8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
1/16
Setting the right FiT rates:Challenges in India
Prayas Energy Group, Pune
Ashwin Gambhir,
Senior Research Associate, Prayas (Energy Group), India.
June 20-21, 2011, Manila
Workshop on Feed-in Tariff Policy
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
2/16
Feed in Tariffs (FiTs)
FiT is a combination of policy instruments.
The FiT rate is only as good as the data and
assu p o s a go o a g .
For a successful RE program, a number of
other policy and regulatory enablers need tobe in place.
2
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
3/16
Outline
Important parameters while setting FiT
Capital Cost
Cost of Capital; financing considerations
Capacity Utilization factor (Generation)
Examples
Wind; Bagasse Cogeneration; Solar (PV and CSP)
Other considerations Retail Tariff Impact on consumers
Tariff period & exit rules
Other Govt and International subsidies/incentives
Conclusions
3
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
4/16
1. Information asymmetry
the Commission observed that no developer came upwith relevant data as was required and also that developersor their representative associations failed to bring in
transparency as mandated under the ERC Act, 1998 in thewhole process by refusing to divulge details. Thus theCommission was constrained to proceed without adequate
Data mainly from developers and industry.
Very little independent analysis. No way to judge the appropriateness.
4
.
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
5/16
Sugar Cogeneration projects in Maharashtra
Project developers filed petition for fuel cost increase
Commissions observations (Order dt. 11 Jan 2010) the petitioner has neither provided any statistics,
computations of cost of generation nor any supporting
ocuments or t e operat ona cogenerat on pro ects n or erto substantiate the cost of generation.
Thus, relying on un-audited information based on limited
number of projects with wide variation may not be prudent.
Still commission increased purchase price by 35%
Similar Issues in Biomass pricing
5
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
6/16
Wind Power in India; Capital Costs in 2007
Client Submissiondate
Cost per MW(Rs. Crore)
Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals Ltd 17.3.2007 5.14
Chennai Port Trust 04.4.2007 5.36
Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Ltd 23.4.2007 5.16
6
ONGC Gujarat 15.6.2007 6.08
Bharat Electronics Ltd, Karnataka 16.6.2007 7.45
45% variationTariffs increasing over time.
FiTs & capacity based incentives like accelerated depreciationcoupled with vertical integration (especially in the wind sector)
discourages competition and cost reduction.
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
7/16
Interest & Discount Rates; ROE
Solar
CERC FiT with
13.25% interestrate and 15.88%
discount rate(Rs/kWh)
With lower
interest (6%)and discountrates (6.6%)
Pricedrop
ROE -10%
Pricedrop
Only for Illustration purposes
7
PV 15.39 12.98 16% 10.11 34%
CSP 15.04 12.34 18% 9.6 36%
The CERC discount rate of appraising thermal power projects is 10.19%, usedonly for comparison.
However in RE, levelized tariffs for actual payments.
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
8/16
Wind zone based tariffs
CERC has come out with guidelines for wind zone basedtariffs.
Maharashtra SERC too has come out with 4 differentwind tariffs (considering CUFs of 20, 23, 27 and 30%).
.
Lack of independent institutional capacity to declare sitesaccording to wind zones.
Germanys wind sector, a case in point.
3 year wind resource data by three independentagencies.
8
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
9/16
Tariff Impact uneven across the country
Very important consideration for regulators while setting FiTs.
Different mix of consumer base across states (industrial,
commercial, domestic, agri) - significantly varying impact.
RE development thus far has been uneven and consumers in
(generation & grid infrastructure).
No mechanism to distribute additional costs equitably.
The National Tariff Policy (recently amended) suggests that allstate should go in for same RPOs (more or less), incl solar implies varied tariff impacts)
9
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
10/16
Other Govt Incentives
A host of Central and State incentives (Capacity,
performance based & fiscal) which vary in applicability and
quantum across technologies, locations & investors makesfor a highly non-level playing field.
cu o compare e rea cos o e ec r c y rom erentechnologies & set appropriate incentives which that do not
result in wind fall profits.
Regulators may or may not include while deciding FiTs.
10
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
11/16
Non-level playing field
Incentives not available uniformly to all investors.
Given the variety of obligated entities and investors (State and
private Utilities, balance sheet financers, IPPs, CPPs and OA), theirconsiderations and constraints (cost of capital, discount rates, needfor working capital, risk of payments, existing financial health etc) vary.
A uniform FiT (based on std assumptions of interest / depreciation &discount rates etc), given the non-level playing field may result inwindfall profits and a non-optimal use of societys resources.
Hence a rationalization of incentives needed prior to FiTsetting.
11
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
12/16
Tariff periods & exit rules
Old RE projects with FiTs but shorter PPA periods
Developed under FiT regime prior to REC
Long term benefits should flow to consumers who supported higherinitial costs.
. . , ,
Commission notes that in Cost Plus Approach, rate per unitcharged by such projects during initial period of 10 years is
bound to be higher as during this period the project has various
debt related obligations. However, it is essential that the
consumer is able to enjoy the benefit of cheaper power once all
debt related obligations are paid off and project has virtually no
variable costs.
12
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
13/16
Competitive bidding 150 MW; 5 MW-size PV
16
18
20
s/kWh
CERC tariff of Rs 17.91 / kWh
Average PV tariff ~ 30% below CERC tariff
Cost savings over 25 years ~ Rs 1,300 Cr / 300 Million USD (NPV 10%)
13
6
8
10
12
14
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150
PVTariffsin
PV Capacity in MW
Rs 12.76 / kWh
Rs 10.95 / kWh
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
14/16
Comp bidding of 479 MW of CSP
16
18
20
kWh
CERC Tariff of Rs 15.31/kWh
Average CSP tariff ~ 24% below CERC tariff
Cost savings over 25 years ~ Rs 3,400 Cr / 750 Million USD (NPV 10%)
PV + CSP Cost savings ~ Rs 4,700 Cr / 1 Billion USD (NPV 10%)
14
6
8
10
12
14
0 100 200 300 400 500
C
ST
tariffsin
`
CST capacity in MW
Rs 12.24/kWh
Rs 10.49/kWh
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
15/16
Conclusions
Need to consider developing country political economy context
and national - sectoral priorities. (Utility financial health, shortages,universal access, paying ability, tariff impacts, caps for high cost solar)
Changes to consider in Indian FiTs
Degression (FiTs increasing over years)
A mechanism like RE Fund (to spread costs equitably in country)
Clear exit rules
Monitoring, Verification and Reporting in a transparent manner (toreview performance and effectiveness).
Balancing project viability and windfall profits is a science and art.Regulator needs to do this tight rope walk.
Need effective institutional structures (to compile and analyze data)coupled with independent analyses to take into account latest
technological and cost trends to try and ensure a level playingfield across technologies and investors.
15
8/6/2019 Ashwin Gambhir - Setting the Right FiT Rates Challenges in India
16/16
Top Related