|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 2 November 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Dendro not an alternative to coal by Nihal Perera This is in response to an article by G. Ponnukone titled "Myth of cheap coal power", which appeared in the Sunday Observer of October 26. It is a known fact to everybody that the capital cost to construct a Coal Plant of One Megawatt of equivalent to One Million Dollars. Whether your set-up the power Station near the coal mine or whether you set-it up 25,000 Kms away from a coal mine it would be the same. Since Sri Lanka has no coal mines we need to import the Coal. Then you need to have a Pier to unload the Coal. Mr. Ponnukone's assumption is quite correct by leaving a big margin of US $ 200 to US $ 1000 per kWH because Mr. Ponnukone and his team based this costing to build a 6 Km long Pier at Norochcholai by dividing the Kalpitiya waters. Therefore under those circumstances this figure of US $ 200 to US $ 1000 is perfectly correct. The other important factor he has taken into consideration is the cost of transmission from the Power Plant to the Consumer. He must have based his calculations by trying to introduce the new transmission lines for Eg. Hambantota to Colombo and from Colombo to Jaffna. Yes, based on a new system of such distribution his assumption is correct. But for example if the Power Station that generates 300 MW is located in Trincomalee the new Transmission Lines will be drawn upto the nearest distribution point. Thereafter the 300 MW is distributed accordingly. Therefore depending on the radius from the step-down Transformer Sub-Station to the distribution point, you need to calculate the cost of Transmission (I am only trying to educate the innocent consumers, not the learned Professors). Mr. Ponnukone's assumptions of transmission loss to below 15% from the present loss factors, by all means is correct. The Capital Cost Recovery Rate of Rs. 4/-. Now who came-up with this rate? Who committed a "Levelized Cost" rate? Why don't Mr. Ponnukone and his analyst's invite the people who have committed this rate and find out how they made such commitment and how the funds are obtained whether it is soft or hard? If they are capable of recovering their money within 5 years or if they want to recover the money after 40 years, what is Mr. Ponnukone's concern? Mr. Ponnukone is not investing his money to worry about the Return on Investment. What Mr. Ponnukone needs to worry is at what price it is supplying the power to the CEB. Without running the CEB at a loss, add-up a reasonable margin and deliver it to the Consumer. If Mr. Ponnukone wants to make 300% margin for the CEB and cover the CEB's losses within one year, then Mr. Ponnukone has the opportunity of providing the Consumer at an ASTRONOMICALLY HIGH figure of Rs. 15/- per kWH as stated by him. Mr. Ponnukone's predictions are good, predicting that the newly constructed 165 MW plant at Kelanitissa generates power at Rs. 4/25 per kWh to the National Grid. Does this mean that the CPC provides oil free of charge to sell power at that rate to the National Grid? Whom are these people trying to hood wink? Enough they have miserably failed to find options or providing cheap power to the consumer. They even have the audacity to challenge the people who have made commitments. If "X" has stated that they will provide power to the CEB at Rs. 4 per kWh at a "Levelized Cost", go ahead and find a way of committing them and to purchase it, without trying to find excuses not to buy. Also The Government has the right to ask for a Performance Bond and for a Guarantee so that if they do not perform or dishonour the commitment, they become the losers. There is one thing that is obvious now to all of us. The rate of US Cents 4 per kWh doesn't seem to leave any room for Bribery & Corruption. Mr. Ponnukone is trying to find alternatives for Coal. There is no alternative for coal. COAL IS THE CHEAPEST AND NOTHING BUT THE CHEAPEST. Dendro is not an alternative for Coal. Dendro if I may spell out in simple language is only an alternative for Oil not an alternative for Coal, provided it is feasible. Costs of feasibility studies: Why did the CEB conduct site studies? Is the CEB the Investor? Where in the World do you find Site Studies being conducted by third parties other than the Investor? With due respect to 95% of the CEB employees who are dedicated and honest, it is the forgone conclusion of the People of Sri Lanka that the 5% of the Ministry of Power & Energy and the officials of CEB whose integrity is questionable have misled successive Governments and bulldozed their way through to achieve their agendas leaving the Entrepreneurs, Industrialists and the Domestic electricity users to cough out their hard earned money unreasonably, for the payment of electricity bills. These bills could have been brought down considerably if a correct decision with a sense of National obligation was taken at crucial times. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
