Power cuts in Sri Lanka are not a recent phenomenon. However, this phenomenon is going to be repeated over and over if we fail to find a sustainable solution. The media reported that during the 2019 blackouts, senior officials in the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) had to beg the rain gods with a special “poojawa” to fill our reservoirs faster as they ran out of any other option.
As reported by media, pressure mounted to a level that the then President was very disappointed with their performance and requested that the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL) and CEB agree on a common plan (1).
It is clear that the energy problem in Sri Lanka is extremely complicated. This problem has no simple solution, as structural constraints, economic limitations, technological drawbacks, and many other complications continue to ravage Sri Lanka’s energy sector.
The current President has received a mandate for a “system change”. How he solves this problem will be a litmus test on his administration. His approach and ability to solve this complicated public policy problem will determine whether such an ambitious “system change” is possible.
Understanding the context
[caption id="attachment_95822" align="alignleft" width="300"]
Sources of electricity generation over time in Sri Lanka[/caption]
The uniqueness of electricity is that we cannot store it on a grand scale – until the world comes up with a cost-effective battery storage solution. This places the CEB in a challenging position, as it has to walk a fine line between undersupplying and oversupplying power to the country, without an option to store electricity and manage shortfalls. In other words, all electricity that is produced has to be met by demand, and the CEB has to have a constant supply available, as it would be impossible to predict electricity demand down to the last unit.
If the electricity demand is higher than what is generated, the grid becomes unstable. Producing more electricity than is demanded will make it difficult to manage the grid. It would also be very expensive as our electricity supply comes from multiple sources such as hydro, coal, thermal, and few renewable energy sources.
[caption id="attachment_95824" align="alignleft" width="233"]
Peak and off-peak demand over the course of a day[/caption]
When demand increases, we can’t just activate a power station and supply electricity to the grid, as activating some power plants, setting up the temperature, and resetting the grid takes a few days. That is one reason as to why the CEB requires a few days to overcome this situation with the Norochcholai Plant becoming dysfunctional.
Even with low power demand due to the contraction of economic activity such as tourism and some industrial plants, resetting the grid without Norochcholai and managing the capacity with other plants takes a few days. To put it simply, the CEB does not have an easy task at hand.
The most economical form of generating electricity is hydropower where the cost per unit is about Rs. 6. We cannot match demand only through hydropower, however, and we have to activate our coal power plants during peak hours when demand rises. The unit cost of coal-generated electricity is approximately Rs. 17.50 per unit and Rs. 25-35 is the unit cost of thermal-generated electricity (2). According to energy specialist Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya (3), the overall cost of production of a unit of electricity is Rs. 23.32 and the approved selling price is Rs. 16.29. In other words, our selling price only covers about 70% of the generation cost.
The important fact is that the cost for each unit we consume is not the same; the cost of the energy we consume during peak hours from 6 p.m.- 1 p.m. is more, as it is mainly generated from thermal and coal.
[caption id="attachment_95823" align="alignleft" width="300"]
Energy generation, transmission, and distribution costs per country[/caption]
Sri Lanka’s cost per electricity unit is comparatively high compared to our neighbours like Kerala, Tamil Nadu, India, and Bangladesh. But one real reason for the cost to be lower in these countries is they have blackouts during peak hours without activating their thermal and coal plants, and households have adapted to face blackouts with some capital investments such as battery power and installing inverters. In Sri Lanka, the economic cost of a blackout would be significantly higher than supplying power through coal, thermal, and renewable energy sources. Hence, our cost is high for a multitude of reasons.
The composition of Sri Lanka’s grid is based on domestic consumption, making our peak demand hours in the evenings between 6 p.m.-10 p.m. In contrast, countries with greater industrial development have peak demand hours during daytime working hours.
Additionally, in Sri Lanka there is a tug of war between the regulator, the PUCSL, and electricity supplier, the CEB, on developing a long-term power generation plan and maintaining our power mix. As a result of this cold war, not a single power plant has been commissioned to be built during the last Government. It is rather unfortunate that Sri Lanka's inability to come to a timely consensus on solutions for this chronic issue has continued to weigh down our national potential.
