My presentation has been up loaded at the BIJLEE Yahoo Group site.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Friday, April 2, 2010
Pulling the plug on Mumbai
The fact is that they've been REFUSED permission, on environmental grounds... and rightly so!! Dahanu are the 'lungs' of Mumbai city!
Instead of finding another location, they're 'sulking' that they haven't been granted what they want (they seem to be used to getting their way!)
===============
Pulling the plug on Mumbai
Dharmendra Jore, Hindustan Times
Mumbai, March 31, 2010
It's going to be a long, hot summer. As in the past five years, there will be no respite for Mumbai's 26 lakh suburban power consumers.
The mercury is fast rising and air-conditioners, coolers and fans are already working overtime. Changing lifestyles and the rise in commercial activities will raise the demand further by 23 per cent, nudging it past 3,000 megawatts (MW) a day. However, supply is likely to peak at 2,400 MW - a shortfall of 600 MW.
And you could face long power cuts or higher bills.
Blame it on the poor expansion of generation capacity and a fight between two arch corporate rivals - the Tata Power Company (TPC) and Reliance Infrastructure (RInfra).
While the state government made many assurances, it could raise power generation by a mere 1.6 per cent over the past year. That leaves it with little choice but to supply power to Mumbai by depriving other parts of the state, where three- to 10-hour power cuts are the daily norm.
In Mumbai, private companies are the major players. TPC generates power and sells it to the Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport (BEST), which supplies the island city, and the Anil Ambani-backed RInfra, which supplies to all of Mumbai's western suburbs and most of the eastern suburbs.
The state-owned power utility plays a direct role only in some eastern suburbs, where it has managed to do away with power cuts altogether. Although this has meant higher bills, customers are satisfied.
BEST too has enough supply; it's only RInfra's customers who face a problem.
RInfra used to buy 500 MW a day from TPC. However, TPC had ambitions of its own in the electricity distribution market. After the Supreme Court allowed it to distribute power to retail consumers (so far it has only directly supplied bulk users like railways) on its own, TPC said it would stop selling to RInfra from April 1 this year.
TPC, which generates 1,900 MW, wants to use the power to supply its own distribution company and sell the remaining power, preferably to the state-owned distributor Mahavitaran. It was encouraged by its first attempt at retailing when many BEST and RInfra consumers switched to it because it offers the best rates.
Alarmed by the prospect of long power cuts and a consumer backlash, the government intervened a week ago. TPC then promised to continue the supply for another month so that the bureaucrats got time to find a solution.
If RInfra is forced to buy power from elsewhere to plug the shortfall, it would have to spend an additional Rs 600-700 crore this summer. This burden is likely to be passed on to consumers.
Both TPC and RInfra officials refused to comment, claiming the government had forbidden them from doing so.
Consumer activist Sandeep Ohri said consumers are the ones who will ultimately suffer. "What we can do is change our supplier. The Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission can play a major role by encouraging competition. It must allow more private players in the city," he said.
A senior bureaucrat saw a temporary solution in the offing. "The government may ask TPC to continue supply to RInfra until the worst of the summer ends," he said on condition of anonymity because the matter was raised in the Legislature and making statements outside the House would breach protocol.
A senior RInfra official said on condition of anonymity that his company was ready to sign a power purchase agreement (PPA) for 500 MW with TPC. "In 2008, we agreed to sign a PPA without preconditions and discuss long-term options for TPC's Unit 8 [a new unit that came up last year]." TPC officials countered
that it could not be forced to supply power to RInfra.
RInfra said that expansion of its Dahanu thermal plant (which has a capacity of 500 MW) by 1,200 MW would solve Mumbai's problem. But it's stuck in red tape. "We have been waiting for environment clearance for 10 years," said the official.
=======
http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/mumbai/Pulling-the-plug-on-Mumbai/Articl\
e1-525255.aspx
=======
2009 HT Media Limited.
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Its amazing how the past can come back to haunt you
Here is a news item (TOI, 14-Sep-2003) about how REL (RINFRA's earlier AVATAR), had wanted to get a Distribution License for many cities in Maharashtra. Incidentally, Tata had also applied for few more cities. (Both applications were eventually turned down by MERC.)
REL also wanted to buy power from power producers other than TATA and MSEB. Well its been SIX years since then and RINFRA has still not formally tied up with anyone else!!
Mr. Anil Ambani had a meeting with then then CM, Mr. Sushilkumar Shinde to move this forward. Mr. Shinde, as we all know is now the Union Minister for Power (coincidence?)
Incidentally, while quoting an example of how the 'monopoly' can be broken, an example of BEST's network usage has been given (see second last para).
I do not recall BEST raising an objection at that time, that they were a "Local Authority" ...
==============
Reliance makes power play for 5 towns
TNN 14 September 2003, 11:48pm IST
MUMBAI: Reliance Energy (formerly called BSES Ltd) has made pitch to light up Maharashtra. Following the central legislation allowing competition among firms selling electricity to consumers, Reliance Energy has made an application to the state government to distribute power directly to homes and offices in five major cities of the state— Pune, Nagpur, Nashik, Aurangabad as well as Navi Mumbai, including Vashi, Nerul, Bhandup, Mulund and parts of Thane.
At present, the loss-making Maharashtra State Electricity Board, which had a revenue deficit of Rs 1,462 crore last year, sells electricity in these areas. Sources said Reliance Energy (REL) filed the application to the state government about ten days ago.
When contacted, state chief secretary Ajit Nimbalkar said the company had made a presentation to chief minister Sushilkumar Shinde last week about setting up a new gasbased power station in the state.
"Among the suggestions made by Reliance was that it also wanted to distribute electricity to various centres," he said. "However, it is too early to comment on Reliance Energy's proposal," he added.
Follwing the meeting between Anil Ambani, CMD of REL and Mr Shinde, the chief minister appointed a committee headed by Mr Nimbalkar to look into the various proposals. "This committee will also examine the proposal to distribute electricity in five towns and cities," said Mr Nimbalkar.
According to industry sources, Reliance Energy wants to set the ball rolling to open up the state's electricity sector, after the passage of the Electricity Act at the Centre allowing competition among players in all aspects of the power sector —generation, transmission and distribution.
Reliance Energy also filed an appeal with the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission about a fortnight ago to open up the existing electricity infrastructure like power lines to competition and fix the necessary charges.
It wants MERC to allow REL to buy power from players other than Tata Power and MSEB for its operations in Mumbai's suburbs,where it sells power to 23 lakh consumers.
According to the Electricity Act, existing monopoly players have to allow other firms to use their existing infrastructure like power lines for a fee.
