3281
|
6021
|
5529
|
11320
|
8433
|
|
Oil
|
1936
|
3024
|
2762
|
6036
|
4883
|
|
Gas
|
570
|
1018
|
1016
|
1762
|
1788
|
|
Others
|
1060
|
1108
|
1152
|
1351
|
1626
|
|
Total
|
7113
|
11968
|
11282
|
22479
|
19332
|
Future electric power system
Electricity
Generation
The power
network of 2040 should have a large
number of small size roof top
SPVs OR wind turbines
OR community based bio-energy/CSP type solar power plants,
because of which the need for a stronger/reliable integrated grid will increase, but the nature of the grid will be
different. There can be very few conventional technology power plants such as few gas based plants and dam based hydel plants, and pumped storage plants, which are already constructed and which have long life cycles.
The chief scientist Dr
Alan Finkel’s report on the future of the national electricity market in
Australia gives a glimpse of how profound the change will be in future. The
report cites data suggesting that by 2050, 30% to 45% of annual
electricity consumption could be supplied by consumer-owned generators; namely,
rooftop solar photovoltaic and battery storage.
Transmission
It is credible
to forecast that instead of the need for more of EHV and UHV transmission corridors transferring large chunks of power over hundreds/thousands of kM, the electricity grid of the future
will be required to be strong and reliable at lower voltage levels, and may be basically designed
to connect a large number of mini/micro grids. In view of large number of small size roof top SPVs OR wind turbines
OR community based bio-energy/CSP type solar power plants, and mini/micro grids expected in future, the distribution system will have to discharge
a very critical
role in maintaining the stability
of the network in connecting power sources and consumers, and in ensuring reliable
and quality supply in the most optimal way.
Distribution
In order to minimise the distribution losses the distribution companies
can be expected
to have much higher ratio of 11 kV to LT lines as compared
to what it is at
present, and much larger number of
pole mounted distribution transformers of appropriate
size
to cater to the requirements of individual consumers. High Voltage
Distribution Systems (HVDS),
which are already
in practice in places like Delhi, to avoid unauthorized use of grid electricity, can become the mainstay
of the system. Each mini/micro grid can be expected to become a Smart Grid and equipped
with suitable ICT and protection systems to be able to be connected
to the integrated grid. In such a scenario the reliability of supply to individual consumers can be expected to be of very high order, because
of the essential need to keep a reliable connectivity at all times
to individual generators
who may supply the excess electricity to the grid.
Other
Issues of concern in DNEP
Chapter 1:
§ The link between the per capita energy consumption and HDI is not
true under all situations. True only at very low consumption level.
§ Why should the share of manufacturing in our GDP go up to 25% from
the present level of 16%? The implications on resource mobilisation, pollution
loading should be at our focus.
§ Why should we strive to attain
such high consumption levels; it is neither essential, not feasible due to huge
population base and nature’s limits?
§
The dichotomy prevailing in the
Indian energy scenario is made clear in IESS modelling. Why should we accept
the increase in per capita energy consumption by 2040 as a foregone conclusion,
while we also say that energy demand could be brought down over the default
scenario by 17% by suitable interventions?
We must make all possible efforts to keep our per capita energy
consumption which will also reduce the import dependency and the corresponding
costs. When we objectively consider our huge population base, gross
inefficiency prevailing in energy usage, alarming rate of natural resources
depletion, the global warming implications etc., maintaining the per capita
energy consumption at about the same level as on today or even reducing it
while aiming to lift our masses from the clutches of poverty at the same time
should be the primary plank of energy policy.
In this context it can be said that both the Integrated Energy Policy
(IEP) of 2011 and the National Energy Policy (NEP) have started on a wrong
footing.
Chapter 2 - Four key objectives:
§
The energy policy should not
have the specific objective of supporting the goal of rapid economic growth. High GDP growth rate paradigm should not lead
to high energy demand.
