You are on page 1of 115

Transmission & Distribution Division

CENTRAL ASIA - SOUTH ASIA ELECTRICITY


TRANSMISSION AND TRADE (CASA-1000)
PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY UPDATE

Final
Report

February 2011

SNC-Lavalin International Inc.

NOTICE
This document contains the expression of the professional opinion of SNC-Lavalin
International. ("SLI") as to the matters set out herein, using its professional judgment and
reasonable care. It is to be read in the context of the agreement dated April 15, 2010 (the
"Agreement") between SLI and The World Bank (the "Client), and the methodology,
procedures and techniques used, SLIs assumptions, and the circumstances and constrains
under which its mandate was performed. This document is written solely for the purpose
stated in the Agreement, and for the sole and exclusive benefit of the Client, whose remedies
are limited to those set out in the Agreement. This document is meant to be read as a whole,
and sections or parts thereof should thus not be read or relied upon out of context. Unless
expressly stated otherwise, assumptions, data and information supplied by, or gathered from
other sources (including the Client, other consultants, etc.) upon which SLIs opinion as set
out herein is based has not been verified by SLI; SLI makes no representation as to its
accuracy and disclaims ail liability with respect thereto.

Final Feasibility Update Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1

EXPORT POTENTIAL OF TAJIKISTAN AND KYRGYZ REPUBLIC ......... 2-1

2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4

Demand Projections ..................................................................................... 2-1


Existing and Committed Supply.................................................................... 2-6
Surplus Analysis ......................................................................................... 2-10
Sensitivity Analysis ..................................................................................... 2-14

IMPORT POTENTIAL OF PAKISTAN ......................................................... 3-1

3.1
3.2
3.3

Generation Capacity ..................................................................................... 3-1


Electricity Demand ........................................................................................ 3-3
Evaluation of Supply-Demand Balance ........................................................ 3-5

IMPORT AND EXPORT POTENTIAL OF AFGHANISTAN......................... 4-1

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4

Power Generation Assessment .................................................................... 4-1


Power Demand Situation in Kabul Region and Country ............................... 4-2
Supply-Demand Balance .............................................................................. 4-2
Review of Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) .......................................... 4-3

COST OF SUPPLY ...................................................................................... 5-1

PROJECT SELECTION AND EXPORTABLE SURPLUS .......................... 6-1

6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4

Assessment of Optimum Size of the Project ................................................ 6-1


Project Configurations .................................................................................. 6-3
Summary of Project Options......................................................................... 6-6
Exportable Surplus ....................................................................................... 6-8

TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTE ................................................................... 7-1

7.1
7.2

HVDC Transmission Line Route ................................................................... 7-2


HVAC Transmission Line (Kyr-Taj) Route .................................................... 7-4

TRANSMISSION NEEDS OF EXISTING NETWORKS ............................... 8-1

8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5

Transmission Needs of the Existing Network in Tajikistan ........................... 8-1


Transmission Needs of the Existing Network in the Kyrgyz Republic .......... 8-4
Transmission Needs of the Existing Network in Afghanistan ....................... 8-4
Transmission Needs of the Existing Network in Pakistan ............................ 8-4
Interconnection between the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan ...................... 8-4

PROJECT COST AND COUNTRY WIDE ALLOCATION ........................... 9-1

9.1

9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6

Cost Estimates of the Proposed HVDC Transmission Interconnection


(Tajikistan Afghanistan - Pakistan) ............................................................ 9-1
Cost Estimates of the Proposed HVAC Transmission Interconnection (the
Kyrgyz Republic - Tajikistan) ........................................................................ 9-2
Network Reinforcement Costs ...................................................................... 9-3
Environmental and Social Costs ................................................................... 9-3
Estimation of Total Project Costs ................................................................. 9-4
Currency Split ............................................................................................... 9-5

10

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 10-1

10.1

Methodology ............................................................................................... 10-1

9.2

CASA-1000 Update

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

10.2
10.3
10.4
10.5
10.6
10.7

Interconnection Option for Economic Analysis ........................................... 10-3


Major Assumptions and Input Data ............................................................ 10-3
Result Summary of Economic Analysis ...................................................... 10-5
Levelized Cost of Transmission .............................................................. 10-6
Sensitivity Analysis ..................................................................................... 10-7
Country-Wise Benefit Allocation ................................................................. 10-9

11

MAJOR RISKS WITH IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION ................ 11-1

11.1
11.2
11.3
11.4

Security....................................................................................................... 11-1
IGC Management ....................................................................................... 11-1
Technical .................................................................................................... 11-1
Schedule..................................................................................................... 11-3

12

FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATIONS ............................................................. 12-1

12.1
12.2
12.3
12.4

HVDC Transmission Line ........................................................................... 12-1


Converter Stations ...................................................................................... 12-1
Control System Concept ............................................................................. 12-2
HVAC Transmission Line ........................................................................... 12-2

13

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ............................................ 13-1

13.1
13.2
13.3
13.4
13.5
13.6
13.7
13.8

Typical Sequence of Milestones ................................................................. 13-1


Typical Implementation Schedules ............................................................. 13-1
Award of EPC-Turnkey Contracts (18 months) .......................................... 13-7
500kV HVDC Converter Stations and Control Centre (36 months) ............ 13-7
500kV HVDC Transmission Line Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (34 months)
.................................................................................................................... 13-7
500kV HVAC Transmission Line Kyrgyz-Tajikistan (30 months) ................ 13-7
Commissioning of Overall Project (4 months) ............................................ 13-8
Bidder Participation .................................................................................... 13-8

14

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ............................................... 14-1

15

CONCLUSIONS AND WAY FORWARD ................................................... 15-1

15.1
15.2

Conclusions ................................................................................................ 15-1


Way Forward .............................................................................................. 15-1

APPENDICES
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.

SDDP Transmission Constrained Stochastic Hydro-Thermal Dispatch


Energy Balance
HVDC Transmission Line Route
HVAC Transmission Line Route
Details of Functional Specifications of HVDC Transmission Line
Details of Functional Specifications of HVAC Transmission Line
Details of Functional Specifications of Converter Stations and Control Scheme
Details of Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan
Notes
Terms of Reference
Comments to Draft Final Report

CASA-1000 Update

ii

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1
Table 2-2
Table 2-3
Table 2-4
Table 2-5
Table 2-6
Table 2-7
Table 2-9
Table 2-10
Table 2-11
Table 2-12
Table 2-13
Table 2-14
Table 2-15
Table 2-16
Table 2-17
Table 2-18
Table 2-19
Table 2-20
Table 3-2
Table 3-3
Table 3-4
Table 6-1
Table 6-2
Table 6-3
Table 6-4
Table 6-5
Table 8-1
Table 8-2
Table 9-1
Table 9-2
Table 9-3
Table 9-4
Table 9-5
Table 9-6
Table 9-7
Table 10-1
Table 10-2
Table 10-3
Table 10-4

Kyrgyz Republic Load Forecasting Input Values Original CASA1000


Feasibility Study (Phase I) ............................................................................ 2-2
Kyrgyz Republic Load Forecasting Input Values CASA1000 Feasibility Study
Update .......................................................................................................... 2-2
Kyrgyz Republic Projected Demand Average Growth Rates ....................... 2-3
Tajikistan Load Forecasting Input Values Original CASA1000 Feasibility
Report Phase I.............................................................................................. 2-4
Average Tariff Hikes as Planned by Barki Tojik ........................................... 2-4
Summary of Key Assumptions Tajikistan .................................................. 2-5
Tajikistan Projected Demand Average Growth Rates .................................. 2-6
Kyrgyz Republic Existing Hydro System ...................................................... 2-7
Kyrgyz Republic Committed Hydro Plants .................................................... 2-8
Kyrgyz Republic 2016 System Installed Capacity and Annual Energy ...... 2-8
Tajikistan Existing Thermal System.............................................................. 2-9
Tajikistan Existing Hydro System ................................................................. 2-9
Tajikistan Committed Hydro Plants ............................................................ 2-10
Tajikistan Imports ....................................................................................... 2-10
Tajikistan 2016 System Installed Capacity and Annual Energy .............. 2-10
Selected Variations of the Three Parameters (Kyrgyz Republic) ............... 2-15
Average Growth Rates (Kyrgyz Republic) .................................................. 2-16
Selected Variations of the Three Parameters (Tajikistan) .......................... 2-17
Average Growth Rates (Tajikistan) ............................................................. 2-18
Generation Capacity Development ............................................................... 3-2
Demand Forecast ......................................................................................... 3-4
Supply-Demand Assessment ....................................................................... 3-5
Total Project Costs for the Different Size Options (in million US$) ............... 6-2
Economic Evaluation for Size Optimization .................................................. 6-3
Options Analysed for Optimization of Project Size ....................................... 6-7
Project Configurations Analysed for 1,300 MW Taj-Afg-Pak HVDC
Interconnection ............................................................................................. 6-7
Project Scenarios Analysed for Kyr-Taj HVAC Interconnection ................... 6-8
Tajikistan Proposed High Level Transmission Reinforcements for the
Different CASA Options ................................................................................ 8-3
Interconnection Options between the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan High
Level Cost Estimation and Transmission Losses ......................................... 8-5
EPC Cost Estimate for the HVDC Tajikistan - Afghanistan - Pakistan
Interconnection (US $ Million) ...................................................................... 9-2
EPC Cost Estimate for the HVAC Kyrgyz Republic - Tajikistan
Interconnection (US $ Million) ...................................................................... 9-3
Network Reinforcement Costs in MUSD ...................................................... 9-3
Environment and Social Costs for Pakistan, Afghanistan and Tajikistan (US $
Million) .......................................................................................................... 9-4
EPC Cost Estimate for HVDC Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan and HVAC
Kyrgyz Republic-Tajikistan Interconnections (US $ Million) ......................... 9-4
Total Project Cost (US $ Million) .................................................................. 9-5
Total Project Costs Currency Split ................................................................ 9-5
Total Project Cost of the Selected Alternative for Economic Analysis ........ 10-4
Economic Analysis Results ........................................................................ 10-6
Annual Transmission Costs ........................................................................ 10-7
Results of Sensitivity Analysis .................................................................... 10-8

CASA-1000 Update

iii

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1
Figure 2-2
Figure 2-3
Figure 2-4
Figure 2-5
Figure 2-6
Figure 2-7
Figure 3-1
Figure 3-2
Figure 3-3
Figure 6-2
Figure 6-3
Figure 7-1
Figure 7-2
Figure 7-3
Figure 7-4
Figure 8-1
Figure 8-2
Figure 13-1
Figure 13-2
Figure 13-3

Figure 13-4
Figure 13-5

Kyrgyz Republic Demand Forecast 2010-2030 Base Case ...................... 2-3


Tajikistan Demand Forecast 2010-2030 Base Case ................................. 2-6
Kyrgyz Republic Average Yearly Surplus (GWh) ....................................... 2-12
Tajikistan Average Yearly Surplus (GWh) .................................................. 2-13
Combined Average Yearly Surplus (GWh) ................................................. 2-14
Kyrgyz Republic Highest and Lowest Demand Scenarios ...................... 2-16
Tajikistan Highest and Lowest Demand Scenarios ................................. 2-18
Energy Generation, Demand and Shortfall in 2006-07 (GWh) ..................... 3-3
Energy Generation, Demand and Shortfall in 2007-08 (GWh) ..................... 3-3
Energy Generation, Demand and Shortfall in 2008-09 (GWh) ..................... 3-4
Diagram of Recommended CASA Project .................................................... 6-6
Monthly Distribution of Exportable Surplus (1300 MW) ................................ 6-8
Proposed Transmission Line Route for CASA Project ................................. 7-1
Alternate Route to Bypass Salang Pass ....................................................... 7-3
Right of Way Constrained Existing Peshawar Substation ............................ 7-5
Proposed Converter Location for Sangtuda-II Substation ............................ 7-6
Diagram of the power flow between Nurek and Sangtuda power stations and
the load center at Dushanbe without the CASA project ............................... 8-2
Diagram of the power flow between Nurek and Sangtuda power stations and
the load center at Dushanbe with the CASA project .................................... 8-3
Typical Sequence of Milestones ................................................................. 13-1
CASA-1000 Project - Typical Implementation Schedule for Award of Turnkey
Contracts .................................................................................................... 13-3
CASA-1000 Project - Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVDC
Converter Stations at Sangtuda, Kabul and Peshawar and for Control Centre
.................................................................................................................... 13-4
CASA-1000 Project - Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVDC
Transmission Line Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan ................................... 13-5
CASA-1000 Project - Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVAC
Transmission Line Kyrgyz Republic-Tajikistan ........................................... 13-6

CASA-1000 Update

iv

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1

PROJECT OVERVIEW

Afghanistan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, and Tajikistan have been pursuing the
development of electricity trading arrangements and the establishment of a Central Asia South Asia Regional Electricity Market (CASAREM). The initial plan was to export power in
the range of 1,000 to 1,300 MW from the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan to Pakistan and
Afghanistan. The major share of the export will be used by Pakistan, and approximately 300
MW will be imported by Afghanistan. Pakistan has also expressed interest in increasing
imports over the medium to long term beyond the initial power requirements of 1,000 MW.
SNC-Lavalin was commissioned to prepare a feasibility study, in two phases, for the
regional interconnection. The final Phase 1 report was submitted in December 2007 and the
Phase 2 report, in January 2009.
Since the 2009 report was issued, there have been significant changes in market conditions
that could have an impact on the cost of the project. In addition, detailed work has been
done by other consultants in the respective countries to provide additional information and
allow a further assessment of the feasibility of the project.
Study Objectives
In 2010, SNC-Lavalin was again commissioned to prepare an update of the initial feasibility
study. The specific objectives of this study are:

Assessment of the availability and cost of power supply options in Tajikistan and Kyrgyz
Republic;

Assessment of the import potential of Pakistan and Afghanistan and the cost of
alternatives of import;

Assessment of the optimal size and configuration of the interconnection;

Identification of the transmission needs of the existing networks in the countries;

Update of line routing, control scheme, project cost, implementation plan, functional
specifications, operations and maintenance plan and associated risks; and

Update of the economic analysis.

Project Highlights
The project is based on the expectation that sufficient surplus power is available in the
countries in the north to represent a substantial potential for trade with the countries in the
south. Moreover, the cost of electricity in the sending countries is below the long-run
marginal cost in the receiving countries, providing a justifiable rationale to invest in the
transmission interconnection.
The HVDC link between Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan is comprised of 1,300 MW
converters in Tajikistan and Pakistan, a 300 MW converter in Afghanistan and a 1,300 MW,
750 km transmission line. The CASA project also includes an HVAC transmission line
between the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan, 477 km long and rated at 1,000 MW. The
recommended project following the optimization analysis is schematically shown in Figure
E-1.

CASA-1000 Update

E-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The assessment of Afghanistan shows that it may have sufficient energy to meet its internal
demand, and possibly have surplus energy during certain times of the year. An important
feature of this configuration is that the converter capacity in Pakistan (Peshawar) is equal to
that in Tajikistan (Sangtuda). This provides flexibility for Pakistan to absorb up to 1300 MW,
should Afghanistan not need to import its entire share. Also, all converter stations are bidirectional; hence if the Kabul system has a surplus of power and the Tajikistan/Kyrgyz
system is unable to provide the full 1,300 MW of export power, Kabul could export to
Pakistan via its bi-directional converter station.

Figure E-1

Diagram of Recommended CASA Project

The proposed transmission line route for the CASA project is shown in Figure E-2. The route
of the HVDC interconnection between Sangtuda in Tajikistan, Kabul in Afghanistan and
Peshawar in Pakistan as well as the HVAC link between Datka in Kyrgyzstan and Khoujand
in Tajikistan is also shown. The Salang Pass represents a challenge due to the space
constraints inside the Salang Tunnel and in the surrounding areas.
The cost of the recommended project is US$ 873 million, excluding Interest During
Construction (IDC). IDC amounts to an additional US$ 80 million. The project is
economically viable based on a 10% discount rate with a Benefit/Cost ration of 1.3% and an
EIRR of 15.6%.
CASA-1000 Update

E-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Figure E-2

Proposed Transmission Line Route for CASA Project

Approach and Methodology


The underlying driver for this project is that both Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic have
surplus energy from their hydro plants that could be used to offset severe shortages in
Pakistan. The key criteria for determining the viability of the project should be based on the
export of surplus power without new generation. The study was conducted for a scenario
where no new generation will be added during the study period in Tajikistan and Kyrgyz
Republic. Thus, if the project is economically viable for this most pessimistic condition, then
it will be viable for all other scenarios as well.
The overall methodology used in the feasibility study first consisted in developing the load
forecasts for the exporting countries. Their export potential was assessed taking into
account the load forecasts, existing and committed power plants as well as import and
export commitments. Hydro energy production capability was modeled based on historical
hourly hydrological data. The import potential of Afghanistan and Pakistan was assessed
using load forecasts, generation plans and other input data provided by the countries.

CASA-1000 Update

E-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The recommended project was then analysed in some detail: the exportable surplus and
availability of firm power were determined, the line routing was reviewed, the costs were
fine-tuned, an economic analysis was undertaken and the project risks were identified.
Finally, the functional specifications, implementation schedule and operation and
maintenance plan were updated.
2

EXPORT POTENTIAL OF TAJIKISTAN AND KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

The data for 2010 was incomplete at the time of preparing the studies for some of the
countries, and thus data up until and including 2009 was used to ensure consistency
between the load forecasts of all the countries.
The load forecast methodology used is similar to the one used by SNC-Lavalin in the
original CASA study (Phase 1) that makes use of the following parameters: base year
demand (GWh), demand elasticity, income elasticity, unserved energy, loss reduction
program, and collection rate effort program.
The projected demand average growth rates over the next twenty years for the Kyrgyz
Republic and Tajikistan are 2.6% and 1.6% respectively as summarized below for various
periods.
Table E-1
Period

Projected Demand Average Growth Rates


2010-2015

2015-2025

2015-2030

2010-2030

Kyrgyz Republic

2.5%

2.1%

2.6%

2.6%

Tajikistan

0.4%

1.4%

2.1%

1.6%

While the exporting countries may consider using existing thermal plants for exports, the
thermal plants are rather old and their cost of generation is very high when considered as
export sources. However, the use of plants with high generation costs to increase the level
of firm power to be delivered could be considered but this is a contractual issue and should
be considered in the development of contractual commitments.
In this study sedimentation and climate change is taken into account. Sedimentation in the
Nurek reservoir is assumed to have reduced the live storage capacity by 25%, to 3,300 hm3.
The effects of climate change in the region were also considered and recent inflow records
were used as they provide a better approximation of the future inflows than older records.
The two countries have close to 6,000 GWh of surplus, almost entirely available in the
summer months, which reduces to less than 900 GWh by 2035 as shown in
Figure E-3.
With no generation expansion and an increasing demand, the Kyrgyz surplus is expected to
drop from about 2,150 GWh of annual surplus in 2010 to less than 400 GWh by 2035.
Similarly, the Tajik surplus is expected to drop from 3,750 GWh at the beginning of the study
horizon to about 500 GWh in 2035.
The historical water inflows show that over the years there were a number of months of
severe water shortages. During these dry periods, the historical data shows that even with
minimal inflows, most of the demand at peak hours can be supplied even if the full energy is

CASA-1000 Update

E-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

not available on a 24 hour basis. During the initial years of the project, 1000 MW can be
guaranteed with a 95% probability for the peak hours during the summer, even in a dry year.
7,000
6,000

GWh

5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035

Year

Figure E-3
3

Combined Average Yearly Surplus (GWh)

IMPORT POTENTIAL OF PAKISTAN

The electricity sector of Pakistan is facing acute shortages in supply which have led to
power outages on a large scale. The wide fluctuation of international oil prices, higher cost
due to gradual phasing out of subsidy, and the circular debt problem have also exacerbated
the situation of power supply in the country.
The Government of Pakistan is taking diverse measures to circumvent the problem of
capacity shortage. These include expansion and refurbishment of existing plants, induction
of new power plants - mainly in the private sector, encouragement of renewable energy,
development of rental power plants, and acquisition of power from captive power plants.
At the end of financial year 2008-09, the total installed generation capacity in the country
was 20,306 MW with 13,370 MW of thermal, 6,474 MW of hydro and 462 MW of nuclear.
Current estimates indicate that over 90,000 MW of generation capacity will be required in
2030. Even with the current identified potential plants, there will be about a 10,000 MW
deficit in 2030.
In view of the huge capital requirements and institutional issues, it might be difficult to build
all the generation capacity as planned. In particular, for the large capacity coal-fired and
hydro plants a significant investment will be required which will be difficult to obtain. For
example, during the financial year 2015-16, the generation plan suggests the commissioning
of 8,900 MW, which will entail a mammoth amount of investment. The substantial lead
times for the construction of these power plants may also result in delays in acquiring
additional capacity as planned. The likelihood of delays in commissioning of these projects
cannot be ignored. Therefore, in such a scenario, the construction of CASA transmission
line would contribute in alleviating the shortage of generation capacity in Pakistan.

CASA-1000 Update

E-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

IMPORT AND EXPORT POTENTIAL OF AFGHANISTAN

The current projections for Afghanistan show that the country-wide demand in 2015 will be
about 760 MW rising to about 1100 MW by 2020. It is estimated that by 2015, there will be
about 1550 MW of capacity available to meet the demand. Hence a significant surplus could
be exported to meet the shortages in Pakistan.
There is an element of uncertainty associated with the load forecast and the ability to
develop the capacity additions within the planned timeframe. However, even with these
uncertainties Afghanistan will likely have significant surplus capacity in 2015 and beyond,
particularly during the summer months when Pakistan needs the power the most.
5

COST OF SUPPLY

The cost of supply for the four countries was based on information supplied and / or derived
by each country and information available from international agencies.