For instance, if another firm wants to sell power to customers in Mumbai, it can do so using BEST's network of wires but it will have to pay for it.
However, for this to start MERC has to fix the rental rates for using another firm's network and power lines.
=================
2009 Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd.
=================
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Reliance-makes-power-play-for-5-towns/articleshow/181849.cms
REL also wanted to buy power from power producers other than TATA and MSEB. Well its been SIX years since then and RINFRA has still not formally tied up with anyone else!!
Mr. Anil Ambani had a meeting with then then CM, Mr. Sushilkumar Shinde to move this forward. Mr. Shinde, as we all know is now the Union Minister for Power (coincidence?)
Incidentally, while quoting an example of how the 'monopoly' can be broken, an example of BEST's network usage has been given (see second last para).
I do not recall BEST raising an objection at that time, that they were a "Local Authority" ...
==============
Reliance makes power play for 5 towns
TNN 14 September 2003, 11:48pm IST
MUMBAI: Reliance Energy (formerly called BSES Ltd) has made pitch to light up Maharashtra. Following the central legislation allowing competition among firms selling electricity to consumers, Reliance Energy has made an application to the state government to distribute power directly to homes and offices in five major cities of the state— Pune, Nagpur, Nashik, Aurangabad as well as Navi Mumbai, including Vashi, Nerul, Bhandup, Mulund and parts of Thane.
At present, the loss-making Maharashtra State Electricity Board, which had a revenue deficit of Rs 1,462 crore last year, sells electricity in these areas. Sources said Reliance Energy (REL) filed the application to the state government about ten days ago.
When contacted, state chief secretary Ajit Nimbalkar said the company had made a presentation to chief minister Sushilkumar Shinde last week about setting up a new gasbased power station in the state.
"Among the suggestions made by Reliance was that it also wanted to distribute electricity to various centres," he said. "However, it is too early to comment on Reliance Energy's proposal," he added.
Follwing the meeting between Anil Ambani, CMD of REL and Mr Shinde, the chief minister appointed a committee headed by Mr Nimbalkar to look into the various proposals. "This committee will also examine the proposal to distribute electricity in five towns and cities," said Mr Nimbalkar.
According to industry sources, Reliance Energy wants to set the ball rolling to open up the state's electricity sector, after the passage of the Electricity Act at the Centre allowing competition among players in all aspects of the power sector —generation, transmission and distribution.
Reliance Energy also filed an appeal with the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission about a fortnight ago to open up the existing electricity infrastructure like power lines to competition and fix the necessary charges.
It wants MERC to allow REL to buy power from players other than Tata Power and MSEB for its operations in Mumbai's suburbs,where it sells power to 23 lakh consumers.
According to the Electricity Act, existing monopoly players have to allow other firms to use their existing infrastructure like power lines for a fee.
For instance, if another firm wants to sell power to customers in Mumbai, it can do so using BEST's network of wires but it will have to pay for it.
However, for this to start MERC has to fix the rental rates for using another firm's network and power lines.
=================
2009 Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd.
=================
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Reliance-makes-power-play-for-5-towns/articleshow/181849.cms
Calculation of Wheeling Charges - RTI reply from MERC
Those who are interested in switching over from RINFRA to Tata, already know that they would still need to pay RINFRA 'wheeling charges' - which is charged by the network owner to the billing/distribution supplier.
MERC in its Interim Order has stated that Wheeling Charges should be paid even by switchover customers.
The question in my mind was how is the Wheeling Charges calculated for TPC and RINFRA and the following details were provided by MERC (under RTI).
RINFRA-D's Low Tension (LT) for FY 2009-10, is calculated as under:
1. Wheeling Charges for the year Rs. 121 per kW per month
2. Contract Demand is 4600 MVA / MW
3. Wheeling Cost for the year is Rs. 667.92 cr (121 x 4600 x 12 / 10000)
4. Annual Sales for the year is 7560.17 Million Units
5. WC is Rs. 0.88 per kWh (667.92 / 7560.17 x 10)
RINFRA-D's High Tension (HT) for FY 2009-10, is calculated as under:
1. Wheeling Charges for the year Rs. 108 per kW per month
2. Contract Demand is 317 MVA / MW
3. Wheeling Cost for the year is Rs. 41.06 cr (108 x 317 x 12 / 10000)
4. Annual Sales for the year is 896.59 Million Units
5. WC is Rs. 0.46 per kWh (41.06 / 896.59 x 10)
TPC-D's Low Tension (LT) for FY 2009-10, is calculated as under:
1. Wheeling Charges for the year Rs. 160 per kW per month
2. Contract Demand is 110 MVA / MW
3. Wheeling Cost for the year is Rs. 21.15 cr (160 x 110 x 12 / 10000)
4. Annual Sales for the year is 572.23 Million Units
5. WC is Rs.. 0.37 per kWh (21.15 / 572.23 x 10)
TPC-D's High Tension (HT) for FY 2009-10, is calculated as under:
1. Wheeling Charges for the year Rs. 78 per kW per month
2. Contract Demand is 398 MVA / MW
3. Wheeling Cost for the year is Rs. 37.25 cr (78 x 398 x 12 / 10000)
4. Annual Sales for the year is 2065.90 Million Units
5. WC is Rs. 0.18 per kWh (37.25 / 2065.90 x 10)
For an RINFRA switchover consumer. Take the standard TPC rate, then deduct the TPC-WC (0.37) and then add the RINFRA-WC (0.88).
An Excel sheet is available with me, for those who are interested in doing 'what-if' scenarios.
RTI can get us information - but once we receive it, experts need to 'decode' it and then take follow up action. Many of the technical experts would be interested in this info and how it will affect us going forward.
There is still a VALID dispute whether switchover consumers need to pay the RINFRA WC at all or not - and this matter is also being taken up by the BIJLEE Group.
Trust this has been of help.
MERC in its Interim Order has stated that Wheeling Charges should be paid even by switchover customers.
The question in my mind was how is the Wheeling Charges calculated for TPC and RINFRA and the following details were provided by MERC (under RTI).
