PRESENTATION
ON
ELECTRIC TRACTION ON INDIAN
RAILWAYSCHANGING PERSPECTIVES &
ISSUES
Ghanshyam Singh
CELE/NR
SOME HISTORICAL FACTS
• First Electrification
- Mumbai – Kurla, 15 RKms
in 1925 at 1500 V
• Electrified RKms prior
to independence
- 388
• SNCF design adopted
- 1957
• First Section at 3000
volts DC
- Howrah-Burdhwan in 1958
• First section electrified - Rajkharswan - Dongaposi
on 25 kV AC
in 1960
• Present electrification
- 17450 RKms
Cumulative Progress of Railway
Electrification on IR
17450
18000
16001
16000
13517
14000
10809
12000
9252
10000
8000
6440
6000
4180
4723 4918
3237
2423
4000
2000 388 529 745
0
1925-47
1961-66
1974-
1985-90
1997-2002
(3rd Plan)
78(5th
(7th Plan)
(9th Plan)
Plan)
Cumulative Progress (RKm)
CURRENT PLANS FOR
ELECTRIFICATION
•Sanctioned work of electrification in various stages of
progress
1362 RKms
•Works anticipated sanction during 2006-07
950 RKms
•Anticipated electrification projects during XI plan
3048 RKms
Impact on Present Working Expense
 30% of ordinary working expense on account
of fuel/energy consumed annually for traction
purposes.
 2/3rd of freight traffic and 1/2 the passenger
traffic being hauled on electric traction.
{Energy bill of over Rs.4000 crores}
 Remaining 1/3rd of freight traffic and 1/2 the
passenger traffic moved on diesel traction.
{Fuel bill of over Rs.6000 crores-- expected to
go up further to Rs. 7000 crores at the present
rate of HSD of Rs. 31.43}.
Impact on Present Working Expense
(Contd.)
Electrification of 17450 Route Kilometers (RKms).
Past total outlay Rs.5890 crores.
Present traffic hauled by electric traction, if hauled by
diesel traction---additional cost Rs. 3800 crores annually
Investment of about Rs.6000 crores till now towards
electrification resulting in a saving of Rs.3800 crores
annually
Instrumental towards the surplus generated presently
Criteria for Railway Electrification and
the Changing Perspective
•
•
•
•
1925-1950:- Inescapable for Suburban trains/ Metro
requiring high acceleration.
1950-1975:- Haulage requirement for graded sections
and high throughput by adopting heavier/longer loads.
1975-2000:- Requirement for high density mixed
(passenger/ freight) routes.
2000- onwards: Carbon credit, environmental impact & energy
security issues along with financial justification on the
basis of traffic density.
Criteria for Railway Electrification and the
Changing Perspective (contd.)
 Economics and commercial requirements of
lower fuel/ energy cost for minimal working
expense
 Network Solution and not sectoral route
solution
Network Planning
1.
2.
Backbone Network:• Golden Quadrilateral (present)
• Dedicated Freight corridor (future)
Other Networks:• Other routes connecting major production and
consumption and export gateways.
• Missing links and spurs in the existing electrified
network
Future Perspective
1.
High speed:• Technical compulsion because of high power/ high
acceleration requirements.
• Electric traction is imperative
2. Heavy Haulage
• Reduced requirement of number of locomotives
because of feasibility to pack higher horse power for
the maximum permissible axle loads.
• Diesel – 6, 000 HP Maximum (6 axle, 32 ton/axle)
• Electric – 10,000 HP Maximum (6 axle, 22.5
ton/axle)
Perceived Limitations/issues of Electric
Traction
LIMITATIONS/ISSUES
COMMENTS
Double Stack Container(DSC) not feasible OHE designs have no limitation. US
under wire. No where in the world DSC is Rail Road & Chinese Rly are already
operated on Electric traction
operating DSC under wire.
Change of traction created on the route
after electrification affecting flow of traffic at
jns. where it can not be done under the
shadow of other activities (crew change,
cleaning, catering, parcel)
Electrification on a route primarily for
major streams, traction change for
minor streams can be addressed by
adopting
network
electrification
approach within the limits of viability.
Shunting on unwired lines and last mile Adoption of dual traction/ battery
access to accident and breakdown sites
operated locomotives as shunters in
electrified territory.
Additional time required for restoration of Can be minimized to the time
OHE after accident
required for Tower Wagon checking.
Perceived limitations/issues of Electric
Traction (contd.)
LIMITATIONS/ISSUES
COMMENTS
Requirement of Diesel Locos in Network approach to RE takes care
electrified territory to sustain train (e.g. Patna-Gaya, Bhusawal-Surat)
services after traffic disruption.
Difficulties in restoration activity at Can be addressed by re-engineering of
accident sites
restoration methodology and breakdown
tools and tackles.
Expandability of Maximum Moving Minimum fixed dimension as per
Dimensions (MMD) after electrification Schedule of Dimension (SOD) is the
of a section.
limiting factor and not OHE.
Electric loco not suitable for shunting
Factually incorrect
Increasing cost of electrical energy
Electricity Act 2003 provides various
options which shall result into a
cheapest energy to Railways.
Perceived limitations/issues of Electric
Traction (contd.)
LIMITATIONS/ISSUES
COMMENTS
Availability of Energy
Electrical –
•Average shortage of 8% and peaking
shortage of 11% (against 30% in the past)
•will be bridged with initiatives taken in the
power sector.