The cost of supply for Tajikistan is estimated at 1.5 US/kWh;

For the Kyrgyz Republic, information on exports of electricity has been taken from data
provided by the NEGK and JSC Power Plants, which was provided on a confidential
basis;

In Pakistan, the price that the state-owned utility (NTDC) is paying for the recent longterm PPAs with the IPPs was used as a proxy of LRMC to estimate the generation cost
in Pakistan over the life time of the interconnection project. The rate for firm energy is
13.2 US cents/kWh and the rate for non-firm is 9.2 US/kWh; and

The generation cost in Afghanistan is estimated to be at least 6 US/kWh for the


study, based on the information provided by DABS. In the absence of any other
credible data, this information was used for the generation cost in Afghanistan.

PROJECT SELECTION

Project Size
Transmission lines are manufactured in discrete step sizes and sizing the transmission lines
for 1300 MW effectively restricts the capacity to about 1300 MW. It is possible to build the
line with a conductor size that is capable of carrying the optimum power level (2300 MW) but
limit the HVDC converter capacity initially to 1300 MW. An analysis of different transfer
capabilities (1300 MW, 1800 MW, 2300 MW, 2800 MW and 3300 MW) showed that there
was no major difference in the benefit / cost ratios of these options.
As the conceptual framework for the project is based on using existing low cost energy in
the exporting countries to supply the importing countries, and that this energy decreased
over the study period, it is preferable to build a line with a 1300 MW conductor. Should the
existence of this line attract investors in the future and more energy become available than a
1300 MW CASA project can transit, another line can be built to transport this energy which
could provide additional reliability to the interconnection.

CASA-1000 Update

E-6

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Project Configuration
A number of configurations options were investigated, including the use of a back-feed on a
220 MW line from Peshawar to Kabul. This option is not attractive for a number of reasons.
In particular, it would increase the complexity of operation due to synchronization of systems
without providing significant additional savings in capital cost.
The implications of eventually adding a fourth terminal to the overall scheme were also
examined. The flexibility of giving four terminals would allow exports of surplus power from
other countries down to Pakistan or Afghanistan. Worldwide, the implementation of fourterminal schemes does not have a positive track record and would constitute a milestone in
the application of HVDC transmission. For the purpose of the CASA project, it is the
Consultants technical recommendation that the number of terminals be limited to no more
than three.
Given that Afghanistan may be in surplus during the summer and not need the original 300
MW allotment from CASA, then the 1300 MW of power from Tajikistan and Kyrgyz Republic
could be delivered directly to Pakistan. Thus the recommended configuration would be at
1300 MW capacity line from the 1300 MW terminal at Sangtuda to the 1300 MW convertor
terminal at Peshawar with 300 MW terminal at Kabul.
7

TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTE

A review of the route and terminal stations was carried out with particular attention to the
Salang Pass and to the Kabul-Peshawar portion of the DC transmission line. Given security
considerations such as demining, and operation and maintenance requirements around
access to the line for repair and maintenance, the line routing recommended in the original
study is deemed most suitable.
A possible alternate route that bypasses the congestion at the Salang Pass is a western
detour via Shibar Pass. However, this increases the transmission line by 150 to 200 km and
adds significant cost, around US$ 50 to 65 million, to the overall project.

Figure E-4
CASA-1000 Update

Alternate Route to Bypass Salang Pass


E-7

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

TRANSMISSION NEEDS OF EXISTING NETWORKS

The costs of the project include an assessment of upgrades required to the existing systems
to ensure reliable supply to the CASA-1000 line. In particular, a specific load swapping
arrangement was studied, in the case of Tajikistan importing power from the Kyrgyz
Republic for further export through the HVDC line. The load swapping arrangement allows
power to flow from Kyrgyz Republic to CASA by passing through the Tajikistan system as
shown in the accompanying figure. This arrangement avoids the construction of a long
dedicated line from Khoujand to Sangtuda while also reducing system losses.

Figure E-5

Tajikistan Internal Power Flow with CASA

During the negotiation of commercial agreements, there are some contractual (metering and
accounting) and operational (coordination and availability of line capacity) issues that will
have to be addressed if the Barki Tajik internal network is used to transfer power from
Khoujand to Sangtuda.
9

PROJECT COST

The project cost, excluding IDC, is estimated at US$ 873 million based on current market
conditions which may change over time in response to market volatility. The basis of the
costs is as follows:

Costs of the 500 kV, 750 km HVDC interconnection link with conversion capacity of
1300 MW at Sangtuda, 300 MW at Kabul and 1300 at Peshawar;

The costs of relocating the existing 220 kV line closer to the mountain on steel tubular
poles with insulated arms and shorter spans to limit the conductor swing; and route the
proposed HVDC line on steel tubular poles (option 1 of the three options proposed in
section 7.2) are included in the HVDC interconnection link costs above;

Costs of ground electrodes at Sangtuda, Kabul and Peshawar;

Costs of the 500 kV, 477 km HVAC Interconnection between Kyrgyz republic (Datka
substation) and Tajikistan (Khoujand substation);

Costs of the country network reinforcements; and

Costs of Environmental and Social mitigation measures.

CASA-1000 Update

E-8

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The cost estimates provided in this feasibility study have included provision for mitigation
measures related to security, technical considerations, operational issues and routing
issues.
Interest during construction (IDC) calculated at a 5% annual interest rate amounts to 80
million USD.
10

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

The primary economic benefit of the project is the avoided costs in Afghanistan and
Pakistan due to import of energy from Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic. The benefits of
the interconnection were assessed by comparing the system cost of generation in the
exporting countries plus the cost of transmission interconnection with the cost of generation
in the importing countries. The economic analysis shows that the levelized cost of
transmission is calculated at 4.97 US/kWh.
The project is economically viable based on 10% discount rate and 30 year life of the asset,
as shown below.
Table E-2

Economic Analysis Results

Benefits

1,724 MUSD

Costs

1,281 MUSD

B/C Ratio

1.34

NPV

440 MUSD

EIRR

15.6 %

Sensitivity studies showed that in the events that costs increase, energy exported decreases
or discount rate increases, the project still produces favorable economic indicators with a
positive NPV and a B/C ratio greater than one, in addition to achieving an EIRR greater than
the discount rate.
Benefits to each country should be determined through commercial agreements that provide
each country an appropriate allocation of the financial benefits to ensure adequate return to
fund financial commitments.
11

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

The project can be completed within minimum 58 months (five years) as shown in the
schedule below. The critical path is driven by the supply of the converter stations (36
months).

CASA-1000 Update

E-9

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Award
Consultancy
Contract

Studies
Complete

8M
M0

3M

4M
M8

Award
Turnkey
Contracts

Tenders
Receipt

RFP
Issued

M12

HVAC
Line
Ready

3M
M15

30M

4M

M18

8 months

HVDC
Line
Ready

HVDC Commissioning
Converters
System
Ready
Complete

2M

M48

M52

4M
M54

M58

30 months

12 months

34 months

15 months

36 months

18 months

40 months
58 months

Figure E-6

Typical Sequence of Milestones

This completion period, however, could be delayed twelve (12) months depending on
different factors such as:

Availability and reliability of existing information and studies;

Countries regulation specially for right-of way of transmission lines;

Stakeholders and utilities intervention during works implementation; and

Interface among Owner, contractors, utilities and countries.

While some activities could be done in parallel to save time, this would require strong
leadership supported by each country through an effective project management unit.
12

CONCLUSION

The recommended project configuration provides flexibility without constraining future


options and is economically viable under very conservative assumptions. Sensitivity studies
show that even under adverse assumptions, the project remains viable. The biggest risk to
the project viability is delays in the completion of the project, since most of the benefits are
linked to the available surplus power.
Given that there are many active stakeholders, agreements need to be in place to facilitate
the process of moving forward in an efficient manner.
In addition there will be challenges in coming to an agreement on operational and
contractual issues. Some of the operational and contractual issues that need to be
addressed in subsequent studies include risk of non payment, accounting of energy
transfers and dispatch services, tariff and transit fees in addition to financing of the project.

CASA-1000 Update

E-10

020913-4SRP-0300-01

INTRODUCTION

Final Feasibility Update Report

INTRODUCTION

Afghanistan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, and Tajikistan have been pursuing the
development of electricity trading arrangements and the establishment of a Central Asia South Asia Regional Electricity Market (CASAREM). The initial plan was to export power in
the range of 1,000 to 1,300 MW from the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan to Pakistan and
Afghanistan. It was envisaged that the major share of the export will be used by Pakistan,
while around 300 MW will be imported by Afghanistan. Pakistan has also expressed interest
in increasing imports over the medium to long term beyond the initial power requirements of
1,000 MW.
SNC-Lavalin was commissioned to prepare a feasibility study, in two phases, for the
regional interconnection. The final Phase 1 report was submitted in December 2007 and the
Phase 2 report, in January 2009.
Since these initial reports were issued, there have been significant changes in market
conditions that could have an impact on the cost of the project. Also, detailed work has been
done by other consultants in the respective countries that now can provide additional
information and allow a further assessment of the feasibility of the project.
The present study is an update of the initial feasibility study, with the addition of certain new
elements. The overall objectives of the study are:

Assessment of the availability and cost of power supply options in Tajikistan and
Kyrgyz Republic;

Assessment of the import potential of Pakistan and Afghanistan and the cost of
alternatives of import;

Assessment of the optimal size and configuration of the interconnection;

Identification of the transmission needs of the existing networks in the countries;

Update of line routing, control scheme, project cost, implementation plan, functional
specifications, operations and maintenance plan and associated risks; and

Update of the economic analysis.

The project is based on the expectation that sufficient power is available in the countries in
the north to represent a substantial potential for trade with the countries in the south.
Moreover, the cost of electricity in the sending countries is below the long-run marginal cost
in the receiving countries, providing a justifiable rationale to invest in the transmission
interconnection.
The study is conducted for a scenario where no new generation will be added during the
study period in Tajikistan and Kyrgyz Republic. The objective of this conservative
assumption is to assess the viability of the project for the most pessimistic generation
scenario to facilitate decisions on the viability of the project. In case the project is
economically viable for this scenario, then it will be viable for other scenarios as well. The
requirements for the generation to be included in the base scenario were set out in the
Terms of Reference (TOR) in Appendix J.

CASA-1000 Update

1-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

This feasibility update report summarizes the findings based on updated information. It
incorporates comments received during the course of the study, which are summarized in
Appendix K. The reports structure is based on the TOR and details of specific aspects of
the report can be found in the appendices.

CASA-1000 Update

1-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

EXPORT POTENTIAL OF TAJIKISTAN AND


KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

Final Feasibility Update Report

EXPORT POTENTIAL OF TAJIKISTAN AND KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

This section summarizes the assessment of the export potential from Tajikistan and the
Kyrgyz Republic to Afghanistan and Pakistan via the CASA project. For this study, the
export potential is defined as the power available from existing and committed supply in the
exporting countries minus the internal demand of the exporting countries. Additional details,
including sensitivity studies are presented in Appendix I, Note I.1.
The assessment of the export potential of Tajikistan and Kyrgyz Republic is based on the
assumption that no new generation will be added in these countries during the study period.
The objective of using this conservative scenario as a base case is to assess the viability of
the project for the most pessimistic generation scenario. In case the project is economically
viable for this scenario, then it will be viable for other scenarios as well. As such, and per the
TOR, power plants that satisfy the following criteria will be taken into consideration in the
export potential assessment: existing plants or new plants that are already under
construction, have committed financing, and can be reasonably accepted to be
commissioned in the next few years.
2.1

Demand Projections

The methodology used in this study is an analytical method similar to the one used by
SNC-Lavalin in the original CASA study (Phase 1) that makes use of the following
parameters:

Base year demand (GWh),

Demand elasticity,

Income elasticity,

Unserved energy,

Loss reduction program, and

Collection rate effort program.

2.1.1

The Kyrgyz Republic Electricity Demand Projections

Input Data
The Kyrgyz Republic presented a list of major projects along with their demand
requirements, dates of commissioning and implementation probabilities. With rather broad
assumptions, the demand projections provided by the Kyrgyz Republic cover the period
2010-2025 with 5-year steps from 2015, with little details except that the annual demand
growth rate is held constant at 2% from 2015 on.
Other historical electric data provided include: short historical sales (2004-2009), tariffs,
unserved energy and losses, as well as energy saving measures (DSM).
It is important to note that at the time of issuance of this report, the data available for 2010 is
partial. Therefore, to ensure reliability of load forecast results and consistency between the
load forecasts of the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan, data up until and including 2009 was
used.

CASA-1000 Update

2-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Assumptions
The values used for the Kyrgyz Republic (Phase 1) in the previous study are presented in
Table 2-1 below.
Table 2-1

Kyrgyz Republic Load Forecasting Input Values Original CASA1000


Feasibility Study (Phase I)

Parameter

Value

Price Elasticity

-0.15

Income Elasticity

0.8

GDP Growth

4% for 2007, 5% for 2008, 4% for 2009 and onwards

Tariff path 2007-2014

2.31 3.12 US cents/kWh, hence T = 4%

Losses Reductions

23% in 2006 to 13% in 2011, hence L(t) = -2.4%

Collection rate

98% by 2015

In the present study, the parameter values in Table 2-1 are updated as shown in Table 2-2
below:
Table 2-2

Kyrgyz Republic Load Forecasting Input Values CASA1000 Feasibility


Study Update

Parameter

Value

Price Elasticity

-0.15

Income Elasticity

0.8

GDP Growth

GDP Forecast Estimates by IMF Staff (2010-2015)1 :


2010: -3.5%; 2011: +7.1% (rounded off to 7.0%); 2012: +6.4% (rounded
off to 6.5%); 2013: +6.1% (rounded off to 6.0%); 2014: +5.9% (rounded
off to 6.0%); 2015: +4.7% (rounded off to 4.5%).
From 2016 onwards: +4.5%.

Tariff path 2009-2014

T = 4%

Losses Reductions

Reduced from 29% (T:8% D:21%) in 2009 to 26% (T:8% D:18%) in


2010 according to stated objective of the Utility; then,
the same reduction rate for next 2 years;
-2% for next 2 years; and, then
-1% to 2015 and onwards up to 2025.

Collection rate

98% by 2015

The starting demand figures (in GWh) are updated to 2009 values that incorporate: sales +
losses + unserved energy. The 2009 actual figures add up to 12.3 TWh, which includes an
unserved energy of 2.3 TWh2.

Source:http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/index.aspx

Source:Annexe2f,aspreadsheetinExcelfile[Annexes_datarequest.xls]sentbyKyrgyzstan.

CASA-1000 Update

2-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Results
The following results (base case) are then obtained:

KyrgyzstanDemandForecast:20102030
25.0

TWh

20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Demand 11.6 11.9 12.2 12.5 12.8 13.1 13.4 13.6 13.9 14.2 14.5 14.8 15.2 15.5 15.8 16.1 16.7 17.3 17.9 18.6 19.2

Demand

Figure 2-1

Kyrgyz Republic Demand Forecast 2010-2030 Base Case

The average growth rates of the projected demand are as follows:


Table 2-3
Period
Average Growth

2.1.2

Kyrgyz Republic Projected Demand Average Growth Rates


2010-2015

2015-2025

2015-2030

2010-2030

2.5%

2.1%

2.6%

2.6%

Tajikistan Electricity Demand Projections

Input Data and Assumptions


The same methodology as in the Kyrgyz Republic is used for Tajikistan. Tajikistan has
identified a number of detailed issues with respect to load forecast, availability of power and
cost of supply. As this report addresses high level issues, given specific conditions as
outlined in the Terms of Reference (see Appendix J), these issues have been considered in
the analysis. However, only those items within the framework of the Terms of Reference
were considered in depth.

CASA-1000 Update

2-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

For Tajikistan, the parameter values used in the original CASA-1000 study were as follows:
Table 2-4

Tajikistan Load Forecasting Input Values Original CASA1000 Feasibility


Report Phase I

Parameter

Value

Price Elasticity

-0.15

Income Elasticity

0.6

GDP Growth

7.5% for 2007, 7.1% for 2008, 4% for 2009 and onwards

Tariff path 2007-2010

0.68 2.50 US cents/kWh

Losses Reductions

13% in 2006 to 10% in 2010

Collection rate

98% by 2014

In the present study, while the price elasticity, GDP growth rate and collection rate figures
are kept the same as in Phase I, the other parameters updated are: income elasticity, losses
and the special status of TALCO with respect to the Tajikistan demand.
The income elasticity is considered the same as for the Kyrgyz Republic (KR). In 2008 the
losses were estimated at 3.0 TWh out of a 17.0 TWh internal consumption3, which is about
17.6%. The assumption is made that these losses will shrink to 10% by the year 2020. This
loss reduction goal corresponds to an annual 0.9% reduction from 2010 to 2020.
The demand share of TALCO is nearly half of the entire country, from 40 to 50% annually. In
the present study, it is assumed to be 45% (at base year). Furthermore, it is also assumed
that TALCOs demand (in GWh or TWh) stays stationary throughout the entire forecast
period.
Tariff hike figures used in the demand forecast (in view of price elasticity of demand) are
from Barki Tojik (BT). These tariff hikes are given in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5

Average Tariff Hikes as Planned by Barki Tojik

Indicators

Years
2010*

2011*
(planned)

2012*
(planned)

2013*
(planned)

7.75

9.60

11.30

13.75

Average tariff (in diram)


Source: Data from BT, December 2010.

In growth rates (percentages), these planned tariff hikes are translated as follows:
2010: 7.75 dirams (+25%)
2011: 8.45 dirams (+24%)
2012: 9.08 dirams (+18%)
2013: 9.67 dirams (+22%)

Source:StateStatisticalCommitteeoftheRepublicofTajikistanwithAssistanceofUNDPTajikistan
(www.stat.tj).

CASA-1000 Update

2-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The unserved energy was evaluated at 2,650 GWh for 2006 while the Net Supply4 which
can be considered as the sum of sales and losses was 17,750 GWh. In 2009, the net supply
was 16,243 GWh. Considering that the unserved energy situation has not improved
between 2006 and 2009, it is deemed that actually the drop in the net supplies between
2006 and 2009 can be considered as additional unserved energy. Conservatively, three
fourths of the difference in the two net supplies are considered as additional unserved
energy for 2009.
The starting demand figures (in GWh) for 2009 for Tajikistan (including TALCO) are then
established as the sum of the Net Supply (that encompasses Sales and Losses) and the
Unserved Energy. The following table summarizes these key assumptions.
Table 2-6

Summary of Key Assumptions Tajikistan

Parameter

Tajikistan

GDP

3.4% from 2009 to 2015 (as proposed by BT). Then 4% from


2016 onwards.

Income Elasticity of Demand

0.8

Unserved Energy: level of 2009

Level of 2006 (2,650GWh), plus

75% of the difference between the Net Supply of 2006


(17,750 GWh) and Net Supply of 2009 (16,243 GWh).

= 3,780 GWh
Price Elasticity of Demand

-0.15

Tariff Hikes

As planned by BT

Losses in 2009
Loss Reduction

Included in Net Supply.


-0.5% p.a. other 10 years from 17% in 2010 to 13% to 2020
(objectives of Tajikistan)*.

2009 Demand

Net Supply + Unserved Energy


= 20.0 TWh

* Loss reduction objectives as of December 2010.

NetSupply=Production+ImportExport.

CASA-1000 Update

2-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Results
Applying the same methodology as in the Kyrgyz Republic to establish the growth rate of the
demand without TALCO, the following forecast results (base case) are obtained. The graph
represents TALCOs demand (flat) and the entire country demand (including TALCO).

TajikistanDemandForecast:20102030

30.0
25.0

TWh

20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
TALCO

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

Country 20.0 19.9 19.8 19.8 19.7 20.0 20.3 20.6 21.0 21.4 21.8 22.1 22.6 23.1 23.6 24.1 24.7 25.2 25.8 26.4 27.0 27.6

Figure 2-2

Tajikistan Demand Forecast 2010-2030 Base Case

The average growth rates of the projected demand are as follows:


Table 2-7
Tajikistan

Tajikistan Projected Demand Average Growth Rates


2010-2015

2015-2030

2010-2030

2010-2025

Country (incl. Talco)

0.3%

2.1%

1.6%

1.4%

Without Talco

0.5%

3.0%

2.4%

2.1%

2.2

Existing and Committed Supply

2.2.1

The Kyrgyz Republic Existing and Committed Supply

Existing System
The Kyrgyz Republics existing system is mainly hydro (2,910 MW, 85%), with some thermal
plants (530 MW, 15%) providing the extra energy in dry seasons and peak periods.

Thermal Plants:
The thermal system consists mostly of the Bishkek plant, with a minor contribution from
the Osh plant. These plants are old and with very high variable cost, mainly used during
winter. The capacities shown reflect the projected rehabilitation and the maximum
attainable energy production; however the plants are not being considered as a source
for exports to CASA.