RINFRA-D's Low Tension (LT) for FY 2009-10, is calculated as under:
1. Wheeling Charges for the year Rs. 121 per kW per month
2. Contract Demand is 4600 MVA / MW
3. Wheeling Cost for the year is Rs. 667.92 cr (121 x 4600 x 12 / 10000)
4. Annual Sales for the year is 7560.17 Million Units
5. WC is Rs. 0.88 per kWh (667.92 / 7560.17 x 10)
RINFRA-D's High Tension (HT) for FY 2009-10, is calculated as under:
1. Wheeling Charges for the year Rs. 108 per kW per month
2. Contract Demand is 317 MVA / MW
3. Wheeling Cost for the year is Rs. 41.06 cr (108 x 317 x 12 / 10000)
4. Annual Sales for the year is 896.59 Million Units
5. WC is Rs. 0.46 per kWh (41.06 / 896.59 x 10)
TPC-D's Low Tension (LT) for FY 2009-10, is calculated as under:
1. Wheeling Charges for the year Rs. 160 per kW per month
2. Contract Demand is 110 MVA / MW
3. Wheeling Cost for the year is Rs. 21.15 cr (160 x 110 x 12 / 10000)
4. Annual Sales for the year is 572.23 Million Units
5. WC is Rs.. 0.37 per kWh (21.15 / 572.23 x 10)
TPC-D's High Tension (HT) for FY 2009-10, is calculated as under:
1. Wheeling Charges for the year Rs. 78 per kW per month
2. Contract Demand is 398 MVA / MW
3. Wheeling Cost for the year is Rs. 37.25 cr (78 x 398 x 12 / 10000)
4. Annual Sales for the year is 2065.90 Million Units
5. WC is Rs. 0.18 per kWh (37.25 / 2065.90 x 10)
For an RINFRA switchover consumer. Take the standard TPC rate, then deduct the TPC-WC (0.37) and then add the RINFRA-WC (0.88).
An Excel sheet is available with me, for those who are interested in doing 'what-if' scenarios.
RTI can get us information - but once we receive it, experts need to 'decode' it and then take follow up action. Many of the technical experts would be interested in this info and how it will affect us going forward.
There is still a VALID dispute whether switchover consumers need to pay the RINFRA WC at all or not - and this matter is also being taken up by the BIJLEE Group.
Trust this has been of help.
Uniform power tariff will cost government Rs. 3,000 cr
At the risk of being unpopular, I would like to repeat that UNIFORM TARIFF is not the answer!
Not only does it negate the benefits of a competitive environment, it is also NOT permitted by the EA 2003, UNLESS the State Govt grants a subsidy.
When the State Govt grants a subsidy - this will eventually need to be collected (as taxes) from EVERY individual, whether he/she is an electricity consumer or not!
Here is an example of what will happen - the State Govt will effectively undertake to 'fund' these utilities for their 'obscene' rates, and make the general public pay for it, by increasing taxes!! The general public will never know HOW much was collected as additional tax to pay this Subsidy!
Suppose the Govt increases the taxes across many items - and ends up collecting MORE than the Subsidy amount??
In such a situation how can uniform tariff be 'consumer friendly'?
This is similar to leaving our environmental problems to our grand-children..."as long as WE don't have to pay, who cares" - right? Is this the LEGACY we want to leave behind?
We must move away from such 'protectionist' measures and let open market competition 'force' the prices down.
Many people wonder whether RINFRA's consumers switching to TPC would make a big difference. Here are some facts:
1. RINFRA's avge costs are higher than TPC and so the consequent cross-subsidy is a larger spread.
2. On a pure arithmetical basis, it IS more cost-effective for RINFRA's high consumption users, to switch to TPC.
Now, it may appear that TPC 'wants' only high-end consumers - which is not true, as any RINFRA consumer can switch.
There are 2 sides to any argument. One could assume that since RINFRA's higher consumers have moved, it would have raise the level for the rest of its remaining consumers. However, the other side of the story is also that the Demand that RINFRA has to meet will also be lower! Consequently it would have to purchase lesser of the 'expensive' power..
This can only be determined if a really SUBSTANTIAL no of consumers switch. As I understand it, as of date only about 3000 consumers may have completed the switchover. Which is too minuscule a no considering that RINFRA has about 2.7 Million consumers!
The issue is not about RINFRA or TPC being benefited - its about each one of US - each consumer - having a choice.
As far as RINFRA's costs are concerned, I guess MERC's investigation would throw light on whether they actually needed to spend all that money on the Mumbai electricity business .. or even if they actually DID spend that money on us - maybe it WAS diverted into the RINFRA group's other ventures.
Since they have admittedly, not been maintaining separate accounts, there is quite a likelihood that they took money from us and spent it elsewhere.
Trust I have thrown some light on the issue.
(Related news item here...)
================
Uniform power tariff will cost government Rs3,000cr
Ashwin Aghor / DNA
Wednesday, December 16, 2009 2:16 IST
Mumbai: If the state government does decide to take power minister Ajit Pawar's recent announcement about introducing uniform power tariffs in Mumbai seriously, it will have to be prepared to bear an additional burden of Rs3,000 crore annually for the subsidies the city's four power suppliers will have to be provided to bring their rates on a par.
Last week, during the winter session of the assembly, Pawar assured the house that the government will explore the feasibility of uniform power tariff for the city. Uniform tariff is more consumer-friendly, and has already been implemented in cities like Delhi, Kolkata, Bangalore and Ahmedabad, despite them having more than one supplier.
===================
http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_uniform-power-tariff-will-cost-government-rs3000cr_1324178
Not only does it negate the benefits of a competitive environment, it is also NOT permitted by the EA 2003, UNLESS the State Govt grants a subsidy.
When the State Govt grants a subsidy - this will eventually need to be collected (as taxes) from EVERY individual, whether he/she is an electricity consumer or not!
Here is an example of what will happen - the State Govt will effectively undertake to 'fund' these utilities for their 'obscene' rates, and make the general public pay for it, by increasing taxes!! The general public will never know HOW much was collected as additional tax to pay this Subsidy!
Suppose the Govt increases the taxes across many items - and ends up collecting MORE than the Subsidy amount??
In such a situation how can uniform tariff be 'consumer friendly'?
This is similar to leaving our environmental problems to our grand-children..."as long as WE don't have to pay, who cares" - right? Is this the LEGACY we want to leave behind?
We must move away from such 'protectionist' measures and let open market competition 'force' the prices down.
Many people wonder whether RINFRA's consumers switching to TPC would make a big difference. Here are some facts:
1. RINFRA's avge costs are higher than TPC and so the consequent cross-subsidy is a larger spread.
2. On a pure arithmetical basis, it IS more cost-effective for RINFRA's high consumption users, to switch to TPC.
Now, it may appear that TPC 'wants' only high-end consumers - which is not true, as any RINFRA consumer can switch.
There are 2 sides to any argument. One could assume that since RINFRA's higher consumers have moved, it would have raise the level for the rest of its remaining consumers. However, the other side of the story is also that the Demand that RINFRA has to meet will also be lower! Consequently it would have to purchase lesser of the 'expensive' power..
This can only be determined if a really SUBSTANTIAL no of consumers switch. As I understand it, as of date only about 3000 consumers may have completed the switchover. Which is too minuscule a no considering that RINFRA has about 2.7 Million consumers!
