Power to the Captives

Companies that generate power for their own needs can now sell excess power

Published: Oct 27, 2009

Six months ago, in an attempt to augment power generation, the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) amended its rules (Section 9) allowing any captive power plant (using 25 percent of its own power) to sell electricity through an open access system, without requiring a separate licence. Earlier, a captive power generation unit was defined as one which consumed 75 percent of the power it produced and it could sell any residual of the power it generated (subject to the ceiling of 25 percent) to the grid only after obtaining a special clearance from the government.

This regulatory change now makes captive power a very lucrative business opportunity. This move is a salve for India’s power pains because in June 2008 rules were also relaxed to allow trading of power through the Indian Energy Exchange (IEX). Given the huge shortage of power, electricity trading will allow extra power to be easily shipped to customers who are short.

Image: Cristina Hu/ Reuters
In one swift move the government has made almost every process industry — steel, chemicals, cement and fertilizers — a source of power generation. These industries needed uninterrupted power. Hence, over the years they have built limited captive power capacities, which they can now expand. Some like Jindal Steel & Power are already making more money from selling power than they do selling their core product.

The lower cost structures of captive power producers (as much as half the cost of grid power) give them an edge in the marketplace. Most processes in industries like steel or cement, produce heat. This waste heat is captured and re-used to rotate a turbine that generates electricity. Aluminium and composite steel units, for instance, use a lot of coal for melting metal in their furnaces. The waste gases and heat in the kiln is converted into power. This is one of the key reasons why the cost of generating electricity for chemical and metal plants is often significantly lower than the cost at which power is purchased from the grid. In fact, in some cases like the sponge iron industry, the plant is viable only if there is captive generation of power.

What can be observed is that except for a few government-owned companies like Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Company Ltd, most players have begun using more power that is generated captively than purchased from the grid. M.S. Unnikrishnan, managing director of Thermax Ltd, a company that is setting up such plants for a variety of customers, predicts a change in power use over the years. Grid-power can be used for distributed power supply over a vast range of customers, while captive power can be used to supply concentrated clusters of consumers. “Captive power is still a very small percentage of the total power production in the country, but it needs to be encouraged,” says Unnikrishnan.

Captive projects were earlier disadvantaged over large independent power projects because the latter signed power purchase agreements with their customers, usually state electricity boards (SEBs). They were not given coal (or other fuel) linkages in the form of captive mines, nor did they enjoy guaranteed offtake for any extra power produced. But recent policy changes allow captive power projects to be allotted fuel linkages. This ensures local raw material supply. And they are now allowed to sell power through energy exchanges to both, companies and SEBs

Power industry analysts point out that producers of captive power already have the skills to manage power projects and fuel sourcing. Not surprising then that a cement producer like the Kolkota-based Shree Cements, should add to its captive unit of 120 MW — it recently announced plans to set up a merchant power unit of 300 MW to add to it. Scaling up power production is much easier than setting up a greenfield power producing facility.

mg_12152_powergraph_captives_280x210.jpg

The fact that the prices quoted on the IEX are higher than the price at which this power is generated, only underlines the fact that there is a lot of money to be made through this route. Return on investment will however depend on the source of fuel and the distance from the grid. In the past, revenues from power-sales have contributed substantially to the bottom lines of captive power producers like Bajaj Hindustan.

To make sale of power through the energy exchange risk free, the CERC has also amended its rules, requiring purchasers to pay up the price of the power they wish to purchase at least 25 hours before it is transmitted to the grid. This adds to the financial security of power producers as they will not be saddled with bad debts resulting from purchasers’ failure to pay up.

Clearly, very interesting days lie ahead for captive power producers.

 


(This story appears in the 06 November, 2009 issue of Forbes India. You can buy our tablet version from Magzter.com. To visit our Archives, click here.)

Show More
Post Your Comment
Required
Required, will not be published
All comments are moderated
  • Chirag Ali

    Dear R.N Bhaskar, Useful article indeed. Recently I haven't read this type of infromative article on captive power

    on Jul 5, 2010
  • Prasad Rao

    A couple of points to note. First, it is debatable whether the recycling and scope economies enjoyed by captive power plants are of a magnitude that can match the impact of scale economies on the cost of conventional power generation (albeit, 'cost', even 'marginal cost', is a fuzzy concept at captive plants). Second, the relaxation of restrictions on production and transmission of captive power (and the plans to expand captive capacity) is likely to enhance competition on the grid already supplied with wind power. Such competition bodes well for large power consumers who would otherwise be at risk of being fleeced with peak spot market prices. Apparently, the CERC has acted pre-emptively in opening up the powe grid to captive power production. All's well until gas prices are 'deemed' fixed at the magical '4.2' !!!

    on Oct 30, 2009
  • R.N.bhaskar

    The changes in the ACT are not in a single line. They come as various modifications at different times. Some of the major policy decisions on captive power are listed below:<br /> 12th, February, 2005<br /> The Gazette of India, EXTRAORDINARY PART I - Section 1, PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY, Ministry of Power<br /> <br /> Ins. by Act 26 of 2007, Sec. 3 (w.e.f.15th June 2007).<br /> > supply of electricity generated from a captive generating plant to any licencee in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules and regulations made > thereunder and to any consumer subject to the regulations made under subsection (2) of section 42.]<br /> <br /> 17 July 2008<br /> L-7/140(155)/CERC-2008 - Arranging tr5ansmission for New Generating Stations, Captive Power Plants and Buyers of Electricity.<br /> <br /> 23.2.2009<br /> Uniform UI cap needs to be imposed on all types of generation inclusive of captive and non-conventional energy sources.<br /> <br /> 12th August, 2009<br /> CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION<br /> NEW DELHI<br /> No.L-7/143/158/2008-CERC<br /> <br />

    on Oct 27, 2009
  • DEEPALI WANKHEDE

    Can i get the the date of amendment in CERC rules (Section 9) which you have quoted in first para of this article.

    on Oct 27, 2009
The Roys of NDTV go House Hunting
Gung-Ho Vietnam