Governance and
Power Development Planning
in Thailand
Suphakit Nuntavorakarn
Healthy Public Policy Foundation and
National Independent Commission on Environment
and Health (Provisional)
www.14iacc.org
www.iacconference.org
www.twitter.com/14iacc
Power Development Plan (PDP)
and its importance
• PDP is the long-term strategic
plan of the Thai power sector (1520 years timeframe)
• PDP determines the future
investment - how many and which
types of power plant?
– For example, total investment of
PDP2010 120 billion USD
• PDP also determines the future
impacts of the power sector,
Electricity Governance in
Thailand, 2nd Assessment (2006-2008)
• Aim toward constructive engagement to encourage
good governance
• Develop and communicate the concept and
assessment direction to the stakeholders since the
beginning period
• Participate and observe the relevant meetings and
forums, as well as arrange the public forum on Power
Planning for local communities and energy networks
• Through the multi-stakeholders Advisory Committee,
develop the indicators as well as review the draft report
Electricity Governance Assessment
(2nd Assessment)
The part on Power Development Planning2007
• Apply the indicators from EGT and
review the draft report by multistakeholders advisory committee
• Comprise of four parts, 14
indicators
– Transparency and access to
information
– Participation
– Capacity
Electricity Governance Assessment on
PDP2007
• Many governance problems in the
PDP2007, reflecting from many
indicators in all four parts
• Leading to questions for the
approval of the PDP2007 and then,
problems in the implementation,
for example
– much higher fuel price than the
assumptions in the PDP
The key recommendation from EGT on PDP
The policy for
Power Development Planning 2010
•
On 7th October 2009, Ministry of Energy announced
the ‘Green PDP’ policy for PDP2010
– Systematic public participation process
– Reduce GHG emission from PDP2007
– Introducing ‘End-Use’ approach for demand
forecast
– Following the targets in the Renewable Energy
Development Plan 2007-2022 by Ministry of
Energy
– Open for different PDP options and performing
Impact Assessment to compare these options
Governance problems of the recent
Power Development Plan 2010-2030
• MoE made the first draft of
PDP2010 since January 2010
without any public inputs or
participation
• MoE made decision not to use
the ‘End-Use Approach’ study,
commissioned by themselves
Governance problems of the recent
Power Development Plan 2010-2030
• The first public hearing on draft
PDP2010 on 17th Feb., while the
‘Long-term GDP Growth’ study,
commissioned by MoE is not
finished yet.
• The second public hearing on
8th Mar. on draft PDP2010, only
four days after a technical
Governance problems of the recent
Power Development Plan 2010-2030
• The Senate Sub-Committee on PDP
arranged two public forums on 4th
and 11th March, with
representative of MoE said that
‘they will postpone the submission
for approval’ due to the ‘Red Shirt’
protest and demonstration
• The National Energy Policy Council
th
Installed Capacity at the end of 2030
Unit : MW
กำล ังผลิตไฟฟ้ำ
Installed Capacity at the end of 2009
New Installed Capacity
Decommission
Installed Capacity at the end of 2030
PDP2010
GDP Base case
29,213
54,005
- 17,671
65,547
New power plants 2010-2030
-
Nuclear 1000 MW
CCGT
Imported coal
SPP Co-Gen.