The issue is not about RINFRA or TPC being benefited - its about each one of US - each consumer - having a choice.
As far as RINFRA's costs are concerned, I guess MERC's investigation would throw light on whether they actually needed to spend all that money on the Mumbai electricity business .. or even if they actually DID spend that money on us - maybe it WAS diverted into the RINFRA group's other ventures.
Since they have admittedly, not been maintaining separate accounts, there is quite a likelihood that they took money from us and spent it elsewhere.
Trust I have thrown some light on the issue.
(Related news item here...)
================
Uniform power tariff will cost government Rs3,000cr
Ashwin Aghor / DNA
Wednesday, December 16, 2009 2:16 IST
Mumbai: If the state government does decide to take power minister Ajit Pawar's recent announcement about introducing uniform power tariffs in Mumbai seriously, it will have to be prepared to bear an additional burden of Rs3,000 crore annually for the subsidies the city's four power suppliers will have to be provided to bring their rates on a par.
Last week, during the winter session of the assembly, Pawar assured the house that the government will explore the feasibility of uniform power tariff for the city. Uniform tariff is more consumer-friendly, and has already been implemented in cities like Delhi, Kolkata, Bangalore and Ahmedabad, despite them having more than one supplier.
===================
http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_uniform-power-tariff-will-cost-government-rs3000cr_1324178
NEWS Posts at the BIJLEE Group
Here is a summary of the some of the NEWS posts at the BIJLEE Group at Yahoo.
No DVC-Bhel link-up for Raghunathpur project
Govt spent more than required on power: CAG
Patni, Spanco among 4 cos empanelled for power project
50-paise sop will boost wind power capacity, say turbine makers
Pact with Bhutan for 4 hydel projects
They look to sun to light up Carter Road
Activists oppose proposed amendment of MSEDCL rules
BSES fudged June 2009 outage figures by 50% - Committee
Delhi private discoms claim capex of 6000 cr - DERC to enquire
You're paying Rs224.5cr for power emergencies
50 paise/unit sop for wind projects feeding power to grid
Delhi meet finds no solution to power crisis in the state
Public hearing on TNEB's plan for 'reliability charge'
Australia Solar Institute keen to partner Indian research bodies
TN launches power transmission co
TN ramping up power generation capacity
Institution of Engineers favours tie-up with Nepal for hydro power
Govt targets generating 20,000 mw from solar energy by 2020
Roadmap for solar power plan only after 3 years: Farooq
Plan panel seeks note on attracting investment in power
CESC likely to generate power from Budge Budge 3rd unit soon
Govt betting big on private power projects
Feedback is welcome.
No DVC-Bhel link-up for Raghunathpur project
Govt spent more than required on power: CAG
Patni, Spanco among 4 cos empanelled for power project
50-paise sop will boost wind power capacity, say turbine makers
Pact with Bhutan for 4 hydel projects
They look to sun to light up Carter Road
Activists oppose proposed amendment of MSEDCL rules
BSES fudged June 2009 outage figures by 50% - Committee
Delhi private discoms claim capex of 6000 cr - DERC to enquire
You're paying Rs224.5cr for power emergencies
50 paise/unit sop for wind projects feeding power to grid
Delhi meet finds no solution to power crisis in the state
Public hearing on TNEB's plan for 'reliability charge'
Australia Solar Institute keen to partner Indian research bodies
TN launches power transmission co
TN ramping up power generation capacity
Institution of Engineers favours tie-up with Nepal for hydro power
Govt targets generating 20,000 mw from solar energy by 2020
Roadmap for solar power plan only after 3 years: Farooq
Plan panel seeks note on attracting investment in power
CESC likely to generate power from Budge Budge 3rd unit soon
Govt betting big on private power projects
Feedback is welcome.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Latest Posts at BIJLEE Yahoo Group
Here is a quick snapshot of some of the latest news items that have been posted at the BIJLEE Yahoo Group Site (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bijlee)
Andrew Yule, FIs to sell off Dishergarh stake
Sumanta Ray Chaudhuri / DNA, Thursday, November 19, 2009 4:36 IST
Companies cede power trading licences
24 Nov 2009, 1005 hrs IST, Subhash Narayan, ET Bureau
BEST sees red over distribution network of Tata
Ashley D'Mello, TNN 24 November 2009, 12:34am IST
To receive these directly, join the BIJLEE Group
Andrew Yule, FIs to sell off Dishergarh stake
Sumanta Ray Chaudhuri / DNA, Thursday, November 19, 2009 4:36 IST
Companies cede power trading licences
24 Nov 2009, 1005 hrs IST, Subhash Narayan, ET Bureau
BEST sees red over distribution network of Tata
Ashley D'Mello, TNN 24 November 2009, 12:34am IST
To receive these directly, join the BIJLEE Group
Calculate savings of switchover to TATA
After much work, anguish and deliberations, MERC had issued an Interim Order in the matter of switchover to TATA. I am happy to inform you that we have successfully had the first case of a switchover. An existing RINFRA consumer has been duly moved to TATA - using RINFRA's network and TATA's Meter!
Now, before everyone decides to do the same, first check whether it makes economic sense to switch to TATA. To help you, I have prepared a detailed Excel sheet for Single Phase, Residential consumers (LT-I) Tariff showing the exact calculations and savings of moving from RINFRA to TATA.
Here are some of the results of the calculations in the PRESENT scenario.
For 1,500 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 13,391 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 9,212
Monthly Savings = Rs. 4,179 Annual Savings = Rs. 50,147
For 1,000 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 8,309 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 5,828
Monthly Savings = Rs. 2,482 Annual Savings = Rs. 29,780
For 800 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 6,277 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 4,474
Monthly Savings = Rs. 1,803 Annual Savings = Rs. 21,634
For 500 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 3,172 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 2,387
Monthly Savings = Rs. 784 Annual Savings = Rs. 9,413
For 350 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 1,857 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 1,490
Monthly Savings = Rs. 368 Annual Savings = Rs. 4,412
For 200 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 879 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 760
Monthly Savings = Rs. 119 Annual Savings = Rs. 1,427
For 100 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 316 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 307
Monthly Savings = Rs. 9 Annual Savings = Rs. 108
It seems clear from the above, that only those consumers who have a higher monthly consumption would benefit more by switching to TATA from RINFRA.