The CEB monopoly
The CEB has an absolute monopoly in power generation, distribution, development, and technology implementation. It’s a monopoly within a non-tradable sector. They have blocked everyone else and kept complete control.
Even though power generation and power stations have been contracted to suppliers of renewable energy in the private sector, they too fall under the CEB’s control. It was reported multiple times by the media that the CEB buys power from private energy suppliers at a high cost, causing colossal losses for the CEB.
It’s a mafia ecosystem between bureaucrats and the private sector. The more thermal power we buy, the more beneficial it is for the cartel members to make more money. The grid and cable network is also maintained (generation, transmission, and distribution) by the CEB with no competition, making it completely inefficient.
When questioning the CEB on its colossal losses, one common excuse provided by all governments is that the CEB sells units of power at a cheap rate so that all Sri Lankans have access to electricity. However, it is important to note that if the CEB makes a loss, it would be indirectly passed to the taxpayer anyway, as no CEB official or parliamentarian pays the losses from their private money. Our cost of power has a greater impact on Sri Lanka’s investments, and its ability to get faster connectivity to the grid is one main parameter in the “Ease of Doing Business Index'' compiled by the World Bank (WB).
The CEB’s losses have also extended into the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC). In the past, the CPC stated that they would stop the supply of fuel if the CEB fails to settle its debts. This continues to be an ongoing battle. Both the CEB’s and CPC’s losses are passed onto taxpayers, even though their claim that our electricity is reasonably prices is a flawed argument and proves to be counterproductive, given that our energy prices are not reasonable when compared to the region.
| Average price in SL Rs. per kWh (at unity power factor) |
| Customer |
Class |
Electricity Usage (kWh/ month) |
Maximum Demand (kW) |
Bangladesh |
Bhutan |
Kerala, India |
Tamil Nadu, India |
Nepal |
Pakistan |
Sri Lanka |
|
| Household |
S |
30 |
- |
7.08 |
0 |
6.33 |
0 |
6.46 |
3.63 |
3.5 |
|
| M |
90 |
- |
7.97 |
0 |
9 |
0 |
11.92 |
8.4 |
9.57 |
|
| L |
180 |
- |
9.13 |
4.46 |
10.96 |
2.26 |
13.82 |
9.89 |
22.24 |
|
| VL |
600 |
- |
12.12 |
6.68 |
20.04 |
13.94 |
17.04 |
11.35 |
38.27 |
|
| Commercial |
S |
1000 |
4 |
18.77 |
9.32 |
16.37 |
19.91 |
18.63 |
17.85 |
21.73 |
|
| M |
58,000 |
232 |
14.66 |
7.58 |
15.3 |
22.47 |
18.42 |
15.82 |
25.19 |
|
| L |
600,000 |
2400 |
14.46 |
7.58 |
14.95 |
22.47 |
18.42 |
13.23 |
23.65 |
|
| Industrial |
S |
5,000 |
20 |
14.81 |
9.32 |
15.89 |
15.1 |
14.96 |
13.5 |
12.24 |
|
| M |
65,000 |
260 |
14.66 |
7.58 |
17.33 |
18.52 |
14.01 |
12.98 |
15.82 |
|
| L |
270,000 |
1080 |
14.46 |
7.58 |
17.33 |
18.52 |
14.33 |
16.52 |
15.2 |
|
| VL |
1,050,000 |
4200 |
14.46 |
6.3 |
17.33 |
18.52 |
13.81 |
12.39 |
15.19 |
|
| S: Small | M: Medium | L: Large | VL: Very large |
Source: Sri Lanka Energy Sector Assessment, Strategy and Road Map by Asian Development Bank published in 2019
Over the years, it was reported that a grant from the Asian Development Bank provided $ 17 million in 2012 to modernise the System Control Centre (SCC), which is the main control centre for managing demand and supply of electricity.
Even though an SCC is the heart of managing electricity demand and supply and stabilising the grid, it took Sri Lanka more than a decade to execute this decision. The CEB, a state corporation with an asset base of Rs. 500 billion, being unable to finance crucial infrastructure development such as the SCC is indicative of a culture of inefficiency and ineffectiveness that is inherently ingrained within monopolies.