Renewables (VSPP, EGAT)
Import from neighboring countries
5,000 (5โรง)
16,670 (19โรง)
8,400 (13โรง)
6,919
5,348
11,669
PDP2010 (GDP Base case)
Installed Capacity by fuel type
เมกะว ัตต์
PDP2010 : (GDP กรณีฐาน)
70,000
ดีเซล
65,000
พลังงานหมุนเวียน
60,000
น้ ามันเตา
ื้ ต่างประเทศ
ซอ
55,000
7%
7%
ถ่านหินนาเข ้า
50,000
8%
ลิกไนต์
45,000
7%
นิวเคลียร์
40,000
พลังน้ า
35,000
5%
5%
6%
6%
7%
30,000
5%
8%
6%
6%
7%
10% 11% 12%
7%
7%
13% 14%
51%
68% 65% 64% 66% 67% 64% 63% 61% 60%
57%
10,000
0
54%
16% 17%
Import
49%
47%
45%
13%
Imported
coal
11%
12% 11%
9%
5%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
6%
7%
5%
7%
5%
7%
5%
7%
5%
8%
5%
11% 10% 10%
9%
9%
9%
8%
9%
9%
9%
9%
8%
8%
8%
7%
7%
2553
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
2561
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2555
43% 42%
15% 17%
13% 15%
4%
7%
5%
2554
45%
44% 43%
51%
7%
6%
7%
7%
18%
15%
7%
6%
5%
7%
18%
18%
17% 18%
9%
8%
8%
8%
Gas
7%
20,000
5,000
8%
8%
15% 15%
25,000
15,000
7%
Renewables
ก๊าซธรรมชาติ
7%
8% 7%
Nuclear
7%
8%
8%
8%
7%
7%
6%
6%
6%
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
ปี
An Alternative PDP
• Needed new capacity
- Peak demand 52,890 MW in 2030
- Reserve Margin at 15% would need
60,824 MW in 2030
- Not 65,547 MW in 2030 as determined in
PDP2010
- Need better arrangement of all Installed
Capacity
DSM in PDP2010
Saving target of T5 high efficiency light bulb program
2010-2019
ปี
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
MW
43
129
215
344
473
584
498
369
198
ปี
2553
2554
2555
MW
43
172
387
Save 0.3% of
2556
2557
2558
2559
2560
the
peak
demand
731
1,204
1,788
2,286
2,655
in 20 years
2561
2,853
Saving target of DSM program for 2020-2030
ปี
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
MW
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
240
ปี
2562
2563
2564
2565
2566
2567
2568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
MW
3,093
3,333
3,573
3,813
4,053
4,293
4,533
4,773
5,013
5,253
5,493
5,733
14
DSM in PDP2010
DSM in PDP2010
Press meeting by MoE “T5 high
efficiency light bulb program will
save around 8,708 GWh per year
or reduce the expenses of 26,124
million Baht per year”
Ref. : EPPO 29/09/2009.
http://www.eppo.go.th/Thaienergynews/Energy_News/
showNewsDetail.aspx?NewsOID=4701&GroupOID=7&
SubGroupOID=22&ObjectID=3
Average saving of
1,170 GWh/year
Ref. : EPPO 17th Feb. 2010
http://www.eppo.go.th/power/pdp/page5.html
Save 12% in 10 years and
29% in 20 ปี
DSM&EE Potential in
the Industrial Sector
• Financially viable potential, around 42% of
total demand in the Industrial Sector (Tira
Foran, 2010)
• Consider achievable savings and
achievable facilities
• Market potential in 10 year
– Save 10% of total demand in the sector
– Around 10,498 GWh , 1,680 MW
An Alternative PDP
• Renewable Energy
- Follow the High Renewables scenario
of the draft PDP2010
- Target of 8,581 MW in 2030
- Adjust the growth to achieve the goal
of 5,608 MW in the Renewable Energy
Development Plan 2007-2022 by MoE
Fast Growth of Renewable
Energy in Thailand
้ กพลังงานหมุนเวียน
การเพิม่ ขึน้ ของกาลงก
ั ารผลิตติดตังจา
MW
1,400
1,200
1,000
VSPP
800
600
SPPNon-Firm
400
200
SPP-Firm
0
1994
2537 2538 2539 2540 2541 2542 2543 2544 2545 2546 2547 2548 2549 2550 2551 2552
2009
Numbers of Renewable Energy
Projects applying for Investment
Promotion
2008
Number
of
Projects
62
Total
Investment
(billion Baht)
19.9
2009
402
229.0
An Alternative PDP
• Co-generation and Tri-generation, that have
much higher energy efficiency, when
compared to conventional power plants
- Follow the target in the draft PDP2010
8,631 MW in 2030
- But will rebuild the existing projects, which
will be retired during 2010-2030 1,798 MW
• Repowering, or building new power plant at
the site of retired plant
– 13,600 MW
An Alternative PDP
รายการ
เมกะว ัตต ์
New Installed Capacity 2010-2030
Better arrangement of all Installed
Capacity
Demand Side Management (15% of
the Peak Demand)
Renewable energy
54,625
5,344
Co-generation and Tri-generation
10,429
Repowering
13,600
Can decrease the new installed
46,090
8,136
8,581
Strategic Impact Assessment
on different PDP options
• Impact on energy security
• Import burden and GDP
contribution
• GHG emission
• Air pollution and waste
• Health impacts
• JobShould
creation be share and
discuss through public
DSM/EE is the cheapest energy option,
but PDP2010 chose the expensive ones and
try to make them look cheap, like coal and nuclear
Comparison of electricity cost from different
options in Pacific Northwest, USA.