However, the decision to DO-THE-SWITCH must be an informed, long-term decision and not a short-term knee jerk reaction. The attached file covers the PRESENT scenario as well a few other known possible scenarios that may happen in the next one year. For instance:
a) Due to approvals from earlier MERC and ATE Orders, RINFRA already has an 'uncovered gap' of Rs. 1,079 crores! Suppose they get an approval to charge this in next year's Tariff - what would be the impact?
b) MERC has stayed the RINFRA June 2009 Tariff Order, but suppose the stay order is lifted?
c) RINFRA has gone to High Court and asked for a stay on the limit of Fuel Adjustment Charge (FAC) of 67 paise. They are asking for 113 paise/unit. Suppose they succeed?
d) In this Interim Order, MERC has allowed RINFRA to collect Wheeling charges, despite our protests that we have already paid for these. In case, it is ruled that we do not have to pay RINFRA Wheeling charges, then the NEW switchover bills will be even more lower.
e) If the consumer uses a TATA meter instead of a RINFRA Meter, it is possible that consumption recording itself is lower!
The attached Excel file also shows how much would be the difference in case the above scenarios start playing out.
Do feel free to circulate this to all concerned and please send me feedback - especially if there are any errors (this is so complicated, even though I've tried my best, there may still be some mistakes!)
This Excel file is also available on the BIJLEE Group in the Files section here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bijlee/files/_RINFRA_SWITCHOVER/
I will request MERC to prepare such types of Calculators and host them on their websites.
Trust this has been of help to you :)
Now, before everyone decides to do the same, first check whether it makes economic sense to switch to TATA. To help you, I have prepared a detailed Excel sheet for Single Phase, Residential consumers (LT-I) Tariff showing the exact calculations and savings of moving from RINFRA to TATA.
Here are some of the results of the calculations in the PRESENT scenario.
For 1,500 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 13,391 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 9,212
Monthly Savings = Rs. 4,179 Annual Savings = Rs. 50,147
For 1,000 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 8,309 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 5,828
Monthly Savings = Rs. 2,482 Annual Savings = Rs. 29,780
For 800 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 6,277 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 4,474
Monthly Savings = Rs. 1,803 Annual Savings = Rs. 21,634
For 500 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 3,172 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 2,387
Monthly Savings = Rs. 784 Annual Savings = Rs. 9,413
For 350 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 1,857 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 1,490
Monthly Savings = Rs. 368 Annual Savings = Rs. 4,412
For 200 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 879 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 760
Monthly Savings = Rs. 119 Annual Savings = Rs. 1,427
For 100 units per month:
Existing RINFRA Bill = Rs. 316 Switchover TATA Bill = Rs. 307
Monthly Savings = Rs. 9 Annual Savings = Rs. 108
It seems clear from the above, that only those consumers who have a higher monthly consumption would benefit more by switching to TATA from RINFRA.
However, the decision to DO-THE-SWITCH must be an informed, long-term decision and not a short-term knee jerk reaction. The attached file covers the PRESENT scenario as well a few other known possible scenarios that may happen in the next one year. For instance:
a) Due to approvals from earlier MERC and ATE Orders, RINFRA already has an 'uncovered gap' of Rs. 1,079 crores! Suppose they get an approval to charge this in next year's Tariff - what would be the impact?
b) MERC has stayed the RINFRA June 2009 Tariff Order, but suppose the stay order is lifted?
c) RINFRA has gone to High Court and asked for a stay on the limit of Fuel Adjustment Charge (FAC) of 67 paise. They are asking for 113 paise/unit. Suppose they succeed?
d) In this Interim Order, MERC has allowed RINFRA to collect Wheeling charges, despite our protests that we have already paid for these. In case, it is ruled that we do not have to pay RINFRA Wheeling charges, then the NEW switchover bills will be even more lower.
e) If the consumer uses a TATA meter instead of a RINFRA Meter, it is possible that consumption recording itself is lower!
The attached Excel file also shows how much would be the difference in case the above scenarios start playing out.
Do feel free to circulate this to all concerned and please send me feedback - especially if there are any errors (this is so complicated, even though I've tried my best, there may still be some mistakes!)
This Excel file is also available on the BIJLEE Group in the Files section here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bijlee/files/_RINFRA_SWITCHOVER/
I will request MERC to prepare such types of Calculators and host them on their websites.
Trust this has been of help to you :)
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Rediff Article
Sometimes you get lucky and people get to know about your struggle.
Rediff put this up
http://business.rediff.com/slide-show/2009/oct/09/slide-show-1-meet-the-man-who-took-on-reliance-energy.htm
Feedback is most welcome :)
Rediff put this up
http://business.rediff.com/slide-show/2009/oct/09/slide-show-1-meet-the-man-who-took-on-reliance-energy.htm
Feedback is most welcome :)
Monday, May 4, 2009
My presentation at MERC's Publilc Hearing
Check this out...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9E-KdDQ7l0
Its the presentation I made at MERC's Public hearing on Rel Infra's Tariff petition.
Got a copy thru RTI.
Hope this encourages more people to make presentations.
More at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bijlee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9E-KdDQ7l0
Its the presentation I made at MERC's Public hearing on Rel Infra's Tariff petition.
Got a copy thru RTI.
Hope this encourages more people to make presentations.
More at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bijlee
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Reliance Tariff Hike - Public Response
The response that I will be submitting to Reliance is attached here and here
Go through it so that you may understand the issues we are dealing with. I am not a legal expert and the legal fraternity may excuse my attempt at this :)
Anyway, I have attempted to include all the issues that would affect Residential consumers.
The procedure is thus:
1. Fill in your name, postal address tel/mobile and email ID (before you take prints). Details need to be filled on Page 1, Page 2 and Page 19.
2. Before Thurs, March 19th, make sure one copy is delivered to
Mr. Ramesh Shenoy, Company Secretary
Reliance Infrastructure Limited
Reliance Energy Centre
Santa Cruz (E)
Mumbai 400055
You would need to show proof of service so make 2 copies and get one stamped / acknowledged by their office - or retain Fax/courier slip (in which case you may need to do it at least one day earlier). There is no email provided for Reliance - so that makes it a little more difficult for us! However, I tried sending it to ramesh.shenoy@relianceada.com.
3. Make 6 copies of the submission (actually make 7, you will need one for yourself!) and attach the fax/courier/stamped page on all 6 copies and then send it before Thurs Mar 19th, to
The Secretary
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission
13th Floor, Centre No. 1, World Trade Centre
Cuffe Parade
Mumbai 400005
Fax: 2216 3976
email: mercindia@mercindia.org.in
To see what really happens, come for the Public Hearing on Thurs Mar 26th at Rangsharda Natya Mandir, Bandra Reclamation, Bandra (W). The hearing starts at 11am.
Let's try and ensure we get justice done !
- Sandeep.
Go through it so that you may understand the issues we are dealing with. I am not a legal expert and the legal fraternity may excuse my attempt at this :)
Anyway, I have attempted to include all the issues that would affect Residential consumers.
