RAKESH SHAH
CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
ABPS Infrastructure Advisory
Legal and Policy Framework for
promotion of RE
Legal Framework
3
 Federal Structure
 Electricity is a concurrent subject.
 Central legislation:
 Electricity Act, 2003
 Basic policy and regulatory framework
 Regulatory Framework
 Central level
 Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) (inter-State issues)
 Province level
 State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERCs) (intra-State issues)
 Forum of Regulators - for harmonization
The Electricity Act, 2003
Enabling provisions
4
 Section 86(1)(e): Specify Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO)
from renewable energy sources
 Section 61(h): Tariff regulations to be guided by promotion of
renewable energy sources
 Section 3: National Electricity Policy, Tariff Policy and Plan
 Section 4: National Policy permitting stand alone systems
including renewable sources of energy for rural areas
The Electricity Act, 2003: Sec. 86(1) (e)
5
 The State Commission shall discharge the following
functions, namely:
“promote cogeneration and generation of electricity
from renewable sources of energy by providing
suitable measures for connectivity with the grid and
sale of electricity to any person, and also specify, for
purchase
of
electricity
from
such
sources,
a
percentage of the total consumption of electricity in
the area of a distribution licensee;”
The Electricity Act, 2003: Sec. 61(h)
6
 The Appropriate Commission shall, subject to the
provisions of this Act, specify the terms and
conditions for the determination of tariff, and in
doing so, shall be guided by the following, namely:-
(h) the promotion of co-generation and generation of
electricity from renewable sources of energy;
Tariff Policy: (6th January 2006)
7
 Appropriate Commission shall fix RPO and SERCs shall fix tariff
 Initially Appropriate Commission to fix preferential tariffs
 In future Discoms to procure RE through competitive bidding
within suppliers offering same type of RE
 In long-term, RE technologies need to compete with all other
sources in terms of full costs
 CERC to provide guidelines for pricing non-firm power if RE
procurement is not through competitive bidding
National Electricity Policy:
(12th February, 05)
8
 Urgent need of promotion of renewable sources of energy
 Efforts need to be made to reduce the capital cost
 Cost of energy can be reduced by promoting competition
 Adequate promotional measures would have to be taken for
development of technologies and its sustained growth
 SERCs to provide suitable measures for connectivity with grid
and fix percentage of purchase from Renewable sources
 Progressively the such share of electricity need to be increased
National Action Plan on Climate Change
(NAPCC), 2008
 National level target for RE Purchase
 5% of total grid purchase in 2010, to be increased by 1% each year
for 10 years: 15% by 2020
 SERCs may set higher target
 Appropriate authorities may issue certificates that procure RE in
excess of the national standard
 Such certificates may be tradable, to enable utilities falling short to
meet their RPO
 RE generation capacity needed: From 25000 to 45000 MW by FY2015
National Solar Mission, 2009
10

Target (grid connected)

20 GW by 2022: Phase I (upto 2013) – 1 GW, Phase II (2013-17) – 4 GW, Phase III
(2017-22) – 20 GW

Solar Purchase Obligation:


0.25% in the Phase I and to go up to 3% by 2022
Bundling of solar power with un-allocated quota of central
stations by NVVNL for resale to utilities

Bid invited for discount from CERC determined tariff
Regulatory Intervention
11
• Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO)
• Preferential Tariff
• Facilitative Framework for Grid Connectivity
• Market Development (Tradable Renewable Energy
Certificates)
Renewable Energy Tariff Design
12
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
ABPS Infrastructure Advisory
Tariff Period
General
Principles
 Wind, Biomass, Bagasse based cogeneration projects:13 years
 Regulatory support during the 13 year tariff period will provide
certainty to the project developer to meet its debt service
obligations
 After this period, the competitive procurement of RE will
ensure that power is procured at most reasonable rate, and
Tariff Period
Control Period
Tariff Design
Project Specific Tariff
benefit passed on the consumer
 Small hydro projects below 5 MW: 35 years
 Solar PV and Solar thermal power projects: 25 years
 Biomass Gasifier and Biogas based power projects: 20 years
 Longer duration of tariff support in view of smaller
size/nascent technologies
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
 Regulation modified to substitute the expression “shall be thirteen
(13) years” by the expression “shall be for a minimum period of
thirteen (13) years”
Control Period
General
Principles
 Short duration Control Period would lead to frequent revision of
tariff however, regulatory concern could be easily addressed due
to close regulatory monitoring
 Long duration Control Period would offer long term certainty of
regulatory principles, it might lead to situation when the underlying
tariff parameters would hold valid through the long duration of the
Tariff Period
Control Period
Control Period
 Benchmark capital cost for Solar PV and Solar Thermal projects
may be reviewed annually by the Commission
Tariff Design
Project Specific Tariff
RE Tariff Regulations-2012 : Five (5) years
 Maturity level of the non solar technologies
 Coterminous with the five year plan and control period of REC
framework till FY 2016-17
 Benchmark capital cost for Solar PV and Solar Thermal projects
may be reviewed annually by the Commission
 Biomass price will be reviewed at the end of the third year of the
Control period in order to take care of any price volatility
Tariff Design
General
Principles
 Generic tariff on levellised basis for the Tariff Period
 RE technologies having single part tariff with two components, tariff
shall be determined on levellised basis for fixed cost component
while the fuel cost component shall be specified on year of operation
basis
 For the purpose of levellised tariff computation, the discount factor
Tariff period
Control Period
Tariff Design
Project Specific Tariff
equivalent to weighted average cost of capital
 Levellisation to be carried out for the ‘useful life’
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
 For the purpose of levellised tariff computation, the discount factor
equivalent to post tax weighted average cost of capital
• CERC followed the post tax method for determination of the
discounting rate for bid evaluation
• while taking the investment decisions developer considers post
tax WACC as the discount rate to post tax incremental cash flows
to arrive at NPV of the project.
Project Specific Tariff
General
Principles
 Municipal Solid Waste Projects
 Any other new RE technologies approved by MNRE
 Solar PV and Solar Thermal Power projects, if a project developer
opts for project specific tariff:
 Hybrid Solar Thermal Power plants
 Biomass project
Tariff period
Control Period
other
than
that
based
on
Rankine Cycle
technology application with water cooled condenser
 Provided that the financial norms specified under these Regulations,
except for capital cost, shall be ceiling norms while determining the
Tariff Design
project specific tariff
Project Specific Tariff
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
 Other hybrid projects include renewable – renewable or renewable –
conventional sources, for which renewable technology is approved by
MNRE
FINANCIAL PRINCIPLES
ABPS Infrastructure Advisory
Reg. 13: Debt Equity Ratio
Financial
Principles
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
 Debt to equity ratio of 70:30 has been specified
 Further, for RE projects where equity employed is more than 30% (in
Debt Equity Ratio
Loan Tenure
Interest Rate
case of project specific tariff determination), the amount of equity for
the purpose for determining the tariff shall be limited to 30% only
whereas in case the equity employed is less than 30%, the actual
equity employed shall be considered.
Depreciation
Return on Equity
Interest rate on WC
O &M Escalation
 The Tariff Policy notified by the Government of India, stipulates
consideration of debt equity ratio of 70:30 for financing all future
projects.
 CERC Tariff Regulations, 2009 also provide for normative debt-equity
Sharing of CDM
Subsidy or Incentive
Taxes & Duties
ratio of 70:30 for Generating Company/licensee.
 Regulatory Commissions across different States for RE projects have
been following the same principle laid down in the TP.
Loan Tenure
Financial
Principles
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
• loan tenure of 10 years
Draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012
Debt Equity Ratio
Loan Tenure
Interest Rate
•
Comments received
•
•
IREDA does not offer a term loan repayment period of 12 years
•
Even if tenure beyond 10 years is offered then it comes with additional
Interest rate on WC
O &M Escalation
Majority of Stakeholders have suggested considering 10 years as loan
tenure for Renewable Energy projects.
Depreciation
Return on Equity
Proposed loan tenure of 12 years
interest rate
•
Solar PV is still considered a nascent technology in Indian context,
loan repayment tenure of 10 years should be considered with
Sharing of CDM
Subsidy or Incentive
proportionate increase in depreciation so as to ensure loan repayment
as per envisaged repayment period.
Taxes & Duties
RE Tariff Regulations-2012 loan tenure of 12 years
Reg. 14: Interest Rate
Financial
Principles
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
• 150 basis points above average SBI – LTPLR , as on 1st April of the
relevant year of the Control Period
Debt Equity Ratio
• W.e.f. 1.07.2010, SBI replaced BPLR regime by regime of Base Rate
Grade I
Grade II
Grade III
Grade IV
Loan Tenure
Schedule-A, AAA.
Rated PSU
Interest Rate
State Sector
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
Wind, Cogen, Hydro
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.5
Solar PV
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
Solar Thermal
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
Depreciation
Return on Equity
Other Sectors
Interest rate on WC
O &M Escalation
11.00
13.50
• IREDA/PFC classify borrowers/investors into four grades and depending
on the grade charge interest rate from 11 to 13.50% depending upon the
renewable energy technology.
