2018 Jun 15
A very heated discussion has been building up on the vision on how power acquisition and transmission should work for the next 30 years. This discussion is fueled by two major parties that have been constantly providing rather differently rooted views on how electricity generation should run its course. One is the CEB, which is the body that provides the Action plan energy generation. The other is the regulatory body which is the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka which provides a filter on whether government policy coincides with CEB proposals.
To swiftly bring you up to date, the Least Cost Long Term Generation Expansion Plan of 2018- 2037 proposed by the CEB had been met with much scrutiny on grounds of corruption and environmental concerns by a variety of organizations spearheaded by the PUCSL and a variety of NGO’s. The friction was quite prominent on the streets of Colombo, as we were able to witness posters that pointed at the PUCSL as an adversary in “boycotting” the energy plans for the country. This matter though traveling far from the lime light is possibly the most contentious topic that exists today.
Where are we now?
PUCSL approved of the base case plan put forth by the LCLTGEP on the 11th of June 2018, and has requested the CEB to provide a revisited document pertaining to the course of action for the years from 2020 to 2039[1][2]. This approval comes with the PUCSL pointing out certain advancements that they believed made it plausible, in a letter addressed to the General Manager of the CEB. PUCSL released this letter to the general public and you can check it out below.
Speaking with Pulse, officials from the PUCSL mentioned that an energy policy within Sri Lanka is approved for a long term, yet the regulator (PUCSL) has the capacity to make amendments every two years revisiting prevailing situations.
The situation seems to be temporarily watered down with regards to the immediate future, but a clear contention with regards to how the energy mix should be made is quite evident. Firstly, let us look at some different stand points and some arguments that are leveled against the 2 point of views present on the ground.
What are the key decision makers saying?
It is important to provide a comprehensive analysis of the prevailing situation with regards to what exists behind the screens of something crucial for the general public. To achieve these ends, we primarily focused on establishing the PUCSL’s concerns and thenbringing to light what an executive committee member of the Ceylon Electricity Board Engineers’ Association (CEBEA) has to say.
Firstly, the most updated version of the PUCSL’s opinion has been put on display by the letter approving the LCLTGEP. Officials suggested in 3 key points, which they found were substantial enough, to approve the plan, though not “complying with the energy mix of the new government policy”. The first point was based on the cabinet decision passed through a cabinet paper, spearheaded by Hon. Ranjith Siyabalpitiya, of which we have attached a copy of the 3rd page below. Here the government has established that the direction of the CEB’s energy policy should cater to providing 50% of the electricity requirement of the country through hydro power plants and non-conventional renewable energy sources by 2030.
Apart from this, the changes that should take place within the energy mix have been clearly illustrated in this data chart sent to us by the PUCSL.
Mr. Jayantha Wijesinghe, the convener for the Rainforest Protectors of Sri Lanka, advocating PUCSL’s standpoint with regards to sustainability suggested that parallels drawn by the CEBEU on countries that run under non-renewable energy should not be the mechanism of analyzing power generation, but rather by looking into the “global trends” of what caters to the sustainability of future generations.
Speaking with Pulse, Eng. Ashok Abeygunawardana, Chairman of the Strategic Enterprise Management Agency mentioned a strong parallel, suggesting that taking prices into account when selectively picking for raw materials is not a successful mechanism of determining what it may look like in the future, as proved by the past. This severely affects the energy plan since the emphasis is on “least cost”. Mr. Ashok went further to suggest the CEB takes the coal and other fuel averages considering the past 3 years into account.
Taking a different approach to the subject, Mr. Ashok further mentioned that a coal power plant may roughly be operational for close to 20 years, and consideration should be made for how long it will take for a power plant to be established. He suggested that the economic impacts of retired power plants and the annual increase in power demand (suggested as 5% to 7%) should be strong factors in determining an energy plan. Here, he finally suggested that the government should look into providing the incentive for people to establish solar panels and function with a more independent approach, thereby essentially breaking the monopoly held by the CEB. It is further important to bring to light the “Soorya Bala Sangramaya” program by the current government which has come to a standstill on a practical level.
The debate boils down to what the more liberal faction LNG power plants suggests, that supplementing a strong renewable energy sector provides for the energy mix of the country.
Eng. Athula Wanniarachchi of the CEB engineers union enlightened us on the flip side of the argument. Mr. Athula mentions that moving to a 100% renewable energy approach for power supply is unrealistic, drawing a comparison with countries that are landlocked.Such countries have the capacity to combine the grids on a multi-lateral level and control fluctuations with the demand. Countries such as Germany, which on some days run completely on renewable energy, have the incentive of providing electricity from the power supply of neighboring countries. This is not possible in Sri Lanka. Power plants cannot be used as experimental grounds, as they hold much leverage over the daily functions of the population.Responding to the pricing issue, Mr. Athula stated that all calculations made are first forwarded as data to the PUCSL an,d if the relevant data employed is wrong, the responsibility to intervene with the calculations lies with the PUCSL in the initial stage itself.
It falls as a duty to the media and the people to look into where the policy makers are taking sensitive infrastructure programs that affect the very roots of where our country is heading. Hopefully we can use the connectivity present today to restructure reform and rebuild the traditional corruption embedded in certain institutions and substitute it with sustainable, neo-humanitarian ventures. Although moving to sustainable energy is an arduous task which requires much effort, it is now a must for the world to move towards renewable sources to ensure a secure future.
________________________________________________________________________
[1]http://www.adaderana.lk/news/48030/pucsl-approves-cebs-base-case-plan-for-power-generation
[2]http://www.cebeu.lk/cebeuw/2018/06/12/dailynews-nchcholai-ceb-engineers-threaten-shutdown-today/