§
The objective of NEP, instead
of focusing on assisting in maximising the GDP, should be to determine that
lowest quantum of energy which will pull the weaker sections of our society
from the clutches of poverty at the lowest overall societal cost.
§
Section 2.2.2 refers to
efficiency. Hence, a lot more focus on all aspects of energy efficiency will be
needed. This aspect also indicates the
vast scope for containing the energy demand growth as compared to the
‘do-nothing’ scenario. Energy efficiency, Demand side
management (DSM) and energy conservation measures must have the highest
priority in our efforts to provide energy/electricity to all by 2022. As
National Electricity Policy has stated, these measures should form the
fundamental plank of our energy policy.
Chapter 5 – Coal:
§
The section refers to the
projection of higher coal production upto 2040 (125 GW of coal power in 2012 is
likely to go up to more than 330-441 GW by 2040). Such a growth projection in
coal production/consumption is in complete violation of the letter and spirit
of Paris agreement on Climate Change. No
argument should be able to support such a growth in coal
production/consumption, if our society is serious about the impacts of Climate
Change and the immediate pollution impacts on the health of our people. NEP
should be very clear on this aspect. It should be considering the peak coal
year much before 2040 instead of ways to meet the demand for coal by the
industry even after 2040.
§
This statement should be challenged: “The
thrust of the NEP will be on interventions required to optimally exploit our
coal resources, while addressing the overall environmental concerns related to
coal mining. Sustained levels of high domestic production would greatly advance
India’s energy security. Coal gasification technology and methanol economy also
hold value for India to commercially tap our coal resources. In the instant
discussion here, we recommend measures, which directly relate to enhancing coal
production, optimum use, and efficiency in use (high efficiency, low
emission).”
§
In a paper in Nature of 28 June 2017 with
a the title “Three years to safeguard our climate” a group of prominent
scientists, policymakers, and corporate leaders have issued a warning that if
the world doesn’t set greenhouse gas emissions on a downward path by 2020,
it could become impossible to contain climate change within safe limits.
Being the third largest GHG emitter, India cannot continue to ignore such
science based warnings to reduce the GHG emissions. In view of the suitable alternatives
available to replace the coal, the country should seriously embark on such
replacement at the earliest.
Chapter 6 - Renewable Energy:
§
Section 6.1: REs will need the
continued monitory/policy support of any sort for many more years, if not for
decades, in order to minimise the GHG emissions from the energy sector. Having
pushed our environment to a dangerous level through reckless burning of fossil
fuels all these years, the society needs to pay the suitable costs to make the
REs the mainstay of the power sector, and to mitigate Climate Change.
§
While considering larger role
for dam based hydro power and nuclear power in the country, the overall cost to
the society from social, economic and environmental perspectives need to be
carefully/objectively considered.
§
This statement in 6.5.3 should
be challenged: It is recognized that due to inherent qualities of lower cost
via economies of scale and ability to meet varying demand for power, grid based
electricity is preferable to renewable solutions. Therefore, efforts will be
made to first electrify villages by extension of grid. However, small size of
habitations and remote locations, often render grid-based solutions unviable.
The electrification of such habitations will not be postponed until grid
reaches, and in the short run off-grid solutions will be provided.
§
This should be said against
6.9.2: In addition to requiring vast tracts of land, the large size RE sources
such as solar or wind power parks also need additional dedicated transmission
lines, which will be in use for a small percentage of time in a day (such as
about 6-8 hours a day for solar power park).
In view of this potential wastage of the financial resources due to low
utilisation factor of the associated transmission systems, and also for the
ease of grid integration, it will be necessary to plan for a large no. of small
or medium size REs (say of the size less than 5 MW) all over the grid, preferably
very close to the existing 11 kV lines. Such a distribution of the generating
sources will also assist in overcoming the voltage instability, which is
haunting the grid operators now.