CASA-1000 Update

2-6

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

While the Kyrgyz Republic would like to use existing thermal plants for exports, the
thermal plants are rather old and their cost of generation is very high to be considered as
an export source. The use of old thermal generation plants to increase the level of firm
power to be delivered is a contractual issue to be determined when contracts are
negotiated. Since the value of firm energy is higher than non-firm energy, the use of
older plants to guarantee a higher level of firm power could be considered in the
development of contractual commitments. This analysis is outside the scope of this
current study.
Table 2-8

Kyrgyz Republic Existing Thermal System

Plant Name

Installed Capacity (MW)

Annual Energy (GWh)

Bishkek

495

3,400

Osh

35

190

Total

530

3,590

Hydro Plants:
The hydro system relies on the Toktogul reservoir and hydro power plant (1,200 MW,
5,110 GWh/year). Downstream plants benefit from Toktoguls turbined outflow as a
regulated inflow, and provide a considerable amount of annual energy (7,235 GWh).
Table 2-9

Kyrgyz Republic Existing Hydro System

Plant Name

Type

Installed Capacity (MW)

Annual Energy (GWh)

Toktogul

Reservoir

1,200

5,110

Kurpsai

Run-of-River

800

3,315

TashKumyr

Run-of-River

450

1,895

Shamaldysai

Run-of-River

240

935

Ush-kurgan

Run-of-River

180

950

At-Bashi

Run-of-River

40

140

2,910

12,345

Total

Committed Plants
In this present study, new additional generation expansion, apart from new committed
plants, is not considered. However, plants that are committed for development and would be
commissioned prior to 2016 (first year of this study) are taken into consideration as they
would constitute a part of the existing system in 2016.

Thermal Plants:
The Kyrgyz Republic has no thermal commitments or rehabilitations of plants prior to
2016.

CASA-1000 Update

2-7

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Hydro Plants:
Work has already started on the Kambarata 2 HPP and the first unit of 120 MW is
expected to be commissioned before January of 2016.
Table 2-10

Kyrgyz Republic Committed Hydro Plants

Plant Name

Type

Installed Capacity (MW)

Annual Energy (GWh)

Kambarata 2

Run-of-River

120

800

With the addition of this plant, the total capacity of the Kyrgyz system in 2016 would be:
Table 2-11

2.2.2

Kyrgyz Republic 2016 System Installed Capacity and Annual Energy


Type

Installed Capacity (MW)

Annual Energy (GWh)

Hydro Plants

3,030

13,145

Thermal Plants

530

3,590

Total

3,560

16,735

Tajikistan - Existing and Committed Supply

Existing System
Tajikistans existing system is mainly hydro (4,900 MW, 94%), with some thermal plants
(318 MW, 6%) providing extra energy in dry seasons and peak periods.

Thermal Plants:
Existing thermal plants consist of the rehabilitated Dushanbe plant and the Yavan plant.
Dushanbe and Yavan are being converted from gas to coal plants. These plants are old
and with very high variable cost, mainly used during winter. The capacities shown
reflect the projected rehabilitation and the maximum attainable energy production;
however the plants are not being considered as a source for exports to CASA.
Similar to the situation in the Kyrgyz Republic, the cost of thermal generation in older
plants is too high to be considered as an export source. The use of old thermal
generation plants to increase the level of firm power to be delivered is a contractual
issue to be determined when contracts are negotiated. Since the value of firm energy is
higher than non-firm energy, the use of older plants to guarantee a higher level of firm
power could be considered in the development of contractual commitments. This
analysis is outside the scope of this current study.

CASA-1000 Update

2-8

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Table 2-12
Plant Name

Tajikistan Existing Thermal System

Installed Capacity (MW)

Annual Energy (GWh)

Dushanbe

198

1,300

Yavan

120

790

Total

318

2,090

Hydro Plants:
Most of Tajikistans hydro production comes from the Nurek reservoir and power plant
(3,200 MW, 11,850 GWh/year). Nureks outflow regulates the inflow for downstream
plants, which produce around 6,710 GWh annually. Kairakkum has its own reservoir
and produces 755 GWh annually.
Sangtuda 1s capacity has been increased by 167.5 MW in the Table 2-13 below, with
the commissioning of the fourth unit which will occur prior to 2016.
Table 2-13
Plant Name

Tajikistan Existing Hydro System

Type

Installed Capacity (MW)

Annual Energy (GWh)

Nurek (1)

Reservoir

3,200

11,850

Baipaza

Run-of-River

600

2,525

Sangtuda 1

Run-of-River

670

2,970

Golovnaya (2)

Run-of-River

220

840

Perepa (2)

Run-of-River

30

250

Central (2)

Run-of-River

30

125

Kairakum

Reservoir

126

755

Run-of-River

25

205

4,901

19,520

Varzob
Total

(1) Includes the rehabilitation of Nurek from 3,000 MW to 3,200 MW.


(2) Includes the rehabilitation of Golovnaya, Perepa and Central,
from 255 MW to 280 MW.

Committed Plants
In this present study, generation expansion is not considered. However, plants that are
committed for development and would be commissioned prior to 2016 (first year of this
study) are taken into consideration as they would constitute a part of the existing system in
2016.

Thermal Plants:
Tajikistan has no thermal commitments or rehabilitations of plants planned prior to
2016.

Hydro Plants:
The second hydro development in Sangtuda is to be commissioned before 2016. It has
220 MW of capacity and would generate close to 1,000 GWh annually.

CASA-1000 Update

2-9

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Table 2-14
Plant Name
Sangtuda 2

Tajikistan Committed Hydro Plants

Type

Installed Capacity (MW)

Annual Energy (GWh)

Run-of-River

220

955

Imports
Tajikistan used imports from Turkmenistan in the winter months (October to March) to meet
its demand and clear its deficits. Historical data indicate close to 1.2 TWh of average annual
imports. The future availability of this energy is in question due to the disconnection of the
electrical link between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. The reduction of these imports would
increase the winter deficits. They have not been considered in the base case evaluation
of the surplus.
Table 2-15
Country
Turkmenistan

Tajikistan Imports

Months

Import Annual Energy (GWh)

Winter (Oct-Mar)

1200

With the addition of Sangtuda 2, the total capacity of the Tajik system in 2016 would be:
Table 2-16

Tajikistan 2016 System Installed Capacity and Annual Energy

Type

Installed Capacity (MW)

Annual Energy (GWh)

Hydro Plants

5,121

20,475

Thermal Plants

318

2,090

Total

5,439

22,565

2.3

Surplus Analysis

2.3.1

Modeling Assumptions

Study Period
In this section, the total energy surplus of the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan is assessed on
a monthly basis. Using SDDP5, both systems were modeled, along with the load forecast
and the simulation were run for the entire study period. The study period begins in 2016,
year of commissioning of the CASA line. It extends for 20 years and the final month of
simulation is December of 2035.
Load Forecast
Annual energy projections from Section 2.2 are used to forecast monthly load duration
curves by scaling historical Load Duration Curves (LDCs) with a factor equal to the growth
rate. Load duration curve forecasts are then modeled in SDDP using 3 load blocks for every
month: a peak load, a medium load and a base load.

StochasticDualDynamicProgramming(SDDP)PowerSystemSimulationProgram

CASA-1000 Update

2-10

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Hydrological Data
To simulate a system with hydro power plants, using SDDP historical inflow records at
considered hydro sites are required. The historical data is used to simulate the inflow during
the years of the study period to have a more realistic scenario. For this purpose, in this
study the historical data chosen is from 1987 to 2009. Using the most recent inflow records
provides a better approximation of the future inflows. Several reports consulted, including
Potential impacts of Climate Change on the hydrological regime of Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz
Republic at the horizons 2050 and 2080 by Ouranos, dated May 2008, indicate that gradual
changes in the shape of the annual hydrograph will take place in the upcoming years up to
2050 due to the effects of temperature increase and glacier melting. Increased spring and
summer runoff due to glacier melt is expected in the region.
Obtaining Average Energy Surplus Values from SDDP Using Historical Hydrological Data
It is important to note that the analysis for exportable surplus does not use average values
for hydrology scenarios. The exportable surplus is calculated using 23 historical hydrological
years (for years 1987-2009). The first simulation assumes that the hydrology of 2016, the
first year of the study period, will correspond to the hydrology of 1987 (2017 will correspond
to 1988, etc.) and calculates the exportable surplus for each year of the study horizon,
taking into account transmission capacity constraints. The simulation is repeated assuming
that the hydrology of 2016 will correspond to the hydrology of 1988 (2017 will correspond to
1989, etc.), again taking into account the transmission constraint in obtaining the exportable
surplus. This simulation is run 23 times, rotating the year that would correspond to the
hydrology for 2016. For each year, the 23 simulated values are averaged to obtain the
average value for exportable surplus. This method differs from the approach using average
hydrology values and addresses the difficulties of taking transmission constraints into
account when using the latter approach.
Appendix A presents an overview of the SDDP model and more detailed explanation about
the manner in which the historical hydrologies are used.
Reservoir Levels
Initial reservoir levels are assumed to be 100% at the start of the 2015-2016 winter for
Nurek and Toktogul. Deficits in the winter months may be observed if not enough water is
stored in the summer when inflows are historically high.
Toktogul HPP
Based on information provided by the Kyrgyz Republic regarding agreements with riparian
states, the flow of the Toktogul HPP was limited to 600 m3/s in the winter months (October
March). In addition it was suggested to have the reservoir level above a minimum value of
10,000-12,000 Hm3 needed in the beginning of the summer (April 1st). The flow constraint
was modeled in SDDP and the reservoir level at the beginning of April was checked in every
simulation.
Nurek HPP
The modeling of the Nurek reservoir was based on the actual operating mode wherein the
reservoir is fully filled in summer and reduced in winter so as to utilize all the available
storage to reduce, which reduces the winter deficits to a minimum.

CASA-1000 Update

2-11

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Nurek Reservoir Sedimentation


It is understood that the Nurek reservoir has been experiencing sedimentation that is
affecting its live storage. It was found that sedimentation reduces the storage for the winter
hence increases winter deficits but it also increases summer generation and surplus since
the plant will turbine the added inflow. In this study sedimentation is taken into account and
the Nurek reservoir is assumed to have been reduced by 25%, with 3,300 hm3 live storage.
Existing Exports
By 2016, Tajikistan should be exporting to Afghanistan through a 220 KV line, rated at
300 MW. The annual exports would be close to 650 GWh. In the SDDP simulations, these
exports are modeled only in the summer months (April-September), when the system has
the most surplus.
Supplies to Afghanistan and Pakistan During Peak Periods
Given the regulation capabilities of the main hydro cascades in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan
provided by the reservoirs of Nurek and Toktogul, whenever there is a limited energy
condition (e.g. during periods where the exported energy is such that the capacity of the
CASA line is not fully utilized), it has been assumed that the exports during summer can be
scheduled at the peak hours of the receiving systems so as to maximize the value of this
energy for the importer.
2.3.2

Kyrgyz Republic Surplus

Using the modeling assumptions from the previous subsection and the existing/committed
system defined in Section 2.2.1, the Kyrgyz Republics average energy surplus is shown in
Figure 2-3 below:
2,500

GWh

2,000
1,500
1,000
500

2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035

Year

Figure 2-3

Kyrgyz Republic Average Yearly Surplus (GWh)

With no generation expansion and an increasing demand, the surplus is expected to drop as
observed in Figure 2-3. At the beginning of the study horizon, a little above 2,150 GWh of
annual surplus are available in the Kyrgyz system. However by 2035, less than 400 GWh
can be exported from the Kyrgyz Republic annually.
CASA-1000 Update

2-12

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Monthly balances for the years 2016; 2020; 2025; 2030 and 2035 are presented in
Appendix B.
2.3.3

Tajikistan Surplus

Using the modeling assumptions from the previous subsection and the existing/committed
system defined in Section 2.2.1. Tajikistans average yearly energy surplus is shown in
Figure 2.4 below:
4,000
3,500
3,000
GWh

2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035

Year

Figure 2-4

Tajikistan Average Yearly Surplus (GWh)

With no generation expansion, the surplus is expected to drop as observed in Figure 2-4. At
the beginning of the study horizon, close to 3,750 GWh of annual surplus are available in
the Tajik system. However by 2035, a little under 500 GWh can be exported from Tajikistan
annually.
Monthly balances for the years 2016; 2020; 2025; 2030 and 2035 are presented in
Appendix B.
2.3.4

Combined Surplus

The surpluses of both countries are added together to obtain the combined average yearly
surplus for the CASA region:

CASA-1000 Update

2-13

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


7,000
6,000

GWh

5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035

Year

Figure 2-5

Combined Average Yearly Surplus (GWh)

The region has close to 6,000 GWh of surplus, almost entirely available in the summer
months. That surplus drops to less than a 900 GWh in 20 years with no generation
expansion and an increasing demand.
2.4

Sensitivity Analysis

2.4.1

Dry Season Sensitivity Analysis

Since the values presented in the previous sub-section are averages over 23 possible
hydrology scenarios, a sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the potential surplus of
the region during the driest years as well as during the wettest years. The scenarios giving
the best and worst surplus were examined.
With 1989 being historically the worst year from an inflow point of view for Nurek, If that year
repeats in 2016, there would be just a little over 1,000 GWh of surplus (1,094 GWh)
compared to the 5,900 GWh average (close to 82% drop). But if a better year like 1988
repeats, the surplus can exceed the average by more than 4,000 GWh to reach 9,971 GWh.
The volatility of the surplus renders the energy available for export mostly non-firm with the
yearly average close to 5,900 GWh.
The complete set of results for this sensitivity is available in Appendix I Note I.1 with tables
and graphs showing the best and worst 5 years, also comparing the 23 years to the
average.
2.4.2

Demand Sensitivity Analysis

The results of the demand study in both the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan as provided in
Section 2.1, which are considered as the Base Case results, were obtained by using
assumptions that included three key parameters, which are:

Tariff increase, which is closely related to price elasticity of demand;

Income elasticity factor; and,

Electricity loss reduction over the years.

CASA-1000 Update

2-14

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

In this subsection the impacts on the results of the variations of these parameters are
analyzed.
The Kyrgyz Republic
Several combinations of the variations of the three key parameters tariff increase rate,
income elasticity values and electricity loss reduction rate were investigated. The following
table (Table 2-17) summarizes a selected set of combinations of variations of these
parameters, where the shaded cells reflect changes with respect to the Base Case figures
as laid out in Table 2-2 of Section 2.1.1.
Table 2-17

Selected Variations of the Three Parameters (Kyrgyz Republic)

Case

Tariff
Increase

0.8

As follows:

Base Case

4% p.a.
up to
2015
Then 3%
afterwards
No
increase

same as
Base
Case

same as Base Case

Scenario 2

6% p.a.
up to
2015

same as
Base
Case

same as Base Case

same as
Base
Case

0.7

Scenario 3

same as
Base
Case

0.9

Scenario 4

Scenario 5

same as
Base
Case

same as
Base
Case

50% lower
than Base
Case, i.e.

Scenario 6

same as
Base
Case

same as
Base
Case

50% faster
than Base
Case, i.e.

No
increase

same as
Base
Case

No Loss Reduction

No
increase

same as
Base
Case

Scenario1

Scenario 7

Scenario 8

Income
Elasticity

Loss Reduction Rate


-3% p.a.
up to
2012

-2% p.a.
to 2014

-1% p.a.
to 2015

-1%
2016
2025

-1.5% p.a.
up to
2012

-1% p.a.
to 2014

-0.5% p.a.
to 2015

0% afterwards

-4.5% p.a.
up to
2012

-3% p.a.
to 2014

-1.5% p.a.
to 2015

0% afterwards

-1% p.a.
to 2014

-0.5% p.a.
to 2015

0% afterwards

same as Base Case

same as Base Case

50%
slower
than Base
Case, i.e.

-1.5% p.a.
up to
2012

The simulations yielded that Scenario 7, representing the status quo, i.e. no tariff increase
and no electricity loss reduction, resulted in the highest demand throughout the forecast
period (2010-2030), as was to be expected. On the other hand, Scenario 6 additional
loss reduction produced the lowest demand. These findings are illustrated in Figure 2-6.

CASA-1000 Update

2-15

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


30.0
25.0

(TWh)

20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0

Scenario6

Figure 2-6

BaseCase

Scenario7

Kyrgyz Republic Highest and Lowest Demand Scenarios

The average growth rates corresponding to the maximum and minimum demand scenarios
are compared to the base case average growth rates in Table 2-18 below.
Table 2-18

Average Growth Rates (Kyrgyz Republic)


Base Case

Scenario 6

Scenario 7

20102015

2.5%

1.4%

5.1%

20152025

2.1%

1.6%

3.6%

20102030

2.6%

2.0%

3.9%

Tajikistan
For Tajikistan as well, several combinations of the variations of the three key parameters
tariff increase rate, income elasticity values and electricity loss reduction rate were
investigated. The following table (Table 2-19) summarizes a selected set of combinations of
variations of these parameters, where the shaded cells reflect changes with respect to the
Base Case figures as laid out in Table 2-6.

CASA-1000 Update

2-16

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Table 2-19

Selected Variations of the Three Parameters (Tajikistan)


Year

Case

Tariff
Increase
as planned
by BT, i.e.,

20092010

20102011

20112012

20122013

25%

24%

18%

22%

Income
Elasticity

Loss Reduction
Rate

0.8

-0.5% p.a. to 2020

Scenario 1 No increase

same as Base
Case

same as Base Case

Scenario 2 +1% higher increase except for 2010

same as Base
Case

same as Base Case

Scenario 3 same as Base Case

0.7

same as Base Case

Scenario 4 same as Base Case

0.9

same as Base Case

Scenario 5 same as Base Case

same as Base
Case

50% slower than in


Base Case, i.e.
-0.25% to yr 2020

Scenario 6 No increase

same as Base
Case

50% faster than in


Base Case, i.e.
-0.75% to yr 2020

Scenario 7 No increase

same as Base
Case

No loss reduction

Scenario 8 No increase

same as Base
Case

50% slower than in


Base Case, hence, 0.25% to yr 2020

Base Case

As in The Kyrgyz Republic, the simulations virtually yielded the same situations in Tajikistan:
Scenario 7, representing the status quo, i.e. no tariff increase and no electricity loss
reduction, resulted in the highest demand throughout the forecast period (2010-2030). On
the other hand, Scenario 6 a faster loss reduction produced the lowest demand,
although it gives virtually the same results as Scenario 3 Income elasticity of 0.7 , with
the latter scenario giving slightly lesser demand towards the end of the forecast period.
These findings are illustrated in Figure 2-7.

CASA-1000 Update

2-17

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


35.0

(TWh)

30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0

Scenario6

Figure 2-7

BaseCase

2030

2029

2028

2027

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

10.0

Scenario7

Tajikistan Highest and Lowest Demand Scenarios

The slight drop in demand in the first years 20102013, for both the Base Case and
Scenario 6, is due to the rather substantial tariff increase in that period +25%, +24%,
+18% and +22%, respectively. The average demand growth rates for the three displayed
scenarios (Base, Highest and Lowest) are given in Table 2-20.
Table 2-20

Average Growth Rates (Tajikistan)


Base Case

2.4.3

Scenario 6

Scenario 7

2010-2015

0.4%

0.2%

1.8%

2015-2030

2.1%

2.0%

2.3%

2010-2030

1.6%

1.6%

2.2%

Effect of Demand sensitivities on Surplus

All of the scenarios mentioned in the previous section provided new demand forecasts.
These forecasts were taken and entered into the database of the model, replacing the base
case demand, and a new surplus evaluation was made for each scenario.
The scenarios that made the most impact on the surplus were:
-

Scenario 7 decreased the 2016 surplus in Tajikistan by 18%. It also decreased the
Kyrgyz 2016 surplus by 47%.

Scenario 3 increased the Tajik surplus by 4% ,

Scenario 2 increased the Kyrgyz surplus by 23%.

