Low-cost hydro power
Sunday, 24 January 2010
THE report by Azizur Rahman published in the FE in its issue on January 21st is not very clear on the matter. Are these conventional hydro-power plants across the rivers Sangu, Mahamuhuri and Mohamaya? Or are these power plants driven by river currents, and located on barges or on shore? This matter has not been clearly indicated, and leaves the report rather confusing to understand!
The exact nature of these plants needs to be clearly defined.
Further, the cost of power at Tk. 0.12 per KWh represents only the direct variable cost of generation, at a maximum production level. It does not include any fixed costs like overheads and cost of capital to finance the project. If these were included, the cost of power would have been much higher! More so, capital as cost for conventional hydro-power plants, is possibly the highest, when compared with coal, oil, gas or U-236 based nuclear power plants. Similarly the cost of Tk. 2.00 per KWh. for gas-fired plant also represents only the direct variable cost, and not the usual commercial cost of power.
The proposal for increasing the height of the Karnafulli dam and increasing the plant's generation capacity is also not realistic. It will involve the relocation and rehabilitation of a large number of local settlements. This will create uncalled-for humanitarian and social problems. Considering these facts, I do not believe this should be an option for consideration. Rather, we should go for balancing, modernisation, replacement and expansion (BMRE) of the existing power plant there and increase its output to at least 80/85 per cent of plant capacity, from the current level of operating at 50 to 60 per cent capacity.
This needs to be taken in hand, as soon as possible. After all, as we say, "a bird in hand is worth two in the bush."
Engr. S. A. Mansoor
Dhaka.
The exact nature of these plants needs to be clearly defined.
Further, the cost of power at Tk. 0.12 per KWh represents only the direct variable cost of generation, at a maximum production level. It does not include any fixed costs like overheads and cost of capital to finance the project. If these were included, the cost of power would have been much higher! More so, capital as cost for conventional hydro-power plants, is possibly the highest, when compared with coal, oil, gas or U-236 based nuclear power plants. Similarly the cost of Tk. 2.00 per KWh. for gas-fired plant also represents only the direct variable cost, and not the usual commercial cost of power.
The proposal for increasing the height of the Karnafulli dam and increasing the plant's generation capacity is also not realistic. It will involve the relocation and rehabilitation of a large number of local settlements. This will create uncalled-for humanitarian and social problems. Considering these facts, I do not believe this should be an option for consideration. Rather, we should go for balancing, modernisation, replacement and expansion (BMRE) of the existing power plant there and increase its output to at least 80/85 per cent of plant capacity, from the current level of operating at 50 to 60 per cent capacity.
This needs to be taken in hand, as soon as possible. After all, as we say, "a bird in hand is worth two in the bush."
Engr. S. A. Mansoor
Dhaka.