Chapter 7 – Nuclear
Power
There is the critical need for the NITI Aayog to deploy effective
economic decision making tools, such as ‘costs and benefits analysis’ (CBA) and
‘options analysis’, while also addressing the following main concerns of CSOs
before accepting “nuclear power technology as being the only base load power
source offering green energy, needs to be promoted even if its share in the
overall mix is not high enough now”. Without convincing the public on such issues,
the NITI Aayog cannot expect people’s approval of its energy policy.
Chapter 8 – Electricity
§
It is true that, India, being a
tropical country and with a tradition of simple living, can be expected to set
an example to the world of how energy ought to be produced and consumed. It is
also true that the potential for electrification of energy demand is immense,
in other sectors such as transportation (Electric Vehicles), cooking,
agriculture and industries. Hence, there is a strong case for a shift towards
electricity across demand sectors. But
the projection also makes it imminent that the electricity sector has to become
vastly more efficient and of very low carbon footprint in nature, which
basically shall men very low levels of fossil fuel usahe in this sector. When we also keep the need to contain GHG
emission in proper perspective, the future path for the energy sector in the
country becomes fairly clear.
§
Keeping in view the social,
economic and environmental concerns of conventional electricity production
technologies such as coal, gas, and dam based hydro and nuclear power, the only
option left for the country is to get all of its electricity and much of energy
from renewable energy sources. Such a transformation requires massive and
concerted efforts in making the production transmission/transportation and
utilisation of electricity highly efficient with huge emphasis on demand side
management and energy conservation. Such a scenario by 2040/50 will also
require focused efforts to reduce the effective demand to a manageable level,
instead of continuing to believe that the per capita electricity consumption
has to match that of world’s average.
The constraints of our natural elements will not permit an unlimited
growth in energy/electricity production/consumption. NEP should base its policy recommendations on
this fundamental reality.
§
While advocating an effective
energy policy for the nation, NEP should base its recommendations on technical
feasibility, sustainability, and the lowest overall cost to the society,
instead of concerning itself with the upfront financial costs alone. Upfront financial
costs should not be the major concern.
As Sir Nicholas Stern has said in his advice to the UK govt. ‘The
Economics of Climate Change’, the Climate Change could have very serious
impacts on growth and development. The costs of stabilising the climate are
significant but manageable, while delay would be dangerous and much more
costly. The benefits of strong, early action on climate change outweigh
costs. This Review has estimated that
certain scenario of Global Warming may result in poor countries like India
suffering economic costs of about 20 % of its GDP, whereas the mitigation of
the same now can be achieved at a cost of about 1% of present GDP. The Review also indicates that more we delay
in addressing the Global Warming the higher we will have to spend in mitigation
of the same in future. In this
background adequate investment to minimise the Global Warming impacts of
conventional power plants is considered worth the “huge financial cost”. Hence,
the upfront financial cost of the required transformation pales to
insignificance when we consider the ecological & economic costs of not
quickly transforming our energy systems.
§
As mentioned correctly in
section 8.8.5 of the draft, clear and definitive policy for next 30-40 years
will help in attracting the vast private capital required for such
transformation. Hence, the policy to move our energy sector to the 2045/50
scenario should be spelt out in as much details as possible so that private
investors can take confidence in such investments. Such a policy guideline will
require due diligence and effective consultation with various stakeholder
groups before finalising the policy framework.
Chapter 13 - Overseas Engagements
This statement should be challenged: “The NEP views energy security
in terms of assured supply. Until domestic sources, particularly the renewable
ones, become available in larger volumes, our import dependence for energy
supply is set to increase. With high import dependence for commercial primary
energy supplies, India has a vested interest in deep overseas engagement across
stakeholders.”
NEP
should be aiming at minimising the need to import energy for multiple
reasons. In order to do so the emphasis
should be on: (i) minimising the total demand for energy; and (ii) to optimally
and sustainably harness the resources available within the country. Sadly,
there is not much of a focus to reduce the total demand for energy itself, but
only to identify different technologies to meet the ever growing demand. Instead of trying to shift the total demand
for transportation fuels to electric vehicles (EV) and batteries, the focus
should be to minimise the transportation needs itself, by suitably modifying
our urban areas and the location of industries/ commerce; adequate development of rural areas; huge
emphasis on mass/ public transportation & railways; and suitably designed disincentive to private
passenger vehicles.