The complete results of these scenarios are presented in Appendix I, Note I.2.
These results show how modifying the demand affects the surplus when no generation
expansion is planned for the study period. The Kyrgyz surplus is more vulnerable to change
due to the demand increase or decrease.
CASA-1000 Update

2-18

020913-4SRP-0300-01

IMPORT POTENTIAL OF PAKISTAN

Final Feasibility Update Report

IMPORT POTENTIAL OF PAKISTAN

The electricity sector of Pakistan is facing acute shortages in supply which have led to
power outages on a large scale. The wide fluctuation of international oil prices, higher cost
due to gradual phasing out of subsidies, and the circular debt problem have also
exacerbated the situation of power supply in the country.
The Government of Pakistan is taking diverse measures to circumvent the problem of
capacity shortage. These include expansion and refurbishment of existing plants, induction
of new power plants - mainly in the private sector, encouragement of renewable energy,
development of rental power plants, and acquisition of power from captive power plants.
This section presents the demand-supply balance till the year 2030 taking into account the
generation expansion plan and the load forecast developed by NTDC.
3.1

Generation Capacity

At the end of financial year 2008-09, the total installed generation capacity in the country
was 20,306 MW. The share of thermal, hydro and nuclear capacities was 13,370 MW,
6,474 MW and 462 MW respectively. The details of the growth of generation capacity for
the period 2003-04 to 2008-09 are provided in Table 3-1 below. For consistency among the
countries, installed capacity numbers are used.
Table 3-1

Installed Generation Capacity by Type (MW)

Financial Year ending 30th June

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

GENCOs

4,834

4,834

4,834

4,834

4,899

4,899

IPPs connected with PEPCO system

5,715

5,743

5,743

5,893

6,129

6,299

IPPs connected with KESCL system

262

262

262

262

262

262

1,756

1,756

1,756

1,756

1,756

1,910

12,567

12,595

12,595

12,745

13,046

13,370

6,463

6,463

6,463

6,444

6,444

6,444

30

30

30

30

30

30

6,493

6,493

6,493

6,474

6,474

6,474

CHASNUPP (connected with PEPCO


system)

325

325

325

325

325

325

KANUPP (connected with KESCL


system)

137

137

137

137

137

137

Sub-Total

462

462

462

462

462

462

19,522

19,550

19,550

19,681

19,982

20,306

THERMAL

KESCL own GENCO


Sub-total
HYDEL
WAPDA
IPPs
Sub-total
NUCLEAR

Total Installed Capacity of the


Country

CASA-1000 Update

3-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

From the information available the total installed capacity for the financial year 2009-10 is
20,731 MW.
In order to have comprehensive information on the generation expansion plan for the
assessment of supply-demand balance and import potential, the Consultant had meetings
with NTDC (National Transmission Despatch Company) and obtained the requisite data on
their generation expansion plan till the financial year 2029-30. The plan envisages the
expansion in the generation capacity by development of power plants by WAPDA (mainly
hydro), IPPs, Gencos, and rental power.
In view of the current acute shortages of electric power in the country and to quickly
circumvent the problem of these capacity shortages, the government has planned to induct
rental power plants in the year 2010-2011. According to the generation development plan
obtained from NTDC, it is envisaged that about 1100 MW of rental power plants will be
commissioned during the current financial year. It is expected that these plants would help
in mitigating the power shortages in the country in the short term.
The total yearly forecasted capacity of the generation system provided by NTDC for the
period 2010-11 to 2029-30 is provided in Table 3-2 below.
Table 3-2

Generation Capacity Development

Year

Generation Capacity (MW)

2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
2024-25
2025-26
2026-27
2027-28
2028-29
2029-30

22697
23788
26279
29405
33630
42350
45338
50034
53284
58867
63683
68349
70014
70614
76214
79014
83014
84014
88334
N/A

In the above generation capacity expansion plan, a relatively significant capacity would be
added during the period 2014 to 2016. This will mainly be from the commissioning of large
capacity coal-fired power stations at Thar and Karachi. In addition, large hydro stations
namely Bunji and Basha are planned to be commissioned during the period 2018-19 to
2021-22.
The CASA transmission line in the expansion plan is projected to be

CASA-1000 Update

3-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

commissioned in the year 2016. This implies a forecast of about 1000 MW of import from the
CASA line from 2016 onwards.
3.2

Electricity Demand

The monthly energy generation, demand and shortfall in GWh for the years 2006-07, 200708 and 2008-09 are illustrated in Figure 3-1, 3-2 and 3-3 respectively. These figures
indicate that the energy shortfall in the year 2006-07 was minimal, however for the following
years the gap between demand and supply increased substantially resulting in high shortfall
in the years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The pattern indicates that shortfall is more severe in the
summer months when the demand for power increased significantly.
10,000.00
9,000.00
8,000.00
7,000.00
6,000.00
5,000.00
4,000.00
3,000.00
2,000.00
1,000.00

(1,000.00)

Figure 3-1

Gen.
Demand

July
Aug.
Sept.
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June

Shortfall

Energy Generation, Demand and Shortfall in 2006-07 (GWh)

12000
10000
8000
6000

Generation

4000

Demand

2000

Shortfall

Figure 3-2

CASA-1000 Update

June

May

April

March

February

January

December

November

October

Sept.

Aug.

July

Energy Generation, Demand and Shortfall in 2007-08 (GWh)

3-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

14,000.00
12,000.00
10,000.00
8,000.00
Generation

6,000.00

Demand

4,000.00

Shortfall

Figure 3-3

June

May

April

March

February

January

December

October

Sept.

Aug.

July

Novemb

2,000.00

Energy Generation, Demand and Shortfall in 2008-09 (GWh)

The electricity demand in Pakistan is growing at a rapid pace due to an increase in the
population and an increase in the demand for power in all sectors of the economy. The last
demand forecast developed by NTDC was obtained during the recent meetings with NTDC.
This demand forecast is presented in Table 3-3 below.
Table 3-3

CASA-1000 Update

Demand Forecast

Year

Electricity Demand (MW)

2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
2024-25
2025-26
2026-27
2027-28
2028-29
2029-30

21755
23491
25356
27488
29513
31722
33204
35618
38607
41832
45257
48885
52777
56863
61158
65700
70396
75177
80203
85532

3-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

3.3

Evaluation of Supply-Demand Balance

In order to evaluate the supply-demand balance, it is necessary to determine the available


capacity. Considering that some generation capacity will be on forced and planned outages
in the system, and taking into account the derating of generating units, the available
capacity will be less than the total installed capacity. Generally speaking, to cater for the
forced and planned outages and the derating of the generating capacity, a reserve capacity
margin of about 20% is normally maintained. In other words, if a capacity reserve margin of
20% is assumed, the available capacity would be less by 20% of the installed capacity. The
following table (Table 3-4) presents the demand-supply assessment by taking into account
the installed and available capacities and the demand forecast.
Table 3-4

Supply-Demand Assessment

Year

Installed
Generation
Capacity (MW)

Available
Capacity (MW)

Demand Forecast
(MW)

Surplus/Shortfall
(MW)

2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
2024-25
2025-26
2026-27
2027-28
2028-29
2029-30

22697
23788
26279
29405
33630
42350
45338
50034
53284
58867
63683
68349
70014
70614
76214
79014
83014
84014
88334
N/A

18158
19030
21023
23524
26904
33880
36270
40027
42627
47094
50946
54679
56011
56491
60971
63211
66411
67211
70667
N/A

21755
23491
25356
27488
29513
31722
33204
35618
38607
41832
45257
48885
52777
56863
61158
65700
70396
75177
80203
85532

-3597
-4461
-4333
-3964
-2609
2158
3066
4409
4020
5262
5689
5794
3234
-372
-187
-2489
-3985
-7966
-9536
N/A

The above table indicates that in case all the planned capacity is realized, there would be a
shortage in the generation capacity during the period 2010-11 to 2014-15 and then during
the period 2023-24 to 2028-29.
Based on the peak load demand forecast, the energy requirements can be estimated by
applying an appropriate load factor. If the system load factor is assumed to be 65%, the
energy requirements for some of the selected years, say 2015-16, 2020-21 and 2025-26 will
be 180,625 GWh, 257,693 GWh and 374,095 GWh respectively.
In view of the huge capital requirements and institutional issues, it might be difficult to build
all the generation capacity as planned. In particular, for the large capacity coal-fired and
hydro plants a significant investment will be required which will be difficult to obtain. For
CASA-1000 Update

3-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

example, during the financial year 2015-16, the generation plan suggests the commissioning
of 8,900 MW, which will entail a mammoth amount of investment. The substantial lead
times for the construction of these power plants may also result in delays in acquiring
additional capacity as planned. Therefore, the likelihood of delays in commissioning of
these projects cannot be ignored. Therefore, in such a scenario, the construction of CASA
transmission line would likely contribute in alleviating the shortage of generation capacity in
Pakistan.
The recent floods in the country and its aftermath would likely have repercussions on the
investment plans for the power sector, which may have an impact on the supply demand
balance, particularly in the short to medium term.

CASA-1000 Update

3-6

020913-4SRP-0300-01

IMPORT AND EXPORT POTENTIAL OF


AFGHANISTAN

Final Feasibility Update Report

IMPORT AND EXPORT POTENTIAL OF AFGHANISTAN

4.1

Power Generation Assessment

In order to assess the power generation situation, endeavours were made to obtain
information on the current power generation scenario and development plans in near future.
Based on the information available, it can be inferred that significant efforts are being made
to develop the generation capacity within the country and also to have imports from the
neighbouring countries. The preliminary analysis of generation situation based on the
current information available is provided in the following paragraphs.
The key hydro generating sources that are contributing to the supply of power to Kabul are
three hydro power plants, namely Naghlu, Mahipur and Surobi. Nahglu power plant has four
25 MW units. One unit at the Naghlu power plant is under rehabilitation, while the rest are
available for generation. Surobi power plant has been refurbished recently, with two 11 MW
units. The Mahipur plant has three 22 MW units and was currently refurbished providing its
full capacity.
In addition to the above-mentioned power plants providing power to Kabul, two new hydro
plants were proposed in the vicinity of the Kabul region. One of the plants, namely Surobi II
is on the Kabul River and has a proposed capacity of 180 MW. The other plant, namely
Baghdara with a capacity of 280 MW is proposed to be constructed on Pansjir River. Surobi
II is a run-of-river plant, while Baghdara is a seasonal reservoir storage power plant. These
two plants according to previous studies by the Consultants appear to be technically
feasible. The current status with regard the implementation of these power plants is not
known. Some of the information available also suggests that two other Hydro plants,
namely Kajakai of 52 MW and Salma of 44 MW are also planned to be commissioned soon.
However, the status regarding the implementation of these plants is not clear.
As regards the thermal power plants, one notable thermal power plant namely Kabul North
West Thermal Power Plant contributes to the supply of power to the Kabul region. Its
installed capacity is about 58 MW. However, according to the current available information
only units 3 and 4 are available thus significantly curtailing its generation capability. In
addition, a 104 MW diesel power plant has been commissioned in Kabul recently.
As regards the development of new generation capacity, one of the key projects under
consideration is the 400 MW Aynak thermal coal-fired power plant. Out of 400 MW, it is
envisaged that 200 MW would be supplied to the power grid, while rest of the power would
be utilized for the copper mine, starting in 2014-15.
Small quantities of gas reserves have been reported in the Sheberghan area sufficient for a
100 MW power plant. Therefore, a thermal plant of 100 MW is planned to be built near
Sheberghan to cater for the power demand in the northern areas. Depending on the
availability of gas and size of the plant, this power plant can also be considered to
supplement the power plants meeting the load of the Kabul region.
In addition to the above power plants, substantial quantum of power import has been
planned from the neighbouring countries. This includes up to 300 MW power from Tajikistan
to be imported from the ADB financed interconnection from Sangtuda to Kunduz, Pol-eKhumri and on to Kabul, which is currently under construction. It is envisaged that this
interconnection will be commissioned by 2013 thus allowing the import from Tajikistan. In
addition, 300 MW of power is planned to be imported from Turkmenistan. Currently,

CASA-1000 Update

4-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Afghanistan is importing about 150MW of power from Uzbekistan and it is envisaged that
this level will be increased to 300 MW by 2012.
4.2

Power Demand Situation in Kabul Region and Country

Kabul with a fast growing population of 4 to 5 million is facing erratic power supply due to
years of war and chaos in the country. The lack of development of power supply
infrastructure over the previous years has also compounded the problem of electricity supply
to the region.
It appears that the power distribution system in the Kabul region and other towns is in a very
dilapidated condition and in order to absorb the available power in the future years it is
imperative to rehabilitate and upgrade the distribution system within the Kabul and other
regions. Its existing condition significantly limits the availability of power supply and is a
serious constraint in delivering power to consumers. In this context, it may be added that a
number of initiatives are being implemented to improve the distribution network in Kabul.
The projects concerning the Kabul city MV system rehabilitation, LV system rehabilitation
and installation of new sub-stations are in progress. Efforts are being made to expedite the
implementation of the distribution projects so that the load shedding in the city can be
minimized. Similar efforts will be required to rehabilitate and improve the distribution system
in other parts of the country.
From the data available on the loading of substations, the maximum total load so far on the
substations in the Kabul region for the year 2010 has been 197 MW. However, this figure
does not represent the full power demand of Kabul as the substantial demand in the Kabul
region may be suppressed.
As regards the electricity demand in the future years, a number of forecasts, which were
available, were reviewed. The Ministry of Energy and Water had projected that the demand
of electricity in the Kabul region will be about 500 MW by the year 20131. The demand
forecast provided in the Power Sector Master Plan developed by Norconsult gives the Kabul
forecast as 260 MW and 347 MW in the years 2015 and 2020 respectively2. The forecast of
the whole country is 905 MW for the year 2020. In addition to these demand projections, the
demand forecast is also available from Global Edison. This demand forecast was
undertaken in 2007. It provides the demand forecast for the Kabul region as 384 MW and
591 MW for the years 2015 and 2020 respectively. For the whole country the demand
projections are 761 MW and 1099 MW for the years 2015 and 2020 respectively.
Considering that the most recent forecast available is from Global Edison3, it should have
used the most up-to-date information available and therefore can be considered as relatively
credible as compared to other forecasts.
4.3

Supply-Demand Balance

In case all the existing power plants mentioned in the Section 4.1 are rehabilitated and the
planned power plants are commissioned timely, the domestic installed power capacity in

ReportonPowerSectorStrategyfortheAfghanDevelopmentStrategy,MinistryofEnergyandWater,April
2007
2

PowerSectorMasterPlan,DemandForecast,Norconsult,October2004.

PowerDemandinAfghanistan(20052025),GlobalEdisonCorporation,Texas,USA,

CASA-1000 Update

4-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Afghanistan will increase to over 1400 MW by 2015. However, considering that 200 MW will
be consumed by the Aynak copper mine, the power available for the grid will be about 1200
MW. Moreover, considering that lead time of hydro plants are long, the likelihood of the
completion of Surobi II, Baghdara, Kajakai and Salma hydro plants appears to be difficult
before 2015. Therefore, in case the generation capacity of these plants is excluded, the
generation supply from domestic plants will be about 644 MW in 2015.
As regards the import of power from the neighbouring countries, if the planned transmission
lines are commissioned, the import capacity would increase to about 900 MW by 2015.
Combining the total planned capacity available to the grid including the planned hydro
capacity and the planned import capacity, the total supply capacity in the country would be
approximately 2100 MW by 2015. However, in case the hydro plants are excluded in view
of lack of certainty about their commissioning dates, the available capacity reduces to 1544
MW in 2015.
Considering the power demand forecast of the country to be 761 MW in the year 2015 and
taking into account the generation supply available in year 2015 of 1544 MW, it becomes
obvious that if all the planned projects excluding the hydro projects mentioned above, and
all the import plans are implemented on time, the Afghanistan will have a surplus of capacity
to the tune of 783 MW. If required, this surplus energy can be exported to Pakistan as it is
envisaged that it will continue to have power shortages in the foreseeable future.
It is important to note that the above analysis was carried out on the basis of installed
capacities of the power plants. The available capacity of the hydro plants depends largely
on the water flows and due to uncertainty in this regard will vary from the installed capacity
of these plants. Broadly speaking, the water flows are relatively high in summer thus
leading to higher generation capacity available during the summer period from these plants.
Similarly, due to forced outages and inefficiencies associated with the thermal plants, the
available capacity of thermal plants will also vary. Generally speaking, the available
capacity will be somewhat less than the installed capacity and will vary periodically due to a
variety of factors.
It is worthwhile to point out that in view of the current situation in Afghanistan and the
constraints associated with the financing and implementation of the projects, the element of
uncertainty associated with the load forecast and capacity development should not be
ignored. However, even taking into consideration the uncertainties associated with the
demand forecast and projected capacity development, Afghanistan will likely have surplus
capacity in 2015 and beyond, at least for a few years, particularly during the summer
months.
4.4

Review of Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs)

Afghanistan currently has Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with the following countries:

Tajikistan;

Iran; and

Turkmenistan.

The following paragraphs present a brief review of these PPAs.

CASA-1000 Update

4-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Power Purchase Agreement with Tajikistan


The PPA with Tajikistan was signed in June 2008. This agreement was made between Da
Afghanistan Breshna Moassasa (DABM) and Barki Tojik Open Joint Stock Holding
Company controlled by the Government of Tajikistan.
The Agreement provides the annual minimum energy delivery schedule and specifies the
minimum obligations for the sale and purchase of firm energy on a monthly basis for the
period 2010-2014. The firm supply delivery schedule is for the months April to October. For
the remaining months Tajikistan is required to supply energy if it is available as there is no
obligation on their part to supply energy during these months. For the period 2010 to 2014,
the minimum and maximum firm energy commitments according to PPA are 500.2 GWh and
650.8 GWh respectively. The PPA also provides the daily firm energy delivery schedule.
For the years beyond 2014, the parties shall agree on the quantum of firm and non-firm
energy to be delivered.
The PPA also provides a constant price of US Cents 3.5 per kWh for firm, non-firm, and
unscheduled energy, and also for the energy needed for testing prior to commercial
operation.
The nominal voltage for the supply of energy is 220 kV. The transmission line is a double
circuit line and its terminal points are Sangtuda in Tajikistan and Kunduz and Pul-i-Khumri
substations in Afghanistan.
Power Purchase Agreement with Iran
The PPA was signed in January 2003 between the Ministry of Energy of Iran and the
Ministry of Energy and Water of Afghanistan. There was a prior PPA which ended in March
2007, however a clause in the current Agreement extends it to March 2016.
According to the PPA, Iran will deliver 200 GWh (+5 GWh) per year to Afghanistan with a
maximum of 90 MW capacity on the transmission lines. The transmission lines include the
following:

132 kV Torbat Jam (Iran) Harat (Afghanistan)

20 kV Taybad (Iran) Harat (Afghanistan).

In addition to the above transmission lines, a transmission line linking Zabel (Iran) to Zarnej
(Afghanistan) can also deliver maximum of 10 MW of power.
As regards the price of electricity, for the period March 2007 to March 2010 the same price
as agreed in the previous PPA was maintained. However, from March 2010 to end of
contract (March 2016) the price of delivery is US Cents 4 per kWh. Afghanistan is required
to pay US Cents 3 per kWh as Iran will charge US Cents 1 per kWh from the Iran Aid to
Afghanistan.
Power Purchase Agreement with Turkmenistan
The PPA between Turkmenistan and Afghanistan was not made available to SNC-Lavalin.
However, we had access to one of the Amendments to the PPA. The information provided
below is based on that Amendment.

CASA-1000 Update

4-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The PPA was signed by the Ministry of Power Engineering and Industry of Turkmenistan
and the Ministry of Water and Power of Afghanistan. According to the Amendment, the
Seller (Turkmenistan) has to provide 759,738,176 kWh of energy during the period October
2003 to December 2010 at the price of US Cents 2 per kWh. The validity of the Agreement
is January 2011.

CASA-1000 Update

4-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

COST OF SUPPLY

Final Feasibility Update Report

COST OF SUPPLY

Assessment of Cost of Supply Assumptions


Costs of supply for economic analysis are normally derived from the specific project costs or
from a long-range country-wide or region-wide master plan analysis. The Long-Run Marginal
Cost (LRMC) is approximated by the levelized cost of supply.
For both Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic, there has not been any recent update of a
master plan for the electricity sector.
However, several projects have been identified and are at different stages of implementation
(e.g. Rogun HPP, Fon Yagnob coal TPP in Tajikistan and Kambarata 1 HPP and Kara
Keche coal TPP in Kyrgyz Republic). Neither the cost of development of these projects nor
the definition of their technical characteristics is available from recent or updated studies.
Given the scarcity of reliable information needed to compute the LRMC, the price of exports
was used as an approximation for the cost of supply in Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic.
Tajikistan - Cost of Supply
Information on exports of electricity has been taken from the Statistical Agency under the
president of the Republic of Tajikistan (http://www.stat.tj/english/home.htm). In addition, the
cost of purchasing power from the Sangtuda I & II projects as well as for the O&M fixed
costs of Nurek and other existing hydro power plants have been considered. The cost of
supply for Tajikistan is estimated at 1.5 cents/kWh.
The Kyrgyz Republic - Cost of Supply
Information on exports of electricity has been taken from data provided by the NEGK and
JSC Power Plants, which was provided on a confidential basis.

Assessment of the Generation Costs in Pakistan


The price that the state-owned utility (NTDC) is paying for the recent long-term PPAs with
the IPPs was used as a proxy of LRMC to estimate the generation cost in Pakistan over the
life time of the interconnection project. The PPAs cost includes the cost of capacity and this
reflects the cost of building new generation projects. As the Power System Master Plan is
currently under preparation, the average of PPA costs is a good approximation to the
LRMC.
Only PPAs using residual fuel oil (RFO) and diesel have been considered. For the economic
analysis, the economic viability of the project was examined by using firm energy valued at
the levelized price of energy and capacity and non firm energy valued at the price of energy
only. The rate for firm energy is 13.2 US cents/kWh and the rate for non-firm is 9.2 US
cents/kWh. The prices are estimated based on the total levelized variable charges and the
total levelized tariff of IPPS determined by NEPRA as on June 30th 2009. Sensitivities that
use higher and lower opportunity costs for Pakistan are analysed in Section 10.

CASA-1000 Update

5-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Assessment of the Generation Costs in Afghanistan


The generation cost in Afghanistan is estimated to be, at least, US$ 0.06/kWh for the
study based on the information provided by DABS. The information provided by DABS
indicates that the cost of generation from Aynak power plant is expected to be
US$0.06/kWh. In the absence of any other credible data, this information is used for the
generation cost in Afghanistan.
In the Consultants view, it is plausible that generation costs in Afghanistan would be
higher than the above mentioned figure. A sensitivity analysis, presented in Section 10,
has been carried out to reflect this scenario (sensitivity #6 in Table 10-4).

