Offshore wind farm construction costs in Britain need to drop by around 30 percent over the next decade if the sector is to develop and help the country meet its green energy targets, a British offshore wind farm developer said.
"If the industry doesn't take off, how else are we going to supply our energy? We don't have the choice, we have to put more renewable energy capacity in place," said Allan MacAskill, business development director for SeaEnergy Renewables, which has permits for developing offshore wind farms in British waters.
He said collaboration among developers was crucial to lower costs, which was especially important for turbines, the substructures holding the wind farms in place and installation of the projects.
He compared the nascent industry to early lessons learned in the oil and gas drilling sector, where drilling the first well of a program took 45 days, while the final project took only eight days, bringing down costs.
"I think you make that very rapid change quite quickly, the learning curve declines toward the end," he told Reuters at a London conference.
International wind energy players such as German engineering firm Siemens, Spain's Gamesa and Danish manufacturer Vestas in January announced plans to build manufacturing and research facilities in the UK.
Britain has awarded licenses to construct up to 40 gigawatts GW of offshore wind capacity off its coasts.
At the start of the year, Britain was the world leader in installed offshore wind capacity with 1,341 megawatts MW in operation, according to the European Wind Energy Association.
NEIMA advances NRC regulatory modernization, creating a licensing framework for advanced reactors, improving uranium permitting, capping reactor fees, and mandating DOE planning for excess uranium, boosting transparency, accountability, and innovation across the US nuclear sector.
Key Points
NEIMA is a US law modernizing NRC rules and enabling advanced reactor licensing while reforming fees.
✅ Modernizes NRC licensing for advanced reactors
✅ Caps annual reactor fees and boosts transparency
✅ Streamlines uranium permitting; directs DOE plans
Bipartisan legislation modernising US nuclear regulation and supporting the establishment of a licensing framework for next-generation advanced reactors has been signed by US President Donald Trump, whose order boosting U.S. uranium and nuclear energy underscored the administration's focus on the sector.
The Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernisation Act (NEIMA) became law on 14 January.
As well as directing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to modify the licensing process for commercial advanced nuclear reactor facilities, the bill establishes new transparency and accountability measures to the regulator's budget and fee programmes, and caps fees for existing reactors. It also directs the NRC to look at ways of improving the efficiency of uranium licensing, including investigating the safety and feasibility of extending uranium recovery licences from ten to 20 years' duration, and directs the Department of Energy, which oversees nuclear cleanup and related projects, to issue at least every ten years a long-term plan detailing the management of its excess uranium inventories.
Maria Korsnick, president and CEO of the US Nuclear Energy Institute, described NEIMA as a "significant, positive step" toward the reform of the NRC's fee collection process. "This legislation establishes a more equitable and transparent funding structure which will benefit all operating reactors and future licensees," she said. "The bill also reaffirms Congress’s support for nuclear innovation by working to establish an efficient and stable regulatory structure that is prepared to license the advanced reactors of the future."
Marilyn Kray, president-elect of the American Nuclear Society, said the passage of the legislation was a "big win" for the nation and its nuclear community. "By reforming outdated laws, NRC will now be able to invest more freely in advanced nuclear R&D and licensing activities. This in turn will accelerate deployment of cutting-edge American nuclear systems and better prepare the next generation of nuclear engineers and technologists," she said.
The bill was introduced in 2017 by Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming. It was approved by Congress on 21 December by 361 votes to 10, having been passed by the Senate the previous day, even as later Biden's climate law developments produced mixed results.
NEIMA is one of several bipartisan bills that support advanced nuclear innovation considered by the 115th US Congress, which ended on 2 January. These are: the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act (NEICA); the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act; the Nuclear Utilisation of Keynote Energy Act; the Advanced Nuclear Fuel Availability Act, a focus sharpened by the U.S. ban on Russian uranium in the fuel market; and legislation to expedite so-called part 810 approvals, which are needed for the export of technology, equipment and components. NEICA, which supports the deployment of advanced reactors and also directs the DOE to develop a reactor-based fast neutron source for the testing of advanced reactor fuels and materials, was signed into law in October.
UK Electricity-Gas Price Decoupling aims to reform wholesale electricity pricing under the Energy Security Bill, shielding households from gas price spikes, supporting renewables, and easing the cost-of-living crisis through market redesign and transparent tariffs.
Key Points
Policy to decouple power prices from gas via the Energy Security Bill, stabilizing bills and reflecting renewables
✅ Breaks gas-to-power pricing link to cut electricity costs
✅ Reduces volatility; shields households from global gas shocks
✅ Highlights benefits of renewables and market transparency
Britons could be handed relief on rocketing household bills under Government plans to sever the link between the prices of gas and electricity, including proposals to restrict energy prices in the market, it has emerged.
Ministers are set to bring forward new laws under the Energy Security Bill to overhaul the UK's energy market in the face of the current cost-of-living crisis.
They have promised to provide greater protection for Britons against global fluctuations in energy prices, through a price cap on bills among other measures.
The current worldwide crisis has been exacerbated by the Ukraine war, which has sent gas prices spiralling higher.
Under the current make-up of Britain's energy market, soaring natural gas prices have had a knock-on effect on electricity costs.
But it has now been reported the new legislation will seek to prevent future shocks in the global gas market having a similar impact on electricity prices.
Yet the overhaul might not come in time to ease high winter energy costs for households ahead of this winter.
According to The Times, Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng will outline proposals for reforms in the coming weeks.
These will then form part of the Energy Security Bill to be introduced in the autumn, with officials anticipating a decrease in energy bills by April.
The newspaper said the plans will end the current system under which the wholesale cost of gas effectively determines the price of electricity for households.
Although more than a quarter of Britain's electricity comes from renewable sources, under current market rules it is the most expensive megawatt needed to meet demand that determines the price for all electricity generation.
This means that soaring gas prices have driven up all electricity costs in recent months, even though only around 40% of UK electricity comes from gas power stations.
Energy experts have compared the current market to train passengers having to pay the peak-period price for every journey they make.
One Government source told The Times: 'In the past it didn’t really matter because the price of gas was reasonably stable.
'Now it seems completely crazy that the price of electricity is based on the price of gas when a large amount of our generation is from renewables.'
It was also claimed ministers hope the reforms will make the market more transparent and emphasise to consumers the benefits of decarbonisation, amid an ongoing industry debate over free electricity for consumers.
A Government spokesperson said: 'The high global gas prices and linked high electricity prices that we are currently facing have given added urgency to the need to consider electricity market reform.
Boeing 787 More-Electric Architecture replaces pneumatics with bleedless pressurization, VFSG starter-generators, electric brakes, and heated wing anti-ice, leveraging APU, RAT, batteries, and airport ground power for efficient, redundant electrical power distribution.
Key Points
An integrated, bleedless electrical system powering start, pressurization, brakes, and anti-ice via VFSGs, APU and RAT.
✅ VFSGs start engines, then generate 235Vac variable-frequency power
✅ Bleedless pressurization, electric anti-ice improve fuel efficiency
✅ Electric brakes cut hydraulic weight and simplify maintenance
The 787 Dreamliner is different to most commercial aircraft flying the skies today. On the surface it may seem pretty similar to the likes of the 777 and A350, but get under the skin and it’s a whole different aircraft.
When Boeing designed the 787, in order to make it as fuel efficient as possible, it had to completely shake up the way some of the normal aircraft systems operated. Traditionally, systems such as the pressurization, engine start and wing anti-ice were powered by pneumatics. The wheel brakes were powered by the hydraulics. These essential systems required a lot of physical architecture and with that comes weight and maintenance. This got engineers thinking.
What if the brakes didn’t need the hydraulics? What if the engines could be started without the pneumatic system? What if the pressurisation system didn’t need bleed air from the engines? Imagine if all these systems could be powered electrically… so that’s what they did.
Power sources
The 787 uses a lot of electricity. Therefore, to keep up with the demand, it has a number of sources of power, much as grid operators track supply on the GB energy dashboard to balance loads. Depending on whether the aircraft is on the ground with its engines off or in the air with both engines running, different combinations of the power sources are used.
Engine starter/generators
The main source of power comes from four 235Vac variable frequency engine starter/generators (VFSGs). There are two of these in each engine. These function as electrically powered starter motors for the engine start, and once the engine is running, then act as engine driven generators.
The generators in the left engine are designated as L1 and L2, the two in the right engine are R1 and R2. They are connected to their respective engine gearbox to generate electrical power directly proportional to the engine speed. With the engines running, the generators provide electrical power to all the aircraft systems.
APU starter/generators
In the tail of most commercial aircraft sits a small engine, the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU). While this does not provide any power for aircraft propulsion, it does provide electrics for when the engines are not running.
The APU of the 787 has the same generators as each of the engines — two 235Vac VFSGs, designated L and R. They act as starter motors to get the APU going and once running, then act as generators. The power generated is once again directly proportional to the APU speed.
The APU not only provides power to the aircraft on the ground when the engines are switched off, but it can also provide power in flight should there be a problem with one of the engine generators.
Battery power
The aircraft has one main battery and one APU battery. The latter is quite basic, providing power to start the APU and for some of the external aircraft lighting.
The main battery is there to power the aircraft up when everything has been switched off and also in cases of extreme electrical failure in flight, and in the grid context, alternatives such as gravity power storage are being explored for long-duration resilience. It provides power to start the APU, acts as a back-up for the brakes and also feeds the captain’s flight instruments until the Ram Air Turbine deploys.
Ram air turbine (RAT) generator
When you need this, you’re really not having a great day. The RAT is a small propeller which automatically drops out of the underside of the aircraft in the event of a double engine failure (or when all three hydraulics system pressures are low). It can also be deployed manually by pressing a switch in the flight deck.
Once deployed into the airflow, the RAT spins up and turns the RAT generator. This provides enough electrical power to operate the captain’s flight instruments and other essentials items for communication, navigation and flight controls.
External power
Using the APU on the ground for electrics is fine, but they do tend to be quite noisy. Not great for airports wishing to keep their noise footprint down. To enable aircraft to be powered without the APU, most big airports will have a ground power system drawing from national grids, including output from facilities such as Barakah Unit 1 as part of the mix. Large cables from the airport power supply connect 115Vac to the aircraft and allow pilots to shut down the APU. This not only keeps the noise down but also saves on the fuel which the APU would use.
The 787 has three external power inputs — two at the front and one at the rear. The forward system is used to power systems required for ground operations such as lighting, cargo door operation and some cabin systems. If only one forward power source is connected, only very limited functions will be available.
The aft external power is only used when the ground power is required for engine start.
Circuit breakers
Most flight decks you visit will have the back wall covered in circuit breakers — CBs. If there is a problem with a system, the circuit breaker may “pop” to preserve the aircraft electrical system. If a particular system is not working, part of the engineers procedure may require them to pull and “collar” a CB — placing a small ring around the CB to stop it from being pushed back in. However, on the 787 there are no physical circuit breakers. You’ve guessed it, they’re electric.
Within the Multi Function Display screen is the Circuit Breaker Indication and Control (CBIC). From here, engineers and pilots are able to access all the “CBs” which would normally be on the back wall of the flight deck. If an operational procedure requires it, engineers are able to electrically pull and collar a CB giving the same result as a conventional CB.
Not only does this mean that the there are no physical CBs which may need replacing, it also creates space behind the flight deck which can be utilised for the galley area and cabin.
A normal flight
While it’s useful to have all these systems, they are never all used at the same time, and, as the power sector’s COVID-19 mitigation strategies showed, resilience planning matters across operations. Depending on the stage of the flight, different power sources will be used, sometimes in conjunction with others, to supply the required power.
On the ground
When we arrive at the aircraft, more often than not the aircraft is plugged into the external power with the APU off. Electricity is the blood of the 787 and it doesn’t like to be without a good supply constantly pumping through its system, and, as seen in NYC electric rhythms during COVID-19, demand patterns can shift quickly. Ground staff will connect two forward external power sources, as this enables us to operate the maximum number of systems as we prepare the aircraft for departure.
Whilst connected to the external source, there is not enough power to run the air conditioning system. As a result, whilst the APU is off, air conditioning is provided by Preconditioned Air (PCA) units on the ground. These connect to the aircraft by a pipe and pump cool air into the cabin to keep the temperature at a comfortable level.
APU start
As we near departure time, we need to start making some changes to the configuration of the electrical system. Before we can push back , the external power needs to be disconnected — the airports don’t take too kindly to us taking their cables with us — and since that supply ultimately comes from the grid, projects like the Bruce Power upgrade increase available capacity during peaks, but we need to generate our own power before we start the engines so to do this, we use the APU.
The APU, like any engine, takes a little time to start up, around 90 seconds or so. If you remember from before, the external power only supplies 115Vac whereas the two VFSGs in the APU each provide 235Vac. As a result, as soon as the APU is running, it automatically takes over the running of the electrical systems. The ground staff are then clear to disconnect the ground power.
If you read my article on how the 787 is pressurised, you’ll know that it’s powered by the electrical system. As soon as the APU is supplying the electricity, there is enough power to run the aircraft air conditioning. The PCA can then be removed.
Engine start
Once all doors and hatches are closed, external cables and pipes have been removed and the APU is running, we’re ready to push back from the gate and start our engines. Both engines are normally started at the same time, unless the outside air temperature is below 5°C.
On other aircraft types, the engines require high pressure air from the APU to turn the starter in the engine. This requires a lot of power from the APU and is also quite noisy. On the 787, the engine start is entirely electrical.
Power is drawn from the APU and feeds the VFSGs in the engines. If you remember from earlier, these fist act as starter motors. The starter motor starts the turn the turbines in the middle of the engine. These in turn start to turn the forward stages of the engine. Once there is enough airflow through the engine, and the fuel is igniting, there is enough energy to continue running itself.
After start
Once the engine is running, the VFSGs stop acting as starter motors and revert to acting as generators. As these generators are the preferred power source, they automatically take over the running of the electrical systems from the APU, which can then be switched off. The aircraft is now in the desired configuration for flight, with the 4 VFSGs in both engines providing all the power the aircraft needs.
As the aircraft moves away towards the runway, another electrically powered system is used — the brakes. On other aircraft types, the brakes are powered by the hydraulics system. This requires extra pipe work and the associated weight that goes with that. Hydraulically powered brake units can also be time consuming to replace.
By having electric brakes, the 787 is able to reduce the weight of the hydraulics system and it also makes it easier to change brake units. “Plug in and play” brakes are far quicker to change, keeping maintenance costs down and reducing flight delays.
In-flight
Another system which is powered electrically on the 787 is the anti-ice system. As aircraft fly though clouds in cold temperatures, ice can build up along the leading edge of the wing. As this reduces the efficiency of the the wing, we need to get rid of this.
Other aircraft types use hot air from the engines to melt it. On the 787, we have electrically powered pads along the leading edge which heat up to melt the ice.
Not only does this keep more power in the engines, but it also reduces the drag created as the hot air leaves the structure of the wing. A double win for fuel savings.
Once on the ground at the destination, it’s time to start thinking about the electrical configuration again. As we make our way to the gate, we start the APU in preparation for the engine shut down. However, because the engine generators have a high priority than the APU generators, the APU does not automatically take over. Instead, an indication on the EICAS shows APU RUNNING, to inform us that the APU is ready to take the electrical load.
Shutdown
With the park brake set, it’s time to shut the engines down. A final check that the APU is indeed running is made before moving the engine control switches to shut off. Plunging the cabin into darkness isn’t a smooth move. As the engines are shut down, the APU automatically takes over the power supply for the aircraft. Once the ground staff have connected the external power, we then have the option to also shut down the APU.
However, before doing this, we consider the cabin environment. If there is no PCA available and it’s hot outside, without the APU the cabin temperature will rise pretty quickly. In situations like this we’ll wait until all the passengers are off the aircraft until we shut down the APU.
Once on external power, the full flight cycle is complete. The aircraft can now be cleaned and catered, ready for the next crew to take over.
Bottom line
Electricity is a fundamental part of operating the 787. Even when there are no passengers on board, some power is required to keep the systems running, ready for the arrival of the next crew. As we prepare the aircraft for departure and start the engines, various methods of powering the aircraft are used.
The aircraft has six electrical generators, of which only four are used in normal flights. Should one fail, there are back-ups available. Should these back-ups fail, there are back-ups for the back-ups in the form of the battery. Should this back-up fail, there is yet another layer of contingency in the form of the RAT. A highly unlikely event.
The 787 was built around improving efficiency and lowering carbon emissions whilst ensuring unrivalled levels safety, and, in the wider energy landscape, perspectives like nuclear beyond electricity highlight complementary paths to decarbonization — a mission it’s able to achieve on hundreds of flights every single day.
Ontario Utility Scam Alert: protect against phishing, spoofed calls, texts, and emails, disconnection threats, and demands for prepaid cards or bitcoin. Tips from Alectra, Elexicon, Hydro One, Hydro Ottawa, and Toronto Hydro.
Key Points
A joint warning by Ontario utilities on tactics and steps to prevent customer fraud, phishing, and spoofed contacts.
✅ Verify bills; call your utility using the official number.
✅ Ignore links; do not accept unexpected e-transfers.
✅ Never pay with gift cards, prepaid cards, or bitcoin.
Five of Ontario's largest utilities have joined forces to raise awareness about ongoing sophisticated utility scams targeting utility customers.
Some common tactics fraudsters use to target Ontarians include impersonation of the local utility or its employees; sending threatening phone calls, texts and emails; or showing up in-person at a customer's home or business and requesting personal information or payment. The requests can include pressure for immediate payment, threats to disconnect service the same day, and demands to purchase prepaid debit cards, gift cards or bitcoin.
The utilities are encouraging all customers to protect themselves and are providing them with the following tips to stay safe, noting that customers want more choice and flexibility in how they manage accounts:
Never make a payment for a charge that isn't listed on your most recent bill
Ignore text messages or emails with suspicious links promising refunds
Don't call the number provided to you — instead, call your utility directly to check the status of your account
Only provide personal information or details about your account when you have initiated the contact with the utility representative
Utility companies will never threaten immediate disconnection for non-payment, and many offer relief programs during hardship
If you feel threatened in any way, contact your local police
Steps you can take to protect yourself against fraud:
Take five minutes to ask additional questions and listen to your instincts — if something doesn't seem right, ask someone about it, and look for news of official utility support efforts that confirm legitimate outreach
Immediately hang up on suspicious phone calls
Don't click any links in emails/text messages asking you to accept electronic transfers
Avoid sharing personal information
Always compare bills to previous ones, including the dollar amount and account number, and stay informed about any official rate changes from your utility
Reporting suspicious behaviour, including suspected electricity theft, helps authorities
If you believe you may be a victim of fraud, please contact the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre at 1-888-495-8501 and your local utility.
Canada Wind Energy Costs are plunging as renewable energy auctions, CfD contracts, and efficient turbines drive prices to 2-4 cents/kWh across Alberta and Saskatchewan, outcompeting grid power via competitive bidding and improved capacity factors.
Key Points
Averaging 2-4 cents/kWh via auctions, CfD support, and bigger turbines, wind is now cost-competitive across Canada.
✅ Alberta CfD bids as low as 3.9 cents/kWh.
✅ Turbine outputs rose from 1 MW to 3.3 MW per tower.
✅ Competitive auctions cut costs ~70% over nine years.
It's taken a decade of technological improvement and a new competitive bidding process for electrical generation contracts, but wind may have finally come into its own as one of the cheapest ways to create power.
Ten years ago, Ontario was developing new wind power projects at a cost of 28 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh), the kind of above-market rate that the U.K., Portugal and other countries were offering to try to kick-start development of renewables.
Now some wind companies say they've brought generation costs down to between 2 and 4 cents — something that appeals to provinces that are looking to significantly increase their renewable energy deployment plans.
The cost of electricity varies across Canada, by province and time of day, from an average of 6.5 cents per kWh in Quebec to as much as 15 cents in Halifax.
Capital Power, an Edmonton-based company, recently won a contract for the Whitla 298.8-megawatt (MW) wind project near Medicine Hat, Alta., with a bid of 3.9 cents per kWh, at a time when three new solar facilities in Alberta have been contracted at lower cost than natural gas, underscoring the trend. That price covers capital costs, transmission and connection to the grid, as well as the cost of building the project.
Jerry Bellikka, director of government relations, said Capital Power has been building wind projects for a decade, in the U.S., Alberta, B.C. and other provinces. In that time the price of wind generation equipment has been declining continually, while the efficiency of wind turbines increases.
Increased efficiency
"It used to be one tower was 1 MW; now each turbine generates 3.3 MW. There's more electricity generated per tower than several years ago," he said.
One wild card for Whitla may be steel prices — because of the U.S. and Canada slapping tariffs on one other's steel and aluminum products. Whitla's towers are set to come from Colorado, and many of the smaller components from China.
Canada introduces new surtaxes to curb flood of steel imports
"We haven't yet taken delivery of the steel. It remains to be seen if we are affected by the tariffs." Belikka said.
Another company had owned the site and had several years of meteorological data, including wind speeds at various heights on the site, which is in a part of southern Alberta known for its strong winds.
But the choice of site was also dependent on the municipality, with rural Forty Mile County eager for the development, Belikka said.
Alberta aims for 30% electricity from wind by 2030
Alberta wants 30 per cent of its electricity to come from renewable sources by 2030 and, as an energy powerhouse, is encouraging that with a guaranteed pricing mechanism in what is otherwise a market-bidding process.
While the cost of generating energy for the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) fluctuates hourly and can be a lot higher when there is high demand, the winners of the renewable energy contracts are guaranteed their fixed-bid price.
The average pool price of electricity last year in Alberta was 5 cents per kWh; in boom times it rose to closer to 8 cents. But if the price rises that high after the wind farm is operating, the renewable generator won't get it, instead rebating anything over 3.9 cents back to the government.
On the other hand, if the average or pool price is a low 2 cents kWh, the province will top up their return to 3.9 cents.
This contract-for-differences (CfD) payment mechanism has been tested in renewable contracts in the U.K. and other jurisdictions, including some U.S. states, according to AESO.
Competitive bidding in Saskatchewan
In Saskatchewan, the plan is to double its capacity of renewable electricity, to 50 per cent of generation capacity, by 2030, and it uses an open bidding system between the private sector generator and publicly owned SaskPower.
In bidding last year on a renewable contract, 15 renewable power developers submitted bids, with an average price of 4.2 cents per kWh.
One low bidder was Potentia with a proposal for a 200 MW project, which should provide electricity for 90,000 homes in the province, at less than 3 cents kWh, according to Robert Hornung of the Canadian Wind Energy Association.
"The cost of wind energy has fallen 70 per cent in the last nine years," he says. "In the last decade, more wind energy has been built than any other form of electricity."
Ontario remains the leading user of wind with 4,902 MW of wind generation as of December 2017, most of that capacity built under a system that offered an above-market price for renewable power, put in place by the previous Liberal government.
In June of last year, the new Conservative government of Doug Ford halted more than 700 renewable-energy projects, one of them a wind farm that is sitting half-built, even as plans to reintroduce renewable projects continue to advance.
The feed-in tariff system that offered a higher rate to early builders of renewable generation ended in 2016, but early contracts with guaranteed prices could last up to 20 years.
Hornung says Ontario now has an excess of generating capacity, as it went on building when the 2008-9 bust cut market consumption dramatically.
But he insists wind can compete in the open market, offering low prices for generation when Ontario needs new capacity.
"I expect there will be competitive processes put in place. I'm quite confident wind projects will continue to go ahead. We're well positioned to do that."
India Thermal Power Coal Imports surged 17.6% as CEA-monitored plants offset weaker CIL and SCCL supplies, driven by Saubhagya-led electricity demand, regional power deficits, and varied consumption across Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, and Gujarat.
Key Points
Fuel volumes imported for Indian thermal plants, tracked by CEA, reflecting shifts in CIL/SCCL supply, demand, and regional power deficits.
✅ Imports up 17.6% as domestic CIL/SCCL deliveries lag targets
✅ Saubhagya-driven demand lifts generation in key beneficiary states
✅ Industrial slowdowns cut usage in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat
The receipt of imported coal by thermal power plants, where plant load factors have risen, has shot up by 17.6 per cent during April-October. The coal import volumes refer to the power plants monitored by the Central Electricity Authority (CEA), and come amid moves to ration coal supplies as electricity demand surges, a power update report from CARE Ratings showed.
Imports escalated as domestic supplies by Coal India Ltd (CIL) and another state run producer- Singareni Collieries Company Ltd (SCCL) dipped in the period, after earlier shortages that have since eased in later months. Rate of supplies by the two coal companies to the CEA monitored power stations stood at 80.4 per cent, indicating a shortfall of 19.6 per cent against the allocated quantity.
According to the study by CARE Ratings, total coal supplied by CIL and SCCL to the power sector stood at 315.9 million tonnes (mt) during April-October as against 328.5 mt in the comparable period of last fiscal year.
The study noted that growth in power generation during the April-October 2019, with India now the third-largest electricity producer globally, was on account of higher demand from Pradhan Mantri Sahaj Bijli Har Ghar Yojana or Saubhagya Scheme beneficiary states. Providing connection to households in order to achieve 100% per cent electrification has in part helped the sector avert de-growth, as part of efforts to rewire Indian electricity and expand access.
Large states namely Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Punjab, West Bengal and Rajasthan have recorded over five per cent growth in consumption of power. These states along with Odisha, Madhya Pradesh and Assam accounted for 75 per cent of the beneficiaries under the Saubhagya Scheme (Household Electrification Scheme). The ongoing economic downturn has led to a sharp fall in electricity demand from industrialised states. Maharashtra, which is also the largest power consuming state in India, recorded a decline in consumption of 5.6 per cent.
Other states namely Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Gujarat and Odisha too recorded fall in power consumed, echoing global dips in daily electricity demand seen later during the pandemic. These states house large clusters of mining, automobile, cement and other manufacturing industries, and a decline in these sectors led to fall in demand for power across these states. - The demand-supply gap or power deficit has remained at 0.6 per cent during the April-October 2019. North-East reported 4.8 per cent of power deficit followed by Northern Region at 1.3 per cent. Within Northern Region, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh accounted for 65 per cent and 30 per cent respectively of the regions power supply deficit.
