CCoE rejects Power Division’s supply-demand figures
ISLAMABAD: The Cabinet Committee on Energy (CCoE) has reportedly rejected the supply and demand figures of electricity presented by the Power Division, prepared by a foreign consultant due to wide difference with JICA figures, well-informed sources told Business Recorder.
According to sources, the Power Division stated that in the final year the regression model value was less than five per cent higher than the PMS Model forecast with the following conclusions drawn by the Consultant: (i) load forecast report done sets the bottom line for future generation addition/power procurement; (ii) the demand forecast done historically by NTDC Planning Division is accurate; (iii) demand versus supply analysis based on committee/ planned generation shows that available capacity surpasses peak demand requirement; and (iv) there is a dire need to have a detailed integrated generation capacity expansion plan to access further generation requirements.
During ensuing discussion, a Joint Secretary to Prime Minister‘s Office stated that detailed studies had also been conducted by the NTDC and JAICA on demand and supply forecast. JICA has forecast power shortages again in 2012; NTDC should have examined the methodology used by JICA in order to understand the variation in projected demand and supply of power in coming year. The report of Consultant did not conform to the study conducted by JICA with regard to generation forecast as the consultant had also included the figures of those power projects like Diamer Basha Dam which would not be functional during the under analysis period of 2018-2025.
Moreover, Consultant has relied on data provided by NTDC which was apparently inaccurate, he said, adding that inaccurate projection of demand and supply has resulted in prolonged power crises with its tremendous negative impact on the economy. Hence, these projections shall be studied and validated on regular basis.
Power Division hired the services of Canada-based Consultant Clark C. Smith, through World Bank to verify supply and demand projections prepared by the NTDC.
The Consultant adopted the following methodologies to validate supply and demand forecasting: (i) Power Market Survey (PMS) - medium 10 year based on previous trends, pending connection applications, development plans; and (ii) PMS software developed by Harza (USA) used worldwide.
Regression – long term (25 years) keeping in view the historical sale, population, GDP, electricity sale price, etc. E-views software developed by Quantitative Micro Software (California USA) used worldwide.
The Consultant submitted the final report on December 9, 2017 with the following comments: a huge effort has been invested in the investigations, interviews and calculation of both the Power Market Survey (PMS) and NTDC regression-based model. Based on the documentation and spreadsheets available for this review there would appear no major gaffes, errors or misrepresentations affecting either model.
According to the Consultant peak demand figures based on 4.3 per cent and 7 per demand annual growth, PMS and regression methodologies would be 25227 MW and 25478 MW respectively, in 2019 26348 MW and 26747 MW, in 2020, 27420 MW and 27921 MW, in 2021, 28601 MW and 29691 MW, in 2022, 29822 MW and 30691 MW, in 2023, 31095 MW and 32155 MW, in 2024, 32429 MW and 33691 MW and in 2025, 33813 and 35309 MW.
In 2018, installed capacity will be 31480 MW against capacity of 26135 MW, followed by 35206 MW in 2019 against capacity of 28357 MW. In 2020, 37305 MW against capacity of 29314, in 2021 45196 MW as compared to capacity of 34124, in 2022 49966 MW against 36422 MW, in 2023 54450 MW as compared to 39345 MW, in 2024 56616 MW against capacity of 41197 and in 2025, 64292 MW against capacity of 47750.
The figures, which are still controversial, in 2018, surplus electricity would be 440 MW, in 2019, 1134 MW, in 2020, 629 MW, in 2021, 3652MW, in 2022, 4114 MW, in 2023, 5050 MW, in 2024 4852 MW and in 2025 9034 MW.
In another meeting presided over by Minister for Power, Managing Director NTDC presented two scenarios highlighting the gap in terms of committed MW to be supplied by various Thar coal-based power project and the capacity of the HVDC transmission line 4000 MW and its corresponding financial impact on NTDC/GoP for payment of full amount to HVDC company for evacuation of 4000 MW of power. While briefing the meeting he further stated that if the HVDC transmission line project is commissioned as per present timeline (November 2020), NTDCL will have to pay around 9,141 MW for unutilized capacity of transmission line during the year. However, if the commissioning of the HVDC transmission line project is extended till February 2012 along with early CoDs of three projects (i.e. SECL, Lucky Electric and Siddiqsons), this amount can be reduced to Rs 2.056 billion
The Managing Director, NTDC stated that the report was shared with the Consultant, who clarified that he had validated the demand forecast without taking the generation forecast into account. Minister for Power proposed that there was a dire need to undergo a detailed analysis on generation forecast keeping in view Commercial Operation Dates (CoDs) of all ongoing power projects.
In another meeting, it was stated by the Energy Coordinator/GD (Evaluation) Planning Division, that there are lot of issues in SCADA-II project of NTDC which need to be addressed. It began in 2005-06 and was financed by JICA with a loan of 30 million Euros. The local contractor was NESPAK. Under the project 500kV and 220kV Grid stations and transmission lines and power generation stations were considered. The objective of the project was quick fault removal and also economic dispatch of power. The project was initially started by Schneider and then handed over to G.E without any approval. There are a lot of problems/obligations which are still not solved in SCADA-II. For example 6000 signals issue is not yet resolved. The work of the 6000 signal is out of scope of NTDC. The NTDC did not cooperate with G.E. The whole payment of 30 million Euros was made without completing the project scope. No inquiry was conducted for this. The left over work of SCADA-II cannot be included in the new PC-I of SCADA-III nor can be completed from the contingencies head of SCADA-III. The sponsor may complete the left over work from own resources. The sponsor may submit PC-IV to Planning Commission before starting of SCADA-III.
In response to the issues raised by Energy Coordinator/DG (Evaluation), the sponsors clarified that the 6000 signals issue in SCADA-II will be met from NTDC own resources and the amount will be deducted from the bank guarantee of the contractor.
Energy Coordinator further stated that there is no issue in SCADA-III and the project is fully supported. If the shortcomings of SCADA-II are resolved then SCADA-III is supported.