CASA-1000 Update

5-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

PROJECT SELECTION AND


EXPORTABLE SURPLUS

Final Feasibility Update Report

PROJECT SELECTION AND EXPORTABLE SURPLUS

Various project sizes and configurations were studied in the context of this feasibility update.
This section discusses the size optimization analysis that was carried out as well as the
configurations that were analysed. In addition, the exportable surplus for the recommended
project size and configuration is showcased.
6.1

Assessment of Optimum Size of the Project

6.1.1

Methodology

To establish the optimal size of the interconnection from Tajikistan to Pakistan, with an
intermediate connection in Afghanistan, the methodology used was the ratio of Benefit /
Cost (B/C) for different transfer capabilities (1300 MW, 1800 MW, 2300 MW, 2800 MW and
3300 MW), considering the contribution of Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic. The benefits
and costs were brought to present value at the beginning of the year of commissioning of
the project estimated for early 2016 using a discount rate of 10%.
6.1.2

Export Potential to Afghanistan and Pakistan

The potential export surplus for each case was obtained from the SDDP model by running
the simulation over 20 years (2016-2035). Figure 6-1 shows the average energy results of
the export potential for different capacities of the CASA HVDC line.
AverageExporttoPAK/AFG(GWh)
1300MW 1800MW 2300MW 2800MW 3300MW
2016
4,009
4,796
5,206
5,637
5,779
2017
3,541
4,237
4,854
5,022
5,060
2018
3,738
4,301
4,718
4,868
4,887
2019
3,457
3,995
4,397
4,453
4,433
2020
3,283
3,885
4,228
4,216
4,214
2021
3,169
3,603
3,747
3,730
3,720
2022
3,063
3,590
3,901
3,930
3,934
2023
3,020
3,431
3,578
3,580
3,573
2024
2,890
3,297
3,480
3,502
3,521
2025
2,499
2,714
2,823
2,843
2,843
2026
2,581
2,902
2,988
2,997
2,997
2027
2,471
2,833
3,081
3,115
3,113
2028
2,097
2,438
2,549
2,562
2,563
2029
1,953
2,247
2,410
2,449
2,449
2030
1,857
2,134
2,177
2,187
2,187
2031
1,653
1,780
1,803
1,802
1,802
2032
1,444
1,599
1,596
1,596
1,596
2033
1,228
1,341
1,320
1,320
1,320
2034
1,052
1,112
1,114
1,114
1,114
2035
813
841
841
841
841

Year

1300MW

1800MW

2300MW

2800MW

2034

2032

2030

2028

2026

2024

2022

2020

2018

6,000
5,500
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2016

GWh

AverageExporttoPAK/AFG
ThroughCASALine
DifferentOptions

3300MW

Figure 6-1

Average Energy Export Potential to AFG & PAK1

It can be noted that for a few years, for example for 2021, the average potential in 2300 MW appears to be greater than that
of larger line capacities (though by a small margin, 0.5% in this case). This is related to the fact that the optimization of export
potential is done for the entire study period (20 years). As the model is concerned about optimizing the simulation over the
entire period, it is possible to see a marginally smaller export potential for a larger capacity if the results are analysed on a year
by year basis. However the benefit optimization over the entire period shows an increase in export potential over the different
capacities.

CASA-1000 Update

6-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


6.1.3

Benefits

For the benefits, the potential energy surplus was valued as described in section 5.
Considering that the peak load in Pakistan is coincident with the time of export potential
from the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan and as described in Section 5, the firm energy was
valued at the levelized price of energy and capacity contracts and the non-firm energy was
valued at the price of energy only.
6.1.4

Costs

The costs of supply considered in this analysis correspond to the exports in Tajikistan and
the Kyrgyz Republic as developed in Section 5.
The summary of transmission investments for the HVDC interconnection between Sangtuda,
Kabul and Peshawar, the HVAC interconnection between Datka and Khoudjand, the internal
reinforcements in the countries and environmental and social costs are shown in Table 6-1.
Details of these costs are provided in appendix I, note I.4. Note that based on the analysis
presented in section 8.6, the Datka-Khoudjand line is taken as the most viable alternative for
interconnection of the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan. The environmental and social costs
vary minimally as a function of the line capacity, hence the same environmental and social
costs have been assumed for all options.
Estimates provided are inclusive of EPC costs, owners engineer fees and contingencies.
The O&M cost was estimated as 3% of the investment cost following the experience of the
consultant for this type of project. This takes into account additional cost due to rugged
terrain and other local conditions.
Table 6-1

Total Project Costs for the Different Size Options (in million US$)

HVDC Size
Option
(MW)

HVDC
Component
including
electrodes

HVAC
Component

Reinforcements
in TAJ, PAK and
AFG

Environmental
and Social
Costs

Total
Project

1,300

626

197

34

16

873

1,800

716

197

60

16

989

2,300

758

197

98

16

1069

2,800

881

197

98

16

1192

3,300

909

197

98

16

1220

*: Total investment includes the EPC costs, owners engineering fees and contingencies
6.1.5

Results

The analysis shows that there is very little difference between the B/C ratios of the 1300
MW, 1800 MW and 2300 MW options as shown in Table 6-2.

CASA-1000 Update

6-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


Table 6-2

Economic Evaluation for Size Optimization

HVDC Size Option


(MW)

B/C Ratio

EIRR (%)

NPV (MUSD)

1300 MW

1.34

16.2%

539

1800 MW

1.38

17.1%

701

2300 MW

1.40

17.5%

786

2800 MW

1.32

16.1%

689

3300 MW

1.31

16.0%

677

If there are financial constraints, the best configuration is a 1300 MW interconnection.


Transmission lines are manufactured in discrete step sizes and sizing the transmission lines
for 1300 MW effectively restricts the capacity to about 1300 MW. It is possible to build the
line with a conductor size that is capable of carrying the optimum power level (2300 MW) but
limit the HVDC converter capacity initially to 1300 MW. This option adds roughly 7% (41
million USD) to the minimum cost 1300 MW option (1300 MW converter capacity with 1300
MW line capacity). However, as the conceptual framework for the project is based on using
existing low cost energy in the exporting countries to supply the importing countries, and
that this energy decreased over the study period, it is preferable to build a line with a 1300
MW conductor. Should the existence of this line attract investors in the future and more
energy become available than the CASA project can transmit, another line can be built to
transport this energy.
6.2

Project Configurations

The main project configurations that were considered are presented in this subsection.
6.2.1

Converter Capacity at Peshawar

The assessment of the import and export potential for Afghanistan in section 4 shows that
there is a possibility that Afghanistan will have sufficient power to meet its internal load, with
potential surplus, especially during the initial years of the study period. In light of this
conclusion, a converter capacity of 1,300 MW at Peshawar, equal to that at Sangtuda,
would provide flexibility for Pakistan to absorb up to 1300 MW, should Afghanistan not need
to import its entire share. Whenever Kabul is unable to take its allocation of 300 MW, this
power can be transferred to Peshawar over the HVDC line and absorbed into the Pakistan
system. If the Kabul system has a surplus of power and the Tajikistan/Kyrgyz system is
unable to provide the full 1,300 MW of export power, then Kabul could export to Pakistan via
its converter station. Therefore the base case configuration is taken as having 1,300 MW
converters at Sangtuda and Peshawar and 300 MW at Kabul, and a 1,300 MW transmission
line.
It is important to note that all converters will be able to both import and export power. Hence
Afghanistan will also be able to export any surplus energy to Pakistan, provided the
combined imports to Pakistan do not exceed 1,300 MW.
6.2.2

Back-feed Option between Peshawar and Kabul

As an alternative to a converter station in Kabul supplying power from the HVDC line, the
multi-terminal arrangement could be replaced by a 2-terminal HVDC interconnection
between Sangtuda and Peshawar. The power dedicated to Kabul could then be supplied
CASA-1000 Update

6-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


via a 220 kV double circuit line from Peshawar back to Kabul. The following advantages
and disadvantages can be enumerated at this time. The advantages are as follows:

The back-feed option would allow electricity to be provided to communities along the
Peshawar-Kabul route.

The back-feed option would provide some flexibility for Afghanistan to export surplus
energy to Pakistan irrespective of whether Pakistan is importing 1,300 MW from
Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic.

Removing the converter station in Kabul would realize a cost reduction (including
EPC costs and estimated owners engineer fees and contingencies) in converter
costs and HVDC line costs of approximately MUS$ 75. It also entails a reduction of
MUS$ 6 related to the electrode in Kabul. The cost of a 260 km, 220 kV double
circuit line from Peshawar to Kabul, via Jalalabad would also be approximately
MUS$ 73 plus the cost of extending the 220 kV switchyard in Peshawar
(approximately MUS$ 5). The net cost reduction would therefore be MUS$3. This is
summarized in Table 6-4 and additional cost details are provided in Appendix I, note
I.4.

On the other hand, several disadvantages to this configuration have been identified. These
are:

The presence of an AC tie between Peshawar and Kabul would mean that; either the
Pakistan/Afghanistan/Tajikistan/Kyrgyz Republic systems would be operated as a
synchronously connected system; or, the supply to Kabul must be switched between
the supply from Peshawar and the supply from Tajikistan on an either/or basis.

Operating a low-capacity 220 kV AC link in parallel with a high-capacity DC link will


give rise to operational problems. In the event of a fault on the HVDC line, the power
transfer between Tajikistan and Pakistan will automatically transfer to the 220 kV
parallel path until such time as the HVDC can be re-scheduled. Although this time
may only be for a few tens of cycles, it would almost certainly result in the electrical
collapse of the 220 kV link, which would then be tripped on overload. Also, because
the AC link is of relatively low capacity, any generation outages in either the Pakistan
system or the Tajikistan/Kyrgyz Republic system will result in significant power
oscillations on the 220 kV link that could result in tripping of the 220 kV lines.

Operating the 220 kV links to Kabul on a segregated basis will also result in
operational difficulties. The northern 220 kV link to Tajikistan is rated at 300 MW, but
could only deliver 200 MW to Kabul, the remainder being taken at Kunduz and Pol-eKhumri. Supplying a total of 300 MW to Kabul would require 100 MW to be supplied
from Peshawar. To achieve this without synchronously connecting all the systems
together would require some splitting of the system in Kabul. This will involve
complex switching arrangements to cater for all system configurations and will
inevitably lead to a degradation in the reliability of supply to the Kabul area. It is
understood that, at present, the Kabul system is operated in a split arrangement to
allow other imports from Central Asia to be utilized there. While this may be
acceptable at the present load levels in Kabul, it will inevitably lead to problems in
the future as the load increases and will result in a degradation of the supply
reliability and additional cost in the sub-transmission system.

Supplying power that is essentially being carried on the HVDC interconnection back
to Kabul on an AC link will result in higher system losses.

To remove the operational difficulties that would arise from operating the Pakistan,
Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyz Republic systems as synchronously connected

CASA-1000 Update

6-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


systems would require that the back-feed from Peshawar be taken into Kabul
through a back-to-back HVDC converter. This would remove the synchronous
connection between the Pakistan and Tajikistan/Kyrgyz systems and prevent the
transfer of power from the HVDC interconnection to the AC interconnection. The cost
of a 200 MW back-to-back converter would be in the range of MUS$ 25-30. Thus,
the provision of a back-to-back converter would make the back-feed option more
costly than the 3-terminal HVDC option. The location of the back-to-back converter
station is immaterial from an electrical or contractual standpoint, but would most
easily be accommodated in an existing substation.
In terms of providing electricity to communities along the Peshawar-Kabul route, it might be
more economical to provide such a supply independently of the interconnection. If the total
load requirement is not large enough to warrant a 220 kV supply, then cost savings can be
achieved by using a lower voltage supply, such as 110 kV. This could be provided directly
from Kabul to Jalalabad or onto the border with Pakistan, picking up loads at the smaller
communities on the way, with low-cost tap-offs or even at lower voltages via distribution
networks from Kabul and Jalalabad. This type of supply arrangement also internalizes the
supply to these communities and does not result in the supply being provided by the
Pakistan system. This may be an important consideration given that the Pakistan system is
itself short of power and may not be in a position to maintain the supply into Afghanistan at
the same time as it needs to shed load due to capacity shortages.
The backfeed option with a simple double circuit 220 kV line to Kabul could resolve a
number of problems in the short term. However it brings about operational difficulties related
to the synchronous operation of the Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyz Republic
systems. For the long term goal of having a unified and synchronized system in Afghanistan,
the backfeed would only work effectively if there is an additional back-to-back HVDC
converter in Kabul or Peshawar.
There are also commercial issues that need to be considered since power for Afghanistan
will have to transit Pakistan territory to get back to Kabul. However, these issues can be
resolved through appropriate contractual arrangements.
6.2.3

Potential Addition of a Fourth Terminal to the CASA Interconnection

The implications of eventually adding a fourth terminal to the overall scheme were also
examined. This may be related to exporting any surplus power from other countries, such as
Uzbekistan, down to Pakistan or Afghanistan. A technical note, included in Appendix I (note
I.5), summarizes the impacts of a fourth terminal on the project. A summary of the
conclusions is presented in this section.
The main two impacts of the addition of a fourth terminal are the following:

Limitations on operations and power transfers: operational limitations will apply


unless certain provisions are taken in the initial design stage:

the DC line needs to be rated accordingly;

the location of the fourth terminal relative to the other three needs to be known, and

the role of each terminal needs to be fixed (importer vs. exporter).

Cost: if the future implementation of a 4th terminal is confirmed then all provisions
should be taken at the initial design stage. The most significant impact on cost
consists in over-rating the DC line to accommodate the extra power to flow to/from
the fourth terminal.

CASA-1000 Update

6-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


The only planned multi-terminal system in operation (Quebec-New England) was finally
restricted to three terminals because of performance concerns (and is being operated most
of the time as a two terminal), and there has been no experience world-wide in planning
and executing multi-terminal HVDC schemes since. The implementation of a four-terminal
scheme for the CASA project would then constitute a milestone in the application of HVDC
transmission.
For the purpose of the CASA project, it is the Consultants technical recommendation that
the number of terminals be limited to either two or three.
6.3

Summary of Project Options

A diagram of the recommended option is provided in Figure 6-2.

Figure 6-2

CASA-1000 Update

Diagram of Recommended CASA Project

6-6

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


Table 6.3 summarizes the different project sizes analysed for the Tajikistan-AfghanistanPakistan interconnection as part of the feasibility study update. The detailed costs are
provided in Appendix I, note I.4.
Table 6-3

Options Analysed for Optimization of Project Size

Option

Total Cost (MUSD)

3 terminal 1,300-300-1,300

873

3 terminal 1,800-300-1,800

989

3 terminal 2,300-300-2,300

1069

3 terminal 2,800-300-2,800

1192

3 terminal 3,300-300-3,300

1220

In addition to the project sizes, different project configurations were investigated. These are
highlighted in Table 6-4.
Table 6-4

Project Configurations Analysed for 1,300 MW Taj-Afg-Pak HVDC


Interconnection
Total Cost
(MUSD)

Analysis Summary

Option

Recommended
option:
3 terminal
1,300-300-1,300

873

Offers flexibility for Pakistan to absorb any of


Afghanistans share that the latter does not need, up to
1,300 MW, which is desirable given the import potential
assessments presented in sections 3 and 4.

3 terminal
1,300-300-1,000

858

Most cost effective option, though does not offer flexibility


of option A.

3 terminal
1,300-300-1,300
with 2,300 MW line

913

Offers the flexibility to accommodate additional


generation capacity though not recommended as the
project is based on using existing low cost energy in the
exporting countries to supply the importing countries, and
that this energy decreased over the study period.

2 terminal
with back-feed

870

Offers the benefit of providing electrification to towns


between Kabul and Jalalabad. However it would render
permanent the segregation of Kabul North and South
power systems, which is not recommended, or would
require a back to back HVDC converter which would
increase the costs.

4 terminal
interconnection

n/a

Implies limitations on operations and power transfers and


significant costs as a 4 terminal HVDC scheme has never
been implemented.

Alternate routing in
Salang Pass (see
section 7)

923 to
938

Bypasses congestion at Salang Pass but increases the


HVDC route by 150 to 200 km.

Note: Project Costs include EPC, Owners Engineer and Contingency estimates, country
reinforcements and environmental and social costs

CASA-1000 Update

6-7

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


Table 6-5 summarizes the project scenarios that were investigated for the Kyrgyz-Tajik
interconnection.
Table 6-5

Project Scenarios Analysed for Kyr-Taj HVAC Interconnection

Option

Total Cost

Reference
Section

Datka-Khoudjand

197

8.6

ii

Datka-Sangtuda

288

8.6

Project Costs include EPC, Owners Engineer and Contingency estimates.

6.4

Exportable Surplus

Figure 6-3 shows the monthly distribution of the exportable surplus through the CASA line
with 1300 MW converters in Tajikistan, 300 MW in Afghanistan and 1300 MW in Pakistan,
for the first 4 years (2016-2019).
The exportable surplus was obtained using relaxed reservoir coordination constraints during
the summer months, which increase flexibility in taking advantage of Toktoguls larger size
without significantly changing Nureks operation. These constraints are introduced without
violating riparian issues. This firms up the power available particularly during shoulder
months, and increases the benefits overall. Additional details on the summer reservoir
coordination are provided in Appendix I, Note I.3.
1,100
1,000
900
800
GWh

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Nov19

Sep19

Jul19

May19

Mar19

Jan19

Sep18

Nov18

Jul18

May18

Mar18

Jan18

Nov17

Sep17

Jul17

May17

Jan17

Mar17

Nov16

Sep16

Jul16

May16

Mar16

Jan16

Month
Tajikistan

Figure 6-3

CASA-1000 Update

KyrgyzRepublic

Monthly Distribution of Exportable Surplus (1300 MW)

6-8

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


The export is concentrated in the 5 months of the summer, from May to September. (Aprils
contribution is minimal). The peak is in July, when Nurek has the highest inflows on
average. The Kyrgyz Republics contribution is mostly in the months of May and September.
With the collaboration of the systems and the coordinated optimization of Nurek and
Toktogul, the available surplus can be distributed over 5 months instead of three. Toktogul
shifts production to the beginning and end of summer and Nurek handles the production in
July and August. Spilling in July and August is thus avoided by not having Toktogul also
optimize its production for these months, where it historically also has its highest inflows.
Analysis of Availability of Firm Energy during Peak Summer Hours
A study was conducted to evaluate the amount of firm energy available for export during the
peak summer hours through the 1,300 MW CASA Line. Two alternatives were considered
for the duration of the peak hours: 4 hours and 2.4 hours.
It was observed that the firm export to Pakistan through the CASA Line is above the 80%
rating (1,040 MW) of the line for 4 months of the summer during the first 3 years for the 4
peak hours case, and during the first 5 years for the 2.4 peak hours case. During
subsequent years, with the load increasing and without any generation expansion plan, the
duration for which this level of firm export is available reduces progressively.
It can be then guaranteed to a 95% probability that there will be available export of at least
1,000 MW for the peak hours during the summer for the initial years of the project. With the
likely generation expansion, this period of guaranteed peak summer export will extend
further.

CASA-1000 Update

6-9

020913-4SRP-0300-01

TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES

Final Feasibility Update Report

TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTE

In light of recent developments in the region, the route recommended in the original study
was reviewed. The findings are summarized in this section, with an emphasis on the space
constraints around the Salang pass and the availability of space for the proposed converter
stations at Sangtuda-II and Peshawar. Figure 7-1 is a high level map of the line route for the
HVDC and HVAC components of the project.

Figure 7-1
CASA-1000 Update

Proposed Transmission Line Route for CASA Project


7-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

7.1

HVDC Transmission Line Route

A desk top review of the route and terminal stations was carried out, with particular attention
to the Kabul-Peshawar portion of the DC transmission line. Given security considerations
such as demining, and operation and maintenance requirements around access to the line
for repair and maintenance, the line routing recommended in the original study is deemed
most suitable. The HVDC line route details are presented in Appendix C.
7.1.1

Salang Pass Space Constraints

The options of routing the HVDC line in the vicinity of Salang Pass are limited. Much of the
existing Right of Way has been utilized for the existing 220 kV Line. The more precise
planning of the existing space will only be possible after the detailed survey of the area. This
detailed survey is usually specified as part of the turn key line construction contract and is
performed by a qualified overhead line surveying company.
However, at this stage according to the information available from site investigations
performed at the time of phase 2 works of the original study, about 7 km of 220 kV double
circuit existing line constrains the routing of the proposed HVDC line in Salang Pass area.
A few options to locate the proposed HVDC line are envisaged as mentioned below:

Relocate the existing 220 kV line closer to the mountain on steel tubular poles with
insulated arms and shorter spans to limit the conductor swing; and route the
proposed HVDC line on steel tubular poles as well but closer to the tunnel.
The estimated cost for converting 7 km of 220 kV double circuit line as tubular pole
line having reduced average span of 275 m can be assessed as US$ 600,000 per
km. A total estimated investment of US$ 4.2 million is envisaged. It is to be noted
that a major outage of both the 220 kV circuits will be required during pole erection
and re-stringing. The existing conductors and some other material can be re-used
and the salvaged lattice steel towers can be bundled and transported to a store yard
for future use as spare towers.

If relocating the 220 kV line does not provide adequate corridor to place towers for
the HVDC line, the spans can be shortened to limit the conductor swing and hence
narrow the required minimum Right of Way for the proposed line. In this option,
lattice steel towers with narrow foot print can also be utilized for the HVDC line.

In case the existing corridor is too narrow at some places and the above two options
cannot be employed, then converting a portion of the existing 220 kV line to
underground cables can be considered .This will allow the existing 220 kV ROW to
be used for the proposed HVDC line. In this case surge arresters and terminal
structures will be required on both ends of the underground cable section. The
required length of the existing OHL which would be needed to be converted to
underground cable can only be determined after a detailed survey by a qualified
overhead line surveying company.

