This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
© 2013 BRIDGE TO INDIA Energy Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved October 2013, New Delhi This report is owned by BRIDGE TO INDIA and is protected by Indian copyright and international copyright/ intellectual property laws under applicable treaties and/or conventions. The user agrees not to export any report into a country that does not have copyright/intellectual property laws that will protect BRIDGE TO INDIA’s rights therein. BRIDGE TO INDIA hereby grants the user a personal, non-exclusive, nonrefundable, non-transferable license to use the report for research purposes only pursuant to the terms and conditions of this agreement. BRIDGE TO INDIA retains exclusive and sole ownership of each report disseminated under this agreement. The user cannot engage in any unauthorized use, reproduction, distribution, publication or electronic transmission of this report or the information/forecasts therein without the express written permission of BRIDGE TO INDIA.
No part of this report may be used or reproduced in any manner or in any form or by any means without mentioning its original source. BRIDGE TO INDIA is not herein engaged in rendering professional advice and services to you. BRIDGE TO INDIA makes no warranties, expressed or implied, as to the ownership, accuracy, or adequacy of the content of this product. BRIDGE TO INDIA shall not be liable for any indirect, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages or for lost revenues or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of such damages or losses and regardless of the theory of liability. For further enquiries or to advertise in future publications, please contact: Mr. Jasmeet Khurana jasmeet. firstname.lastname@example.org
Contact BRIDGE TO INDIA Pvt. Ltd. N-117, Panchsheel Park New Delhi 110017 India email@example.com www.bridgetoindia.com www.bridgetoindia.com/blog www.IndiaSolarMarket.com www.IndiaSolarHomes.com Follow us on
© BRIDGE TO INDIA,
5 Group captive power plants under an OPEX model 5.2 Definition 5.3 Renewable Purchase Obligation 3. Key question: How does the group captive model sale of solar power work in India? 5.2 India Solar Market Prices 2.4 Benefits ofthe “group captive” model 5.CONTENTS 1.3 Regulations: The“open access” mechanism 5.4 REC projects 4. 2013 . Indo Solar 10 5. Market Dashboard 2.7 Risks 5.1 Background 5.8 Conclusion 12 12 12 12 15 16 17 21 22 23 23 6.2 State policies Tamil Nadu Andhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh Karnataka Rajasthan Punjab 3.1 Glossary of terms © BRIDGE TO INDIA. Industry 4.3 Installed Capacity in India 01 02 02 02 03 04 04 05 06 06 07 07 07 07 08 08 08 3. Annexure 6.1 Market Compass 2.6 The business case for “group captive” power projects 5. Policy and Projects Outlook 3.1 National Solar Mission 3. HR Gupta. Managing Director. Overview 2.1 Interview: Mr.
2013 .© BRIDGE TO INDIA.
For example. OVERVIEW India added a meager 155 MW in the previous quarter (July 2013 to September 2013) as compared to the cumulative 780 MW added in the first two quarters of 2013.5 GW is currently at different stages of development. 2013 01 . In this edition. In spite of the various factors for delay. new allocations for a cumulative capacity of 1.There is still confusion about how many Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) will actually be signed from these allocations. Chinese module prices for Indian supplies have stabilized. there has been some amount of new interest in the third party sale of power through various business models and we see the first projects coming up in this segment. Thus delay might also translate into abortion in some cases. Apart from that. with elections coming up and concerns over India’s high fiscal deficit remaining.5 GW is currently under different stages of development. If a significant part of these prospective PPAs get signed. The rupee devaluation has made imported equipments and foreign loans more expensive. India’s total installed capacity at present stands at 1. delay in achieving financial closure and delay from developer’s end due to the recent rupee devaluation. if not increased. The key reasons for project delays have been problems related to land acquisition. Apart from that.5 GW have been proposed. we are providing an in-depth assessment of the ‘group captive’ model in our ‘key question’ section. Projects that were calculated too tightly or even with falling equipment costs in mind. out of the total 2 GW capacity planned under Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh state policies. government officials in the south Indian states of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh seem confident that many more PPAs will be signed by the end of this year. Projects would then be commissioned between the last quarter of 2014 and first quarter of 2015. there has been some activity on the state level. The revenue for such third party sale of power is often combined with the revenue from Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) and/or the benefit from Accelerated Depreciation (AD). the overall outlook of the market appears positive and we can expect a significant capacity addition over the next one year. in the last couple of months. In fact. because the eagerly awaited phase two of the National Solar Mission (NSM) continues to be postponed. for some projects under the Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh state policies.5 GW for utility scale projects in India by the end of 2014. If PPA signing picks up for the projects allocated under the Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh state policies and if the NSM is announced within this year. around 1. the Request for Selection (RfS) document might be further delayed. Models such as ‘group captive’ are being discussed for larger project capacities.96 GW. even government officials assume that only 50% might actually be realized. It is currently awaiting cabinet approval. Also.This slowdown is primarily due to the lack of allocations last year. Andhra Pradesh is now inviting more interests and wants to sign PPAs in excess of 500 MW. India’s total installed PV capacity at present stands at 1. © BRIDGE TO INDIA. In addition. While the NSM slacks. might not be viable to build under current conditions. The mood is further suppressed. the deadlines have been extended without penalties. India added a meager 155 MW in the previous quarter (July 2013 to September 2013) as compared to the cumulative 780 MW added in the first two quarters of 2013. So far PPAs for 60 MW have been signed (all in Andhra Pradesh). However. then we can expect a cumulative installed capacity of around 3.96 GW. around 1. Over and above that.1. In the last two quarters.
who did not want to be named there is some dispute in the Karnataka bids and the process is on hold until further clarity.65/Wp* $ 0. MARKET DASHBOARD 2.07/kWh. as per a governement official.2. Europe) Thin Film modules (Japan) All prices are for a reference 10MW project All prices are without duties and taxes Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA Trend Decreased Unchanged Decreased Decreased Decreased Decreased Decreased 13% © BRIDGE TO INDIA. 2013 02 © BRIDGE TO INDIA. 2013 GI *$ rate has been used to avoid effect of currency fluctuations ---------------------1 The lowest tariff of ` 5. However. Taiwan) Thin Film modules (US and Malaysia) c-Si modules (Japan.1 MARKET COMPASS MA T E UR NA S NG IN G NT CE E R E M 2.51/KWh (€0.2 INDIAN SOLAR MARKET PRICES Indication Lowest FiT Interest Rate Average Capex c-Si modules (China.53/Wp* $ 0. 2013 GR OW PV ` 5. © BRIDGE TO INDIA.58/Wp* $ 0. $0.60/Wp* .09/kWh) has been mentioned by Sun Pharma under Karnataka bidding process.51/kWh1 ` 65/Wp $ 0.