One of the main promises of H.E. the President is creating an e-government system and digitising government systems and processes. If the Government is serious about this, installing smart meters as soon as possible under the digitisation programme must be a key consideration. With the installation of smart meters, a significant cost for the CEB would be reduced. In an age where our bank card is connected to a mobile-based platform, where private buses are in discussion about a smart card, can we as a country still afford to have a system where an officer has to visit every household in Sri Lanka to check the electricity meter and provide a bill? Especially in an energy market where the cost of the unit changes based on the period of the year and as per the time of electricity usage? Introducing smart meters will not be a popular solution, but a system change cannot be achieved without making unpopular decisions!
Possible solutions
The problems at hand have many tiers. The main barriers for reforms are structural. While operational and human resource-related reforms can be undertaken, without structural reforms, the operational issues and human resource issues sustainably fixed will continue to be chronic weaknesses.
Structural changes
Imposing a strict leadership style or rolling heads at the senior level of bureaucracy in the energy sector will not be productive given the structural problems that exist. In fact, it will most likely worsen the situation if dealt with in this manner.
As a first step, the monopoly held by the CEB must be un-entangled and straightened out. The ecosystem of corruption, inefficiency, and malpractices has to be exposed to competition, with players entering the market.
There are multiple options to do this, and we have to unbundle the monopoly of power generation, transmission, and distribution as the first step. This will be a major structural change. To ensure competition in the long run, a competition law has to be established which will not only be beneficial to the power and energy sector but for all Sri Lankan monopolies.
Opening energy for trading
[caption id="attachment_95825" align="alignleft" width="300"]
Energy consumption by sector[/caption]
Since Sri Lanka is an island, we are not in a position to trade energy, as our grid is not connected to any other energy market. Even if we generate a surplus of energy, we cannot trade, and in an emergency, we do not have the capacity to manage a sudden shortage.
One suggestion by Prof. Rohan Samarajiva in a report compiled under the chairmanship former Central Bank Governor Dr. Indrajit Coomaraswamy and handed over to H.E. the President, is to connect Sri Lanka’s grid to the South Indian grid through an HVDC (High Voltage DC) cable.
Energy trading is already in place between Bhutan and India, and Bhutan is a net energy exporter and their energy cost is very low as their generation is mainly from hydropower due to their unique mountains and geography. This has to be taken up at the highest level with negotiations bilaterally if we are aspiring to be part of a big energy market and if we are serious about being a hub for energy in the Indian Ocean.
In an era of uncertainty and supply chain diversification, it is not a bad idea to move ahead from a simple self-sufficiency mentality, to a mentality of generating a surplus and aiming to become competitive within the energy industry.
While we work on these long-term solutions, we have to make sure to build the necessary power plants in the short run to manage our energy supply, while diversifying towards renewable energy sources.
The energy mafia is so large and sometimes they work by planting big ideas that are backed by self interest of the key decision-makers, including H.E. the President.
If we continue to think in isolation and settle for mediocre options yet again, we will just be postponing the problem before us. Our President has the rare opportunity to fulfil his mandate of a “system change” and tangibly change the system by reforming the energy sector. Alternatively, he could take the easy road by postponing any serious tackling of the problem. I hope the Government will have the courage to change the system, instead of giving into pressure.
By implementing this reform, the Government will be working towards bringing the average Sri Lankan out of the figurative darkness of the nation’s long-running electricity crisis.
References
- https://newshub.lk/en/2019/04/03/president-decides-to-boycott-cabinet-meeting-until-ceb-pucsl-dispute-is-resolved/
- http://www.ft.lk/columns/Electricity-crisis-and-Gotabaya-s-proposals/4-693134
- https://www.sundayobserver.lk/2020/03/01/opinion/lame-excuses-given-shutting-down-power-plants-dr-tilak-siyambalapitiya
(The writer is the Chief Operating Officer of Advocata Institute. He can be contacted at dhananath@advocata.org. Learn more about Advocata’s work at www.advocata.org. The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute, or anyone affiliated with the institute)