Approximately 7 km of the existing 220 kV double circuit line is envisaged to be


undergrounded in order to use the existing 220 kV line ROW for the proposed HVDC
line. The budget estimate for the required cable 220 kV XLPE cable is US$ 2 million per
kilometre including the terminal equipment. An estimated total additional investment of
US$ 28 million is envisaged for the option mentioned above.
The implementation of this option will also require an outage on the 220 kV circuits.
CASA-1000 Update

7-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

All existing line materials and latticed steel towers can be salvaged, suitably packed and
can be used as spare material/towers.
7.1.2

Alternate Route to Bypass Salang Pass

Figure 7-2 highlights in red a possible alternate route that bypasses the congestion at the
Salang Pass. The alternate route is a western detour via Shibar Pass. However, this
increases the transmission line by 150 to 200 km and adds significant cost, around 50 to 65
US$ million, to the overall project.

Figure 7-2

Alternate Route to Bypass Salang Pass


Source: Transoxiana

7.1.3

Space Availability for the Proposed Converter Stations at Sangtuda-II and


Peshawar

As indicated by NTDC, the existing 500 kV substation at Sheikh Muhammadi has


constraints on further extension related to right of way for additional lines. This is shown in
Figure 7-3. NTDC has proposed a new substation (Peshawar New), at a suitable nearby
location, near the 500 kV and 220 kV network feeding PESCO. The cost estimates have
been revised to include a 500 kV, 10 km in and out connection to the location of Peshawar
New from the existing 500 kV line.
The Sangtuda II proposed converter location is shown in Figure 7-4. In view of encroaching
private lands, it is recommended to reserve the area for the future construction of the
converter station.
CASA-1000 Update

7-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

7.2

HVAC Transmission Line (Kyr-Taj) Route

The transmission line route details for the HVAC 500 kV line between Datka and Khoudjand
were developed as part of the original CASA-1000 feasibility study and are shown in
Appendix D.

CASA-1000 Update

7-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Figure 7-3
CASA-1000 Update

Right of Way Constrained Existing Peshawar Substation


7-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Figure 7-4
CASA-1000 Update

Proposed Converter Location for Sangtuda-II Substation


7-6

020913-4SRP-0300-01

TRANSMISSION NEEDS OF EXISTING


NETWORKS

Final Feasibility Update Report

TRANSMISSION NEEDS OF EXISTING NETWORKS

Data was collected on the transmission needs of each of the Tajikistan, Afghanistan and
Pakistan networks. The results of the assessment include (i) a review of the existing load
flow studies, where applicable, (ii) an assessment of the transmission reinforcements in
each network, and (iii) a specific load swapping study in the case of Tajikistan importing
power from the Kyrgyz Republic for further export through the HVDC line.
8.1

Transmission Needs of the Existing Network in Tajikistan

Methodology
Based on the data provided in the Jacobs report and the internal Tajikistan network report
by the Asian Development Bank (ADB report), a high level analysis of the capacity of the
Tajikistan 500/220 kV power network to deliver the CASA project at Sangtuda is carried out
in the following steps:

Determination of the location and levels of the main load centers;

Identification of the main generators and their typical power outputs;

A high level schematic of the Tajikistan network is developed by identifying the main
500/220 kV transmission corridors;

Identification of the predominant direction of the power flows;

Analysis of the approximate magnitudes of the flow of power within the Tajikistan
network for the different CASA options; and,

Recommendation of the corresponding conservative upgrades for the Tajikistan


220/500 kV power grid for each CASA option.

Based on the review of the data, the following main assumptions were used for the
assessment of the transmission needs of the existing network:

The Uzbekistan and Tajikistan networks are not connected and do not exchange
power at the time.

Results
The general assessment after a review of the input data follows:

The predominant flows in Tajikistan prior to the commissioning of the CASA project
are south to north;

The bulk of the generation is located at Nurek (3000MW) and Sangtuda I and II (890
MW) power plants;

The demand for Tajikistan is concentrated in the capital Dushanbe;

The power generated at Sangtuda I and II power plants is evacuated via the 220 kV
corridor to the load center at Dushanbe;

The power generated at Nurek power plant is evacuated through the 500 kV corridor
to Regar substation and finally to Dushanbe;

By the time that the HVDC interconnection will be in place, there will also be a power
export from Tajikistan to Afghanistan through the Sangtuda Kunduz and Pol-e-

CASA-1000 Update

8-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Khumi 220 kV, double circuit interconnection which will also be extended from Pol-eKhumri to Kabul. This interconnection is rated at 300 MW, however this applies to
the capability of the line at the Sangtuda end. The section of the line from Pol-e
Khumri to Kabul is 200 km in length. For such a length, the maximum safe loading
would be 2 x the surge impedance loading of 125 MW or 250 MW. Taking into
account the section from Sangtuda to Pol-e-Khumri (265 km route length), the
maximum delivery capability at Kabul would be closer to 200 MW; and,

Figure 8-1 depicts a high-level flow diagram for the power transfer between
Sangtuda, Nurek and Dushanbe if the CASA project is not in service. Note that most
of the power supplying the load center at Dushanbe needs to flow from Nurek and
Sangtuda.

Figure 8-1

Diagram of the power flow between Nurek and Sangtuda power stations
and the load center at Dushanbe without the CASA project

Once the CASA project is operational, the net power injection at the Sangtuda
substation will be equal to the generated power at the Sangtuda I and II power plants
minus the 220 kV/200MW export to Afghanistan and the power drawn by the CASA
DC interconnection.

Figure 8-2 depicts a high-level flow diagram for the power transfer between
Sangtuda, Nurek and Dushanbe with the CASA project in service. This power
swapping option feeds a fraction of the load in Dushanbe through the HVAC 500kV
interconnection between Tajikistan and Kyrgyztan, while using equivalent power
generated in Sangtuda and Nurek power stations to be exported through the HVDC
connection between Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Note that the power
transfer requirement between Nurek/Sangtuda and Dushanbe is decreased when
compared to the case without the CASA project.

CASA-1000 Update

8-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Figure 8-2

Diagram of the power flow between Nurek and Sangtuda power stations
and the load center at Dushanbe with the CASA project

After close examination of the PSS/E print out data in the ADB report Tajikistan:
Power Rehabilitation Phase II, the power transfer between Nurek and Sangtuda
consists mainly of the equivalent of two 220 kV transmission paths with a combined
capacity of 2x276 MW = 552MW1. Other parallel paths between Nurek and Sangtuda
are assumed to contribute marginally to the power transfer capacity between both
substations.

According to the Techno-Economic Pre-feasibility Study for the Central Asia-South


Asia Transmission Interconnection (CASA 1000) dated December 2007, the length
of a line between Nurek and Sangtuda substations is 80 km.

The table below shows the power to be transferred to Sangtuda and the recommended
reinforcement between Nurek and Sangtuda substations for the different CASA options.
Table 8-1

Tajikistan Proposed High Level Transmission Reinforcements for the


Different CASA Options

HVDC
capacity

Nurek-Sangtuda
Transfer

Transfer Deficit

Proposed Reinforcement

1300

610

58

220kV single circuit

1800

1110

558

500kV single circuit

2300

1610

1058

500kV double circuit

2800

2110

1558

500kV double circuit

3300

2610

2058

500kV double circuit

InthisanalysisnoreliabilitycriterionsuchasN1hasbeenconsidered.

CASA-1000 Update

8-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Tajikistan proposed a number of transmission options. The consultant considered these


options and included indicative costs for reinforcing the networks to ensure that CASA
power can be evacuated reliably based on the original configurations proposed in the first
CASA-1000 study.
8.2

Transmission Needs of the Existing Network in the Kyrgyz Republic

The power system in the Kyrgyz Republic can deliver up to 1000 MW at the Datka
substation without incurring significant costs in the upgrade of its internal AC power system.
From Datka, this level of power can be delivered to Tajikistan either through a 500 kV line to
Khoujand or a direct 500kV line to Sangtuda.
8.3

Transmission Needs of the Existing Network in Afghanistan

The Afghanistan 220kV network at Kabul is in the early stages of development and is mainly
a distribution system at this time. The capability of the distribution system is limited since
much of this network is in need of repair and rehabilitation. The upgrades necessary to
allow the Kabul system to absorb the import from Tajikistan are required whether or not the
interconnection is built since the power must come from either the interconnection or from
local generation. Thus any costs associated with such an upgrade are external to the
economic viability of the interconnection.
In order to integrate the converter station into the existing transmission/distribution network
in Kabul, an allowance for 10 km of 220 kV double circuit line has been made in the cost
estimate.
8.4

Transmission Needs of the Existing Network in Pakistan

Based on load flow studies carried out during the initial assessment of the HVDC
interconnection, the Pakistan network at Peshawar can absorb all the power to be delivered
by the CASA DC interconnection project without incurring significant costs in the upgrade of
their AC power systems up to an import level of 1,000 MW. If the import level into Pakistan
were increased to 1,300 MW or 2,000 MW, then some additional 500 kV transmission out of
the Peshawar area would probably be required. This could take the form of a 500 kV line
from Peshawar to Ghazi Barotha, as examined in the Phase-I report. However, if the import
were kept at the 1,000 MW level, the additional 300 to 1,000 MW would have to be provided
from generation in the south of the country. This would certainly require additional
transmission capacity from south to north and would be more expensive than the
reinforcement out of Peshawar. Thus any reinforcement of the 500 kV system out of
Peshawar is considered as part of general system reinforcement and is not directly tied to
the interconnection project.
Access restrictions to the Peshawar substation site due to existing 500 kV and 220 kV lines
would mean that the HVDC converter station would need to be located at a site remote from
Peshawar and tied into the Peshawar substation via some short 500 kV circuits. This has
been included in the cost estimate by allowing for two 10 km 500 kV circuit to integrate the
converter station into the existing network.
8.5

Interconnection between the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan

Two options of delivering power from the Kyrgyz Republic to Sangtuda are examined. The
first option is to deliver the power over a dedicated line directly from Datka to Sangtuda. The
second option is to deliver power from Datka to Khoudjand on a dedicated line and using the

CASA-1000 Update

8-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

internal Barki Tojik network to transmit power onward to Sangtuda. The latter option is
effectively a swap of power with power from Sangtuda that normally serves the load in North
East Tajikistan being supplied by power from the Kyrgyz Republic at Khoujand.
Analysis of Datka Khoudjand Interconnection - 500 kV / 1000 MW
After reviewing the input data, the demand at Dushanbe is generally greater than the power
imported by Tajikistan from the Kyrgyz republic via the Datka-Khoudjand interconnection. As
most of the generation in Tajikistan is located in Sangtuda and Nurek power plants located
south of Dushanbe, the effect of this interconnection is to decrease the power flow from the
south to the north. This power flow reduction causes a greater proportion of the power
generated in Nurek and Sangtuda power plants to be exported though the CASA
interconnection. This option has been referred to as the power swapping option where a
power import in the demand-rich north is swapped by a power export in the generation-rich
south. Under this Option, Table 8-1 which enumerates the transmission reinforcements, is
still valid.
Analysis of Datka Sangtuda Interconnection - 500 kV / 1000 MW
A high-level preliminary assessment of the Datka Sangtuda power line shows that:

The length of the line is roughly 40% to 50% longer that of the Datka - Khoudjand
line.

Line compensation (series and shunt) and one intermediate substation are likely to
be necessary in order to transport 1000 MW over a 500 kV / 670 km line.

From the point of view of the Tajikistan internal power system, connecting Datka directly to
Sangtuda possibly requires more extensive AC system reinforcements in Tajikistan when
compared to the Datka-Khoudjand interconnection. The injection of power at Sangtuda
substation from Kyrgyzstan only adds to the predominant south-north power flow in
Tajikistan and aggravates any pre-existing transmission deficiency. Connecting Datka
directly to Sangtuda does not take advantage of serving a fraction of the load at Dushanbe
from Kyrgyzstan and the subsequent reduction of the transmission requirements from
Nurek/Sangtuda to Dushanbe (the so-called swapping of power). The estimated costs and
transmission losses related to both options are summarized in Table 8.2 under the following
assumptions:

The Datka Sangtuda line is 40 percent longer that the Datka Khoudjand line.

One intermediate substation is required for the Datka Sangtuda line.

Losses are calculated for a line loading of 1000 MW at a power factor of 0.95.

Table 8-2

Interconnection Options between the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan


High Level Cost Estimation and Transmission Losses

Kyr-Taj Interconnection Option

Costs

Transmission Losses

US $ million

MW

Datka - Khoudjand

197

13

Datka - Sangtuda

288

18

Project Costs include EPC, Owners Engineer and Contingency estimates.

CASA-1000 Update

8-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Given the obvious advantages of the Datka Khoudjand interconnection, this option will be
taken as the basis for the economic analysis and the project costing. Please refer to section
9 for the detailed costing analysis of the Datka Khoudjand transmission line.
There are some contractual and operational issues that need to be addressed if the Barki
Tajik internal network is used to transfer the power from Khoudjand to Sangtuda. The
contractual issues related primarily to accounting of energy delivered to Barki Tajik network
from the Kyrgyz Republic and the equivalent energy being delivered to the CASA line. There
will have to be additional coordination required to ensure proper flows of power during the
time that power is transferred on the Datka Khoudjand line.
As noted above, there are significant costs associated with the construction of a dedicated
additional line. Not only will the power swapping option avoid additional transmission losses
through a dedicated line, but it will also result in reduced losses in the Barki Tajik system.

CASA-1000 Update

8-6

020913-4SRP-0300-01

PROJECT COST AND COUNTRY WIDE


ALLOCATION

Final Feasibility Update Report

PROJECT COST AND COUNTRY WIDE ALLOCATION

Various project sizes and configurations were analysed as part of this study. This section
provides cost details for the recommended project only. However other project alternatives
that were analysed in the process of selecting the recommended project are discussed in
section 6 and cost details for these are provided in appendix I, note I.4.
In this report updated costs are provided for the HVDC transmission interconnection
between Tajikistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan as well as for the HVAC interconnection
between the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan. The costs are presented as follows:

HVDC transmission interconnection (Tajikistan Afghanistan Pakistan);

HVAC transmission interconnection (the Kyrgyz Republic Tajikistan); and

Total project (HVDC interconnection + HVAC Interconnection) including contingency


and Owners engineer fees as well as the costs for the country network
reinforcement and environmental and social mitigations

The project costs presented in this section are best estimates based on current market
conditions. These may change over time in response to market volatility.
The project cost estimates are based on the following:

9.1

Costs of the 500 kV, 750 km HVDC interconnection link with conversion capacity of
1300 MW at Sangtuda, 300 MW at Kabul and 1300 at Peshawar.

The costs of relocating the existing 220 kV line closer to the mountain on steel
tubular poles with insulated arms and shorter spans to limit the conductor swing; and
route the proposed HVDC line on steel tubular poles (option 1 of the three options
proposed in section 7.2) are included in the HVDC interconnection link costs above.

Costs of ground electrodes at Sangtuda, Kabul and Peshawar.

Costs of the 500 kV, 477 km HVAC Interconnection between Kyrgyz republic (Datka
substation) and Tajikistan (Khoudjand substation)

Costs of the country network reinforcements

Costs of Environmental and Social mitigation measures


Cost Estimates of the Proposed HVDC Transmission Interconnection
(Tajikistan Afghanistan - Pakistan)

Table 9-1 provides the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) cost estimates for
the converter stations and substations, as well as the transmission line, for the Tajikistan Afghanistan - Pakistan HVDC interconnection.

CASA-1000 Update

9-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Table 9-1

EPC Cost Estimate for the HVDC Tajikistan - Afghanistan - Pakistan


Interconnection (US $ Million)
Converter
Stations +
Substations

Transmission Line

Electrodes

Total

Tajikistan

128

33

166

Afghanistan

71

162

239

Pakistan

128

20

153

326

216

16

558

Countries

The Kyrgyz Republic


Total EPC

*Estimates include EPC costs only.


Cost Estimates for the HVDC Converter Stations and Substations
SNC-Lavalin contacted the main suppliers of HVDC converters worldwide to provide an
updated cost estimate of the converter stations. These costs are based on the following
scope of work:

A complete turnkey contract for the converter stations including supply, delivery and
installation as well as site leveling and preparation;

The converters are comprised of a bipolar system with ground electrodes, +/- 500 kV
DC voltage, unity power factor at the AC buses, complete with valves, converter
transformers, AC and DC filters, reactive power compensation equipment, and a
50Hz filter on the DC line side, and complete with all switching, controls, buildings
and auxiliaries, but excluding AC line termination circuit breaker entries to the AC
switchyards. The AC bus voltage at either end is assumed to be 500 kV.

Cost Estimates for the HVDC Transmission Line


The HVDC line estimates are based on the costs presented in the original CASA Feasibility
Study Phase 2 report, updated to reflect appropriate changes. Cost references from relevant
projects were used for verification.
9.2

Cost Estimates of the Proposed HVAC Transmission Interconnection (the


Kyrgyz Republic - Tajikistan)

Table 9-2 below presents the cost estimates for the line and substations for the
Kyrgyz Republic - Tajikistan interconnection between Datka and Khoudjand.

CASA-1000 Update

9-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Table 9-2

EPC Cost Estimate for the HVAC Kyrgyz Republic - Tajikistan


Interconnection (US $ Million)

Countries

Substations

Transmission Line

Total

The Kyrgyz Republic

151

160

Tajikistan

16

Total EPC

18

158

176

*Estimates include EPC costs only.


Cost Estimates for the HVAC Line
The 500 kV line connecting the Kyrgyz republic (Datka substation) and Tajikistan
(Khoudjand substation) was assumed to follow the route described in the previous CASA
Feasibility Study Phase 2 Report, Section 4. The cost estimate was updated to reflect
changes in market conditions since the previous pre-feasibility study.
Cost Estimates for the HVAC Substations
The substation costs associated to the 500 kV Datka Khoudjand transmission line include
the line termination with associated switchgear and bus-work. The above estimation does
not include any step-up transformer cost.
9.3

Network Reinforcement Costs

In addition, the network reinforcements discussed in section 8 are included in the analysis
and are presented in Table 9-3.
Table 9-3

Network Reinforcement Costs in MUSD

HVDC Size Option (MW)

Tajikistan

Afghanistan

Pakistan

1,300

24.1

4.3

5.9

Notes: Project Costs include EPC, Owners Engineer and Contingency estimates

9.4

Environmental and Social Costs

The environment and social costs including land acquisition costs for Pakistan, Afghanistan
and Tajikistan estimated at 2007 prices in the Environmental Social Impact Assessment
reports for CASA Phase II Study were used. A 15% increase of the costs has been
assumed for inflation for the past 3 years.
The environment and social costs for Pakistan, Afghanistan and Tajikistan as well as for the
Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic interconnection line estimated in the Environmental
Social Impact Assessment reports for CASA Phase II Study are provided in Table 9-4 below.

CASA-1000 Update

9-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Table 9-4

Environment and Social Costs for Pakistan, Afghanistan and Tajikistan


(US $ Million)
Pak

Afg

Taj

Taj-Kyr
line

Total

Environmental and social cost estimate


for the original CASA Phase II Study

2.3

9.5

1.9

0.3

14.0

Environmental and social cost estimate


for the feasibility update*

2.6

10.9

2.2

0.4

16.1

* A 15% increase of the environment and social costs for CASA Phase II Study has been
assumed for inflation for the past 3 years.
9.5

Estimation of Total Project Costs

Table 9-5 below summarizes the total project costs, which includes the HVAC
interconnection between the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan and the HVDC interconnection
between Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan. All costs are based on the premise that this
project will be bid internationally and will adhere to international standards.
Table 9-5

EPC Cost Estimate for HVDC Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan and HVAC


Kyrgyz Republic-Tajikistan Interconnections (US $ Million)
HVDC Component

Countries

HVAC Component
HVDC
HVAC
Cost

Converter
Stations +
Substations

Electrodes

Transmission
Line

Substation

Overhead
Line

Tajikistan

128

33

182

Afghanistan

71

162

238

Pakistan

128

20

153

151

160

The Kyrgyz
Republic
Total EPC
Costs

558

176

734

*Estimates include EPC costs only.


In order to estimate the total project costs other costs such as Owners Engineer,
Contingency, country network reinforcements, environmental and social mitigation measures
were added to the EPC costs shown in Table 9-5 above. These costs were calculated as
follows:

Owners Engineer 2% of EPC Costs

Contingency 10% of EPC plus Owners Engineer Costs

Table 9-6 shows the total project costs based on the parameters defined above.

