Resolving the energy crisis

We applaud effort, but we would encourage government to take a little more time to study the long-term implications.


Editorial June 29, 2013
The government of Pakistan has a tendency to make energy policy by simply going for the latest fads. That is how we got into the trouble of having too many oil-fired power plants in the first place.

When it comes to the energy sector reforms, the Nawaz Administration appears to be making relatively sensible choices. What makes the administration’s plan particularly impressive is that it seeks to balance what is politically possible with what is technically and financially necessary. So, for instance, the government is seeking to pay off the energy sector’s circular debt in one go in order to significantly reduce power cuts and win the public’s confidence before tackling the harder bits of the problem, like raising tariffs and forcing electricity thieves to pay their bills. We also admire the government’s commitment to reduce the weighted average cost of producing electricity for the national grid by moving towards cheaper fuel sources. We worry, however, that some of these moves are being made without a more thorough analysis of the future costs.

Take, for instance, the government’s agreement with the independent power producers (IPPs) to switch their expensive oil-fired power plants to a cheaper fuel source, coal. This apparently seems like a sensible policy. Coal-fired power generation costs approximately Rs10 per kilowatt-hour, even when running on imported coal, compared with the Rs18 a unit or higher that oil-fired power plants cost. A sensible saving that would have the added advantage of reducing the cost of power generation to just under the upper limit set by the prime minister for how high the government is willing to let retail electricity tariffs rise to.

We applaud the effort, but we would encourage the government to take a little more time to study the long-term implications of converting from oil to coal. According to the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority’s 2012 state of industry report, oil-fired power plants account for over 8,000 megawatts of installed capacity. Converting all of those to coal is an effort likely to cost several billion dollars. The government of Pakistan has a tendency to make energy policy by simply going for the latest fads. That is how we got into the trouble of having too many oil-fired power plants in the first place. We set them up in the mid to late-1990s, when oil prices were at historic lows in inflation-adjusted terms, and it seemed to make all the sense in the world to build power plants for something that we could fuel either through our own indigenous resources or through imports from friendly regional countries. As we now know, that turned out to be a disastrous idea.

When in the mid-2000s, the prices of oil started going up, we started converting many power plants to natural gas, under the assumption that the country had abundant gas reserves, not realising that much of those had been depleted due to a half-century policy of horribly mispricing the commodity and incentivising its waste. And so, just under a decade later, we are once again talking about changing the fuel source for our power plants.

The government would do well to realise that a thermal power plant has an operating life of about 30 years. That means that any plan that only takes into account fuel prices this year, and not how they might fluctuate over, at least, the next decade is likely to come up short-sighted. Pakistan has tried several different iterations of this strategy at least twice now and is looking set to repeat the same mistake a third time. Have we learnt nothing from our mistakes?

We are not opposed to the idea of switching to coal-fired power plants, though there is something to be said for the environmental hazards of doing so. However, we do urge the government to take the trouble to figure out whether or not the mathematics that currently make the option so attractive are likely to hold true for the next few years. Otherwise, we will be back to square one in another decade.

Pakistan cannot afford another lost decade. We understand the prime minister’s urgency to get things done. But taking just a little more time to get them right is likely to be an investment worth making.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 30th, 2013.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

COMMENTS (5)

Waqas | 8 years ago | Reply

@khan: Oil resources are being discovered in greater frequency as the shale revolution progresses (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/12/us-iea-oil-report-idUSBRE8AB0IQ20121112) so the high price of oil is unlikely to be sustained, and hence it would be unwise for the government to make the costly one-time, irreversible switch to coal powered stations if the source of coal for those plants will be imported. The demand for coal from China will rise once its economy gets back on track. http://www.miningweekly.com/article/chinas-coal-demand-set-to-double---wood-mac-2013-06-04

unbelievable | 8 years ago | Reply

The elephant in the room that the Editor doesn't want to address is lack of money. Circular debt, fuel shortages, and power production shortages all were caused because Pakistan doesn't have enough money. If you don't have money how are you going to fund power plant conversions, new production facilities, paying off circular debt and all the other grandiose items in the new energy policy? Perhaps an ET article explaining how Pakistan is going to fund the new energy policy is in order?

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

E-Publications

Most Read