Real Levelized Cost (Cents/kWh - 2000$)
12
10
EE
8
Renewables
Coal
6
Gas turbines
Combined cycle
4
2
0
245
514
1598
2202
2560
3444
4934
6735
Cumulative Resource Potential (Average Megawatts)
Resource potential for generic coal, gas & wind resources shown for typical unit size.
Additional potential is available at comparable costs.
Source: Northwest Power and Conservation Council
8945
Investment and fuel costs in PDP 2010
กาลังผลิต
เงินลงทุน
(ปี 2552)
Heat Rate
อายุ
้
การใชงาน
ื้ เพลิง
ราคาเชอ
(ปี 2563)
(เมกกะวัตต์)
($/kW)
(Btu/kWh)
(ปี )
($/MMbtu)
AP
EP
รวม
โรงไฟฟ้ าถ่านหิน
800
1,550
9,125
30
4.01
1.27
1.37
2.64
โรงไฟฟ้ านิวเคลียร์
1000
3,087
10,953
60
0.50
2.60
0.19
2.79
โรงไฟฟ้ าถ่านหิน (CCS)
800
2,632
9,125
30
4.01
1.99
1.37
3.36
800
727
6,800
25
11.12
0.65
3.04
3.69
800
727
6,800
25
14.26
0.65
3.69
4.34
290
437
10,410
20
30.66
2.05
11.69
13.74
โรงไฟฟ้ า
โรงไฟฟ้ าพลังความร ้อนร่วม
(Gas Existing)
โรงไฟฟ้ าพลังความร ้อนร่วม
(Marginal Gas)
โรงไฟฟ้ ากังหันแก๊ส
หมำยเหตุ โรงไฟฟ้ำนิวเคลียร์ รำคำรวม
- Power Plant Equipment
- Site Preparation & Civil Work
- Raw Water System
- Land & Land Right
ื้ เพลิง
- ระบบเก็บร ักษำและกำจ ัดกำกเชอ
- อืน
่ ๆ
โรงไฟฟ้ำถ่ำนหิน
- ใชเ้ ทคโนโลยี Supercritical หรือ Ultra Supercritical
้ ำ่ นหินนำเข้ำประเภท Bituminous
- ใชถ
- ติดตงระบบ
ั้
FGD
ต ้นทุน (บาท/kWh)
(ปี 2563)
Fuel prices in
PDP2010
Prices in the last
10 years (US$/MMBTU)
18
Dubai Crude
16
14
Australian Coal
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2542
2543
2544
2545
2546
2547
2548
2549
่
ทีมา:
http://indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=coalaustralian&months=300
http://indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=crudeoil-dubai&months=300
2550
2551
The problematic regulation and
conflicts of interests
ROIC and Investment Efficiency
• Using Return on Invested Capital
(ROIC) as the main criteria for
setting electricity tariff may lead to
over investment
• since more investment means more
profit
• Strong regulation on investment
plans is needed, but the Regulators
still lack of data, knowledge, and
human resources to check and
balance
• The approval of the tariff is still with
the National Energy Policy Council
ROIC = Net profit after tax
Investment
EGAT 8.4%
MEA 4.8%
PEA
Result :
Over Demand Forecast and prefer high investment options
The cycle of supporting more investment
under ‘monopoly’ power
Power Planning
that prefer
high investment
options
2
Benefits of
utilities,
energy
companies
, etc.
1
Over
Demand Forecast
3
Electricity tariff that allow
the pass on of excess costs to consumers
Ft : Fuel Adjustment Charge
• EGAT: a part of the electricity tariff that increase or
decrease automatically, according to changes in fuel costs
and other uncontrol costs
• The mechanism to pass on the costs to consumers, which
includes
– Fuel costs
– Electricity price for private producers and import (including
profit guarantee, compensation for inflation and exchange
rate)
– Expenses according to government policies (e.g.
Community Development Funds, ‘Adder’ for renewable
energy, etc.)
– Compensation for lower sale (or over investment)
Power Business
35%
PTT
35%
MEA
30%
EGAT
45%
Thai Oil Plc.