CASA-1000 Update

9-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Table 9-6

Total Project Cost (US $ Million)

Component

Project Costs

EPC (HVDC+HVAC)

734

Owners Engineer

15

Contingency

74

Internal Reinforcements in Countries (Including


engineering costs and contingencies)

34

TOTAL

873

In addition, interest during construction (IDC) calculated at a 5% annual interest rate


amounts to 80 million USD.
9.6

Currency Split

A portion of the total cost would be expended in Euros, and the remainder in US dollars.
Table 9-7 below shows the split between currencies for the EPC project costs. An exchange
rate of 1.4 was used to convert the Euros to US dollars as at 5 November 2010.
Table 9-7

Total Project Costs Currency Split


Project Costs

Component

EPC

CASA-1000 Update

Project Costs to be
Expended as Euros
(Costs Expressed in US
$ Million)

Project Costs to be
Expended as US $
(Costs Expressed in
US $ Million)

Total Project Costs


(Costs Expressed in
US $ Million)

240

633

873

9-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

10

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Final Feasibility Update Report

10

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

This section presents the analysis of two aspects of the interconnection project:

The economic evaluation including sensitivity analysis for the interconnection


alternative considered as a suitable option to have a transmission line of 1,300 MW
and converter stations of 1,300 MW capacity in Tajikistan, 1,300 MW in Pakistan and
300 MW in Afghanistan in view of the economic performance and funding constraints
to finance and execute the project; and

The benefit allocation to each of the countries and country-wise B/C ratios

10.1

Methodology

A number of approaches can be used for the economic analysis of the cross-border
transmission interconnection projects. The choice of appropriate approach depends on a
number of factors including the purpose of the interconnection project, data availability, and
so on. The following paragraphs present the proposed approach.
Broadly speaking, for the economic evaluation, the cost of generation in Tajikistan and the
Kyrgyz Republic plus the cost of interconnection are compared with the cost of generation in
Pakistan and Afghanistan. The avoided costs in Afghanistan and Pakistan due to import of
energy from Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic represent the benefits of the
interconnection.
The economic evaluation of the project involves the following principle tasks:

Assessment of the cost for export of power from Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic;

Assessment of the generation costs in Pakistan and Afghanistan;

Assessment of the transmission interconnection costs; and

Benefit-cost analysis and estimation of EIRR.

Cost of Supply of Exporters and Avoided Cost of Importers


The assessment of the costs of supply in Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic and the
generation costs in Pakistan and Afghanistan are detailed in section 5 and summarized
below.
The cost of supply for Kyrgyz Republic exports has been estimated based on recent export
contracts with volumes similar to the CASA exports. The levelized cost of export and present
value (PV) of the cost of export over the life of the interconnection project are assessed by
using an appropriate discount rate.
The cost of supply for Tajikistan exports has been estimated based on official figures for
2009 and the cost of purchasing power from the Sangtuda I & II projects as well as for the
O&M fixed costs of Nurek and other existing hydro power plants.
In Pakistan the figures for avoided cost of power have been estimated using the average
price of PPAs using residual fuel oil (RFO) and diesel. The levelized cost of generation and
PV of generation costs for Pakistan will also be assessed.

CASA-1000 Update

10-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

A conservative estimate has been used for the avoided cost of power in Afghanistan based
on recent project costs, existing import contracts and alternative sources.
Assessment of Transmission Interconnection Costs
One important aspect of the economic analysis is the estimation of the transmission
interconnection costs. After determining the principal technical parameters of the
transmission line, the transmission line costs for both the Tajikistan-Kyrgyz Republic HVAC
line and the Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan HVDC line are estimated. The detailed costs
are provided in section 9. The total cost of transmission interconnection and PV of the
transmission interconnection costs are estimated. This includes the investment and O&M
costs of the interconnection over the economic life of the interconnection.
The reinforcement costs in Tajikistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan required for delivering the
power from the exporting countries to the importing countries were also estimated and
included in the project costs for the economic analysis. In addition, provision was made for
environmental and social costs.
The costs associated with the project are:

HVDC Interconnection Cost between Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan


(Investment and O&M);

Ground electrodes in Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan;

HVAC Interconnection Cost between Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic (Investment
and O&M);

Reinforcement costs in Tajikistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan (Investment and O&M);


and

Project environmental and social costs.

Assessment of Benefits
As regards the project economic benefits, it is to be noted that the primary economic
benefits will result from the export of lower-cost energy from Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz
Republic which will displace the higher-cost energy in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Once the
system costs of generation are estimated in both the exporting countries (the Kyrgyz
Republic and Tajikistan) and the importing countries (Pakistan and Afghanistan), the
benefits of the interconnection are assessed by comparing the system cost of generation in
the exporting countries plus the cost of transmission interconnection with the cost of
generation in the importing countries.
The interconnection can also provide secondary environmental, social and economic
benefits. Though these benefits are discussed in section 10.3.2, for this study only the
primary economic benefits were quantified and included in the economic analysis.
Benefit-Cost Analysis and Estimation of EIRR
The benefit-cost ratio of the project is determined by calculating the ratio of the benefits of
the project and the transmission interconnection costs. The EIRR is estimated based on the
benefit and cost flow streams over the study period. Other benefits such as environmental
benefits and indirect benefits shall be assessed and included for the analysis in the next
stage.

CASA-1000 Update

10-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

10.2

Interconnection Option for Economic Analysis

As presented in section 6.1, the size optimization analysis shows that there is very little
difference between the B/C ratios of the 1,300 MW, 1,800 MW and 2,300 MW options.
However, in the event of funding constraints to finance and execute a project of 1,800 MW
or 2,300 MW, the recommended option is to have a transmission line of 1,300 MW and
converter stations of 1,300 MW in Tajikistan, 1,300 MW in Pakistan and 300 MW in
Afghanistan. The 1,300 MW converter capacity in Peshawar provides flexibility that would
enable Pakistan to import, in addition to its 1,000 MW share, any of Afghanistans 300 MW
that it may not need. This option has been used as the base case for the economic analysis
keeping the export energy surplus to the level of 1,300 MW.
10.3

Major Assumptions and Input Data

Major assumptions and input economic parameters that were used for the economic
evaluation are provided in the following paragraphs.
It is important to note that the feasibility study is based on a number of conservative
assumptions, listed below:

The energy surplus potential was assessed based on the assumption that no
additional generation capacity will be added during the study horizon in the exporting
countries. A sensitivity assuming that generation is built to compensate for the
increase in load, hence providing constant energy export to Pakistan and
Afghanistan, is shown in section 10.6 (see sensitivity #7).

A conservative rate was used for energy opportunity cost in Pakistan. A sensitivity
analysis with a higher rate is presented in section 10.6 (see sensitivity #4).

A conservative rate of 0.06 $/kWh was used for energy opportunity cost in
Afghanistan. A sensitivity analysis with a higher rate is presented in section 10.6 (see
sensitivity #6).

Only primary economic benefits were quantified. Other secondary benefits


(environmental, social) were not quantified.

10.3.1

Costs

The costs required to be assessed for the study include:

The cost for export of power from Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic;

Investment and O&M costs of CASA project including the HVDC interconnection
between Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the interconnection between the Kyrgyz
Republic and Tajikistan, the reinforcement costs in Tajikistan, Pakistan and
Afghanistan, and the project environmental and social costs; and

Generation cost (LRMC) in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Assessment of the Cost for Export of power from Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic
As detailed in section 5, the cost of supply for Kyrgyz Republic exports has been estimated
based on recent export contracts with volumes similar to the CASA exports, provided on a
confidential basis.

CASA-1000 Update

10-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The cost of supply for Tajikistan exports has been estimated based on official figures for
2009 (from the Statistical Agency under the President of the Republic of Tajikistan
http://www.stat.tj/english/home.htm) and the cost of purchasing power from the Sangtuda I &
II projects as well as for the O&M fixed costs of Nurek and other existing hydro power plants.
The cost of supply for Tajikistan is estimated at 1.5 cents/kWh.
Assessment of the Transmission Interconnection Costs
As outlined in section 9, the interconnection project for economic analysis is proposed to
comprise 1,300 MW converters in Sangtuda and Peshawar, a 300 MW converter in Kabul,
and 1,300 MW transmission line. The project cost including EPC costs, owners engineer
fees, contingencies, internal reinforcements and environmental and social costs for this
option is provided in the table below.
Table 10-1

Total Project Cost of the Selected Alternative for Economic Analysis


Unit: million US$
HVDC
Component
including
electrodes

HVAC
Component

Reinforcements in
TAJ, PAK and
AFG

Environmental
and Social
Costs

Total
Project

626

197

34

16

873

Total
Investment*

* Total investment includes the EPC costs, owners engineering fees and contingencies
The above table illustrates that the investment of HVDC components, HVAC components
and reinforcements in Tajikistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan are estimated to be US $ 626
million, US $ 197 million and US$ 34 million, respectively, giving the total Project investment
costs of US $ 873 million.
The O&M cost was estimated as 3% of the investment cost.
A placeholder has been used for environmental and social costs. Firm numbers for the
environmental and social costs will be available following detailed studies to be undertaken
shortly. The environmental and social costs estimates in this analysis will be updated at that
time. However a sensitivity analysis is presented using environmental and social cost figures
provided in the original CASA study. The environmental and social costs for Pakistan,
Afghanistan and Tajikistan estimated at 2007 years price in the Environmental Social
Impact Assessment reports for CASA Phase II Study were used for the sensitivity analysis in
Section 10.5 of this report. A 15% increase of the costs has been assumed for inflation for
the past 3 years.
Assessment of the Generation Costs in Pakistan and Afghanistan
In Pakistan the figures for avoided cost of power have been estimated using the average
price of PPAs using residual fuel oil (RFO) and diesel. According to figures from the NEPRA
website the all-in price of the contracts including capacity charges is 13.2 US cents/kWh and
the energy price is 9.2 US cents/kWh.
A conservative estimate has been used for the avoided cost of power in Afghanistan based
on recent project costs, existing import contracts and alternative sources. The price used in
Afghanistan is 6 US cents/kWh.

CASA-1000 Update

10-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Section 5 provides additional information on the assessment of generation costs in Pakistan


and Afghanistan.
10.3.2

Benefits

The primary economic benefit of the project is the avoided costs in Afghanistan and
Pakistan due to import of energy from Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic. The benefits of
the interconnection were assessed by comparing the system cost of generation in the
exporting countries plus the cost of transmission interconnection with the cost of generation
in the importing countries.
The potential energy surplus is obtained from the SDDP simulation model for 20 years
(2016-2035) for the CASA 1,300 MW interconnection option, which is a conservative
estimate for the benefits. For the following 10 years from 2036 to 2045, energy surplus is
assumed to decrease by the average decreasing rate of the last 5 years energy surplus
from 2031-2035 for each of the following years.
The interconnection can also provide environmental benefits related to a shift towards
environmentally preferred generation sources and to a reduction of green house gas
emissions when hydro energy replaces thermal energy in the importing countries.
Cross-border transmission and energy transactions stand to strengthen regional
cooperation. The interconnection between Tajikistan and Kyrgyz Republic can improve the
system coordination and system operating flexibility and provide benefits to the countries.
Finally, the development of the interconnection project can promote the economic growth
and encourage the economic cooperation among the exporting and importing counties. The
construction of the project results in short-term employment for the construction companies
and suppliers. The revenue of the companies and suppliers in turn generate additional
income in other sectors, i.e. indirect benefits. In long term, the ongoing operation and
maintenance of the transmission lines will provide employment for the operating and
maintenance staff in the countries.
10.3.3

Discount rate

The rate used for discounting the costs and benefits is ten (10) percent.
10.3.4

Useful lifetime

Useful lifetime of the transmission interconnection for the economic evaluation was
assumed to be 30 years.
10.3.5

Escalation

Escalation was not considered in the economic analysis.


10.4

Result Summary of Economic Analysis

To assess the economic viability of the interconnection project, a spreadsheet model was
built to cover the period of economic evaluation from 2016 through 2045 to model the
benefit and cost flows, calculate the economic parameters (B/C Ratio, NPV, and EIRR) and
conduct the sensitivity analysis.

CASA-1000 Update

10-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The present value of benefits (year 2016) for each of the countries was calculated based on
the discount rate of 10% for the study period of 30 years. The present worth of the benefits
and the total costs including O&M costs for the overall project are estimated to be US$
1,721 million and US$ 1,281 million, respectively, discounted to the beginning to 2016 at
10%. The B/C ratio and the EIRR are estimated to be 1.34 and 15.6%, respectively, for the
overall project. The NPV is estimated to be US$ 440 million at the discount rate of 10% to
the beginning of 2016. The results are summarized in Table 10-2.
Table 10-2

Economic Analysis Results

Benefits

1,724 MUSD

Costs

1,281 MUSD

B/C Ratio

1.34

NPV

440 MUSD

EIRR

15.6 %

Having a B/C Ratio above 1 and an EIRR greater than the discount rate (10%), the project is
economically sound. Sensitivity analyses in the following subsection will serve as additional
tests to check the projects economic viability under different scenarios. If the project still
holds B/C Ratios greater than 1 and EIRRs greater than 10% for the multiple scenarios then
it would be suggested to proceed with the project from an economic standpoint once the
financial constraints are met.
10.5

Levelized Cost of Transmission

To obtain the annual transmission cost of energy, the annualized investment cost is
calculated over the 30-year lifetime of the project. Hence the 873 MUSD projects
annualized investment cost is 110 MUSD/year, with a 10% discount rate. Adding the O&M
cost and dividing the total by the total energy exported yearly, the annual transmission cost
of energy is calculated in /kWh:

CASA-1000 Update

10-6

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Table 10-3

Annual Transmission Costs

Year

Annual Cost of
Transmission
(/kWh)

Year

Annual Cost of
Transmission
(/kWh)

2016

3.37

2031

8.15

2017

3.82

2032

9.34

2018

3.61

2033

10.99

2019

3.91

2034

12.83

2020

4.12

2035

16.52

2021

4.27

2036

19.04

2022

4.42

2037

21.95

2023

4.47

2038

25.30

2024

4.67

2039

29.16

2025

5.42

2040

33.61

2026

5.23

2041

38.73

2027

5.46

2042

44.64

2028

6.44

2043

51.45

2029

6.91

2044

59.30

2030

7.26

2045

68.35

As observed in the table above, in the initial years of the project, the cost of transmission is
around 4 /kWh. However, with increasing load and no generation expansion plans, the
surplus decreases and this drives the annual transmission cost of energy to rise to around
70 /kWh by 2038. Hence, with an adequate generation expansion plan, if the level of
surplus can be maintained around that of the initial years, a transmission charge of 4 /kWh
would be appropriate to recover the investment.
Dividing the NPV of the investment and O&M by the NPV of the exportable energy, the
levelized cost of transmission is calculated at 4.97 /kWh which is close to the annualized
cost in the initial years.
10.6

Sensitivity Analysis

The sensitivity analysis was undertaken to examine the impacts on the economic
performance of the project by changing the following factors:

Discount rate (8% and 12%)

Capital costs of the interconnection project (+10% and -10%)

Energy surplus (+10% and -10%). Please note that for the +10% sensitivity, the
transmission constraint was taken into consideration when assessing the exportable
energy surplus.

Higher opportunity cost in Pakistan (cost of rental plants, i.e. US$ 0.20.kWh)

Lower opportunity cost in Pakistan: average price of residual fuel oil (RFO) and
diesel PPAs (base case) in addition to gaz IPPs

CASA-1000 Update

10-7

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Higher generation costs in Afghanistan (same as the generation costs in Pakistan,


US$ 0.132/kWh for firm energy, US$ 0.092/kWh for non firm energy)

Assuming generation capacity is built to match load increase in Tajikistan and the
Kyrgyz Republic as to maintain constant export to Pakistan and Afghanistan

Afghanistan can use only 100 MW. Pakistan will import the remaining 1,200 MW.

One year project delay

Uncoordinated operation of Nurek and Toktogul reservoirs

The following table summarizes the B/C ratio, EIRR, and NPV of the overall project due to
the variation of the above-mentioned factors.
Table 10-4

Results of Sensitivity Analysis

Economic Parameters
B/C Ratio

EIRR

NPV
(M US$)

8%
Base Case (10%)
12%

1.50
1.34
1.21

15.6%
15.6%
15.6%

642
440
264

-10%
Base Case
+10%

1.49
1.34
1.22

17.6%
15.6%
13.8%

566
440
313

-10%
Base Case
+10%

1.17
1.34
1.51

13.0%
15.6%
17.9%

222
440
657

Higher opportunity cost in Pakistan


US$ 0.20/kWh

2.89

31.9%

2,422

Lower opportunity cost in Pakistan


Average price of residual fuel oil
(RFO), diesel and gas PPAs

1.15

12.5%

187

Higher generation costs in


Afghanistan
US$ 0.132/kWh for firm energy,
US$ 0.092/kWh for non firm energy

1.44

17.0%

570

Assuming constant energy export to


Pakistan and Afghanistan

2.11

20.8%

1,418

Afghanistan use only 100 MW;


Pakistan uses the balance of 1,200
MW

1.45

17.1%

577

One year project delay

1.14

13.9%

273

10

Energy surplus with uncoordinated


operation of Nurek and Toktogul
reservoirs

1.16

12.6%

202

Sensitivity

Factors
Discount rate

Capital costs
2

Energy Surplus
3

CASA-1000 Update

10-8

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The above table shows that the project has a positive NPV and a B/C ratio greater than one
for all sensitivities, in addition to achieving an EIRR greater than the discount rate. These
results confirm the economic viability of the project, further strengthening the conclusion
drawn from the results of the economic analysis in the previous subsection. If costs
increase, energy exported decreases or discount rate increases, the project still produces
favorable economic indicators.
10.7

Country-Wise Benefit Allocation

Though benefit allocation is usually done as part of a financial rather than an economic
analysis, the benefit allocation for each country was requested during the initial study to
provide some indication of how benefits can be allocated to each country. The updated
country-wise allocation is provided in appendix I, note I.6.
However, for deciding the viability of the project, the overall economic benefit / cost ratio
should be the determining economic criteria. Commercial agreements should ensure that
each country receives appropriate allocation of the financial benefits to ensure adequate
return to fund financial commitments.

CASA-1000 Update

10-9

020913-4SRP-0300-01

11

MAJOR RISKS WITH IMPLEMENTATION


AND OPERATION

Final Feasibility Update Report

11

MAJOR RISKS WITH IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION

11.1

Security

Security is a key issue for the project, both during construction and operations. The primary
security issues are related to landmines, sabotage and theft of equipment. These issues can
be addressed with proper planning but never eliminated. Contingency plans will have to be
in place to mitigate the impact of security-related issues.
Construction of the line will have to take place on land cleared of landmines which will entail
additional cost and delays. However, during the construction of the 220 kV line, it was found
that not all landmines were properly cleared, even though they were officially certified as
clear. Additional precautions will need to be taken by the contractors and the operators. A
10 million US$ cost provision has been included to this effect.
For operational reasons related to quick restoration of power, the line should be built in
areas that are relatively accessible by road. The incidence of sabotage and theft will have to
be ascertained but any increase in outages due to these threats can be mitigated somewhat
with restoration procedures that enable the operators to respond quickly. This would require
good access to the line to reduce outage times. Restoration procedures would require a
larger inventory of spare parts (including temporary towers) and work crews. These costs
have been included in the initial project costs as well as in operation and maintenance
allocations. For example, operation and maintenance costs are normally 2% of capital costs,
but for the CASA line 3% was used.
Unauthorized power take-off along the line is not an issue in the case of HVDC as power
has to be converted into AC through a converter station before feeding any type of load.
Moreover, the amount of power sent and received at each converter station is strictly
controlled by the valves and the control system.
11.2

IGC Management

The IGC structure will have ensure that the decision-making process is streamlined to deal
with major issues that may arise during the construction and operation of the line. It is
anticipated that protocols will be developed early on in the process to deal with day-to-day
decisions.
However, as day-to-day management during the construction will be the responsibility of the
contractor and operations will be in the hands of the company managing the transmission
once construction is completed, the IGC will only need to deal with extra-ordinary events
11.3

Technical

11.3.1

Lightning

The major technical risk associated with any transmission line involves the impact of
external factors on the security and availability of the line. The major cause of line outages
due to external factors is the incidence of lightning strokes to the line. Careful design of the
overhead shielding of the line will reduce the number of direct strokes to a phase conductor
to virtually zero. However, lightning strokes to the overhead shield wires can still result in
line tripping due to back-flashovers from the tower to the phase conductor. This can be
reduced by attempting to lower the tower footing resistance of each tower, but cannot be
entirely eliminated.
CASA-1000 Update

11-1

020913-4SRP-0200-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Statistical data on transmission line forced outages is available from a number of sources,
but these tend to provide conflicting information due to very different service conditions in
different parts of the world. The major factor influencing the lightning performance of a
particular transmission line is the level of thunderstorm activity in the area of the line. This is
normally quantified as the number of thunderstorm-days per year and the trip-out rate due to
lightning is considered to be proportional to this variable. The project area for this study is
generally low in terms of the number of thunderstorm-days per year. The reduction in energy
transported across the line over the course of a year due to such trip-outs is not significant,
although the interconnected system has to be able to survive the outage of the circuit.
Permanent line outages normally have relatively short repair times (< 1 day on average) but
for this project, because of the difficulties of transport throughout Afghanistan, repair times
are likely to be of the order of 3-4 days. Fortunately, such events should be limited to 1 or 2
occurrences per year. A significant difference should be noted between an AC transmission
scheme and a DC transmission scheme in this regard. A double circuit (or two single circuit)
500 kV AC interconnection inherently has the capacity to carry a 1 100 MW transfer with
one circuit out of service. For an HVDC interconnection, the permanent outage of one pole
due to a line fault would result in a reduction in the transfer capacity to approximately
550 MW. However, measures are available at additional cost that would allow the full
capacity to be restored quickly, such as pole switching and the use of earth return. There
are fault conditions, such as the loss of a converter transformer or DC smoothing reactor
that can result in the long-term unavailability of one pole. Such conditions are extremely rare
and are not normally considered significant.
11.3.2

Ground Electrodes

The other major technical risk associated with HVDC interconnections is the cost of
obtaining a ground electrode at each converter station with a reasonable ground resistance
(<1). No information has been gathered at this stage on the soil conditions or geology at
any of the potential converter locations to be able to determine the grounding electrode
locations and requirements. The normal cost for a ground electrode is of the order of
US$ 1 million in good soil conditions. In very adverse soil conditions, this cost will increase
and could go up to US$ 9 million per electrode.
11.3.3

Operational Coordination between System Operators

From an operational perspective, there are also significant differences between AC and DC
interconnections. A DC interconnection can be easily controlled as an independent facility.
Power and current orders can be selected ahead of time and programmed into the DC
control schemes of both rectifiers and inverters to set the level of transfer independently of
the AC systems connected at either end. An AC interconnection maintains its desired
transfer level by continuously adjusting the generation levels in the connected AC systems
to cater to changes in the demand in each system. With such an interconnection, one
system (usually the largest) takes the responsibility for controlling the frequency of the
interconnected system and the smaller systems take responsibility for controlling the power
transferred across the interconnection. With either interconnection scheme, it is required
that close cooperation is maintained between the system operators of the connected
systems so that the correct generation/load balance can be maintained in each system to
ensure that frequency deviations are minimized. A major difference between AC and DC
interconnections is that the failure of one system to maintain a correct generation/load
balance impacts all the participants in the AC interconnected system, whereas with a DC
interconnection, the impact is seen only in the system that fails to maintain its correct
balance. A DC interconnection also provides immunity in each connected system from the

CASA-1000 Update

11-2

020913-4SRP-0200-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

impact of faults in the other system, insofar as these faults do not affect the operation of the
DC interconnection itself.
There are numerous risks inherent in a project of this nature in addition to the normal
implementation and operational risks of a normal transmission line. Some of the risks have
been discussed in the Phase I report. These and additional risks are summarized in this
section.
11.3.4

Salang Pass

There are numerous technical challenges for this line, especially with respect to construction
and maintenance at high altitudes and through rugged terrain. The passage of the line
through the Salang pass will be a challenge but it is not insurmountable, as discussed
elsewhere in this report. The construction and subsequent Operations and Maintenance
costs are higher than normal as a result. Options for dealing with Salang Pass Constraints
are addressed in Seciton 7.2
11.4

Schedule

Risks related to schedule are discussed in Section 13 which presents typical implementation
schedules. These schedules will have to be reviewed prior to implementation and address
issues such as:

Acquisition of land for substations

Technical agreements

Logistics (transportation)

CASA-1000 Update

11-3

020913-4SRP-0200-01

12

FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATIONS

Final Feasibility Update Report

12

FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATIONS

Functional Specifications were developed as part of the original report to cover (i) the HVDC
transmission line, (ii) the three converter stations, (iii) the overall control system concept for
this regional interconnection and (iv) the HVAC transmission line required to reinforce the
Tajikistan system.
For each one of these components, the issues which have risen as part of this update are
explained below along with their impact, if any, on the original functional specifications.
12.1

HVDC Transmission Line

The critical parameters that shape the functional specification of the line are the following:

HVDC line voltage

Changes in the line voltage will impact the design of the tower, the levels of
insulation, clearance, etc. This voltage has not changed from its original value: +/500kV;

HVDC line current

Changes in the line current will impact the number and size of conductors used on
each pole to carry the DC current. This is a direct result of the power rating of the
converter stations. A Cardinal conductor has been specified in order to carry 1300
MW.