3 INSTALLED CAPACITY IN INDIA © BRIDGE TO INDIA.2. 2013 Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA 03 . 2013 © BRIDGE TO INDIA.
BRIDGE TO INDIA. POLICY AND PROJECTS OUTLOOK In the last quarter. it is unlikely that the policy will be approved soon. In the upcoming quarter (October 2013 to December 2013).5 GW is currently under different stages of development across India.1 NATIONAL SOLAR MISSION Project developers have been looking forward to the new allocations under batch one of phase two of the National Solar Mission (NSM) for some time now. On the bright side. However. due to delays in the signing of PPAs in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu and due to a noshow of phase two of the NSM until now. Gujarat briefly contemplated a retrospective tariff revision. in the last quarter (July 2013 to September 2013). © BRIDGE TO INDIA. the bulk of newly commissioned projects will come not from policies. 3. With this proposed capacity addition we can expect India’s cumulative PV capacity for utility scale projects to reach at least 2. the states of Punjab. there is a high probability that it might be postponed until after the general elections in May 2014. However.5 GW by the end of 2014. there has been no official news since. is optimistic that the bidding process for the NSM will begin this year itself. The draft RfS document was released in April 2013 and the bidding process was originally expected for May of this year. As per recent statements by ministry officials. and new allocations in Karnataka seem to have been put on hold due to a dispute (refer below). but from the private sale of solar power under the REC mechanism. the announcement of the creation of the new state of Telangana from Andhra Pradesh. BRIDGE TO INDIA had predicted an installed capacity of 4 GW by the end of 2014. however. A capacity of close to 1. 2013 04 . we have revised our projections downward.5 GW by mid of 2014 and close to 3. The finalized policy and related documents for phase two of the NSM have now been submitted to the Union Cabinet for approval. the states of Punjab. Uttar Pradesh and Karnataka allocated new projects. the finalized policy and related documents have now been submitted to the Union Cabinet for approval. If the allocations under the NSM are not annonced within a month. with concerns about India’s high fiscal deficit and with the model code of conduct for the upcoming elections. which put the allocations and future bankability of projects under question. Uttar Pradesh and Karnataka allocated new projects.3. there has been no penalty levied for delayed projects under the Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka policies. We would describe the last quarter as being dominated by policy instability: We have seen confusion in Tamil Nadu over the tariff proposed by its regulatory commission. However. Moreover. Earlier. which is setting a bad precedent for the upcoming projects in those states.
Sri (20 MW).05 (130 MW) 100 7.2 – 8.48 6. ).51 – 8. 2013 Mohan Breweries (110 MW).01 – 9. 2013 Key Projects Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA © BRIDGE TO INDIA.330 None 500* None None None None RfS for 1 MW x 50 announced NA 550 NA NA 50 NA 120 NA 170 Dec-2014 Dec2014 Mar-14 (50 MW) Dec-14 (110MW) Dec -14 Mar-14 Dec-14 Mar-14 250 MW by March 2014.a. Essel (25 MW). 1. Mahira SaiSudhir (30 MW) developed Energo Power (10 MW) (20 MW) Engineering (20 MW) (10 MW) * Based on an interview with the Andhra Pradesh state department officials.05 8.determined tariff © BRIDGE TO INDIA.63 7.5 (60 MW) 5. (25 MW). Asopus (34 Moserbaer MW).9-8.240 MW by Dec-14 Jan 14 – Mar 14 Jan 14 – Mar 14 Ongoing Jan 14 – Mar 14 Ongoing Jan 2014 – Ongoing Mar 2014 Most of the procurements will take place between JanuaryMarch 2014 Essel Essel Welspun Acme Essel Roha Mining Infra (10 (32 MW). Kranthi Helena MW). United Telecom (100 MW). projects (25 MW) MW).94 – 8.45 7. Welspun (60 MW) . Infra (50 Dyechem (35 MW). Moserbaer Essel Edifice Power InfraWelspun (20 Mining (30 MW (10 MW). this will be based on direct allocation at the pre.27 6.49 (with an escalation of 5% p.59 New PPAs expected to be signed by the year end (MW) Further allocations (MW) Delayed projects (MW) Expected commissioning date of projects under deployment Expected period of procurement 230 0 120 0 1. for the first 10 years) 500 80 7.Table 3-1: Overview of the state policies in India Tamil Nadu Allocation date Jun-13 Andhra Pradesh Jun-13 Karnataka Apr-12 Punjab Jul-13 Madhya Pradesh May-12 Uttar Pradesh Jul-13 Rajasthan Mar-13 Total/average Most of the allocations happened in the first half of 2013 420 PPAs signed as on September 2013 (MW) Tariff (INR/ kWh) 0 60 60 0 225 0 75 6. MW). (25 MW).
As there has been an initial delay due to the concerns over the tariff revision. applications for less than 150 MW are expected to finalize in Andhra Pradesh.10/kWh) with a 5% escalation for the first 10 years. Instead.Tamil Nadu TEDA has tried to assure the project developers that the new proposed tariff in Tamil Nadu will have no bearing on their projects and that TNERC will provide a sanction for the tariffs currently being offered. Andhra Pradesh Most investors are currently skeptical about projects in Andhra Pradesh taking off anytime soon. loss in confidence in the processes being followed.08/ kWh.700 MW of original applications submitted in 2013.However. The state’s nodal agency. Out of 1. we can expect a majority of the project developers to back out. Another reason for a poor response from investor and developers in the state is the expected split of Andhra Pradesh into two separate states (the new state is to be called Telangana. has proposed a separate tariff of `5.07/kWh.com/blog/?p=1605 © BRIDGE TO INDIA. Tamil Nadu’s tender in December 2012 led to an issuance of Letter of Intents (LOIs) for 690 MW of projects. On the other hand. One reason is that the initial retrospective change in tariff by the state3 has led to a ---------------------2 1 EUR = INR 80 and 1 USD = INR 60 3 http://bridgetoindia. Four to five large projects (up to 100 MW) are expected to take up this offer. Out of the 1. some developers have their reservations. we expect a capacity of 200 MW to be commissioned by September 2014. In a situation where the tariffs being offered by TEDA are not approved by TNERC. The PPA with the developers is only bankable if TNERC approves the tariff being offered by TEDA. Tamil Nadu Energy Development Agency (TEDA). As per our discussion with the officials. they do not foresee the proposed division of the state to have a considerable impact on the solar projects. As there is an incentive for early commissioning in Andhra Pradesh. has offered a tariff of `6.78/kWh(€0. where the distribution company might be bifurcated in the future. will be able to benefit from that. if TNERC approves the older tariffs. TEDA has tried to assure the project developers that the new proposed tariff will have no bearing on their projects and that TNERC will provide a sanction for the tariffs currently being offered. the largest capacity addition in 2014 can be expected from Tamil Nadu. the regulatory agency that is required to sanction all tariffs.700 MW of original applications submitted in 2013.48/kWh (€0. 2013 06 . Apart from this. As per our discussions with the government officials. Andhra Pradesh has provided an open offer for developers to take up projects at the existing tariffs. no PPAs have been signed as of September 2013 but all PPAs are expected to be signed in the next couple of months. Around 61 MW of PPAs have already been signed and as per the officials of New and Renewable Energy Development Corporation of Andhra Pradesh.10/kWh)2 without escalation. we might not see 300 MW projects being commissioned by June 2014 as predicted by us in the July 2013 edition of the India Solar Compass. project developers who have a head start in terms of finalizing land procurement and partner selection for Engineering Procurement and Construction (EPC) before signing of the PPAs. another 80 MW of PPAs are expected soon. $0. This is especially true for those who have projects in central Andhra Pradesh. applications for less than 150 MW is expected to finalize. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission (TNERC). We expect that at least a capacity of 60 MW will be commissioned ahead of schedule and within the third quarter of 2014. $0.