15%
บริษัท ไทยออยล์ จากัด
54.99%
CLP
14.99%
RATCH
25.41% 22.42%
EGCO
บริษัท ราชบุรี โฮลดิง้ จากัด
บริษัท ผลิตไฟฟ้ า จากัด
Thai Oil Power
50%
Gluf
Electric
50%
บริษัท กัลฟ์ อิเลคทริค จากัด
50%
ราชบุร ี
อัลลัยแอนซ ์
26%
Banpu
Glow Energy
บริษัท ไทยออยล์ จากัด
56%
ผลิตไฟฟ้ า
อิสระ
700 MW
15%
อมตะ
เพาเวอร์
บางปะกง
112 MW
24%
ผลิตไฟฟ้ า
และน้ าเย็น
14.85%
อมตะ
เอ็กโก
เพาเวอร์
165 MW
25%
100%
50%
ราชบุร ี
เพาเวอร์
ผลิตไฟฟ้ า
ราชบุร ี
ไตร
เอนเนอยี
1,400 MW
80%
3,645 MW
700 MW
ระยอง
1,232 MW
ขนอม
824 MW
100%
แก่งคอย
1,468 MW
100%
Glow
IPP
BLCP
1,468 MW
713 MW
บริษัท โกลว์ ไอพีพ ี จากัด
70.3%
100%
ทีแอลพี
โคเจน
117 MW
100%
100%
ร ้อยเอ็ด
กรีน
9.9 MW
100%
100%
กัลฟ์
หนองแค
สมุทรปราการ
ั่ โคเจนเนอเรชน
ั่ โคเจนเนอเรชน
ั่
โคเจนเนอเรชน
110 MW
126 MW
126 MW
โกลว์
พลังงาน
358 MW
โกลว์
เอสพีพ1
ี
124 MW
100%
กัลฟ์
ยะลา
23 MW
โกลว์เอสพีพ2
ี /
โกลว์เอสพีพ3
ี
514 MW
Conflict of Interests in Ministry of Energy
• The exception in the National Energy Policy Council
Act B.E.2551 (2008)
• Section 5/1. A Member of the National Energy Policy Council
shall:
• (2) not hold any post in a juristic entity operating a business
related to the generation, transmission or distribution of nonrenewable energy or electricity, except for the case that the
Member of the National Energy Policy Council is a civil servant,
who has been assigned by the government or by the Board of a
given state-owned enterprise to assume a post of Board
Member or any other post in that state-owned enterprise
operating an energy-related business or in a juristic entity of
which the state-owned enterprise is a shareholder.
Conflict of Interests in Ministry of
Energy
• The exception in the Standard
Characteristic for Board and Staff
of State-owned Enterprise B.E.2550
(2008)
• Section 6 Board member in Stateowned Enterprise shall:
• (10) not hold any post in a juristic
entity that get the concession, joint
venture, or has the link to the
Examples (Data in 2008)
Role in the
Role in the private
Government
sector
Chair of the Board,
Mr.Porn SecretaryGeneral, Ministry Electricity
chai
Generating
Rujipra of Energy
Authority of
pa
Thailand
National Energy Board,
Electricity
Policy Council
Generating
Company
(EGCO)
(resign in 2007)
Chair, SubChair of the Board,
PTT (resign in 2007)
Committee on
Electricity
Example Annual benefits to Chair of
the Board, PTT in 2008
Mr.Norkhun Sittipong, Deputy
Secretary-General, Ministry of
Energy
Role in the
private sector
Meeting
Allowan
ce
Bonus
Role in the
Salary
Addition
Chair
of the sector770,000 2,200,000
Government
for
Executive
Board
position
Deputy SecretaryGeneral, Ministry
of Energy
Baht
Total
Total
2,900,0
00
1,056,
804,00
252,000
0
000
National Energy Policy Council,
Chaired by PM
Energy Policy Administrative Committee,
Chaired by Energy Minister
Sub-committee on Waste-to-Energy
Sub-committee on EGAT Coordination
Secretary-General
or
the Deputy Secretary-Generals
is Energy Eff. Std.
Sub-committee on
Sub-committee on Demand
Forecast
the chair
of the Sub-committees
Sub-committee on Hydropower
Sub-committee on PDP
Sub-committee on DSM
Energy Policy and Planning Office,
is secretariat
of the Sub-on Environment and
Sub-committee
Sub-committee on an MoE
IPP project
Energy
committees
Sub-committee on
Community Development Funds
Sub-committee on Renewable
Energy
Recommendations to improve
the PDP process
• Change the ROIC to Performance-based regulation
– Introduce Contracted Demand to large electricity users (e.g.
more than 10 MW)
• Improve the Ft by excluding the compensation for lower
sale
• DSM should be considered as one investment option for
electricity supply
• Compare various draft PDPs, according to Government
policies and planning objectives
– Integrated Resource Planning; IRP
– Various forums, dialogue, etc. for public deliberation
Toward Reflexive Governance in the PDP process
Thank you for your attention
email: suphakijn@yahoo.com