Sharing of CDM
Subsidy or Incentive
Taxes & Duties
• Matured technologies are being financed at lower interest rate
• RE Tariff Regulation-2012: Normative interest rate of 300 basis points
above Average SBI Base Rate prevalent during the first six months of
previous year of the relevant year of the Control Period
Reg. 13: Depreciation
Financial
Principles
RE Tariff Regulations-2009 : The depreciation rate for the first 10 years
of the Tariff Period shall be 7% per annum and the remaining
Debt Equity Ratio
depreciation shall be spread over the remaining useful life of the project
from 11th year onwards.
Loan Tenure
Interest Rate
Draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012 : The depreciation rate for the first 12
years of the Tariff Period shall be 5.83% per annum and the remaining
Depreciation
depreciation shall be spread over the remaining useful life of the project
Return on Equity
from 13th year onwards.
Interest rate on WC
O &M Escalation
Sharing of CDM
Subsidy or Incentive
Comments received
•
Many stakeholders have suggested that that there is no such change
in scenario that the Depreciation rate must be decreased and have
demanded that the earlier clause of depreciation may be retained.
Taxes & Duties
RE Tariff Regulations-2012 : Retained as per the draft regulations
Return on Equity
Financial
Principles
RE Tariff Regulations-2009 :Normative Return on Equity:
• pre-tax 19% per annum for the first 10 years :Considered 10 years tax
holiday benefit available under the Section 80-IA of Income Tax Act, 1961
Debt Equity Ratio
Loan Tenure
and the Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) would be applicable on book profit
of such undertaking
• pre-tax 24% per annum 11th years onwards
Interest Rate
Comments received
Depreciation
• Return on Equity shall be adjusted for any variation in MAT/Corporate tax.
Return on Equity
• Tariff should be tabulated on a post-tax basis by fixing the ROE and
assuming the present rate of Income tax; and permit tax to be a pass
Interest rate on WC
O &M Escalation
through item.
• Suitable ROE may be provided so that investor get Post tax return of 20%
• Normative ROE should be revised to reflect the higher monetary rates
Sharing of CDM
Subsidy or Incentive
Taxes & Duties
prevailing in the markets
. RE Tariff Regulations-2012:
Normative ROE of pre-tax 20% (=16%/(1- 20%)) per annum for the first 10
years and pre-tax 24% (=16%/(1- 32.445%)) per annum 11th
onwards considering 20% MAT rate and 32.445% Corporate Tax rate
years
Working Capital
Financial
Principles
•
RE Tariff Regulations-2009:
(a) Wind Energy / Small Hydro Power
(i) Operation & Maintenance expense for one month,
(ii) Receivables equivalent to 2 months of energy charges for sale of
Debt Equity Ratio
electricity calculated on the normative CUF.
Loan Tenure
Interest Rate
(iii) Maintenance spare @ 15% of operation and maintenance expenses.
(b) Biomass Power and Non-fossil fuel Co-generation
(i) Fuel costs for four months equivalent to normative PLF
Depreciation
(ii) Operation & Maintenance expense for one month,
Return on Equity
(iii) Receivables equivalent to 2 months of fixed and variable charges for
sale of electricity calculated on the target PLF.
Interest rate on WC
(iv) Maintenance spare @ 15% of operation and maintenance expenses
O &M Escalation
Comments received
Sharing of CDM
•
of 4 months, O&M cost: 6 months instead of 1 month
Subsidy or Incentive
Taxes & Duties
Receivables: 3 months instead of 2 months, Fuel cost : 6 months instead
•
Maintenance Spares: 20% of O & M cost instead of 15%
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
• Retained as per 2009 Regulations
Interest on Working Capital
Financial
Principles
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
:100 basis points above average SBI–
LTPLR prevalent during the previous year of the relevant year of the
Control Period
Debt Equity Ratio
Loan Tenure
Draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012: Average State Bank of India Base
Interest Rate
Rate of the previous year plus 350 basis points
Depreciation
Return on Equity
Comments received
•
Interest rate on WC
Interest Rate: SBI BR + 550-600 basis points, 2% more nterest on
loan
O &M Escalation
Sharing of CDM
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
•
Subsidy or Incentive
Taxes & Duties
Normative interest rate for working capital of 350 basis points above
average SBI Base rate prevalent during the first six months previous
year of the relevant year of the Control Period
O & M Escalation:
RE Tariff Regulation-2012 : Escalation rate of 5.72%
Financial
Principles
Current trend in WPI and CPI
Sr. No.
Year
1
1999
WPI for all
Comodities
76.79
Debt Equity Ratio
2
2000
81.59
95
48.95
38
86.954
Loan Tenure
3
2001
85.8
99
51.48
39.6
91.08
4
2002
87.92
103
52.75
41.2
93.952
Interest Rate
5
2003
92.6
107
55.56
42.8
98.36
Depreciation
6
2004
98.72
111
59.23
44.4
103.632
7
2005
103.37
116
62.02
46.4
108.422
8
2006
109.59
123
65.75
49.2
114.954
9
2007
114.94
131
68.96
52.4
121.364
10
2008
124.92
142
74.95
56.8
131.752
11
2009
127.86
157
76.72
62.8
139.516
12
2010
140.08
176
84.05
70.4
154.448
13
2011
152.93
189
91.76
75.6
167.358
Return on Equity
Interest rate on WC
O &M Escalation
Sharing of CDM
Subsidy or Incentive
Taxes & Duties
CPI for Industrial
Workers
60% of 40% of
WPI
CPI
Comosite
Series
92
46.07
36.8
82.874
13 years CAGR
6.03%
10 Years CAGR
6.63%
8 Years CAGR
7.09%
5 years CAGR
8.37%
Sharing of CDM
Financial
Principles
Draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012: As per 2009 Regulations
Comments received
•
benefits are allowed to be retained by the project developer
Debt Equity Ratio
Loan Tenure
Most of the stakeholders suggested that 100% gross proceeds of CDM
•
Sharing of CDM benefit, if any, shoulld be applicable only after the sale
proceeds from CERs are received by Project Developer
Interest Rate
Depreciation
Return on Equity
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
•
As regards sharing of CDM benefits, Commission considered the
stipulations made under the tariff policy, recommendations by Forum of
Interest rate on WC
Regulators (FOR) under its Report on Policies for Renewable Energy
O &M Escalation
and the similar provision in the tariff regulations for conventional
power.
Sharing of CDM
Subsidy or Incentive
Taxes & Duties
•
Clarifed in the Statement of Reasons that the sharing of CDM benefit,
if any, shall be applicable only after the sale proceeds from CERs are
received by Project Developer and not from date of commissioning.
Subsidy and Incentives by the Central / State Government
Financial
Principles
Debt Equity Ratio
Loan Tenure
Draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012
Comments received
•
MNRE capital subsidy should not be included
•
capital subsidies available for bagasse cogeneration and Small Hydro
power project should also to be factored in Capital cost.
•
Interest Rate
Depreciation
Return on Equity
Generation Based Incentive (GBI) being provided by the Government
should not be considered for arriving at the tariff
RE Tariff Regulation-2012
•
Under cost plus regime, all reasonable costs and returns are being
allowed to be recovered through such preferential tariff, it is fair that
Interest rate on WC
any subsidy, accelerated depreciation benefit or generation based
O &M Escalation
incentive (which is a substitute for accelerated depreciation benefits)
be factored in while determining tariff.
Sharing of CDM
Subsidy or Incentive
Taxes & Duties
•
Regarding capital subsidies available for bagasse cogeneration and
Small Hydro power projects if any, factored in the same in the final
Regulation.
Taxes and Duties
Financial
Principles
Draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012
“Tariff determined under these regulations shall be exclusive of taxes and
duties as may be levied by the appropriate Government:
Debt Equity Ratio
Loan Tenure
Interest Rate
Provided that the taxes and duties levied by the appropriate Government
shall be allowed as pass through on actual incurred basis.”
Comments received
•
Rajasthan Biomass Power Developers Association has submitted that
it is not clear whether this provision is applicable to capital cost of the
Depreciation
project. Excise duty, sales tax, works contract tax and other levies
Return on Equity
charged by appropriate Government may be allowed at pass through
Interest rate on WC
O &M Escalation
on the estimated capital cost also.
RE Tariff Regulations-2012 SOR clarified that this provision is not
applicable to excise duty, sales tax, works contract tax and other levies
Sharing of CDM
charged by appropriate Government which form the part of the capital
Subsidy or Incentive
cost of the project as normative Capital cost specified by the
Commission is inclusive of the same.
Taxes & Duties
•
Retained the provisions as specified under draft Regulations.