Andhra Pradesh has also opened up a window for new interests for developers to set up solar projects at the same tariff that is being offered to the existing projects (`6. The 25 and 20 MW projects were to be commissioned by June 2013 National Hydro Power Corporation (NHPC) for a proposed 100 MW solar and the 105 MW project by December 2013. The deadline for the remaining capacity of 120 MW has now been extended until March 2014 and none of the project developers is being penalized. The official deadline has been extended until 2014 without fines for the delays. 2013 07 . The government has further signed a another of 105 MW were allocated in memorandum of understanding with May 2012. given the low tariffs in the state. According to unconfirmed sources. the recent allocation process for a capacity of 130 MW has been put on hold as some companies have disputed the published tariffs.10/kWh). we expect a capacity of 80 MW to be commissioned before the new deadline. they are expecting fresh applications of around 500 MW. these projects were to be commissioned by October 2013. one project of 20 MW and signed before the end of the year. claiming some procedural mistake. four projects of 25 MW each. As per our conversations with the officials. the delay is cited likely do their own EPC and might be as being due to difficulties in achieving able to complete their projects ahead © BRIDGE TO INDIA. Given the experience under most solar policies and going by the previous experinece of the developers.49/kWh (€0. The left over capacity of 50 MW from the allocations in 2012 is expected to be commissioned by the end of the first quarter of 2014. Moser Baer (20 MW). It is not yet clear when this project is to be finalized. financial closure coupled with delays in acquiring land for projects has led to substantial delay in the commissioning of the remaining projects. only one project with a capacity of 10 MW by Jindal Aluminum has been commissioned on time. The PPAs in the state are expected to be In Madhya Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh Uttar Pradesh has finalized agreements with seven project developers for a cumulative capacity of 130 MW. due to delay in land acquisition and financial closure. We think that commissioning of any part of the newly allocated capacity of 130 MW within the next year is unlikely. As per the PPA. However. as of September 2013. all projects are expected to meet their deadline of March 2014. project. however. for a capacity of 130 MW has been put on hold as some companies have disputed the published tariffs. As per officials in the department. BRIDGE TO INDIA thinks that their estimates are too optimistic and we do not expect that the fresh additional capacity will exceed 200 MW. Uttar Pradesh has finalized agreements with seven project developers for a cumulative capacity of 130 MW. Most of the only a 105 MW project by Welspun mentioned project developers will has been commissioned ahead of schedule.08/kWh. Rajasthan A capacity of 75 MW that has been allocated in Rajasthan seems to be on track. Karnataka A capacity of 60 MW had been allocated under the Karnataka state policy in April 2012.The recent allocation process in Karnataka. Sree Developers (20 MW). Also. The developers are: Jakson Power (10 MW). These allocations are likely to remain on hold until there is more clarity. Hence. However. we. they mentioned that most of the projects have either secured financial closure or are in the process of finalizing it. Refex Energy (10 MW). As so often. Azure power (10 MW) and Madhya Pradesh Essel Infraprojects (50 MW). expect that two to three projects with a capacity of around 25 MW will be commissioned by the March 2014 deadline and the remaining by around June 2014. One project developer commented that the delay of their project has been due to the recent rupee devaluation. However. DK Infracon (10 MW). $0.
Also. of 2013. Similarly. © BRIDGE TO INDIA. these Pradesh (EPC contracted to Tata Power projects will look more attractive to the Solar). we might see an projects under the REC mechanism. These developments are an Some of the key projects in the indication that more states are getting state are: Asopus Infrastructure (34 serious about implementing RPOs.10/kWh. to the enforcement of Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPOs) in India. None of the PPAs have been signed until now and we expect them to be signed by the end of the year. The Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission has mandated the DISCOMs to comply with RPOs. This can (30 MW). Uttar Pradesh (EPC contracted to Due to this reason. As a result. Azure Power solar power will increase. for the given six months for financial closure states that are not currently meeting and 13 months for commissioning. $0. This is because the time spent in selecting an EPC partner will be saved and the allocation of internal resources will be more efficient. the debt financing BHEL) and 10 MW project in Orissa for projects in Punjab is expected to (EPC contracted to BHEL). power gaining popularity and several 3. it is unlikely Out of a capacity of 155 MW that has that there will be any major capacity been added in India in the previous additions from Punjab in the first half quarter.Punjab has finalized agreements with 26 project developers to develop a cumulative capacity of 250 MW. ---------------------4 EPC providers are setting up solar parks specifically for REC or captive projects. For example. Solairedirect (20 MW). there has been more confidence in the market with regards ‘solar parks’4 coming up primarily in the states of Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. 2014. Delhi distribution companies (DISCOMs). be relatively easier. have already included the RPO compliance expenses in the tariff. This As the debt financing is usually done includes the 50 MW project in Madhya after the land has been bought. MW). Many largely due to the high land costs and of these projects are expected to be relatively low irradiation in the state. the obligated entities in Punjab have been mandated to comply with the Punjab RPOs of financial year 2011-12 and Punjab has finalized agreements 2012-13. Welspun Solar (32 MW). in the next one year. National Thermal Power The average tariff in Punjab is `8. Essel As more states begin to implement Infraprojects (30 MW). their RPOs.4 REC PROJECTS 3. Moserbaer the RPO mechanism the demand for Clean Energy (30 MW). the DISCOMs in these states. commissioned by March 2014. around 40 MW is for the projects under the REC mechanism. selection of equipment and timelines will be taken by the project developer itself. around 40 MW is for the of 2014. as all the decisions regarding the technical design.3 RENEWABLE PURCHASE OBLIGATION Recently. However. we expect an additional capacity of 150 MW for projects that use a combination of revenue through RECs with industrial or commercial tariffs. for example.This power plants across the country for is higher than most other states. 2013 08 . Out of a capacity of 155 MW that has been added in India in the previous quarter. Punj provide an additional impetus to the Lloyd (20 MW). it is expected that there will not be any procedural delays. additional capacity of around 100 MW With projects for third-party sale of by September 2014.28/ Corporation is setting up various kWh (€0. These parks provide land and grid-connectivity assistance to solar project developers. 10 MW and 15 MW project in lenders at the time of debt financing. The projects have been solar market. West Bengal is planning to with 26 project developers to develop comply with its solar RPO by the end a cumulative capacity of 250 MW.14/kWh).