HVDC line route

The route is important for the functional specification as special conditions such as
high altitude and terrain have to be taken into account. With the exception of the
highlighted need to determine a new suitable location for the substation in Peshawar,
the line has not changed since the original study.

The functional specification of the HVDC transmission line developed as part of the original
study remains valid. An update of the route around the Peshawar substation will be required
as part of a subsequent study once the location of the new substation is known. The original
DC transmission line functional specification is included in Appendix E.
12.2

Converter Stations

The various aspects of the size optimization exercise carried out as part of this update will
affect the following parameters as far as the converter stations are concerned:

Converter station arrangement and staging

The arrangement is still planned to be bipolar and constructed in a single stage.

Base power rating

The power rating for the bipole is still recommended as 1300 MW. The higher rating
used for the line is only to preserve flexibility for possible future upgrades. The
specification in Appendix G is written on the basis of a 1300 MW project.

CASA-1000 Update

12-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

Number of terminals

The backfeed option was analyzed in more detail as part of this update and it was
found that the three terminal option remained the better choice for this
interconnection. The number of terminals then remains three.

Grounding and electrodes

The actual feasibility of installing electrodes can only be decided at the detailed study
stage when earth resistivity measurements can be carried out in the vicinity of each
converter station site. In case no suitable site is found, the alternative in case of loss
of a pole is to use that poles conductor as a metallic return. Electrodes are currently
included in the functional specifications and their price is taken into account in the
project cost.

The original functional specification for the converter stations is then not impacted. It is
included in Appendix G.
12.3

Control System Concept

The aspects of this update which can potentially affect the detailed control scheme
developed as part of the original functional specifications are the following:

Number of converters

The control system concept is highly dependent on the number of terminals in the
interconnection. The original concept was developed for three terminals, and
remains valid.

Converter station arrangement and staging

The arrangement is still planned to be bipolar and constructed in a single stage.

Central Control Unit:

The interconnection control centre could be located in any one dispatch centre of any
of the countries involved, or could be a separate control centre. This depends on
the agreements reached between the countries. The scheme could also be set up so
that all countries have the possibility of taking control of the scheme, however only
one country could have control at any given time. The cost implications of the various
options are not significant.

It is important to note that the nature of the AC system reinforcements do not have any
impact on the control system concept. This is due to the fact that DC technology operates
on the basis of a power order. The power transfer order received at each converter station
from the master control will be executed regardless of the strength of the AC networks.
Based on the above, there is no impact on the functional specification for the control system
included in Appendix G.
12.4

HVAC Transmission Line

The functional specification of the HVAC transmission line linking Tajikistan to the Kyrgyz
Republic is shown in Appendix F, and depends mainly on the size of the CASA
interconnection and the load swapping arrangement between the two countries. Given that
the size has remained at 1000 MW, the load swapping conditions remained unchanged as
well. As such the functional specification of this line then remains unchanged from the
original report.
CASA-1000 Update

12-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

13

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

Final Feasibility Update Report

13

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

This section presents the typical implementation schedule for the project on a monthly basis.
Detailed and specific schedules should be developed in further phases of the project.
13.1

Typical Sequence of Milestones

Figure 13-1 below illustrates the typical sequence of key milestones up to completion of
commissioning works and without including warranty period neither performance guarantee
period which may vary from one to three years for such project.

Award
Consultancy
Contract

Studies
Complete

8M

4M

M0

M8

Award
Turnkey
Contracts

Tenders
Receipt

RFP
Issued

3M
M12

HVAC
Line
Ready

3M
M15

30M

4M

M18

8 months

HVDC
Line
Ready

M48

HVDC Commissioning
Converters
System
Ready
Complete

2M
M52

4M
M54

M58

30 months

12 months

34 months

15 months

36 months

18 months

40 months
58 months

Figure 13-1
13.2

Typical Sequence of Milestones

Typical Implementation Schedules

Figures 13-2, 13-3, 13-4 and 13-5 below illustrate the following typical implementation
schedules in the form of a Gantt Chart and on a monthly basis:
- Figure 13-2

Typical Implementation Schedule for Award of Turnkey Contracts,


applicable to all components of the project

- Figure 13-3

Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVDC Converter Stations at


Sangtuda, Kabul and Peshawar and for Control Centre

- Figure 13-4

Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVDC Transmission Line


Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (750km).

- Figure 13-5

Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVAC Transmission Line


Kyrgyz-Tajikistan (450km).

SNC-Lavalin estimates that the project can be completed within a minimum of 58 months
(five years). However, this completion period may be extended twelve (12) months
depending on different factors such as:
-

Availability and reliability of existing information and studies

Countries regulation especially for right-of way of transmission lines

Stakeholders and utilities intervention during works implementation

Interface among Owner, contractors, utilities and countries.

CASA-1000 Update

13-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

The first eighteen (18) months are common to all the components of the project: Twelve (12)
months to produce studies, specifications and tender documents; and six (6) months to
evaluate tenders and to award EPC-turnkey Contracts.
Assuming that all EPC-Turnkey Contracts commence on the same date, SNC-Lavalin
estimates that each component of the project can be completed as follows:
-

500kV HVDC Converter Stations and Control Centre

36 months

500kV HVDC Transmission Line Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan

34 months

500kV HVAC Transmission Line Kyrgyz-Tajikistan

32 months

The critical path is usually driven by the converter stations and in particular by the
manufacturing and delivering of major equipment such as converter transformers and
converter valves. However, different regulations in each country may divert the critical path
to the transmission lines.

CASA-1000 Update

13-2

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

1
1.1
1.3
2
2.1
2.2
3
3.1
3.2
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
5

Procurement of Turnkey Contracts


500kV HVDC & HVAC System
Award of Consultancy Contract
Inception and Estimating
Inception and Data Collection
Project Estimates
System and Design Studies
Critical System Studies
Non-Critical System Studies
System and Design Studies
Critical Design Studies
Non-Critical Design Studies
Technical Specifications
Functional HVDC Specifications
Standard HVAC Specifications
Technical Datasheets
Preparation of Tender Documents

5.1

Instructions to Tenderers and Tender Forms

5.2

Conditions of Contract

Month
9
10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

5.3 Schedule of Prices


6 Prequalification of Tenderers (RFQ)
6.1 Preparation of Application Documents
6.2 Preparation and Receipt of Applications
6.3 Evaluation and Selection of Prequalified Tenderers
7 Tendering and Award (RFP)
7.1

Preparation and Receipt of Tenders

7.2

Evaluation of Un-priced Tenders

7.3

Evaluation of Priced Tenders

7.4

Preaward and Award of Turnkey Contracts


Notes:
Schedule common to all components of the Project
It is assumed availability and realiability of existing information
It is assumed minimum intervention of Stakeholders and Utilities
No time extension for preparation of tenders is assumed

Figure 13-2
CASA-1000 Update

CASA-1000 Project - Typical Implementation Schedule for Award of Turnkey Contracts


13-3

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


500kV HVDC Converter Stations and Control Centre
Sangtuda (Tajikistan) + Kabul in (Afghanistan) + Peshaw ar (Pakistan)

Month
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Award of Turnkey Contract and Notice to Proceed


1 HVDC Converter Station Design and Engineering
1.1 Mobilization
Survey of the Converter Station Areas at Taj.,Kabul and
1.2
Peshawar
1.3 Preparation of Design and Drawings
1.4 Design Review and Approval
1.5 Electrodes-Field Investigation
1.6 Design -CASA Transm. Control centre
1.7 Electrodes-Design
2 Manufacturing of HVDC Converter Station
2.1 Converter Transformers
2.2 Capacitors
2.3 Reactors
2.4 Valves
2.5 Switchyard Equipment
2.6 Manufacture -CASA Transm. Control centre
3 Supply and Delivery
3.1 Converter Transformers
3.2 Capacitors
3.3 Reactors
3.4 Valves
3.5 Switchyard Equipment
3.6 Supply -CASA Transm. Control centre
4 Installation and Const. of HVDC Converter Station
4.1 Earth Work
4.2 Foundations /structures
4.3 Electrodes Installation (optional)
4.4 Switchyard and Control Building
4.5 Equipemnt Erection and Installation
4.6 Installation -CASA Transm. Control centre
5 Testing, Programming and Commissioning
5.1 Testing HVDC Converter Stations
5.2 Programming/testing CASA Transm. Control Centre
5.3 HVDC System Ready for Commissioning
Notes:
Schedule applicable to three (3) converter stations and one (1) control centre
It is assumed that the work on all the converter stations will be done simulataneously
It is assumed minimum intervention of Stakeholders and Utilities

Figure 13-3
CASA-1000 Update

CASA-1000 Project - Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVDC Converter Stations at Sangtuda, Kabul and
Peshawar and for Control Centre
13-4

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report


500kV 750km HVDC Transmission Line
Tajikistan (117km) + Afghanistan (562km) + Pakistan (71km)

Month
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Award of Turnkey Contract(s) and Notice to Proceed


1 Transmission Line Design and Engineering
1.1 Mobilization
Survey of the transmission line route and substation areas
1.2
(combination of LiDAR and ground survey)
1.3 Preparation of Design and Drawings
1.4 Design Review and Approval
1.5 Tower Spotting
2 Manufacturing of Transmission Line
2.1 Tower Structures
2.2 Conductors
2.3 Insulators
2.4 Miscellaneous Hardware
3 Supply and Delivery
3.1 Tower Structures
3.2 Conductors
3.3 Insulators
3.4 Miscellaneous Hardware
4 Installation and Construction of Transm. Line
4.1 De-Mining Operation
4.2 ROW Clearing and Access Roads
4.3 Soil Investigation ,Foundations and Grounding
4.4 Tower Erection
4.5 Conductor Stringing
5 Testing and Commissioning of Transm. Line
5.1 Testing
5.2 HVDC Line Ready for Commissioning
Notes:
Multiple construction contracts maybe be required to complete works in 34 months
Minimum two (2) construction crews are required to complete works in 34 months
It is assumed minimum intervention of Stakeholders and Utilities
It is assumed minimum environmental restrictions

Figure 13-4

CASA-1000 Update

CASA-1000 Project - Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVDC Transmission Line Tajikistan-AfghanistanPakistan
13-5

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
5
5.1
5.4

500kV 450km HVAC Transmission Line


Kyrgyz (430km) + Tajikistan (20km)
Award of Turnkey Contract and Notice to Proceed
Transmission Line Design and Engineering
Mobilization
Survey of the transmission line route and substation areas
(combination of LiDAR and ground survey)
Preparation of Design and Drawings
Design Review and Approval
Tower Spotting
Manufacturing of Transmission Line
Tower Structures
Conductors
Insulators
Miscellaneous Hardware
Supply and Delivery
Tower Structures
Conductors
Insulators
Miscellaneous Hardware
Installation and Construction of Transm. Line
ROW Clearing and Access Roads
Soil Investigation ,Foundations and Grounding
Tower Erection
Conductor Stringing
Testing and Commissioning of Transm. Line
Testing
HVAC Line Ready for Commissioning

Month
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Notes:
Minimum one (1) construction crew required to complete works in 30 months
It is assumed minimum intervention of Stakeholders and Utilities
It is assumed minimum environmental restrictions

Figure 13-5

CASA-1000 Project - Typical Implementation Schedule for 500kV HVAC Transmission Line Kyrgyz Republic-Tajikistan

CASA-1000 Update

13-6

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

13.3

Award of EPC-Turnkey Contracts (18 months)

As mentioned above, the first eighteen (18) months are common to all the components of
the project. Data collection and power system studies requires at least six (6) months and
the technical specifications another six (6) months. In the worst case scenario, three (3)
months more should be added to complete the studies and the specifications.
The preparation of the technical specifications and the tender documents is usually
performed simultaneously as well as the pre-qualification of bidders (shortlist). The
Tenderers will require at least three (3) months to prepare a complete and responsive
tender and then three (3) months more will be required to evaluate tenders and to award
EPC-Turnkey Contracts. In the worst case scenario, three (3) months more should be added
to prepare and evaluate tenders.
The land required for the 1300MW converter station at the 500 KV substation in Peshawar is
not available at the moment. Acquiring rights to this land can be a lengthy process, which
could result in delays in cases of litigations with the land owners. It is suggested to take up
this issue immediately at the beginning of the Award of EPC-Turnkey Contracts period.
13.4

500kV HVDC Converter Stations and Control Centre (36 months)

The typical completion period for the implementation of the HVDC converter stations is 36
months without including commissioning of the entire HVDC system and assuming minimum
intervention of Stakeholders and Utilities and full availability of manufacturing factories. In
the worst case scenario, a completion period of 42 months should be considered.
SNC-Lavalin assumes that the three (3) converter stations and the Control Centre are
implemented simultaneously by a single EPC-Contractor.
13.5

500kV HVDC Transmission Line Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (34 months)

The typical completion period for the implementation of 750km of HVDC transmission lines
is 34 months without including commissioning of the entire HVDC system and assuming
minimum environmental requirements and minimum intervention of Stakeholders and
Utilities. In the worst case scenario, a completion period of 40 months should be considered.
The above completion period assumes two (2) construction crews working in parallel.
However, the construction period can be accelerated by assigning works to multiple EPCContractors, one having several construction crews.
13.6

500kV HVAC Transmission Line Kyrgyz-Tajikistan (30 months)

The typical completion period for the implementation of 450km of HVAC transmission lines
is 30 months without including commissioning of the entire system and assuming minimum
environmental requirements and minimum intervention of Stakeholders and Utilities. In the
worst case scenario, a completion period of 36 months should be considered.
The above completion period assumes two (2) construction crews working in parallel.
However, the construction period can be accelerated by assigning works to multiple EPCContractors, one having several construction crews.

CASA-1000 Update

13-7

020913-4SRP-0300-01

Final Feasibility Update Report

13.7

Commissioning of Overall Project (4 months)

The program of testing and commissioning, followed by trial operation, comprises the
detailed tests for the equipment and systems before energizing each converter station
followed by end to end testing of the total transmission system. As well local and remote
controls will be tested and accepted at the conclusion of this program. The electrical integrity
of the transmission line sections will be confirmed during the trial tests.
All EPC-Turnkey Contracts should be commissioning on the same time to allow transfer of
power and testing of the entire HVDC and HVAC system. SNC-Lavalin estimates four (4)
months for commissioning of the entire system, including one or two months of trial
operation.
13.8

Bidder Participation

During the Phase I report a number of potential bidders expressed interest in the project.
Bidder interest is a function of the nature and the structure of the project. An assessment of
potential bidder interest in the project can be provided, together with recommendations for
maximizing participation in the bidding, once there is firm definition of the project. Some of
companies that expressed interest in project during Phase I have changed their orientation
and ownership as a result of the worldwide financial crisis.
An addendum to this report can be issued once there is a clear decision to go to the next
phase of the project.

CASA-1000 Update

13-8

020913-4SRP-0300-01

14

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

Final Feasibility Update Report

14

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

The primary goal of Operation and Maintenance (O&M) practices is to achieve a high level
of operational reliability and to have reliable power transfers with minimum losses. These
practices should help in improving the reliability and maintenance of plant and equipment,
maximising capacity utilisation, increasing operating efficiency, and reducing operating and
maintenance costs.
The key responsibilities of the Operation and Maintenance function are:

To ensure quality and reliability of power supply on the line;

To optimize equipment operating and maintenance costs through effective utilisation


of capacity and resources;

To maintain and enhance the availability and reliability of plant and equipment with
effective maintenance planning;

To improve spares planning and optimize spares inventories;

To standardize work procedures;

To ensure the safety of maintenance personnel;

To provide a mechanism for estimating and controlling maintenance expenses; and

To generate MIS reports for better decision-making and control.

The proposed HVDC transmission system is a 3-terminal system operating on +/-500kV


bipolar overhead transmission line, 750km long, the system linking the hydro generation in
Tajikistan to the load centres in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The interconnection system
consists of three HVDC converter stations, one each in Tajikistan, Afghanistan and
Pakistan. The initial capacity of the three converter stations shall be 1300 MW in Tajikistan,
1300MW in Pakistan and 300MW in Afghanistan. The connecting AC systems shall be
500kV, 50Hz in Tajikistan and Pakistan, and 220kV, 50Hz in Afghanistan.
For the operation and maintenance of the transmission line and converter stations a team of
trained personnel and an effective organization would be required. The Operation and
Maintenance Plan, which is presented in Appendix H, describes the routine and emergency
maintenance tasks and inventory management for operating and maintaining the CASA1000 Interconnection facility, namely the HVDC line linking Tajikistan, Afghanistan and
Pakistan, the Converter Stations and the System Control Centre.

CASA-1000 Update

14-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

15

CONCLUSIONS AND WAY FORWARD

Final Feasibility Update Report

15

CONCLUSIONS AND WAY FORWARD

15.1

Conclusions

The recommended project configuration provides flexibility without constraining future


options. Given that there are many active stakeholders, agreements need to be in place to
facilitate the process of moving forward in an efficient manner. Any delay in the project will
have a negative impact on the economic viability.
15.2

Way Forward

One of the greatest challenges will be coming to an agreement on operational and


contractual issues. Some of the operational and contractual issues that need to be
addressed in subsequent studies include:

Risk of non payment


There are many examples (for example the Southern African Power Pool) which
have shown that contractual and operational agreements can overcome any
potential payment problem. The supply of power to Pakistan is independent of
Afghanistans ability to meet its financial contractual commitments.

Accounting of energy transfers

The contractual and operational challenges of the Kyrgyz-Tajikistan load swap


arrangements need to be thought through thoroughly to ensure proper accounting of
effective transfer of energy. The agreements would have to address such issues as
who will be administering the metering, safeguards to ensuring transparency of
dispatch and calculation of losses and throughput, and dispute resolution
mechanisms.

These arrangements are contractual in nature and are outside the focus of the
current study and would be part of a subsequent study.

Dispatch services, tariff and transit fees

Payment for dispatch services, tariff and transit fees with respect to payments will
have to be established, for electricity transmitted through OJSC National Electric
Grid of Kyrgyzstan as well as through the Barki Tajik system.

This will have to be established at the time of formulating contractual agreements


this is not in the scope of the present study.

CASA-1000 Update

15-1

020913-4SRP-0300-01

SNC-LAVALIN
1801 McGill College
Montral, Qubec
H3A 2N4
Canada H4S 1W8
Tl.: (514) 393-8000
Fax: (514) 334-1446

www.snclavalin.com