TECHNOLOGY SPECIFIC NORMS: WIND ENERGY
Wind - Capital Cost
Wind
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
Year
Date of Order/Regulation
` Lacs/MW
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Capital cost
2009-10
17.09.2009
515.00
2010-11
26.02.2010
467.13
2011-12
09.11.2010
492.52
Wind - Capital Cost
Wind
International Trend: Installed Project Cost - USA
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
U.S. Department of Energy’s report on “2010 Wind Technologies Market Report”: June - 2011 prepared by
the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL)
• 1 GW of capacity that either have been or will be built in 2011 suggests
that average installed costs may decline in 2011
Wind - Capital Cost
Wind
International Trend: Turbine Cost - USA
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
U.S. Department of Energy’s report on “2010 Wind Technologies Market Report”: June - 2011 prepared by
the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL)
• In US total Project costs which were bottomed out in 2001-04; rose by
$850/kW on average through 2009; held steady in 2010 at around
$2,160/kW and appear to be dropping in 2011 at around $2000/kW
Wind - Capital Cost
Wind
Capital Cost considered by other SERCs
Name of the Commission
Date of Order/Regulation
Capital cost
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
` Lacs/MW
CERC (2009-10)
17.09.2009
515.00
KERC
11.12.2009
470.00 (inc. evacuation cost)
CERC (2010-11)
26.02.2010
467.13
MPERC
14.05.2010
500.00 (inc. evacuation cost)
OERC
14.09.2010
467.13 (As per CERC, w/o
(FY 10-11 to FY12-13)
escalation)
CERC (2011-12)
09.11.2010
492.52
MERC (2010-11)
29.04.2011
489.53 (As per CERC, with
escalation)
Wind - Capital Cost
Capital Cost: Actual Project cost approach
Wind
IREDA
• IREDA has financed 14 projects of total 790 MW during FY 2010-11 and
FY 2011-12
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
• Capital cost per MW ranges from `5.53 to `6.45
• Weighted average cost : ` 5.90 Cr./ MW
PFC
• PFC financed 3 projects of total capacity of 124.2 MW in 07-08
• Capital cost / MW ranges from `5.45 Cr./ MW to ` 7.10 per MW
• Weighted average cost : ` 6.15 Cr./ MW
• Since such capital cost data are prior to the CERC RE Tariff Regulation2009, the same has not been considered for the determination of capital
cost benchmark norm
UNFCCC
• Capital cost data of 19 projects of total 221 MW registered with
UNFCCC commissioned during FY 2009-11 analyzed
• Capital cost/MW ranges from `4.43 to `6.62 Cr./ MW
• Weighted average cost : `5.32 Cr./ MW
Wind - Capital Cost
Wind
Capital Cost: Market based approach
• Various private and public entities have set up wind farms by inviting
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
the tenders from various wind project developers
• Total 34.20 MW capacity awarded through tender process during the
FY2010-11 of total 5 wind projects
• Capital cost/ MW ranges from `5.82 Cr. to `6.18 Cr.
• Weighted average cost works out to `6.00 Cr./ MW
Wind - Capital Cost
Wind
Capital Cost:
Source
No. of Projects
MW
Capital Cost
IREDA (FY 10-11)
10
570
`5.90 Cr./ MW
CUF
IREDA (FY 11-12)
4
220
`5.90 Cr./ MW
UNFCCC (FY 09-10)
14
137
`5.23 Cr./ MW
UNFCCC (FY 10-11)
5
84
`5.47 Cr./ MW
Tender (FY 10-11)
5
34
`6.00 Cr./ MW
Total
38
1045
O & M Cost
• The average project cost in the industry stands higher at around `
5.23 to 6 Cr./MW depending upon the size, capacity, sites as against
the CERC’s normative ` 4.92 Cr./MW for 2011-12
Wind - Capital Cost
2.1 MW-S88
Wind
Component Breakup
SUPPLY OF WTG WITHOUT TT
Capital Cost
CUF
SUPPLY OF BLADE
SUPPLY OF TT
SUPPLY OF TRANSFORMER
O & M Cost
ERECTION
COMMISSIONING
MEDA CHARGES
MEDA Application Fees
ZP Road charges
CIVIL WORKS
ELEC LINE & SUPPLY
LAND
EVACUATION
% cost
58%
9%
12%
1%
2%
0%
1%
0%
0%
5%
4%
3%
5%
100%
Net Cost
33265546
5284916
6761086
751232
974985
108272
315517
5259
210345
2925897
2299406
1442365
3155174
57,500,000
Wind - Capital Cost
Wind
Major reason for the increase of the costs
• Primarily due to increased cost of the balance of systems
Sr. No
1
Capital Cost
CUF
2
3
4
5
O & M Cost
6
7
8
9
10
Particulars
Land
CIVIL
Foundation
Internal Road
Area development
Total: 1to 4
DP Yard
Internal lines & Poles (33 kV lines @ Rs 14 lacs per
km)
Total: 5 to 6
Erection & Commissioning
(assuming deployment of 500 T cranes)
EHV + Pooling station (assuming a 33 kV/132 kV : 100
MVA) Pooling station ((20 Cr - consisting of 2 x 50 MVA
: 33 kV/132 kV, including bay + land)
Miscellaneous
Total : 8 to 9
Logistics
Grant Total
in lac `
15
22
3
4
29
8
14
22
22
20
1
21
15
114
• There has been a tremendous increase in the market value of the
land, and the creation of infrastructure (viz. civil, electrical, crane
charges, logistics etc.)
• As per the latest estimates the cost/MW (excluding the wind turbine)
ranges from ` 1.10-1.35 Cr. per MW, against approximately ` 65-70
lakhs/MW two years ago.
Wind
-
Capital
Cost:
PSU/State
Govt.
companies
investment through Tenders for FY 2010-11
Wind
Name of PSU/State
• PSU
Government
Qty * MW
Capacity
Site/State
Crore including
MW
Service Tax)
Capital Cost
Hutti Gold Mines Ltd.
CUF
O & M Cost
Cost/MW (Rs. In
1 * 2.10
2.10
Chitradurga/Karnataka
5.85
17 * 1.50
25.50
Akal / Rajasthan
6.06
2 * 1.50
3.00
Adodar / Gujarat
6.15
1 * 1.50
1.50
Jamanwada / Gujarat
6.18
1 * 2.10
2.10
Jamanwada / Gujarat
5.82
(HGML)
Hindustan Petroleum
Corporation Limited
(HPCL)
Surat Municipal
Corporation (SMC)
Gujarat Energy
Development Agency
(GEDA)
Gujarat Energy
Development Agency
(GEDA)
Total
34.20
6.00
Wind - Capital Cost: IREDA - FY 2011-12
Wind
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
PROJECTS SANCTIONED DURING 2011-12
Sr
No.
Applicant Name
1 BHILWARA GREEN ENERGY
LIMITED
2 SURAJBARI WINDFARM DEV
ELOPMENT PRIVATE LTD
3 VISH WIND INFRASTRUCTUR
E LLP.
4 CAPARO ENERGY (INDIA) LT
D.
Sector Descri
ption
Wind
State
Capacity Project Cost Cost/MW
(MW)
(Rs. Lakhs)
(Rs.
Lakhs)
Maharashtra
51.00
32878.00
644.67
WTE
Regen
Wind
Gujarat
18.00
13103.00
727.94
Vestas
Wind
Gujarat
50.40
28320.00
561.90
Enercon
Wind
Rajasthan,
Maharashtra,
Gujarat
100.80
55700.00
552.58
Suzlon
Wind - Capital Cost
Wind
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
• The comparison of capital cost variation in actual project cost
approach and market cost approach with the pooled regulated
capital cost approach clearly indicates that the pooled regulated
capital cost norm derived under regulatory approach is lower than
the average capital cost norm derived under actual project database
approach
Source
No. of Projects
MW
IREDA (FY 10-11)
10
570
`5.90 Cr./ MW
IREDA (FY 11-12)
4
220
`5.90 Cr./ MW
UNFCCC (FY 09-10)
14
137
`5.23 Cr./ MW
UNFCCC (FY 10-11)
5
84
`5.47 Cr./ MW
Tender (FY 10-11)
5
34
`6.00 Cr./ MW
Total
38
1045
RE Tariff Regulation -2012: Pooled cost of market based and actual
cost approach as the normative capital cost for first year of the next
Control Period which works out to ` 5.75 Cr./MW
Reg. 26: Wind: Capacity Utilisation Factor (CUF)
RE Tariff Regulations-2009 : CUF
Wind
Annual Mean Wind Power Density
(W/m2) at 50 mtr hub height
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
CUF
200-250
20%
250-300
23%
300-400
27%
> 400
30%
• Wind Atlas as and when prepared by C-WET would be basis of
categorization of wind sties
• C-WET
• Published Indian Wind Atlas in February 2010
• Suggested that it is not advisable to use Atlas for tariff fixation and
the same is also mentioned in the preface of atlas
• Suggested that the theoretical energy in the WPD cannot really
represent the power getting out from today’s model of wind turbine
as actual performance is depends on the power curve and efficiency
of machine
• MNRE Circular dated 1.08.2011: No restriction will exist for WPD criteria
as far the development of wind power project is concerned
Historical Increase in Hub Height & Rotor Diameter: USA
Wind
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
• Electricity Markets and Policy Group, Energy Analysis Department:
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Wind Energy Installation for year FY 2010-11
Wind
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Developer
State
Suzlon
Enercon
Vestas
Maruti Windfarm
RS Windfarm
TS Windfarm
Sriram EPC
Vestas RRB
Gamesa
Regen
SWPL
GWL
Pioneer Wind
WinWind
Cwel
INOX
Kenersys
Shiva Wind
TTG
LeitWind
IWPL
TOTAL
%
MAH
107.2
31.2
KAR
TN
RAJ
93.95 191.55 333.5
116
112
103.2
39.6 115.5
21.15
41.25
25
1
4.5
MP
42.6
25
99
213.35
96
10
31.93
28
29
14.03
2
2
1.5
0.25
36.3
239.05 254.05 997.41 436.7
10.16 10.80 42.41 18.57
Total
951.9
504
175.5
%
Hub Height
40.48 65 75 78 80
21.43 50 56 57 65
7.46 70 78 80
1
21.15
41.25
25
28.5
99
227.8
108
6.45
34.93
32.25
29
14.03
2
12
1.5
0.25
36.3
1
0.90
1.75
1.06
1.21
4.21
9.69
4.59
0.27
1.49
1.37
1.23
0.60
0.09
0.51
0.06
0.01
1.54
0.04
312.8
13.30
63.2 2351.81 100
2.69 100.00 84.46
2.5
6
2.25
GUJ
183.1
78.4
20.4
48.6
2.07
14.45
7.5
0.45
3
2
AP
63.2
41
65
75 85
45
50
70
80
80
50
65
LBNL : Reassessing Wind Potential Estimates for India:
Wind
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Source : LBNL
Wind: Capacity Utilisation Factor (CUF)
Wind
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
Annual Mean WPD
(W/m2) at 50 mtr HH
CUF
Capital Cost
Zone-1
200-250
20%
CUF
Zone-2
250-300
23%
Zone-3
300-400
27%
Zone-4
> 400
30%
O & M Cost
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
WPD at 80 mtr
Zone-1
Upto 200
20%
Zone-2
200-250
22%
Zone-3
250-300
25%
Zone-4
300-400
29%
Zone-5
> 400
32%
Wind: Operation & Maintenance Cost
Wind
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
• Normative O&M expenses for the first year of the Control Period (i.e. FY
2009-10) : ` 6.5 Lakh per MW.
Capital Cost
CUF
• Escalation Rate: 5.72% per annum over the tariff period to compute the
levellised tariff.
• FY 2010-11: ` 6.87 Lakh per MW, FY 2011-12: ` 7.26 Lakh per MW
O & M Cost
 Market data on actual project-level O&M costs are not readily
available.
 O&M agreement being signed between the wind farm developers and
investors are in the range of ` 7 to 10 lakh/MW.
 Now Forecasting cost would be additional cost
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
• Commission considered 5.72% annual escalation over the normative
Operation and Maintenance Cost allowed for FY 11-12 along with
additional insurance cost was considered at 0.25% of capital cost as well
as forecasting cost: FY 2012-13 Rs. 9 Lakh/MW with 5.72% Esc.
Wind: RE Tariff
Annual
Mean WPD
(W/m2) at
50 mtr HH
CUF
2009-10
Zone-1
200-250
20%
5.63
5.07
5.33
Zone-2
250-300
23%
4.90
4.41
4.63
Zone-3
300-400
27%
4.70
3.75
3.95
Zone-4
> 400
30%
3.75
3.38
3.55
Wind
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
WPD at 80
mtr
2012-13
Zone-1
Upto 200
20%
5.96
Zone-2
200-250
22%
5.42
Zone-3
250-300
25%
4.77
Zone-4
300-400
29%
3.97
Zone-5
> 400
32%
3.73
2010-11 2011-12
TECHNOLOGY SPECIFIC NORMS:
SMALL HYDRO PROJECT
Small Hydro - Capital Cost
Small Hydro
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
Region
Project Size
Capital Cost
(FY 2009-10)
(` Lakh/ MW)
Himachal Pradesh,
Uttarakhand and North
Eastern States
Below 5 MW
5 MW to 25 MW
700
630
634.94
571.44
669.42
602.48
Below 5 MW
5 MW to 25 MW
550
500
498.88
453.53
525.97
478.16
Capital Cost
Capital Cost
(FY 2010-11)
(` Lakh/ MW)
Capital Cost
(FY 2011-12)
(` Lakh/ MW)
O & M Cost
Other States
Small Hydro - Capital Cost
Small Hydro
Capital Cost considered by other SERCs
KERC
HPERC
OERC
MERC
UERC
Upto 5 MW: 7.0
5 MW to 10 MW: 6.85
10MW to 15 MW: 6.70
15 MW to 20 MW: 6.50
20 MW to 25 MW: 6.30
Projects
Commissioned after
01.04.2009
July 2010
Capital Cost
Project Cost
(Cr/Mw)
4.75
6.5
6.7
FY 10-11: 4.98
for < 1 to 5MW and
4.53 for > 5 to 25 MW
indexation mechanism as per
CERC For future years
Order
Dec 2009
Feb 2010
May 2010
June 2010
O & M Cost
• MERC and UERC has followed CERC specified norm for capital cost
• MERC has followed indexation mechanism as per CREC
• UERC, OERC and KERC have not considered the year on year basis
variation in capital cost
• KERC has included evacuation/grid connectivity cost as part of Capital
Cost
Small Hydro - Capital Cost
Small Hydro
Capital Cost : Actual Project Cost Approach
Source
No of
Capacity, MW
Projects
IREDA
7
78.15 MW
PFC
12
83.45 MW
UNFCCC
1
15.00 MW
Total
20
176.60 MW
Capital Cost
O & M Cost
IREDA
No. of
projects
Region
Project Size
Himachal Pradesh,
Uttarakhand and North
Eastern States
Below 5 MW
5 MW to 25 MW
1
2
Below 5 MW
5 MW to 25 MW
1
Other States
Capital Cost
(FY 2009-10)
(` Lakh/ MW)
-
Capital Cost
(FY 2010-11)
(` Lakh/ MW)
-
796
743
2
817
538
1
-
518
No. of
projects
PFC
• PFC financed 10 projects of total cap. of 72.75 MW in 08-09.
• Capital cost per MW ranges from `7.89 Cr to `15.39 Cr
Small Hydro - Capital Cost
Small Hydro
Capital Cost : Actual Project Cost Approach
PFC
• PFC financed 2 small hydro projects in Kerala State of total capacity of
Capital Cost
10.7 MW in 2009-10.
O & M Cost
Region
Other States:
Kerala
Project Size
No. of
projects
MW
Capital Cost
(FY 2009-10)
(` Lakh/ MW)
Below 5 MW
5 MW to 25 MW
1
1
3.2 MW
7.5 MW
594
458
UNFCCC
• Capital cost data of 1 projects of total 15 MW commissioned in
Karnataka State registered with UNFCCC commissioned during FY
2009-10 having per MW capital cost at ` 5.26 Cr./ MW
Small Hydro - Capital Cost
Small Hydro
Capital Cost : Basis for Formulation of Capital Cost
Benchmark
• weighted average capital costs under different categories under actual
Capital Cost
O & M Cost
cost approach in FY 2009-10 are compared with the CERC considered
cost in the same year as under
Region
Project Size
Actual Capital Actual Capital Actual Capital
Cost
Cost
Cost
(FY 2009-10) (FY 2010-11) (FY 2011-12)
(` Lakh/ MW) (` Lakh/ MW) (` Lakh/ MW)
Himachal Pradesh,
Below 5 MW
Uttarakhand and
5 MW to 25 MW
North Eastern
States
Other States
Below 5 MW
5 MW to 25 MW
1
2
796
743
1
594
-
-
2
503
1
538
2
Capital Cost
(FY 2012-13)
(` Lakh/ MW)
-
770
817
700
600
1
-
518
550
Small Hydro: Operation & Maintenance Cost
Small Hydro
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
Region
Project Size
Capital Cost
Below 5 MW
O & M Cost
FY11-12
O&M Expense
(` Lakh/ MW
FY121-13
O&M Expense
(` Lakh/ MW
21
23.47
25
15
16.77
18
Below 5 MW
17
19.00
20
5 MW to 25 MW
12
13.41
14
Himachal Pradesh,
Uttarakhand
and
North
Eastern5 MW to 25 MW
States
Other States
FY09-10
O&M Expense
(` Lakh/ MW)
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
• O&M cost for FY 11-12 escalated with 5.72% annual escalation
Small Hydro: Tariff 2012-13
Small Hydro
09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13
Capital Cost
HP, Uttarakhand and NE States (Below 5MW)
` /kWh
3.90
3.59
3.78
4.14
O & M Cost
HP, Uttarakhand and NE States (5MW to 25 MW)
` /kWh
3.35
3.06
3.22
3.54
Other States (Below 5 MW)
4.62
4.26
4.49
4.88
4.00
3.65
3.84
4.16
Other States (5MW to 25 MW)
` /kWh
` /kWh
TECHNOLOGY SPECIFIC NORMS:
Biomass Based Power Projects with Rankine Cycle Technology
Biomass Power Project: Capital Cost
Biomass
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
Year
Date of Order/Regulation
Capital Cost
Capital cost
` Lacs/MW
Biomass Price
2009-10
17.09.2009
450.00
Station Heat Rate
2010-11
26.02.2010
402.54
Gross Calorific value
2011-12
09.11.2010
426.30
O & M Cost
Auxiliary Consumption
Biomass Power Project: Capital Cost
Biomass
Capital Cost Approved by the SERCs
SERCs
Capital Cost
Indexation Mechanism
Order/ Regulation
Remark
` Cr./MW
RERC
5.40 :
As per Formula
Regulation 23/01/2009
Not provided
Order No.5 of 2010:
Water Cooled Condenser
Capital Cost
5.85 :
Air Cooled Condenser
Biomass Price
GERC
4.25
O & M Cost
17.05.2010
Took note of CERC determined
CC for FY10-11, specified
higher CC as common for water
and Air cooled condenser
Regulation
As per CERC
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
UERC
4.50
Not provided
Dated 06.07.2010
Auxiliary Consumption
MERC
4.03
KERC
(2010-11)
4.87
As per CERC
Regulation
Not provided
07.06.2010
Order No.5 of 2010:
inclusive of transmission
infrastructure costs
JSERC
4.50
Not provided
As per CERC
11.12.2009
Took note of CERC specified
CC for 2009-10
Regulation
As per CERC
Dated 27.01.2010
HERC
4.50
Not provided
Order dated 27.5.2011 As per CERC
Biomass Power Project: Capital Cost
Biomass
Actual Project Cost Approach
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
FY2009-10
Source
No of
Projects
Capacity,
MW
Station Heat Rate
FY2010-11
Capita
l Cost,
Rs.
Cr/M
W
FY2011-12
No of
Projects
Capacity,
MW
Capital
Cost,
Rs.
Cr/MW
No of
Project
s
Capacity,
MW
2
19.90
4.79
1
9.90
Gross Calorific value
IREDA
Auxiliary Consumption
UNFCCC
4
36.8
4.74
2
24.5
5.39
Total
4
36.8
4.74
4
44.4
5.12
Capital
Cost,
Rs.
Cr/M
W
5.00
Biomass Power Project: Capital Cost
Actual Project Cost Approach: 12 MW Plant in Rajasthan
Sub Head
Biomass
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
Rs. In Cr.
7.58
Civil Work, Land & Site Development, Building Structure and Infra development for Residential Building
for more than 100 persons, Labour quarters admin building, office block, canteen, store, godown
Civil Work, Building Structure and foundation for plant boiler, TG, ESP ACC, fuel yard, fuel shed,
weighing system
Sub TOTAL (A)
ACC
Biomass Infra - Chippers
Biomass Infra - Tractors
Boiler
Chimney
Conveyor Systems
Cooling Tower
DG Inverter
Electrcial & Fabrication
ESP
Fire Hydrant
Furniture & Fixtures
Instrumentation & Control
Lab Equipemnts
Metering Systems
Office Equipement
Overhead Line
Plant Lighting
Power Receving Facilities
Steam Piping & Exhaust Piping
Switchyard
TG
Transfarmer
Vehicles
Weigh Bridge
Workshop, Tools & Tackels & Stores
WTP
Sub TOTAL (B)
Preliminary & Pre-Operative Exp.
Interest during Construction
Margin Money for Working Capital
Sub TOTAL (C)
11.42
6.13
2.06
0.45
16.65
0.91
2.48
0.05
0.60
0.59
2.72
0.31
0.55
0.06
0.12
0.60
0.61
0.08
0.18
0.32
2.22
1.17
9.42
1.44
0.13
0.13
0.45
0.94
51.38
5.50
3.70
1.50
10.70
GRAND TOTAL (A+B+C)
73.50
3.84
Biomass Power Project: Capital Cost
12MW biomass based power project in Tehsil Gangapurcity Dist.
Sawai Madhopur in Rajasthan
Biomass
(Rs. in Lacs)
S.N.
Particulars
Total Cost
1
Land
250.00
2
Site Development
35.00
3
Buildings and Civil Works
866.12
4
Plant & Machinery
5149.00
5
Other Misc Assets
55.00
6
Preliminary & Pre-operative Expenses
206.72
7
Finance Charges and IDC
639.60
8
Working Capital Margin
183.83
9
Contingencies on 1 to 5
317.76
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
Total
7703.03
Total Project Cost
7703.03
Biomass Power Project: Capital Cost
10MW biomass based power plant at Merta, Dist Nagaur in Rajasthan
Biomass
Particulars
Land
Site Development
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
Buildings and Civil Works
Total Cost
155.16
18.00
644.15
Plant & Machinery
4321.92
Other Misc Assets
92.61
Preliminary & Pre-operative Expenses
Finance Charges
146.32
28.29
IDC
551.82
Total
5958.27
Biomass Power Project: Capital Cost
Biomass
IREDA Benchmark for financing biomass projects for FY
2011-12
Pressure
Capital Cost
Biomass Power (` Crore/MW)
Configuration
(ata)
6 MW
7.5 MW
10 MW
44
4.03
3.93
3.79
66
5.38
5.19
5.03
Station Heat Rate
86
5.59
5.37
5.15
Gross Calorific value
102
5.93
5.77
5.61
110
6.05
5.89
5.72
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Auxiliary Consumption
Basis for Formulation of Capital Cost Benchmark:
• Normative capital cost of Rs 4.45 Cr./MW
(with Water Cooled
Condenser and with out Transmission lines) is proposed for first year
of the Control Period
Biomass Power Project: Biomass Price
Biomass
RE Tariff Regulations-2009
Biomass price
Biomass price
Biomass price
(Rs/MT)
(Rs/MT)
(Rs/MT)
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
Andhra Pradesh
1301
1,342.81
1,460.75
Haryana
2168
2,237.67
2,434.21
Maharashtra
1801
1,858.87
2,022.14
Madhya Pradesh
1299
1,340.74
1,458.50
Punjab
2092
2,159.23
2,348.88
Rajasthan
1822
1,880.55
2,045.72
Tamil Nadu
1823
1,881.58
2,046.84
Uttar Pradesh
1518
1,566.78
1,704.39
Other States
1797
1,854.75
2,017.65
State
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
Biomass Power Project: Biomass Price
Biomass
Proposal in Draft Regulation-2012
Biomass price
State
Proposed in
(Rs/MT)
(Rs/MT)
(Rs/MT)
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
Andhra Pradesh
1301
1,342.81
1,460.75
2315
Haryana
2168
2,237.67
2,434.21
2635
Maharashtra
1801
1,858.87
2,022.14
2116
Madhya Pradesh
1299
1,340.74
1,458.50
1507
Punjab
2092
2,159.23
2,348.88
2756
Rajasthan
1822
1,880.55
2,045.72
2300
Tamil Nadu
1823
1,881.58
2,046.84
2277
Uttar Pradesh
1518
1,566.78
1,704.39
2355
Other States
1797
1,854.75
2,017.65
2283
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
Biomass price Biomass price
draft Reg.
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
• Approach considered was Median value of SERC determined price
escalated with 5% to bring at FY12-13, MNRE suggested price and
equivalent heat approach
Biomass Power Project: Biomass Price
Biomass
Comments received:
As proposed in draft
RegulationFY2012-13
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Comments received
(` /MT)
State
(` /MT)
Andhra Pradesh
2315
e- auction coal price
Haryana
2635
-
Maharashtra
2116
3000-3800
Madhya Pradesh
1507
2864-3000
Punjab
2756
3000
Rajasthan
2300
2415-3215
Tamil Nadu
2277
2500
Uttar Pradesh
2355
-
2283
Karnataka: 3200, Gujarat 3000,
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
Other States
Orissa: 3000
Reg. 44: Biomass Price :
Biomass
Staff viewsDraft
State
Capital Cost
Andhra
Haryana
Biomass Price
Maharashtra
Biomass
Rationale
Regulation
Price
2315
2315
APERC norms escalated with 5% to bring at FY 2012-13
2635
2635
HERC norms escalated with 5% to bring at FY 2012-13
2116
2695
As reviewed by MERC
1507
2476
Shifted to other state category
2756
2756
PSERC norms escalated with 5% to bring at FY 2012-13
O & M Cost
Madhya
Station Heat Rate
Punjab
2300
Gross Calorific value
Rajasthan
2300
As proposed in the draft
Tamil Nadu
2277
2277
As proposed in the draft
2355
2355
As proposed in the draft
2283
2476
Average of the above States
Auxiliary Consumption
UP
Other States
• Latest norm specified by the respective State Commission as well as
detailed study if any carried out by the States whichever is maximum.
Biomass Price : Escalation
Biomass
Proposal: Fuel price Indexation formula or 5% escalation
Capital Cost
Comments received
Biomass Price
•
factor of should be 10% -11% annum instead of 5% annually
O & M Cost
escalation.
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
Most of the stakeholders suggested that normative escalation
•
Some of the stakeholders have suggested that biomass
price/tariff should be fixed annually.
Biomass Price : Escalation
WPI for
Biomass
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
WPI for all
60% of WPI of
non coking
20% of
20% of WPI
Non Cocking
Year
Commodities
WPI of HSD
coal
WPI
of HSD
coal
Composite Series
1999
76.79
44.29
64.77
15.358
8.858
38.862
63.078
2000
81.59
60.49
67.07
16.318
12.098
40.242
68.658
2001
85.8
69.88
80.19
17.16
13.976
48.114
79.25
2002
87.92
72.65
81.38
17.584
14.53
48.828
80.942
2003
92.6
81.71
85.31
18.52
16.342
51.186
86.048
2004
98.72
95.34
96.5
19.744
19.068
57.9
96.712
2005
103.37
115.39
102.6
20.674
23.078
61.56
105.312
2006
109.59
129.68
102.5
21.918
25.936
61.5
109.354
2007
114.94
125.62
104.01
22.988
25.124
62.406
110.518
2008
124.92
135.66
112.7
24.984
27.132
67.62
119.736
2009
127.86
130.33
116.53
25.572
26.066
69.918
121.556
2010
140.08
147.91
131.2
28.016
29.582
78.72
136.318
2011
152.93
160.37
160.91
30.586
32.074
96.546
159.206
13 years CAGR
8.02%
10 Years CAGR
7.81%
8 Years CAGR
7.38%
5 years CAGR
9.55%
Review of Biomass Fuel prices for the projects
commissioned in the earlier control period
Biomass
Proposal:
•
control period for the next Control Period and same shall also
Capital Cost
be applicable to project commissioned under this Control
Biomass Price
Period.
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
The biomass base price shall be revised at the end of the
Comments received
•
Most of the stakeholders suggested that the prices need to
Gross Calorific value
be revised every quarterly or half yearly or annually instead of
Auxiliary Consumption
at the end of the Control Period.
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
•
The biomass price shall be reviewed in the third year of the
control period in order to capture the volatility in the biomass
fuel market as well as more realistic prices.
Reg. 39: Biomass Project: Operation & Maintenance Cost
Biomass
Proposal in Draft Regulations
• 24 Lakh/MW for FY 2012-13 (which are determined by applying annual escalation
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
factor of 5.72% per annum on the O&M cost norm applicable for FY 2011-12)
Comments received
• Separate norm for project with water-cooled and air-cooled condensers
• Separate norm for smaller biomass power plant
Gross Calorific value
• 6.5% to 9.39% of the Capital cost
Auxiliary Consumption
• Suggestions received in the range of ` 32 .4 Lakh /MW to ` 50 Lakh/MW
• Annual escalation factor should be 7%
• CERC speciifed norm for :200 MW sets: ` 21.51 Lac/MW, Tanda: ` 31.02 Lac/MW,
Badarpur: ` 34.12 Lac/MW, Talchar: ` 38.70 Lac/MW
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
• Retained the norm as provided in the draft Regulations
Reg. 38 : Biomass Project: Station Heat Rate
Biomass
• RE Tariff Regulations-2009: 3800 Kcal/kWh
• Proposal in draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012: 4000 Kcal/kWh
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
• Comments received:
• Some of the stakeholders suggested that SHR of 4200kCal/kWh and
4400kCal/kWh should be considered for project with water-cooled
condensers and air-cooled condensers
• Some of the stakeholders requested to consider the SHR as
Auxiliary Consumption
4500kCal/kWh as per CEA study
• Station Heat Rate of 4400 kcal/kwh for paddy straw fired biomass
power plant should be considered
• Dalkia Energy Services has recommended to consider SHR as 4100,
4400 and 4150kCal/kWh for rice husk based (> 5MW), straw based
and other fuel based biomass power plants.
Reg. 38 : Biomass Project: Station Heat Rate
Biomass
•
MNRE recommendation on SHR for different technology :
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
•
Station Heat Rate
Biomass
Source
IPP
(> 5 MW)
Tail End
(< 2 MW)
Rice Husk
Straw
Others
4100
4400
4150
5200
5500
5200
National Productivity Council conducted a field study for MEDA for
assessment of heat rate of commissioned biomass power plants in
Maharashtra.
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
Project with Boiler
Type
Station Heat Rate
kCal/KWh
AFBC
Traveling Grate
4000 – 4100
4150 - 4250
•
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
•
Station Heat Rate at 4000 kCal/kWh
Reg. 38 : Biomass Project: Gross Calorific value
Biomass
RE Tariff Regulations-2009: State wise GCV specified, Average GCV was
3462 kCal/kg
Proposal in draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012: 3300 kCal/kg
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
Comments received
• CEA, National Productivity Council and MNRE recommended GCV have
not considered degradation in GCV of these seasonal fuels over the non-
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
seasonal period.
• Due to the rains, storage, contamination by fuel suppliers and inherent
Gross Calorific value
mud in agricultural residues there is a significant reduction in GCV of
Auxiliary Consumption
biomass fuels.
• Actual GCV in rice husk is between 3000-3100 kCal/kg.
• GCV of cotton stalk available in Gujarat is around 3600-3700 kcal/kg and
average GCV of the biomass would be around 3500 kCal/kg.
• Some of the stakeholders suggested that average GCV should be taken
as 3000 kCal/kg considering loss of GCV during storage, which is a
practical requirement.
Reg. 43 : Gross Calorific value
• MNRE Recommendation
Biomass
• MNRE also mentioned that there are other losses which are being
encountered during the storage and handling of biomass due to land
settlement, loss of fuel during sand storm,
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
• GCV loss due to decaying of biomass. MNRE referred a recent survey
has been carried out by DESL under mandate from Rajasthan Renewable
Energy Corporation Ltd. (RREC) to assess such losses which are in the
range of 3.2 to 3.5%.
Station Heat Rate
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
• MNRE recommended that there should be provision of loss of fuel during
storage at around 2%.
• MNRE recommended following general principles can be adopted for the
GCV as under:
Biomass
GCV (kCal / kg)
Rice husk
3200
Straw/Stalks/Other husks
3300
Plantation
2800
Reg. 43 : Gross Calorific value
Biomass
• The National Productivity Council (NPC) in its study mentioned that based
on the fuel analysis report from the different plants, GCV & moisture
variation found as under:
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
Variation in Moisture
Biomass
GCV (kCal / kg)
Rice husk
3000-3200
Maize Bhutia
3500
Cotton Stalk (Air Dried Basis)
3250
(%)
12-18
21
8
Gross Calorific value
Auxiliary Consumption
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
• Normative GCV of biomass at 3300 kCal/kg
• Use of 15% of coal (average coal GCV at 3600 kCal/kg) and 85%
uses of Biomass fuel of 3200 kCal/kg.
• The weighted average GCV works out to around 3300 kCal/kg.
UNFCCC: FIFTH MONITORING REPORT
Biomass in Rajasthan – Electricity Generation
from Mustard Crop Residues
As per above data SFC: 1.27 kg/kWh
As per our proposal SHR 4000 kCal/kWh GCV : 3200 Kcal/kg: SFC: 1.25 kg/kWh
Reg. 37 : Biomass Project: Auxiliary Consumption
Biomass
• RE Tariff Regulations-2009: 10%
• Proposal in draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012: 10%
Capital Cost
Biomass Price
Comments received
• Many stakeholders have suggested to increase the same which are
ranges from 11.5% to 14%
O & M Cost
Station Heat Rate
• Separate norm for projects with
water cooled
and air cooled
condensers
Gross Calorific value
• Higher auxiliary consumption during stabilisation period
Auxiliary Consumption
• Separate norm for straw fired plants, Auxiliary Consumption should be
considered at 14% for Water Cooled Condenser and 16% for Air
Cooled Condenser
RE Tariff Regulations-2012: 10%
Biomass Based Power Plant Tariff
Biomass Tariff
Capital Cost: ` 4.26 Crore/MW (FY11-12)
Capital Cost: ` 4.45 Crore/MW (FY12-13)
Andhra Pradesh
2011-12
` /kWh
3.78
2012-13
` /kWh
5.18
Haryana
4.97
5.65
Maharashtra
4.31
5.74
Punjab
4.94
5.83
Rajasthan
4.28
5.16
Tamil Nadu
4.58
5.12
Uttar Pradesh
4.06
5.24
Others
4.41
5.42
TECHNOLOGY SPECIFIC NORMS:
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
30 MW Bagasse Cogen project at a Sugar Mill in Maharashtra
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- Capital Cost
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Proposal in Draft RE Tariff Regulations-2012: ` 420 Lakh / MW
Comments Received
• IL&FS RE Ltd.
Capital Cost
Bagasse Price
O & M Cost
Auxiliary Consumption
• Capital cost of bagasse based co-generation projects should be ` 550
Lakhs/MW.
• Capital Cost of two projects (36 MW and 44 MW) commissioned by IREL
under Urjankur Nidhi initiative on Boot basis incurred project cost of ` 530
Lakh/MW and ` 550 Lakh/MW respectively for projects with 110 ata
pressure and 5400 C temperature.
RE Trariff Regulations-2012
• While proposing the normative capital cost of ` 420 Lakh / MW we
considered the capital cost norm developed by IREDA for financing the
project during FY 2011-12 considering the typical size of the project for
2500 TCD with 66 bar / 480 o C configuration.
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- Capital Cost
Bagasse based
cogeneration
IREDA Benchmark for financing biomass projects for FY 2011-12
Pressure
Bagasse Co-gen (` Crore/MW)
Configuratio
Capital Cost
n
Bagasse Price
2500
3500 TCD 5000 TCD
TCD
>5000
TCD
Kg/ cm2
O & M Cost
44
3.70
3.58
3.53
3.46
66
4.13
4.06
4.00
3.93
86
4.77
4.70
4.66
4.60
102
5.42
5.12
4.83
4.77
Auxiliary Consumption
• It can be
seen that higher
if one opts 4.87
for higher
110
5.53 capital cost
5.22is justified4.93
temperature and pressure configuration.
• Commission reatained the norm of Capital Cost at ` 420 Lakhs/MW
which is also in line with the benchmark capital cost norm developed
by IREDA
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- Bagasse Price
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Proposal
• Bagasse price assumption for FY2012-13 (`/MT) across States:
‘equivalent heat value’ approach for landed cost of coal for thermal
Capital Cost
Bagasse Price
Stations for respective States
State
Bagasse Price (`/MT)
O & M Cost
Andhra Pradesh
1307
Auxiliary Consumption
Haryana
1859
Maharashtra
1327
Madhya Pradesh
946
Punjab
1636
Tamil Nadu
1408
Uttar Pradesh
1458
Other States
1420
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- Bagasse Price
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Proposal Draft RE tariff Regulations-2012
• Bagasse price assumption for FY2012-13 (`/MT) across States:
‘equivalent heat value’ approach for landed cost of coal for thermal
Capital Cost
Bagasse Price
Stations for respective States
State
Bagasse Price (`/MT)
O & M Cost
Andhra Pradesh
1307
Auxiliary Consumption
Haryana
1859
Maharashtra
1327
Madhya Pradesh
946
Punjab
1636
Tamil Nadu
1408
Uttar Pradesh
1458
Other States
1420
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- Bagasse Price
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Comments Received
IL&FS RE Ltd. : Considering both crushing season and off-season, average
price of bagasse delivered at project site is ` 1750-2000 for the FY 2010-
Capital Cost
11 in Maharashtra.
Bagasse Price
•
O & M Cost
Fuel prices particularly for the state of Maharashtra should be specified at
a price of at least ` 1850/MT with normative escalation factor of 10% per
annum instead of ` 1327/- with annual escalation of 5%.
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
•
Commission retained the approach proposed in the draft Regulations i.e.
‘equivalent heat value’ approach for landed cost of coal for thermal
Stations for respective States with a variation in order to take into account
State specific prevailing prices of bagasse as may be considered by the
respective Commission if the same is higher than the price. Accordingly
Maharashtra State price revised to Rs. 1832/MT and MP shifted to other
States category
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- Bagasse Price
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Comments Received
•
IL&FS RE Ltd.
•
considering both crushing season and off-season, average price of
bagasse delivered at project site is ` 1750-2000 for the FY 2010-11 in
Capital Cost
Bagasse Price
Maharashtra.
•
Fuel prices particularly for the state of Maharashtra should be specified at
a price of at least ` 1850/MT with normative escalation factor of 10% per
O & M Cost
annum instead of ` 1327/- with annual escalation of 5%.
Auxiliary Consumption
Staff View
•
We may retain the approach proposed in the draft Regulations i.e.
‘equivalent heat value’ approach for landed cost of coal for thermal
Stations for respective States with a variation in order to take into account
State specific prevailing prices of bagasse as may be considered by the
respective Commission if the same is higher than the price.
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- Bagasse Price
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Capital Cost
State
Bagasse Price
O & M Cost
Bagasse Price
(`/MT)
Andhra Pradesh
1307
Haryana
1859
Maharashtra
1832
Punjab
1636
Tamil Nadu
1408
Uttar Pradesh
1458
Other States
1583
Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- O & M Expenses
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Proposal in Draft Regulations-2012
• ` 16 Lakh/MW for FY 2012-13
Capital Cost
GUVNL
Bagasse Price
•
O&M expanses should be consider at ` 14.75 Lakh/MW as
O & M Cost
considered by the SERCs with annual escalation at 5.72%
Auxiliary Consumption
Staff View
•
Normative O&M Expenses for non‐fossil fuel co‐generation projects
for the year 2012‐13 has been specified as ` 16 Lakh per MW which
shall be escalated at the rate of 5.72% per annum over the tariff
period
Reg. 50: Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
- Auxiliary consumption
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Proposal in the draft RE Tariff Regulations: 8.5%
Comments received
IL&FS RE Ltd.
Capital Cost
•
should be considered as 10%
Bagasse Price
O & M Cost
Auxiliary consumption for the bagasse based cogeneration projects
•
It is difficult to achieve an auxiliary consumption of 8.5%, for projects
with technical configuration of 110 ata steam and 5400 C
Auxiliary Consumption
temperature parameters.
RE Tariff Regulations-2012: 8.5%
•
Since the non-fossil fuel based cogeneration plants have some of
the auxiliary equipments common between the sugar mill and the
power generation unit. Also, the bagasse require less processing
compared to the biomass.
•
We may retain the norm as specified under Draft Regulations
Tariff: Non-fossil fuel based Cogeneration Projects
Bagasse based
cogeneration
Bagasse based Co-generation: ` /kWh
Capital Cost
Bagasse Price
Capital Cost: ` 4.21 Crore/MW (FY11-12)
Capital Cost: ` 4.20 Crore/MW (FY12-13)
O & M Cost
Auxiliary Consumption
09-10
10-11
11-12
12-13
` /kWh
` /kWh
` /kWh
` /kWh
Andhra Pradesh
4.93
4.23
4.51
5.06
Haryana
5.78
4.86
5.21
5.73
Maharashtra
4.80
4.05
4.34
5.42
Punjab
5.75
4.84
5.19
5.30
Tamil Nadu
5.10
4.29
4.60
4.61
Uttar Pradesh
5.21
4.45
4.76
5.35
Others
5.17
4.38
4.68
5.20
States
TECHNOLOGY SPECIFIC NORMS:
SOLAR PV POWER PLANT
Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- Capital Cost & Module Cost
Solar PV
Proposal
•
Module Cost
Non Module Cost
O & M Cost
Module Degradation
Normative capital cost: ` 1000Lakh/MW
Comments Received
• Prayas has suggested that, procurement of solar power
should be only through the competitive based reverse
bidding process with the feed‐in‐tariff acting as a ceiling.
• CESC Limited parameters assumed on higher side
• Torrent Power Limited :` 1100 Lakh including
evacu.ation cost
• ACME: ` 1152 Lakh/MW
• EMCO Limited ` 1200 Lakh/MW as reduction in cost of
various items considered is not achievable in actual
practice and exchange rate for US$ should be
considered as ` 54 and in order to take care of
fluctuation in the rate of US $ a suitable mechanism is
needed to be devised and it may be made pass
through.
Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- Capital Cost & Module Cost
Solar PV
Proposal
•
Module Cost
Normative capital cost: ` 1000Lakh/MW
Comments Received
Non Module Cost
•
Reliance Power Ltd.: `1300 - 1400 Lakh/MW
O & M Cost
•
SDS Solar Private Limited:
Module Degradation
•
Only module cost has gone down and other non
module cost components have gone up.
•
Solar PV project cost should be considered under
two head: (1) Project upto Max of 2 MW and (2)
bigger projects.
Reg. 57: Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- Capital Cost: Module cost
Solar PV
Solar PV modules price: Energy Trend’s survey
weekly spot prices per watt as on 28/12//2011
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Module Degradation
Reg. 57: Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- Capital Cost: Module Cost
Solar PV
• Current average thin film module price Crystalline module price varies
Capital Cost
in the range of $0.80 to $0.89/Watt.
• Most of the international studies reveal that the prices are expected to
CUF
decline in future.
O & M Cost
Module Degradation
• It is proposed that we may specify module cost at $ 0.85$/W. With the
current exchange rate of ` 53/US$, the module cost comes out to be `
450 lakh/MW.
Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- Capital Cost: Non-Module Cost
Solar PV
Non Module Cost
Sr. No.
Particulars
Capital Cost
O & M Cost
CUF
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Land Cost
Civil and General Works
Mounting Structures
Power Conditioning Unit
Evacuation Cost up to Interconnection Point (Cables and
Transformers)
Preliminary and Pre-Operative
Expenses including IDC and
contingency
Total Non Module Cost
Capital Cost
Norm
FY 2011-12
(` Cr/MW)
0.15
0.95
1.05
1.60
Capital Cost
Norm
FY 2012-13
(` Cr/MW)
0.16
0.90
1.00
0.98
0.90
1.00
1.22
0.80
5.87
4.84
Benchmark project cost of Solar PV projects
• Total cost of Solar Photo voltaic power projects for the FY2012-13 as ` 9.34
Crore/MW
• Taking care of degradation in the module output over a period of time, the total
cost of Solar Photo voltaic power projects for the FY2012-13 proposed at ` 10.0
Crore/MW
Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- Capacity Utilization Factor
Solar PV
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Proposal :Normative CUF: 19%
Comments Received
• EMCO Limited :
• Normative CUF should be considered at 17-18 % as only few
States like Rajasthan and Gujarat are able to achieve a CUF of
19%.
• EMCO Limited has further suggested that the auxiliary
consumption for solar PV projects should be considered as 1%
of the total generation as the energy consumption by inverters,
air conditioning, and water treatment and pumping, lighting is
high. GERC draft Sola PV Tariff order has also considered the
same.
• Torrent Power Limited
• Actual data from the operating site should be collected, analyzed
and be used as the basis for determination of CUF for Solar PV
projects.
• Aannual degradation of 1% in CUF annually should be
considered in the Regulation.
• GUVNL
• CUF should be specified on zonal basis which will ensure benefit
to consumers in areas where high solar radiation are received
Reg. 59: Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- Capacity Utilization Factor
Solar PV
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Comments Received
• NTPC Limited
• Country may be divided into 4-5 solar zones
• Degradation of solar modules with age should be considered.
• Auxiliary Consumption of 5.5% for solar PV stations should be
considered while determining tariff. Break up of 5.5% are as under:
• Transformer losses = 3.0% (remain charged for 24 hrs)
• Station facilities, lighting, washing arrangement, etc = 2.5%.
•
ACME
• CUF should be considered at 17% for Solar for Crystalline Technology
& 19% for Thin Film Technology as a reference point to reflect the all
India average.
• Projects where interconnection point is at the end of transmission line,
an additional provision of 2.5% towards transmission losses be
considered.
• 1.1% as auxiliary consumption factor should be taken in account
various loads at the project site such as lighting, inverter auxiliary as
well as some common facilities.
• Shri Shanti Prasad
• Auxiliary consumption and de-ration to be considered
Reg. 59: Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- Capacity Utilization Factor
Solar PV
•
A study carried out by the Commission on “Performance of Solar Power
Plants In India” reveals that the average CUF at more than 80%
locations works out to be more than 19% for solar PV plant based on
thin film technology. Similarly, the average CUF at more than 50%
locations works out to be more than 19% for solar PV plants based on
crystalline technology.
•
Considering the same and in the absence of actual data of full one year,
we to retain the benchmark CUF as proposed in the draft Regulations for
the next Control Period for determination tariff.
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Power Project
- O & M Expenses
Solar PV
Proposal
•
Capital Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Normative O&M Expenses: ` 11.00 lakh/MW
Comments Received
•
GUVNL has suggested that O&M expanses should be considered at `
8.35 Lakh/MW as considered by other SERCs with annual escalation
at 5.72%.
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
• Considering the current inflation trend, the normative O & M Expenses
considered as proposed in the draft Regulations.
Tariff: Solar PV
Technology
Solar PV
CC: ` 14.42 Cr/MW (FY11-12)
CC: ` 10 Cr/MW (FY12-13)
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
` /kWh
` /kWh
` /kWh
` /kWh
18.44
17.91
15.39
10.39
TECHNOLOGY SPECIFIC NORMS:
SOLAR THERMAL POWER PLANT
Solar Thermal Power Project
- Capital Cost
Solar
Thermal
• Capital cost of solar thermal project is dependent on the solar irradiation
level at a particular location
Module Cost
• Variation of solar irradiation level at different locations result in variation
in electricity output, CUF and capital costs.
CUF
O & M Cost
• For solar thermal power projects, the electricity output is computed by
the formula:
=Annual average solar irradiation (KWh/m2/year) x Plant Efficiency (%)
x Solar Field size (m2)
• Solar field size is the one of the most decisive factor in deciding the cost
of the project.
• The solar field, comprising of mirrors, concentrates the incident solar
irradiation onto heat absorber tubes which absorb the thermal energy
and transfers it to a heat transfer fluid. Heat exchangers transfer thermal
energy to generate steam that drives a conventional turbine.
Solar Thermal Power Project - Solar Field Size
Solar
Thermal
• Designing the ‘right’ size of solar field to generate sufficient thermal heat
required to drive the turbine continually throughout its operation is
depend on the solar irradiation level which varies according to the ‘time
Module Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
of day’ (maximum in the afternoon, low in the mornings and evenings)
and ‘month of year’ (lower during monsoon, higher during summer
months).
• A larger than necessary (or a smaller) solar field may result in excess (or
deficient) solar energy required to drive the turbine thereby causing solar
energy to be dumped.
• Based on the solar field efficiency, hourly incident irradiation, and the
thermal to electric plant efficiency, solar simulation software is used to
compute the thermal heat of steam required by the system to drive the
steam turbine for different solar field sizes, along with electric output,
capital costs, and CUF.
Solar Thermal Power Project
- Capital Cost & CUF
Solar
Thermal
• The CUF is dependent on solar field size and no. of hours of storage
which are optimized for minimum LOCE.
• Project cost is dependent on the CUF projected and corresponding solar
Module Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
field size.
• Solar irradiation varies from location to location across the country.
Therefore field size requirement and in turn the project cost would also
vary for a particular CUF across the country.
• Parabolic Trough technology has achieved close to full commercial
status while cost data for the power Tower, Fresnel and Dish Stirling
technologies are in the process of being established.
• Therefore, available cost data of Parabolic Trough technology is
considered for the determination of benchmark capital cost norm for
solar thermal projects for the year 2012-13.
Solar Thermal Power Project - Capital Cost & CUF
Solar
Thermal
• Relation between solar field size, corresponding CUF and dumped energy
for a 111 MW plant with net generation of 100 MW
SM
Solar Field
Output
CUF
E-Dump
Dump/Output
Module Cost
1.64
843,660
229,802,081.00
26.30%
145,249,200
63.2062%
CUF
1.48
761,910
221,261,862.00
25.30%
83,002,880
37.5134%
1.415
729,210
216,570,205.00
24.70%
61,464,410
28.3808%
1.35
696,510
211,657,613.00
24.20%
42,340,810
20.0044%
1.26
650,730
202,454,388
23.10%
20,579,080
10.1648%
1.25
644,190
200,980,390
23.00%
18,134,440
9.0230%
1.245
640,920
200,233,277
22.90%
16,970,220
8.4752%
1.195
614,760
193,631,312
22.10%
9,262,562
4.7836%
1.15
591,870
187,090,149
21.40%
4,788,951
2.5597%
1.11
572,250
181,053,466
20.70%
2,215,236
1.2235%
1.07
552,630
174,750,605
20.00%
712,963
0.4080%
1.035
533,010
168,054,750
19.20%
78,549
0.0467%
1.03
529,740
166,854,200
19.10%
39,564
0.0237%
1.02
526,470
165,810,786
18.90%
13,534
0.0082%
1.015
523,200
154,522,901
18.80%
1,392
0.0009%
1.01
519,930
163,352,776
18.70%
-
1
516,660
162,145,245
18.50%
-
O & M Cost
SAM Modeling
Location
Jodhpur
DNI: 2074
kWh/m2/year
Solar Thermal Power Project - Capital Cost & CUF
Solar
Thermal
SAM Modeling: Location Jodhpur, DNI:2074 kWh/m2/year
Module Cost
Dumped Energy
O & M Cost
Solar Field Size
CUF
CUF
Reg. 61: Solar Thermal Power Project - Capital Cost & CUF
Solar
Thermal
SAM Modeling: Location Jodhpur, DNI:2074 kWh/m2/year
Module Cost
Dumped Energy
O & M Cost
Solar Field Size
CUF
CUF
Reg. 61: Solar Thermal Power Project - Capital Cost & CUF
SAM Modeling: Location Jodhpur, DNI:2074 kWh/m2/year
Solar
Thermal
Module Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
Solar Field (m2 )/MW
Sr. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
5804
€ per m2
30
41
35
Particulars
Structure
HCE (Absorber Tubes):
Mirrors
12
20
35
15
10
12
25
235
9.00
1
Labour charges for assembling, welding, allignment and topography
Solar Field Piping
HTF System (pumps, tanks, Heat exchangers etc.)
HTF Fluid
Electrical system
Control and Instrumentation
Civil Works
Total Solar Field cost € /m2
Total Solar Field cost
` Crore / MW
Power Block
Steam Turbine and alternator € per kW
2
Balance of Plant*
175
400
2.64
A
B
Total Power Block cost € per kW
` Crore / MW
225
1
2
Total Power Block cost per MW
Other Cost elements
Land cost: (6.25 Acre/MW `3 lakh/Acre) ` Crore / MW
Site development ` Crore/MW
3
Erection and commissioning charges: 2.5% of total A+B
0.29
4
Preliminary & Pre-Operative Expenses including IDC and contingency and other costs
1.25
C
Other Cost elements
Total Project Cost: A+B+C
2.19
13.83
*
` Crore / MW
` Crore / MW
0.19
0.46
Steam generation system, Cooling tower, condensation system, Auxiliary System, water treatment plant, Cooling Tower,
compressed air system, water pumping from catchment area, effluent treatment, fire protection, maintenance workshop,
Control and instrumentation, Civil works, Electrical substation, lines and installation
Reg. 61: Solar Thermal Power Project - Capital Cost & CUF
Solar
Thermal
Module Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
http://www.shriramepc.com/pdf/Shriram-EPC-Clip-aug-24-2011.pdf
Solar Thermal Power Project – O & M Cost
Solar
Thermal
• There is hardly any operational experience of MW scale thermal power
projects in India to ascertain norms for O&M expenses.
• Regulation 63 of the RE Regulations-2009
Module Cost
CUF
O & M Cost
• Normative O&M expenses for solar thermal power projects
FY2009-10: ` 13.00 Lakh/MW to be escalated at the rate of 5.72%
per annum
• FY 2011-12: ` 14.53 Lakh/MW
RE Tariff Regulations-2012
• FY2012-13: ` 15 Lakh/MW
Solar Thermal
Technology
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
` /kWh
` /kWh
` /kWh
` /kWh
13.45
15.31
15.04
12.46
Solar Thermal
CC: ` 15 Cr/MW (FY11-12)
CC: ` 13 Cr/MW (FY12-13)
Biomass Gasifier and
Biogas
State
Levellised
Fixed Cost
Variable Cost
(FY 2012-13)
Applicable Tariff
Rate
(FY 2012-13)
(`/kWh)
(`/kWh)
(`/kWh)
Benefit of
Accelerated
Depreciation
(if availed)
(`/kWh)
Net Levellised
Tariff
(upon adjusting for
Accelerated
Depreciation
benefit) (if availed)
(`/kWh)
Biomass Gasifier Power Project
Andhra
Pradesh
Haryana
2.29
3.22
5.51
0.11
5.40
2.34
3.66
6.00
0.11
5.89
Maharashtra
2.35
3.74
6.09
0.11
5.98
Punjab
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu
2.36
2.29
2.28
3.83
3.19
3.16
6.19
5.48
5.44
0.11
0.11
0.11
6.08
5.37
5.33
Uttar Pradesh
2.29
3.27
5.56
0.11
5.45
Others
2.32
3.44
5.76
0.11
5.65
0.21
6.23
Biogas based power project
Biogas
3.06
3.38
6.44
Thank You