2013 . 2013 09 Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA © BRIDGE TO INDIA.Figure 3-1: Projected quarterly PV installations in India (in MW) © BRIDGE TO INDIA.
In the January 2013 edition of the India Solar Compass. given that the final outcome has to be preceded by an interim order. manufacturers are banking on the implementation of anti-dumping duties (ADD) and a domestic content requirement (DCR). Indo Solar As of today. To revive their fortunes. this would be insufficient to support the 2 GW of manufacturing capacity in India. On ADD. What is the current state of the Indian solar manufacturing industry? Cell manufacturing in India is practically idle.1 INTERVIEW: HR GUPTA. we are now in the 20th month since we sought remedial action and 10th month since initiation. sizeable orders and visibility is not there. However. with some exceptions. To present a contrarian view. HR Gupta. However. INDUSTRY An anti-dumping duty has the potential to change the supply dynamics in the Indian solar sector drastically. BRIDGE TO INDIA has maintained that imposition of ADD would be negative for the Indian solar sector as it will drive up costs and slow down adoption of the technology. As per the normal procedure. DCR is only applicable for the NSM projects in India and it is expected that batch one of phase two of the NSM would have a capacity of around 200 MW earmarked for domestic modules. 4. an interim order could be announced as early as July 2013. Managing Director of Indo Solar. The company has plans to increase the capacity to 360 MWp. 2013 10 . Module makers are mostly catering to the off-grid requirement and are now also receiving some enquires from Europe. most of the photovoltaic (PV) manufacturing capacity in India is either lying idle or operating at a very low capacity. This is despite the fact that the US has challenged DCR in the World Trade Organization (WTO). 2. What can be expected in terms of DCR and anti-dumping duties? By when can we expect some clarity on the subject? My understanding on DCR is that the documents for phase two of the NSM are awaiting cabinet approval. Some module manufacturers are also developing their own projects and using their own modules for these projects to keep their plants operational. Managing Director. we asked HR Gupta. However. There is a high probability that the matter will be decided next month. © BRIDGE TO INDIA. this is a legal and not a political procedure and if dumping has taken place. ADD on the other hand has the potential to change the supply dynamics in the Indian solar sector drastically. Indian manufacturers have largely been unable to compete with international module suppliers on costs. Given that no interim order has been announced until date. then ADD will most likely be imposed irrespective of the implications on the industry. which should be the primary goal. BRIDGE TO INDIA had forecast that going by the procedure followed for ADD. to share his views on the Indian solar manufacturing sector. the final outcome should have been expected 23rd November 2013 (one year from the date of initiation). Indo Solar is India’s largest cell manufacturer with a current manufacturing capacity of 160 MWp. it can be assumed that this investigation is taking longer than usual.4. This might be due to the fact that this is a high profile case with considerable international scrutiny and pressure. INDO SOLAR 1. Nevertheless. These facilities are either underutilized or completely shut. MANAGING DIRECTOR. the investigations might well miss the deadline.
soon there will borrow cheaper offshore and switch to be no supply side at all. What would be your recipe to make the tariffs for solar power are the manufacturing of solar modules expected to go up. of debt and high power costs but these can easily be optimized when If one allows only negative margins manufacturers are bankable. 2013 11 . They did not install the tracking system as reported by us. can on the supply side. Errata from the previous edition of the India Solar Compass (July 2013): Correction is in the table on page 19. in the basis has already wiped out around US. the bill of materials is anyway similar amongst all manufacturers. In order to grid power. you will see that operational US$ 80 Billion in market capital and manufacturing costs are similar the supply side of the solar value chain globally.In India. we have high cost of debt and high power costs but these can easily be optimized when manufacturers are bankable and can borrow cheaper offshore and switch to grid power. prices should Manufacturing of solar cells and be commensurate to support the modules is already competitive and sustainability of the sector. Satec Enviro supplied only the steel for the trackers. as The cost of solar power on a dumping was done by NREL and MIT. Do you agree? Is it competitive in the long run? justified? If you closely analyze costs. 3. maintain a stable production capacity and allow for R&D. Insolare has installed the trackers for their project. © BRIDGE TO INDIA. 4. we have high cost has been decimated globally. If anti-dumping duties are enforced. In India.