At
present it is hard to find adequate encouragement for the production and usage
of bio-fuels in the country. There is
huge potential for sustainably produced bio-fuels, without impacting the food
production, and this potential should be optimally harnessed to minimise the
import dependence for liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons.
Knowing
well the huge issues associated with nuclear power technology, including the overseas
technology, it is truly unfortunate that the country is continuing with its
policy of increasing its dependence on nuclear power technology and to import
nuclear fuels.
At
a time when the world is moving away from coal power, and when the IPCC has unequivocally
asked for massive reduction in the usage of fossil fuels, and when many of the
coal power plants in the country are either operating at very low PLF or about
to become stranded assets, the country has not yet banned the import of coal.
NEP
should look at all these issues, and clearly stop such ill-conceived import
dependent polices.
The
public do not get to read about any R&D efforts in advanced battery and
other energy storage technologies; micro/smart grid and associated
technologies; ocean energy; geothermal; Concentrated Solar Power (CSP); small
size wind turbines; efficient & convenient solar cookers, etc. NEP should
laydown concrete action plan to effectively invest adequate resources in the
associated R&D efforts.
Chapter 14 - Air Quality
Instead
of looking only at air quality, there is a need to take an objective look at
various elements of our environment: air, water, agricultural land and forest
in general, and at Climate Change in particular. With DNEP’s projection for the burning of so
much fossil fuel by 2040, it will be impossible to keep air quality at
acceptable standards. Burning of such
vast quantities of fossil fuels will have huge deleterious impacts on other
elements of the environment too, while lowering the credibility of India’s
Climate Change leadership claims.
Chapter 15 -
Conclusion India Vision 2040
15.1 The
energy scenario for 2040/50 should be the one where the necessary policy and
regulatory framework are in place to provide clean, equitable and sustainable
energy at reasonable cost with the primary focus on to lift the poor out of the
clutches of the poverty.
15.3 NEP cannot be seen as rational, if it
projects an increase in dependence on overseas supply, even 25 years later.
With an increased dependence on overseas supply energy security cannot be
better than what it is now. It is not clear as to the basis on which the draft
has stated: “ …it is hoped that there will be high levels of confidence, devoid
of supply threats.”
Hence, all possible efforts to minimise our total energy demand and
to meet such a demand by domestic resources should be the primary plank of our
energy policy. India is endowed with huge potential in solar, wind and bio-mass
energy, and hence the dependence on overseas supply should come down instead of
increasing.
15.6. Energy
mix: It is incomprehensible that the overall share of fossil
fuels is projected to come down from 81% in 2012 just to 78% in
ambitious pathway in 2040; with all the planning and policy interventions will the
drop be just 3% whereas the total energy
supply would have registered 2.7 to 3.2 time increase? This means a vast increase in GHG emissions
in absolute terms. What will be our role in combating the global warming
threats? With so much of fossil fuel burning will the quality of our air any
better than the present quality because of which we have serious health
concerns now?
15.8. Structure
of the Industry: At the global level it is projected that by 2050 more
than 60% of the energy consumption is likely to be in the form of electricity
because of the ease, absence of pollutants at the point of usage, and the fact
that all of electricity demand can be met through RE sources. Hence, our
efforts should be to increase the share of electricity much higher than that
projected; let us say it can be as high as 50% by 2040/50. NEP should be working towards this end.
“The coastal south and west India, being close to the oil/gas rich
West Asia, will witness a more significant role of LNG, including imported coal
based plants. “
Such dependence on imported
coal and oil will be against the long term national interests, and against the
present policy of the govt. to eliminate coal import. Such projected dependence
must be drastically reduced by optimally harnessing the domestic resources of
energy.
-----------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment