Comments on: Power Policy Of Divide And Rule http://www.harshadoak.com/2007/04/pune-city/power-policy-of-divide-and-rule.html Harshad Oak's blog about India, Pune, Politics, Religion, Society, Books, Technology... Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:17:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Akshay Damle http://www.harshadoak.com/2007/04/pune-city/power-policy-of-divide-and-rule.html/comment-page-1/#comment-41125 Akshay Damle Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:56:00 +0000 http://www.harshadoak.com/2007/04/pune-city/power-policy-of-divide-and-rule.html#comment-41125 Also based on your argument about Mumbai getting special treatment, this is false without any basis. There is a legal binding that ensures that The government of maharashtra has an agreement with the private power companies in Mumbai (REL, Best) to ensure that any shortfall will be mitigated by MSEB. There is a ruling in MERC about the same. Also if you see one of the latest document, (TPC and REL for mumbai created 2000+MW of power and only 287MW from Maharashtra was tranferred to Mumbai). Also at the core of the reliable power supply in Mumbai is the "islanding" system that is implemented. The power theft / loss in Mumbai is the lowest in the country (under 10%) whereas in India it is between 30 - 45%. Power tariff in Mumbai is amongst the highest in the country. These are some of the reasons for the high reliability of power in Mumbai. Therefore arguing about step-motherly treatment between Mumbai and Maharashtra is flawed. I would have been pleased to see you argue about increase tariffs, implementing the "islanding" solution in other cities, reducing power thefts (T&C losses). These imo are the most important things to address. With regards to the ongoing power projects, documents listed on the MahaGenCo site (http://www.mahagenco.in/Ongoing-projects_english.pdf) & (http://www.mahagenco.in/Future-projects_english.pdf) suggest that there is some activity in ensuring "power for all". What we need is a concerted effort from activists to ensure that these plans are accomplished within the given time framework. As far as agricultural area is concerned, several load management efforts such as feeder seperation have helped villages that have adopted them. There are many villages (some I've visited) where there is blatant theft of power that is being diverted to agricultural pumps. These illegal connections have been provided at the behest of powerful political parties.  All of this unaccounted power theft has caused considerable loss to the power utility. Why not highlight these facts in your "Divide and Rule" argument ? Finally there is a grim power situation in the country, and there is a need to augment power supply. Several cleantech power solutions as well as the Jaitapur Nuclear plant need to be green lighted.  My intention is not to dismiss what you say, all I am trying to say is that making an argument needs to use facts which I don't think your post used.   Also based on your argument about Mumbai getting special treatment, this is false without any basis. There is a legal binding that ensures that The government of maharashtra has an agreement with the private power companies in Mumbai (REL, Best) to ensure that any shortfall will be mitigated by MSEB. There is a ruling in MERC about the same. Also if you see one of the latest document, (TPC and REL for mumbai created 2000+MW of power and only 287MW from Maharashtra was tranferred to Mumbai). Also at the core of the reliable power supply in Mumbai is the “islanding” system that is implemented. The power theft / loss in Mumbai is the lowest in the country (under 10%) whereas in India it is between 30 – 45%. Power tariff in Mumbai is amongst the highest in the country. These are some of the reasons for the high reliability of power in Mumbai. Therefore arguing about step-motherly treatment between Mumbai and Maharashtra is flawed.

I would have been pleased to see you argue about increase tariffs, implementing the “islanding” solution in other cities, reducing power thefts (T&C losses). These imo are the most important things to address.

With regards to the ongoing power projects, documents listed on the MahaGenCo site (http://www.mahagenco.in/Ongoing-projects_english.pdf) & (http://www.mahagenco.in/Future-projects_english.pdf) suggest that there is some activity in ensuring “power for all”. What we need is a concerted effort from activists to ensure that these plans are accomplished within the given time framework.

As far as agricultural area is concerned, several load management efforts such as feeder seperation have helped villages that have adopted them. There are many villages (some I’ve visited) where there is blatant theft of power that is being diverted to agricultural pumps. These illegal connections have been provided at the behest of powerful political parties.  All of this unaccounted power theft has caused considerable loss to the power utility. Why not highlight these facts in your “Divide and Rule” argument ?

Finally there is a grim power situation in the country, and there is a need to augment power supply. Several cleantech power solutions as well as the Jaitapur Nuclear plant need to be green lighted. 

My intention is not to dismiss what you say, all I am trying to say is that making an argument needs to use facts which I don’t think your post used.
 

]]> By: Akshay Damle http://www.harshadoak.com/2007/04/pune-city/power-policy-of-divide-and-rule.html/comment-page-1/#comment-41124 Akshay Damle Sun, 16 Oct 2011 06:35:00 +0000 http://www.harshadoak.com/2007/04/pune-city/power-policy-of-divide-and-rule.html#comment-41124 I really don't agree with your "divide and rule" argument. The divisions are done based on power loss. If you go through the load shedding protocol documents available on the website, it is clear that the division is not based on economics. There are many "smaller" towns that are part of A or B groups. The real trouble was the lack of activity in terms of creating power plants in a phased manner and the high loss. There are areas in Maharashtra which has a loss of over 50%! Looking at the plans though (also available on the website), there is some urgency seen in creating new sources of power. There is a need to ensure that the utility works on that plan. Also privatization of the utility along with power tariff hikes is necessary if the cost of power has increased. Your view of power situation wasn't based on accurate study of the power situation in Maharashtra but was a emotional knee jerk reaction to the situation. There are many questions to be asked about the grim power situation in Maharashtra/ india, but sadly these aren't the ones. I really don’t agree with your “divide and rule” argument. The divisions are done based on power loss. If you go through the load shedding protocol documents available on the website, it is clear that the division is not based on economics. There are many “smaller” towns that are part of A or B groups.
The real trouble was the lack of activity in terms of creating power plants in a phased manner and the high loss. There are areas in Maharashtra which has a loss of over 50%!

Looking at the plans though (also available on the website), there is some urgency seen in creating new sources of power. There is a need to ensure that the utility works on that plan. Also privatization of the utility along with power tariff hikes is necessary if the cost of power has increased.

Your view of power situation wasn’t based on accurate study of the power situation in Maharashtra but was a emotional knee jerk reaction to the situation. There are many questions to be asked about the grim power situation in Maharashtra/ india, but sadly these aren’t the ones.

]]>