the Indian solar market DOES Until has been dominated by policy based THE GROUP projects that rely on government or obligations. $8. While open access consumers can buy directly from the group captive project or the open market.3/kW/ per month.25/kW/per month) to ` 500/kW/month (€6. This varies with the connected load and is chargeable within a range of ` 15/kW/per month (€0. determined on an annual basis.5. In such a situation. 5. While open access consumers can buy directly from the group captive project or the open market. Generation of solar power under the ‘group captive’ model is one of most talked about business models in the Indian market at present. ‘Open access’ allows large power consumers (typically with a connected load of 1 © BRIDGE TO INDIA. However. These include: i C onnectivity charges – These are recurring. as long as the following conditions are met: i N ot less than 26% of the ownership is held by captive consumers. Generally. ‘Open access’ allows large power consumers to buy power directly from the open market.1 BACKGROUND now.003/kWh) iii T ransmission charges – These charges are payable to the transmission licensee (state transmission unit) for using the transmission infrastructure. 2013 . solar power plants under the group captive model opt for the LTOA based agreements.001 – 0.19/kW/ per month.001 –0. Several new business models are evolving in India to tap into this opportunity. KEY QUESTION: HOW 5. treating them as captive consumers. the charges are in the range of `0.3/kW/per month) depending on the category of consumer. ii N ot less than 51% of the aggregate electricity generated in such plant. $0. $0. India is currently in a situation where parity for many industrial and commercial consumers is within reach. is used for captive consumption. They take into consideration the distance of the customer from the load center (generator) and the direction of the node in the grid. These charges and the related losses are applicable to captive generating plants and consumers connected to a central or state transmission network (66 kVA or 132 kVA) or a DISCOM network (11kVA and 33 kVA). On the basis of the type of contract. The act allows for a structure for supply of power to a group of consumers. MW and above) to buy power directly from the open market.16/kWh (€0. a CAPTIVE MODEL incentives fall in the cost of solar power and a WORK? rise in the cost of conventional power Typically. open access is categorized as: ’Short term open access’ (STOA). 5. they are subject to several charges that are incurred for using the already available transmission and distribution infrastructure. they are subject to several charges that are incurred for using the already available transmission and distribution infrastructure.002/kWh. Typically. fixed charges payable by a consumer for the electricity connection provided by the distribution licensee DISCOM. any additional revenue through the REC mechanism or any other incentive such as a waiver of open access charges or electricity duty can tilt the balance to make solar power an attractive option for power consumers and investors alike.08 – 0. group captive power projects have to operate within the ambit of the ‘open access’ mechanism.3 REGULATIONS: THE ‘OPEN ACCESS’ MECHANISM Typically.2 DEFINITION The ‘group captive’ model is based on the Electricity Act 2003. ‘medium term open access’ (MTOA) and ‘long term open access’ (LTOA). ii P oC charges – Point of connection charges are transmission charges introduced to recover the fixed costs of the transmission network. group captive power projects have to operate within the ambit of the ‘open access’ mechanism. 12 have prompted many companies to explore business models wherein solar power can compete in the power market without government support. viability enablers such as accelerated depreciation.
12/kWh (€0. They are determined by the State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs) for each consumer categories and typically range from 4 – 10 %.01/ kWh.001 – 0. revisions in scheduling and energy accounting. The largest impact. Typically. however. The largest impact is that of the Cross Subsidy Surcharge (CSS).04/kWh) depending on the state. these are in the range of 2 – 6 %. amongst all the open access charges is that of the Cross Subsidy Surcharge.002 – 0.10 – 0. 2013 13 . $0.001 – 0.002 – 0. wheeling charges and transmission charges. iv Transmission losses – Losses are considered for the assumed electricity units lost in the transmission line between the generator and the consumer.03/kWh.000/MW/ month (€625 – 2.10 – 0. When a consumer opts for open access.013/kWh).500 (€19 – 31. viii SLDC/RLDC charge – These are charges payable by STOA consumers who avail services of the state/regional load dispatch center (SLDC/RLDC).000 to 200.80/kWh (€0. These charges are in the range of `50. Figure 5-1: Key charges and losses taken for an average case of group captive sale of power in India © BRIDGE TO INDIA.3. They are typically in the range of `0.333/MW/month for LTOA consumers and in range of `0. $0.008/kWh) for STOA consumers. vii Cross Subsidy Surcharge – These are charges payable by consumers who opt for supply through open access. $0. we are only concerned with the wheeling and transmission charges. Transmission and wheeling losses vary significantly across states. They are typically in the range of `1. They are applicable to all power generating plants connected to the distribution grid at 33 kV or below and availing open access. These charges currently vary between zero and `2. In India. Such services include scheduling. wheeling charges and transmission charges.006/kWh. 2013 Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA © BRIDGE TO INDIA. v Wheeling charges – These charges are payable to the distribution licensee for using the distribution network. vi Wheeling losses – These are the losses incurred while transporting electricity through the distribution network.50/kWh (€0. CSS. Therefore. industrial and commercial clients cross subsidize electricity rates for agricultural and residential consumers. This surcharge is designed to make up for the lost cross subsidy. is waived off for group captive projects. $25 – 42) per day or part of the day.500/MW/month. $833. the distribution licensee loses a high value consumer who would have subsidized low paying consumers.500 – 2.
74/kWh (€0. Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh have waived off the open access charges for solar power and Madhya Pradesh. In some states. Himachal Pradesh and Odisha. The tariff orders in Karnataka and Rajasthan account for the lowest losses in India.0 14 Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA . Therefore. developers must choose between the two benefits.63/kWh . on the other hand. in INR/kWh) Additional cost impact on solar power under the open access mechanism (without any concessional charges) 3. The overall impact can vary between `0.5 © BRIDGE TO INDIA. A combination of these can vary from 7. © BRIDGE TO INDIA.74% to 12.5 2. RECs cannot be claimed if concessional wheeling and distribution charges are being availed. As we can see in the Figure 5-2 the impact of open access charges and losses will be the lowest in Andhra Pradesh. 2013 Open access losses (impact in INR/kWh) Open access charges Madhya Pradesh West Bengal Tamil Nadu Andhra Pradesh Karnataka Haryana Uttar Pradesh Punjab Rajasthan Kerala Bihar Maharashtra Himachal Pradesh Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. according to Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) guidelines.0 1.03/kWh.5/kWh). Figure 5-2: State-wise costs associated with the open access mechanism (without any concessional benefits.010.2. Transmission and wheeling losses also vary significantly across states. Uttar Pradesh and Delhi and the highest in Maharashtra. for example. 2013 Odisha Delhi 0.5 1. $0. Punjab and Gujarat are known to provide some concessions in terms of charges and losses considered.008 – 0. Punjab and Madhya Pradesh account for the highest.developers can avail Chhattisgarh Gujarat concessional open access charges. Uttar Pradesh and Delhi and the highest in Maharashtra.0 2. have completely waived off these charges for the solar projects.25% of the total power supplied. For example.0 0.The impact of open access charges and losses will be the lowest in Andhra Pradesh. However. Odisha and Himachal Pradesh. have the highest charges among all states. Himachal Pradesh and Odisha.
0 0. they following benefits: would need to get an additional sanction at a one-time cost or.5 2. Apart from the incentives such as a This means that users are usually waiver of CSS. the sale of RECs might provide additional financial incentives.5 1. thereby benefitting from economies of scale. it is also possible for power consumers to get ’additional power entitlement’. of power from the sub-station and group captive consumers also have the in case they need more power. 2013 Madhya Pradesh Tamil Nadu West Bengal Uttar Pradesh Andhra Pradesh Karnataka Punjab Haryana Kerala Maharashtra Chhattisgarh Rajasthan Gujarat Orissa Bihar Delhi .0 Open access losses (impact in INR/kWh) Open access charges States with concessional charges Himachal Pradesh together to build a larger project.5 0.0 2. iii I n some states. 2013 15 Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA © BRIDGE TO INDIA. © BRIDGE TO INDIA. a power consumer stops buying power. in i The key benefit of the group captive some cases with revised tariff. Additional cost impact on solar power under the open access mechanism (with concessional charges) 3. model is that bankability risks of A group captive model can help the off-taker can be minimized by provide an additional entitlement spreading it across multiple power without changing the sanctioned consumers. power banking facilities entitled to draw a certain amount and concessional open access charges. 5.4 BENEFITS Smaller power OF THE ‘GROUP customers can come CAPTIVE’ MODEL thereby benefitting from economies of scale. another off-taker can easily iv Accelerated depreciation (AD) be accommodated instead.Figure 5-3: Cost associated with the open access mechanism for selcted states at currently available concessional charges (in INR/kWh) The key benefit of the group captive model is that bankability risks of the off-taker can be minimized by spreading it across multiple power consumers. Along with that. in case load from the sub-station.0 1. benefits and revenue through ii S maller power customers can come together to build a larger project.
sale of power rather than cost of e. ` 70 million (€875. 5.g. cumulative & convertible preference shares will be held by the investor 26% of the common stock will be held by the power consumer The remaining 74% of the common stock will be held by the investor © BRIDGE TO INDIA. to make the project eligible for the group captive scheme. 5-4).5 GROUP CAPTIVE POWER PLANTS UNDER AN OPEX Third party investors MODEL Group captive solar power projects may be an attractive option for captive i 1% common equity consumers who can not only buy power 9% preferential equity at cheaper rates from the plant but can ii 9 also. $910) financial structure.e. by investing into the project. depreciates a fixed asset in such a way that the amount of depreciation taken each year is higher during the earlier years of an asset’s life. the power consumer just invests the equity portion (30%) of the required Third party investors and independent 26% of the common stock (1%) into power producers (IPPs) who wish to the SPV. The project will be owned by the SPV. If a third party investor wants to have the maximum AD benefit. it allows the company to avoid paying taxes on the depreciated amount. Debt (70%) Equity (30%) Preferential stock (99%) Common stock (1%) 100% of the participative.600 (€683. 2013 Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA ---------------------5 Accelerated depreciation refers to any one of several methods by which a company.000. This means that for a 1 MW offer an Operating Expense (OPEX) project to be set up with a capital model (i. sale of a power plant) can also avail $1. the power consumer just the AD benefits by adopting a certain needs to invest ` 54. for ‘financial accounting’ or tax purposes. avail In such a structure (refer to the Figure accelerated depreciation5 benefits.and independent power producers (IPPs) who wish to offer an Operating Expense (OPEX) model can also avail the group captive benefits by adopting a certain financial structure. $910) to make the project eligible for the group captive scheme. Vehicle (SPV) can be formed with joint holding of the investor (the developer) and the power consumer. © BRIDGE TO INDIA.600 (€683. a Special Purpose IPP can provide the remaining equity. The investor or In such a case.166. the equity structure of the SPV could be as follows: Figure 5-4: Financial structuring for a group captive project where the power consumer is not the investor Capital cost of the project The power consumer just needs to invest ` 54. An accelerated depreciation of 80% in the first year is allowed for infrastructure projects under section 80 (I) of the income tax act. As this is subtracted from the cash flow. 2013 16 .667).
5. it location and circumstances. iii T he intra state transmission and wheeling losses are considered and the percentage values have been converted into `/kWh.6 THE BUSINESS CASE FOR ‘GROUP CAPTIVE’ POWER PROJECTS A ‘group captive’ project must be able to supply power to a consumer at a tariff that is below the existing alternative cost of procuring power. which is likely to be implemented from April 2015. However. © BRIDGE TO INDIA. will make it extremely difficult for anyone to carry out financial manipulations just from the taxation perspective. one of the project developer pointed us to a Supreme Court ruling which said that accelerated depreciation can be claimed by the ‘part’ or ‘full’ owner of the SPV. 50% of the RECs sold and 75% of the RECs sold). However. we have calculated an option with and without AD benefit. it does not make sense for a newly created SPV to claim the benefit as it has no existing profit on its balance sheets that it can offset against the depreciation claimed. CIT 166 ITR 783. it does not make sense for a newly created SPV to claim the benefit as it has no existing profit on its balance sheets There is no rule to specify the split between the preferential stock and the common stock and it can vary from project to project. We have left out the scenario for 100% of the RECs being sold as we think that there is no realistic possibility of that happening. For each scenario. Disclaimer: Most project developers claim that this financial structuring is completely legal and followed for several power projects for other sources of power. the ‘open access’ charges and losses have been converted into INR/kWh. some government officials are known to have raised concerns over the legality of such a model. we do not believe that there is any viable way for a SPV to claim AD. General AntiAvoidance Rules (GAAR) under the Direct Tax Code (DTC). 2013 17 . investors looking to sell power (OPEX model) using the group captive mode should not expect to avail the benefits of AD. The group captive regulations states that the 26% minimum share required for the power consumer is of the equity (or common stock). Solar will always compete with other sources of power that can be bought using the open access mechanism. an owner or a fraction owner of the SPV is entitled to claim depreciation on the asset owned by a SPV. Solar will always compete with other sources of power that can be bought using the open access mechanism. we understand that Section 32 (I) of the Income Tax Act was amended in 1997 and there is a Supreme Court ruling from the case of Seth Banarsi Dass Gupta v. Moreover. 25% of the RECs sold.Based on common understanding of the accelerated depreciation benefit. we have cannot avail the benefits of accelerated not included such a comparison in our depreciation (AD) on the SPV’s assets. Based on the information provided. Therefore. The main parameters for the analysis are as follows: i F or the grid tariff for industrial and commercial consumers. ii L TOA transmission charges and wheeling (distribution) charges for HT 33 kV consumers were converted into `/kWh. v The viable solar PPA tariff is calculated for four different REC scenarios (no RECs sold.we have chosen HT 33 kVA consumer tariffs for our analysis. analysis. based on our discussion with tax experts. iv E qually. as the availability and price purpose of the project and does not yet of other sources of power may vary by have a profit on its balance sheets. However. that says that based on the changes in section 32 (I) of the Income Tax Act. As a new SPV is created for the However. Based on common understanding of the accelerated depreciation benefit.
500/MW/year. the concessional open access charges have been considered as follows: o Andhra Pradesh. viii O&M costs of ` 1 million/MW/year (€12.vi The equity IRR expectation is taken as 15%. ---------------------6 http://bit. ’group captive’ power plants can be viable in the following states: Delhi and Maharashtra. If up to 25% of RECs are sold. ii F or all other calculations. The following assumptions have been made for the analysis: i W heeling and transmission charges are usually given in percentage terms. the capacity utilization factor (CUF) for each state has been used as per CERC6. $1.083. $16.ly/mVPsSl © BRIDGE TO INDIA. ’group captive’ power plants can be viable in the following states: Delhi and Maharashtra. Uttar Pradesh: transmission and wheeling charges exempted o Punjab. post which no further REC revenue v P lant life and PPA period of 25 years vi N o escalation of the tariff throughout the PPA period vii CAPEX of ` 65 million/MW (€812. Madhya Pradesh:concessional wheeling losses of 2% Based on our modeling.333/MW).500/MW. Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu. If 75% of the RECs are solar. If 50% of the RECs are sold. if up to 25% of RECs are sold. 2013 18 . We have converted it into INR/kWh for a better understanding and analysis (generation of 1. iv R ECs traded at the floor price until 2017.6 million units/MWp installed has been used for this conversion). Punjab. Karnataka. ‘group captive’ power plants can be viable in the following additional states: Andhra Pradesh. vii Irradiation level has been taken as averages for each state. ‘group captive’ power plants can be viable in the following additional states: Bihar Kerala and West Bengal.667/MW/ year) ix Debt Equity ratio of 70:30 x When no RECs are sold. iii Size of solar power plant is 10 MW.
7. 7.83 9.00 9.54 0.99 (commercial) 2.6 6.38 (industrial).49 © BRIDGE TO INDIA.46 1.33 7.25 7.28 7. 7.83 6.27 6.58 6.51 7.74 0.28 (commercial) © BRIDGE TO INDIA.01 0.36 7.5 (commercial) 9.61 5.09 (industrial).15 8.5 (commercial) 1.35 1.00 6.4 Without AD Maharashtra With AD Delhi Delhi Maharashtra Andhra Pradesh Karnataka Maharashtra 50% of the RECs are being sold at floor prices With AD Punjab Rajasthan Tamil Nadu Delhi Maharashtra Andhra Without AD Pradesh Delhi Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA Only commercial Industrial & commercial Only commercial 7.68 0.6 (industrial).1 0.27 (industrial).83 6.64 2.5 9.32 0.51 9. where applicable) 25% of the RECs are being sold at floor prices With AD Delhi Maharashtra Maharashtra 7.5 9. 1.28 6.04 8. 2013 .79 6.83 0.83 6.73 Only commercial 9. 1.6 (industrial).22 1.22 0.91 6.17 (commercial) 0.04 0.92 0.93 6.09 6. 2013 Without AD Only commercial Industrial & commercial Only commercial Industrial & commercial 5.6 (industrial).04 5.5 (commercial) 7.83 6. 1.Table 5-1: State-wise viability of group captive solar projects in India Assumption on RECs being sold State Type of consumer for whom solar power through open access is viable Viable solar PPA tariff that can be offered to consumers (INR/kWh) 7.43 Existing tariff being paid by the consumers (INR/ kWh) Difference between existing tariff and viable solar PPA tariff (INR/kWh) RECs not being availed (concessional charges for open access considered.
0 6.33 0.46 0. 0.5 7.39 (industrial). 5.5 (industrial).85 6.2 (industrial).25 6.44(industrial).83(commercial) 3.36(commercial) 5.89 6. 2.33 (industrial).4 5. 7.Assumption on RECs being sold State State Type of consumer for whom solar power through open access is viable Industrial & commercial Viable solar PPA tariff that can be offered to consumers (INR/kWh) 4. 6.78 Existing tariff being paid by the consumers (INR/ kWh) Difference between existing tariff and viable solar PPA tariff (INR/kWh) Andhra Pradesh Bihar Delhi Maharashtra Punjab With AD Rajasthan Karnataka 75% of the RECs are being sold at floor prices Kerala Tamil Nadu West Bengal Haryana Uttar Pradesh Delhi Punjab 5.58(commercial) 1.45 0.1 (commercial) 0.63 Industrial & commercial 5. 0. 2013 .69 (commercial) © BRIDGE TO INDIA. 0.5 (commercial) 6.69 5.87 5.23 (industrial).50 (industrial).3 (industrial).04 5.27 4.28 (commercial) 5.11 Only commercial 5.81 (commercial) 5.11 (industrial). 9.54 5.14 (commercial) 7.5 (commercial) 0. 6.6 (industrial) .97 5.56 (commercial) 6.0 6. 1.52 (industrial). 0.6 (industrial).5(commercial) 6.31 0.83 7. 1.0 9.33(industrial) .33 (industrial).22 5.46 1.28 1. 6.23 (commercial) 1.0 6.37 1. 2013 20 Without AD Karnataka Maharashtra Tamil Nadu Andhra Pradesh Source: BRIDGE TO INDIA Only commercial 6. 7.54 6. 2.77 5.0 6.58 (commercial) 7.86 1.2 5.83 © BRIDGE TO INDIA.75 2.91 (industrial). 6.69 6.5 (commercial) 0.06 (industrial).27 5.23 0.25(commercial) 1.31 0.
iii B ankability of the off-taker – In case one of the power consumer stops buying power from the group captive project and no other consumer is willing to step in. The cash-flow for the cost of power on the open access project has to be managed carefully. the base price of an REC. for consumers opting for power under current regulations. this amount of power might have to be sold to the power distribution company at the Average Pooled Purchase Cost (APPC) of power. ---------------------7 http://bridgetoindia. This risk might be reduced power is now available for thirdby the overall policy support for party sale at ` 7 – 8/kWh (€0. end of the financial year. In such a scenario. Even though to other power procurement the RPO mechanism itself might sources. However. While solar charges. 2013 21 . probably at a lower price.10/kWh. However. On top of this. they are subject to change every year. Apart from all the generic risks associated with solar power projects (refer to our report called. $0.7 RISKS Open access charges are subject to change every year. Moreover.5. when some obligated entities Nadu. difference in the cost of solar power the threat perception among Indian and the cost of an REC (essentially utilities may also increase. These risks can be categorized as follows: BRIDGE TO INDIA believes that the overall deficit in power availability will continue to increase and that tariffs will continue to rise over the medium and long-term. which ‘solar’ without ‘power’) has may result in higher open access increased significantly. most purchases from group captive REC demand is still expected only plants. the significantly alter the demand revenue should be expected to be and supply situation and thus the largely concentrated towards the prices on the open access market. the REC market about the impact of solar power on will still remain subdued as the their business.com/our-reports/india-solar-decision-briefs# © BRIDGE TO INDIA. market regularly reaches as high especially with respect to a debt as ` 8/kWh. In the same manner. The South Indian states towards the end of the financial of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil year.09 solar power and the power deficit in – 0. changes such as the connection of therefore.12/kWh. $0. ‘Bankability and Debt Financing for Solar Projects in India’ (April 2013) for details)7. Developers should.3/kWh power can be a significant driver (€0. Even though the RPO mechanism itself might pick up. for instance. As a result. Some of the projected revenue would be lost. the the given year. if states are serious about implementation.13 /kWh). In such a scenario. structural repayment plan. The risk is heightened in a scenario where iv Risk associated with RECs– The utilities feel threatened because REC market in India has not their high paying customers move developed as hoped. where the obligated entity does not even ii Structural changes in the power get the power component is priced supply –More secure availability of at a minimum rate of ` 9. which is expected soon. only assume a limited the southern grid to the northern sale of RECs in their financial grid. the REC market will still remain subdued as the difference in the cost of solar power and the cost of an REC i A nnual revision of open access charges and rules – Open access charges and rules are often unclear.12 – 0. can calculations and within that too. there are some risks specific to the group captive model. assessing the financial viability of a long term project always has an element of uncertainty attached. if states are serious about utilities in the US complaining implementation. assessing the financial viability of a long term project always has an element of uncertainty attached. have very high are looking to meet their RPOs for power deficits. India. We have already seen pick up.16/kWh). structural shifts may occur on specific locations.
drastic upward tariff revisions can be expected.06 – 0. The key benefit of the ‘group captive’ model is that it provides a good way for solar project developers to reach the needed scale. many of these projects are expected to be considering an overly optimistic scenario for the revenue through RECs. If CERC allows RECs to be availed along with these concessional charges. currently. We have already seen upward tariff revisions in excess of 30% in states such as Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh over the last year alone. Karnataka. States such as Andhra Pradesh. The key to the short to medium term These are as follows: success for such projects is regulatory support in terms of lower open access i An encouraging development is charges for solar power plants. none of the solar projects have taken group captive route. We have already states follow this trend. Judging by the tariffs being offered. the equation would change considerably in favor of the group captive model over co-located projects. access charges have been waived off entirely. it might not be the best option for the power consumer as solar power would still need to compete with other available sources of power. are already taking the being waived off under most new steps in this right direction. no escalation has been considered. The key to the short to medium term success for such projects is regulatory support in terms of lower open access charges for solar power plants. If a developer can convince power consumers to agree to an annual increment in the price of solar power even lower tariffs can be offered to the consumers. more viable business proposition. as Andhra Pradesh has petitioned it to . it helps reduce the PPA risk by having multiple off-takers and it also helps reduce legal risks as the asset can be located outside of the power consumer’s premises. ii I n the above analysis. Whether or not ‘group captive’ projects become mainstream in India is still an open question. We expect that such projects will not see the light of the day as it will be extremely difficult for them to arrange debt. Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu would become viable. If more solar policies.5.8 CONCLUSION Currently.07/kWh. most industry observers believe that power prices in India will continue to rise. However. the sale of power through the group captive and open access mechanism is viable without RECs only in Delhi and Maharashtra. Most that open access charges are new policies. Based on the above analysis.up to 50% of the RECs can be sold. Compared to the projects on the power There are several scenarios with a consumers’ location. vis-àvis a single customer captive project.00/ kWh (€0. the slight deviation from the above analysis open access charges are too high to that can help this model become a provide for any real benefit of scale. if 50% of the RECs can be sold at the floor price till 2017.50 – 7. In the wake of debt-structuring plans for the state distribution companies. Punjab. $0. Currently. where the project is typically located at the customer’s premises. We expect this trend will continue.09 – 0. we can expect noted this in Andhra Pradesh to see an increased viability for the and Uttar Pradesh. Until now. where open group captive model in the future. BRIDGE TO INDIA thinks that the ‘group captive’ model is viable in some states with/without RECs. a group captive plant might be able to sell solar power at tariffs of around ` 5.12/ kWh). the sale of power through the group captive and open access mechanism is viable without RECs only in Delhi and Maharashtra. In a number of states. Several projects for third-party sale of power are currently being planned across India under the ‘group captive’ model. Even in the states where it is viable. open access charges. 2013 22 . Madhya Pradesh and Punjab also offer concessional © BRIDGE TO INDIA.
Docmestic Content Requirement DISCOM – State Distribution Company EPC – Engineering.1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AD – Accelerated Depreciation ADD. 2013 23 . Procurement and Construction FiT – Feed-in-Tariff IPP – Independent Power Producers LoI – Letter of Intent LTOA – Long Term Open Access MTOA – Medium Term Open Access MNRE – Ministry of New and Renewable Energy NHPC – National Hydro Power Corporation NSM – Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission O&M – Operation and Maintenance OPEX – Operational Expense PoC – Point of Connection PPA – Power Purchase Agreement PV – Photovoltaic REC – Renewable Energy Certificate RfS – Request for Selection RLDC – Regional Load Dispatch Centre RPO – Renewable Purchase Obligation SERC – State Energy Regulatory Commission SLDC – Regional Load Dispatch Centre SPV – Special Purpose Vehicle STOA – Short Term Open Access SECI – Solar Energy Corporation of India © BRIDGE TO INDIA. ANNEXURE 6.6.Anti-dumping duties APPC – Average Pooled Purchase Cost CAPEX – Capital Expenditure CERC – Central Electricity Regulatory Commission CSP – Concentrated Solar Power CUF – Capacity Utilization Factor DCR.
2013 24 .© BRIDGE TO INDIA.
com/ bridgetoindia www. Contact contact@bridgetoindia. Through customized solutions for its clients.com www.bridgetoindia. 2013 25 . BRIDGE TO INDIA contributes to a sustainable world by implementing the latest technological and systemic innovations where their impact is the highest. companies and institutions. BRIDGE TO INDIA offers market intelligence. Founded in 2008. the company focuses on renewable energy technologies in the Indian market.bridgetoindia.com Follow us on facebook.com/blog © BRIDGE TO INDIA.BRIDGE TO INDIA is a consulting company with an entrepreneurial approach based in New Delhi. Munich and Hamburg. strategic consulting and project development services to Indian and international investors.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.