The procedure is thus:
1. Fill in your name, postal address tel/mobile and email ID (before you take prints). Details need to be filled on Page 1, Page 2 and Page 19.
2. Before Thurs, March 19th, make sure one copy is delivered to
Mr. Ramesh Shenoy, Company Secretary
Reliance Infrastructure Limited
Reliance Energy Centre
Santa Cruz (E)
Mumbai 400055
You would need to show proof of service so make 2 copies and get one stamped / acknowledged by their office - or retain Fax/courier slip (in which case you may need to do it at least one day earlier). There is no email provided for Reliance - so that makes it a little more difficult for us! However, I tried sending it to ramesh.shenoy@relianceada.com.
3. Make 6 copies of the submission (actually make 7, you will need one for yourself!) and attach the fax/courier/stamped page on all 6 copies and then send it before Thurs Mar 19th, to
The Secretary
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission
13th Floor, Centre No. 1, World Trade Centre
Cuffe Parade
Mumbai 400005
Fax: 2216 3976
email: mercindia@mercindia.org.in
To see what really happens, come for the Public Hearing on Thurs Mar 26th at Rangsharda Natya Mandir, Bandra Reclamation, Bandra (W). The hearing starts at 11am.
Let's try and ensure we get justice done !
- Sandeep.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Reliance's Proposed Tariff Hike
I have been going through the Reliance Tariff petition and was trying to find out the increase in electricity charges, since Sep 2006 (the past 30 months). I was surprised with the results and decided to prepare a 'calculator' for Reliance customers to realize how much their tariff has gone up in the past 30 months.
I've uploaded the file here on the Bijlee YahooGroup site and you can sign in to access it (scroll down the list to reach the file "Revised_Reliance_Tariff_Calculator.xls).
All you need to do is input your consumption in the yellow box on the first sheet - and the data will appear as to how much you would have paid at various intervals during this time frame. The dates taken are based on the various tariff orders issued by MERC.
I have included the figure of what would happen, if Reliance's current proposal is approved.
Just to give you a few examples:
1. If your consumption is 100 units - in Sep 2006 you would have paid Rs. 205.29, and (if Reliance's proposal is approved) from Apr 2009, you would be paying Rs. 418.76 - a whopping 104% up in 30 months - and average of almost 42% per year (or 3.5% per month)
2. If your consumption is 400 units - in Sep 2006 you would have paid Rs. 1,577.15, and (if Reliance's proposal is approved) from Apr 2009, you would be paying Rs. 2,923.84 - an increase of 85% in 30 months - and average of approx 34% per year (or nearly 2.9% per month).
Just to put this in perspective, the official Inflation Index for India for FY 2006-07 was 519 and for FY 2008-09 it is 582, which means that as per the Govt. the actual inflation has been around 12% (582/519) for this period.
Also, from Sep 2006 till date, central excise duty has come down from 14% to 8% (down 43%), service tax has come down from 12.36% to 10.3% (down 17%), the price of oil (per barrel) has come down from US$ 63.75 to US$ 41.31 (down 35%) - and yet Reliance has petitioned MERC with an increase that will end up in us paying almost 30% MORE.
I wonder if our disposable incomes went up as much !!
The MERC Public Hearing on Reliance's Tariff Petition is scheduled for Thursday, March 26th at Rangsharda, Bandra Reclamation at 11am. I trust at least a few of you would file a public response opposing the hike (I will be filing one - and you would like to do that, please email me and I send you a copy of what I file).
For those who can't wait - send an email to mercindia@mercindia.org.in - not that they take cognizance of emails - but still 1,000 emails can make a BIG difference - considering that there are about 28 Lakh consumers of Reliance... and don't forget to mark me a copy!
Go ahead and try this - and do send me your feedback at sandeep.ohri@ymail.com (bouquets and brickbats - both will be accepted humbly).
- Sandeep
(Disclaimer: I have tried to make this calculator as accurate as possible - but please try and understand that this is really complex and hey.. who said everyone was perfect!)
I've uploaded the file here on the Bijlee YahooGroup site and you can sign in to access it (scroll down the list to reach the file "Revised_Reliance_Tariff_Calculator.xls).
All you need to do is input your consumption in the yellow box on the first sheet - and the data will appear as to how much you would have paid at various intervals during this time frame. The dates taken are based on the various tariff orders issued by MERC.
I have included the figure of what would happen, if Reliance's current proposal is approved.
Just to give you a few examples:
1. If your consumption is 100 units - in Sep 2006 you would have paid Rs. 205.29, and (if Reliance's proposal is approved) from Apr 2009, you would be paying Rs. 418.76 - a whopping 104% up in 30 months - and average of almost 42% per year (or 3.5% per month)
2. If your consumption is 400 units - in Sep 2006 you would have paid Rs. 1,577.15, and (if Reliance's proposal is approved) from Apr 2009, you would be paying Rs. 2,923.84 - an increase of 85% in 30 months - and average of approx 34% per year (or nearly 2.9% per month).
Just to put this in perspective, the official Inflation Index for India for FY 2006-07 was 519 and for FY 2008-09 it is 582, which means that as per the Govt. the actual inflation has been around 12% (582/519) for this period.
Also, from Sep 2006 till date, central excise duty has come down from 14% to 8% (down 43%), service tax has come down from 12.36% to 10.3% (down 17%), the price of oil (per barrel) has come down from US$ 63.75 to US$ 41.31 (down 35%) - and yet Reliance has petitioned MERC with an increase that will end up in us paying almost 30% MORE.
I wonder if our disposable incomes went up as much !!
The MERC Public Hearing on Reliance's Tariff Petition is scheduled for Thursday, March 26th at Rangsharda, Bandra Reclamation at 11am. I trust at least a few of you would file a public response opposing the hike (I will be filing one - and you would like to do that, please email me and I send you a copy of what I file).
For those who can't wait - send an email to mercindia@mercindia.org.in - not that they take cognizance of emails - but still 1,000 emails can make a BIG difference - considering that there are about 28 Lakh consumers of Reliance... and don't forget to mark me a copy!
Go ahead and try this - and do send me your feedback at sandeep.ohri@ymail.com (bouquets and brickbats - both will be accepted humbly).
- Sandeep
(Disclaimer: I have tried to make this calculator as accurate as possible - but please try and understand that this is really complex and hey.. who said everyone was perfect!)
Saturday, July 12, 2008
SC allows Tata Power to retail Power to Mumbai
Get set for (re)entry of Tata Power in the Mumbai Retail sector.
See this..
Increased competition is good news for 25L electricity consumers who are presently 'suffering' under R-ADAG's tyranny.
