Report of Indian Institute of Public Administration ... - Ministry of Power

Synopsis of State Reports (Vol.-IV)
Study on `Impact of Restructuring of SEBs’
The plant load factor (PLF) of Kota and Suratgarh thermal power stations was
among the top in the category of thermal power stations in the country. Time
and again, these plants have won awards at the national level. After
restructuring also, the tempo has been maintained, rather it has been further
improved and the generation capacity, which was 1,299.53 MW in 1999-2000,
has reached 2,569.35 MW in 2003-04, which means a near 100 per cent
increase.
In Rajasthan, the cost of transporting coal to STPS and KTPS is more than that
of coal. Instead of being attracted with the location of power plants within the
State, a time has come when different States may like to collaborate in setting
up of the power plants as pithead power stations. Wheeling of power is
relatively cheaper than transportation of coal over very long distances.
NTPC might like to prepare a shelf of projects based on pithead thermal power
stations. It could invite willing States to join. Of course, tactically the State
where the power generating plant is to be located should also be persuaded to
join as a partner State. Once the alternative of pithead power stations becomes
viable and tariff turns out to be attractive, the States might prefer not to set up
thermal power stations at locations far off from the coalmines.
The transmission wing of RSEB has performed very well during the prerestructuring
period. RRVPNL has been maintaining this level of performance.
Mathania Solar Project
Rajasthan has maximum solar insolation in the country and much needs to be
done on this front. Unfortunately the progress of the Mathania solar project
particularly in its shifting fuel choices is rather intriguing. In a 140 MW plant,
with solar component being only 35 MW, it is difficult to term it as a solar
plant. The Rajasthan authorities perhaps would do well to concentrate on the
solar component of the project instead of trying to make it a hybrid plant.
Distribution System
Table 6.1: Distribution Losses (%)
Pre-Restructuring Post-Restructuring
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04
28.31 24.93 26.46 29.43 42.00 38.36 37.66 39.83 41.5
66