Diesel•Shortage of 70%
•being met by imports
•Depleting global resources.
•Global developments (war etc.)
•Exorbitant rise in Green House Gases in
atmosphere
Any Other ???????????????
Technology knows no limitation.
Conclusion
 Electrification on IR has been the most debated developmental input
for Rail transport leading to fluctuating pace of electrification as
compared to other inputs e.g doubling, gauge conversion etc.
 The debate is primarily driven by internal organizational conflicts
arising out of historical evolution of traction development and perceived
career prospects in specific pockets
 Prevalence of non institutional operational fancies deprived of sound
financial, economic, developmental and strategic appreciation.
 With initiative in power sector & adoption of appropriate strategy for
power procurement, cost of electrical energy is expected to go down.
ELECTRIFICATION OF IR SHOULD BE DONE ON PRIORITY ON
NETWORK SOLUTION & FINANCIAL VIABILITY PRINCIPALS
Strategies which needs to be looked into
& evaluated for adoption on IR
 Creation of Energy Management Organization
 Creation of PSU as Distribution licensee
 Captive Generation Plan
 Deemed Captive & Distributed Generation
 Power Purchased from IPP/PTC through Open Access
 Power Purchase through State Utility(present model)
 Representations before SERCs & Appellate tribunals for reasonable
tariffs
 Power purchase from central generating units.
 Demand side management
19
70
-7
19 1
72
-7
19 3
74
-7
19 5
76
-7
19 7
78
-7
19 9
80
-8
19 1
82
-8
19 3
84
-8
19 5
86
19 8 7
88
-8
19 9
90
-9
19 1
92
-9
19 3
94
-9
19 5
96
-9
19 7
98
-9
20 9
00
-0
20 1
02
-0
20 3
04
-0
5
TREND OF AVERAGE UNIT RATE
Average unit rate (paise)
450
425
400
375
350
325
300
275
250
225
200
175
150
125
100
75
50
25
0
Creation of Energy Management
Organization
• Creation of Dedicated Energy Management Cell at
Divisional, Zonal & Board’s level .
• Objectives of the organization
 Analysis of consumption pattern and exercise control
over consumption & quality of power consumed.
 Evaluate various options of purchase of cheaper energy.
 Analysis of ARR/tariff orders of State Utilities.
 Filling objections.suggestions to SERCs.
 Filing appeal with Appellate Tribunal.
 Regulate contract demand with distribution licensee as
per consumption pattern & anticipated traffic.
 Energy conservation measure.
Creation of PSU as Distribution licensee
2.702.95
Railway PSU as Distribution
licensee
0.10
Level of
payment
2.60-2.85
STU
0.25-0.50
In many cases
may not be
required
2.35
CTU
0.25
2.10
Cost of generation of BUS
Level of availing
power supply by
Railways
PSU as distribution licensee may file its own ARR & obtain a
cheaper tariff for Railways.
Captive Generation Plan
Indian Railways may install its own captive generation plant
2.60-2.85
2.602.85
STU
0.25-0.50
2.35
CTU
0.25
2.10
Cost of
generation
Level at which
payments to be made
by Railways
Level of availing
power supply by
Railways
Deemed Captive & Distributed
Generation
Railway may become 26 % equity holder in various generation companies
& acquire status of captive generation plant by consuming 51 % energy
generated by the plant.
2.35-2.95
2.602.95
STU
0.25-0.50
2.35
CTU
0.25
2.10
Cost of
generation
Level at which
payments to be
made by Railways
Level of availing
power supply by
Railways
Power Purchased from IPP/PTC
through Open Access
3.854.35
Cross subsidy
1.00
2.853.35
State wheeling charges & loss
compensation
0.00-0.50
2.85
STU (Inter region)
0.25 *
2.60
STU own region
0.25
2.35
CTU
0.25
2.10
Cost of energy at generator bus
Level of
payment by
Railways
Level at
which power
supply is
availed by
Rlys
* Theses layer may
not be there in
some of the load
points
Power Purchase through State Utility
( Present model)
4.22
Surcharge (Cross
consumers)
1.02
subsidy
to
other
3.20
O & M+Distribution loss+ inefficiency
0.75
2.45
STU (Wheeling + loss compensation)
0.25
2.20
CTU (PGCIL)
(Wheeling charges+loss compensation)
0.25
1.95
Cost of purchase by utility
1.95
Payment is
made by
Railways
Level at which
power supply
is availed by
Railways
Representations before SERCs & Appellate
tribunals for reasonable tariffs
• Regular representation to SERCs in a professional way
• Following table showing the trend of average unit cost as a
result of regular representation to SERCs
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
428
427
428
428
421
POWER PROCURED THROUGH
CENTRAL GENERATING UNITS
3.66
To NTPC as extra surcharge as
per commitment
0.50
3.16
Surcharge by state utility
0.46
2.70
Rly network-Wheeling+ loss
compensation
0.25
2.45
CTU (PGCIL)
0.25
2.20
Cost of power from NTPC
2.20
Level at
which
payment
is made
Level at
which power
supply is
availed by
Railways
Demand Side Management
• Correct estimation of contract demand.
• On line monitoring of actual maximum demand.
• Ensuring high load factor.
• Load balancing through transfer of sections between
feeding zones.
• Installation of power factor correction equipment.
• Real time on line coordination with Traffic.