Now, to clear out a few doubts (no doubt, created by some vested interests):
1. Tata Power does NOT have to apply for a fresh License, as reported in some sections of the Press. It already holds a valid license for supply to the whole of Mumbai. In fact, the interpretation of that very license was the one questioned by REL in the Supreme Court. So the question of a 'fresh public hearing' (which is mandatory before grant of a license) need not be held.
2. Tata Power does not need to file for a fresh 'Tariff Order.' It has already received an approval for its latest Tariff Order as it is already supplying electricity to Mumbai and already HAS some retail consumers. MERC had put a 'stay' on it getting 'new consumers' below 1000 kV, but it was (and is) already serving many consumers in the general retail segment.
3. Tata Power need not set up an entirely new distribution network. The Electricity Act 2003, in its great wisdom, had already forseen this situation and already provides for any distributor using the distribution assets of another (to avoid cost-escalation). The second distributor woulod need to pay the first one a charge for usage, called 'wheeling charges'. Incidentally, MERC has already approved standard wheeling charges as well.
The only delay I foresee is in the logistics of the execution. REL will now give TPC a hard time in freezing these wheeling charges (and also in finalising the modalities of which assets it can 'share').
The other side issue that arises is that of REL's requirement of electricity, now that many of its customers may want to move to TPC.
REL may now, not need so much electricity from outside its Dahanu plant and hence need not buy 'expensive power'. Also, it may not need so much of capital expenditure.
Hence, its chargeable tariff may actually come down !! Right ?
Well, maybe I'm not so smart after all ;)
See this..
Increased competition is good news for 25L electricity consumers who are presently 'suffering' under R-ADAG's tyranny.
Now, to clear out a few doubts (no doubt, created by some vested interests):
1. Tata Power does NOT have to apply for a fresh License, as reported in some sections of the Press. It already holds a valid license for supply to the whole of Mumbai. In fact, the interpretation of that very license was the one questioned by REL in the Supreme Court. So the question of a 'fresh public hearing' (which is mandatory before grant of a license) need not be held.
2. Tata Power does not need to file for a fresh 'Tariff Order.' It has already received an approval for its latest Tariff Order as it is already supplying electricity to Mumbai and already HAS some retail consumers. MERC had put a 'stay' on it getting 'new consumers' below 1000 kV, but it was (and is) already serving many consumers in the general retail segment.
3. Tata Power need not set up an entirely new distribution network. The Electricity Act 2003, in its great wisdom, had already forseen this situation and already provides for any distributor using the distribution assets of another (to avoid cost-escalation). The second distributor woulod need to pay the first one a charge for usage, called 'wheeling charges'. Incidentally, MERC has already approved standard wheeling charges as well.
The only delay I foresee is in the logistics of the execution. REL will now give TPC a hard time in freezing these wheeling charges (and also in finalising the modalities of which assets it can 'share').
The other side issue that arises is that of REL's requirement of electricity, now that many of its customers may want to move to TPC.
REL may now, not need so much electricity from outside its Dahanu plant and hence need not buy 'expensive power'. Also, it may not need so much of capital expenditure.
Hence, its chargeable tariff may actually come down !! Right ?
Well, maybe I'm not so smart after all ;)
Is MERC lying .. or is REL Infra lying ?? - Open letter to MERC
06.07.08 (great date!)
To
The Secretary & Members
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission
Centre 1, World Trade Centre
Mumbai
Dear Sirs,
Re: Status of Reliance Infrastructure Ltd (erstwhile Reliance Energy Ltd) as an Electricity Distributor under the EA 2003
Please refer attached 2 image files:
1. MERC-RTI.jpg
2. REL_July4th_article.jpg
The first one is a reply sent by your organisation stating that Reliance Infrastructure Ltd is not authorised to distribute electricity.
The second one is an advertisement released by the same Reliance company stating (in the first para under 'Background') that 'Reliance Infrastructure is an electricity distribution company with a distribution license to supply electricity in and around the suburbs of Mumbai..'
Now, please tell us (the general public whom you are supposed to serve - and who pay for your salaries from their hard earned money) .. WHO is LYING?
Did your PIO lie to Mr. Ponrathnam (in the RTI reply) or is the Reliance ADAG company lying (in a public advertisement)?
If your PIO is lying - he can be penalised and so can your entire organisation.
If the Reliance ADAG is lying.. what action can you take? In the past there has never been any penal action on the lies that this same Reliance ADAG company has told (please refer the latest Tariff Order - where they have 'admitted' to making numerous mistakes .. and you have done NOTHING!)
Look forward to receiving your response on this issue.
Warm regards,
Sandeep N. Ohri
Coordinator-bijlee
Bombay Small Scale Industries Association
snohri2004@yahoo.co.in
9833097575
Copy to: The Fourth estate and other like-minded people - with a request to ensure fair play to the common tax-payer...
To
The Secretary & Members
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission
Centre 1, World Trade Centre
Mumbai
Dear Sirs,
Re: Status of Reliance Infrastructure Ltd (erstwhile Reliance Energy Ltd) as an Electricity Distributor under the EA 2003
Please refer attached 2 image files:
1. MERC-RTI.jpg
2. REL_July4th_article.jpg
The first one is a reply sent by your organisation stating that Reliance Infrastructure Ltd is not authorised to distribute electricity.
The second one is an advertisement released by the same Reliance company stating (in the first para under 'Background') that 'Reliance Infrastructure is an electricity distribution company with a distribution license to supply electricity in and around the suburbs of Mumbai..'
Now, please tell us (the general public whom you are supposed to serve - and who pay for your salaries from their hard earned money) .. WHO is LYING?
Did your PIO lie to Mr. Ponrathnam (in the RTI reply) or is the Reliance ADAG company lying (in a public advertisement)?
If your PIO is lying - he can be penalised and so can your entire organisation.
If the Reliance ADAG is lying.. what action can you take? In the past there has never been any penal action on the lies that this same Reliance ADAG company has told (please refer the latest Tariff Order - where they have 'admitted' to making numerous mistakes .. and you have done NOTHING!)
Look forward to receiving your response on this issue.
Warm regards,
Sandeep N. Ohri
Coordinator-bijlee
Bombay Small Scale Industries Association
snohri2004@yahoo.co.in
9833097575
Copy to: The Fourth estate and other like-minded people - with a request to ensure fair play to the common tax-payer...
"Name change reflects new business", says REL
Remember I had said that when there is a change in name, the objectives of the company also change? Read here, what the company themselves have to say about their name change.
Go on, MERC, keep saying that a name change makes no difference.. now how are you going to figure out how much of the tariff collected is going towards Mumbai electricity business...
I'm DAMN sure WE suburban residents are paying for ALL their other business ...
Here's an interesting point of view .. if their costs of electricity purchase goes up -- they don't HAVE to raise the tariff, they will just report a slightly lower profit in their quarterly results .. so
WHY the hell doesn't MERC understand this ????
If anyone has the gaul .. please haul these guys up...!!
Go on, MERC, keep saying that a name change makes no difference.. now how are you going to figure out how much of the tariff collected is going towards Mumbai electricity business...
I'm DAMN sure WE suburban residents are paying for ALL their other business ...
Here's an interesting point of view .. if their costs of electricity purchase goes up -- they don't HAVE to raise the tariff, they will just report a slightly lower profit in their quarterly results .. so
WHY the hell doesn't MERC understand this ????
If anyone has the gaul .. please haul these guys up...!!
REL Name change announcement...
Click this link www.rel.co.in and see what happens ...
Also, here is the link for the official announcement on the REL website here:
http://www.rel.co.in/newsmedia/pdf/REL_now_Reliance_Infrastructure.pdf
Hahaha.... Sorry, but I can't stop laughing .. one of the biggest groups in the country - and THIS is the 'sneaky' way in which they announce their name change!
Also, here is the link for the official announcement on the REL website here:
http://www.rel.co.in/newsmedia/pdf/REL_now_Reliance_Infrastructure.pdf
Hahaha.... Sorry, but I can't stop laughing .. one of the biggest groups in the country - and THIS is the 'sneaky' way in which they announce their name change!
REL becomes REL INFRA becomes REL POWER ??
OK .. so we all know that Reliance Energy first moved some of its Power Generation projects to Reliance Power (much to the 'disgust' of REL's shareholders).
Then it changed its name from Reliance Energy to Reliance Infrastructure.
Now, it seems (as per this news item from The Hindu) that the 'electricity' business of (erstwhile) Reliance Energy .. has gone to Reliance Power ???
..and all this while our own MERC fiddles a la Nero ...while we burn (the candles...)
Then it changed its name from Reliance Energy to Reliance Infrastructure.
Now, it seems (as per this news item from The Hindu) that the 'electricity' business of (erstwhile) Reliance Energy .. has gone to Reliance Power ???
..and all this while our own MERC fiddles a la Nero ...while we burn (the candles...)
REL's name change and what it means to you...
REL applied for a change of name .. to Reliance Infrastructure .. now here's the fun ..
As we all know (via RTI) that the Electricity Distribution License for Mumbai Suburbs belongs
to 'Bombay Suburban Electricity Supply Company Limited' ...
... whose name was changed to 'BSES Limited' and 'Transfer of license' was not even applied for!
... and then the company was taken over by Reliance (undivided) group and again, no Transfer was applied.
... and then the company was 'allocated' to Anil Ambani Group and again, no transfer was applied.
... and then the name was changed to Reliance Energy Ltd and again, no transfer was applied for. In fact this time MERC tells the public that no transfer is required in a name change and tries to convince the people that Companies Act 'overrides' the Electricity Act (when it reality it DOES NOT)
... and now the name is changed to Reliance Infrastructure and do you think they have applied for a Transfer ?? Keep guessing !! More on that later ...
Anyway, the other point is that everytime a name change is effected, there needs to be a major change in the 'Objects' of the company - meaning the new company may now, not really be strictly an 'electricity' company - making it even more difficult for MERC (or anyone else) to figure out the accounts and the profitability of the electricity business .. so how are we going to determine tariff ??
The spineless MERC has still not been able to get REL to submit a separate P&L (and Balance Sheet) for the Mumbai Electricity business .. so consumers will again be taken for a ride.
On one hand REL is declaring one successful Quarter after another .. with upward spiralling profits .. and on the other hand it is trying to tell MERC that it is suffering a loss on account of higher Purchase Cost .. and therefore it needs to RAISE tariff !!
How long are you going to buy this story ??
Chew on it .. as you pay higher bills this summer....
As we all know (via RTI) that the Electricity Distribution License for Mumbai Suburbs belongs
to 'Bombay Suburban Electricity Supply Company Limited' ...
... whose name was changed to 'BSES Limited' and 'Transfer of license' was not even applied for!
... and then the company was taken over by Reliance (undivided) group and again, no Transfer was applied.
... and then the company was 'allocated' to Anil Ambani Group and again, no transfer was applied.
... and then the name was changed to Reliance Energy Ltd and again, no transfer was applied for. In fact this time MERC tells the public that no transfer is required in a name change and tries to convince the people that Companies Act 'overrides' the Electricity Act (when it reality it DOES NOT)
... and now the name is changed to Reliance Infrastructure and do you think they have applied for a Transfer ?? Keep guessing !! More on that later ...
Anyway, the other point is that everytime a name change is effected, there needs to be a major change in the 'Objects' of the company - meaning the new company may now, not really be strictly an 'electricity' company - making it even more difficult for MERC (or anyone else) to figure out the accounts and the profitability of the electricity business .. so how are we going to determine tariff ??
The spineless MERC has still not been able to get REL to submit a separate P&L (and Balance Sheet) for the Mumbai Electricity business .. so consumers will again be taken for a ride.
On one hand REL is declaring one successful Quarter after another .. with upward spiralling profits .. and on the other hand it is trying to tell MERC that it is suffering a loss on account of higher Purchase Cost .. and therefore it needs to RAISE tariff !!
How long are you going to buy this story ??
Chew on it .. as you pay higher bills this summer....
Power companies make merry..
Power companies have been telling us for quite some time that they are running up losses .. at least that's what REL has always been trying to tell us.
Consequently, they keep raising the rates on account of the so-called higher purchase costs.
And now read this...
If you've noticed .. all such news is reserved for the 'stock market' oriented sites .. and the general press gets the dreary news about rising costs .. doomsday situation ... raising tariff .. etc ...
Consequently, they keep raising the rates on account of the so-called higher purchase costs.
And now read this...
If you've noticed .. all such news is reserved for the 'stock market' oriented sites .. and the general press gets the dreary news about rising costs .. doomsday situation ... raising tariff .. etc ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
ELBC detects current to earth and prevents shocks and accidents, a BSES official said adding that it is a small price to pay for safety and peace of mind.
"This simple device detects even a small current to earth automatically tripping and disconnecting the electricity supply," he said.
The BSES has made it mandatory to install ELCB for all new connections of 5 kW and above.
"All existing consumers having a load of 5 kW and above are advised to install ELCB," he said.
Another benefit of installing an ELCB is that it also detects faulty and inter-mixing of internal wiring. On detection, the ELCB immediately trips, thus preventing potential wastage of electricity and accidents.