More than 15 years back when Deve Gowda came to Mysore, MGP had submitted a memo on how to improve KEB. There were three main suggestions. 1. KEB should be broken down into five independent companies. 2. There should be a professional management and not just ministry administration. 3. There should be an indpendent regulatory body to monitor these five companies and approve their tariff structure.

I doubt seriously Deve Gowda ever looked into that note of ours. Any way in the course of few years, our first recommendation has been implemented in some respects. There are now five independent companies, but not fully integrated. They are distribution companies and there is another generation and transmission comapnies. Second recommendation has been also implemented in some respects. But still it is under a generalist IAS officer who are not generally of high caliber. It is the third which is the most important recommendation has been fully implemented thanks to central act.

It is here we the citizens have failed miserably in taking over responsibility. A consumer organization like MGP should have taken this seriously. So far it has not been able to shoulder this since no technically qualified person has offered any help. Still MGP has filed objections from time to time. Now that we have an expert in Sharma, we can hope for oustanding work and contribute to the success of KERC. Still we need more experts to help Shrama. Monitoring of operations of Chamundi Energy Supply Company is not a simple function. MGP gets today many complicated reports and there is no one who is technically competent to go through them to point credible questions. I have seen politicians, industry represenatiatives making few general comments and news papers reporting as though some tough questions have been raised. What we need is diggiing into these numbers and asking KERC some intelligent questions based in facts.

Is Mysore ready to carry this function? For this we cannot depend upon volunteer help. We need to pay money. After all as a result of this work consumers can save crores of rupees.

It was very kind of Dr. Shenoy, who himself is the energy expert, and Mr. Gowri Satya, a senior journalist to call me an expert. I do not know how far I deserve that title. There is much much more in the energy/power sector than I know. I consider myself a primary school student in the vast knowledge ocean of energy sector, and probably a middle school student in eletcrical power sector. But that should not be an excuse for not taking up additional responsibilities to interact with fellow citizens on the KERC or CESCOM issues, and trying to present them to the appropriate authorities in as effective manner as possible.

I also thank Mr. Gowri Sathyan for his kind words on my presentation to KERC on 9th. I would have preferred to have another 20 minutes time on that occassion to raise some more important issues to the whole society.

It would be too unweildy (it is 9 pages long) to replicate here what I have made a written submission to KERC. If some one is interested to know the details of my submission please let me know, so that I can e-mail it to them.
My e-mail id is:
shankar.sharma2005@gmail.com

Some of the salient points of my submission were:
a) The public of the state have waited patiently for 59 years since independence for the needed performance level from the electricity supply companies, but only to see repeated failure of the supply companies.
b) Failed old policies of adding generation capacity only without improving other areas of the industry have to be discarded, and a paradigm shift is needed.
c) The application by ESCOMs for tariff review and their performance so far have not been in compliance with most of the relevant Acts and rules.
d) In order to bridge the gap between cost and revenue, increase in revenue through increased price is not the only solution, but reduction of costs is a much more acceptable and viable solution.
e)In view of the huge technical & commercial losses, of the order of about 30%, prevailing in the distribution system there is ample opportunity to reduce the cost of supply, which alone can put the ESCOMs into a revenue surplus position.
f) In the struggle to balance the demand and supply of electricity to all sections of our society, since the supply side is not entirely in the control of ESCOMs, and also since it is more and more complex, ESCOMs should put a lot of emphasis on Demand Side Management (DSM), where there is a huge scope, including that of reduction of losses.
g) DSM measures like the use of energy efficient lamps (CFL), solar water heaters, Solar PV panels, Time of Day metering to more no. of consumer categories, reduction of energy loss in IP set (which is up to 30% of the total energy), etc were some of the steps suggested.
h) Attention of the KERC was also drawn to the fact that there was no shortage of generation capacity available to the state, and if the power network was operating at efficient levels, there need not have been any power cuts , which we experienced during the last few years.
i) This higher efficiency also would have resulted in good voltage for all conumers, and there would have been minimum failures of appliances like motors, and minimum interruptions. This in addition to higher economic benefits.
j) In view of this the application of ESCOMs for increase in tariff should be summarily rejected, and they should be aksed not approach KERC for increase in tariff until all the previous directives of the Commission are complied with, and adeqaute level of performance improvement could be established.
k) KERC was also appealed to take bold steps, and pass directives of far reaching consequences towards improving the electricity industry as a whole.
l) The results of two studies were shown to indicate that the ongoing policy of the State govt. in encouraging additional generation capacity without a scientific approach is likely to lead to excess base load capacity by 2012, leading to unnecessary financial burden on to the state's public, and also in over exploitation of natural resources.

I will consider it a previlege to work with Dr. Shenoy, and others in Mysore city on issues relating to electricity industry, and to represent MGP and/or similar forums whenever possible.

Even if some one likes to call submission to KERC under items a) to l) in my posting as a wish list, there is no great harm. We all start with a wish list or even dreams, and attempt to realise them. We have to make a start somewhere.

If one looks at my submission with an open mind, it is clear that what is being asked of the ESCOMs are pretty basic, and nothing fancy. If ESCOMs cannot meet even these requirements we will continue to suffer from poor quality of service, certain sections of the society will be deprived of the benfit of this basic infrastructure, and the allround development of the society will remain at the bottom of another wish list of our country.

With the enactment of Indian Electricity Act 2003, and the establishment of Electricity Regulatory Commissions (ERC), there are discernible changes in the attitude of the electricity companies. ERCs at the centre and the states are laying down clear guidlines for these companies, and giving opportunities for various stake holders to express their expectations of these companies.

If we, the public, cannot make a good use of the changed environment there cannot be any hope for better. We cannot expect all public issues to be addressed by MPs and MLAs only. They have lot more issues to concern themselves with. The public, in large numbers, must make it clear to the ESCOMs that the public will not continue to tolerate the high level of inefficiency as was seen in the past. Armed with such strong public opinion ERCs will be able to discipline the ESCOMs. Otherwise ERCs will be amongst the plethora of Commissions, which have been set with good intention, but which have not delivered.

Dear Dr. Shenoy,

Thanks for your encouraging words. KERC tariff ruling appears to have been largely influenced by a huge number of objections numbering over 11,000 across the state. I do not believe that any of these objectors would have expressed sympathy with the ESCOMs’ appeal for increase in tariff. ESCOMs have been directed many times in the past by KERC to improve the overall performance by a huge margin, which these companies have been unable to achieve. So there is a growing level of disenchantment towards the overall attitude of ESCOMs. The strong views of the public can be expected to become even stronger in the future.

As you have said correctly, I too believe the KERC ruling should have included many other steps to improve the overall performance of ESCOMs. These include directives to adopt much more effective Demand Side Management, reduction of ditribution losses by atleast 3- 5% each year, bill collection efficiency across the state to go up to 95 % etc. . KERC seem to have few constraints. May be they were trying to avoid putting too much into one ruling. I am reasonably confident that there will be further improvements in the future rulings.

I agree with you that the battle should be sustained at an appropriate level by the participation of more number of organisations and individuals atleast during the public hearing.

It appears that every one of the paying public have welcomed the the recent ruling of KERC on tariff application by electricity supply companies. The ruling has disallowed the proposal by these companies to hike the tariff by 40 paise per unit of energy consumed. Every group or individuals, who participated in the public consultation process of KERC, also seem to have been elated that the honorable Commission has heeded to their objections.

Electricity tariff in State reduced marginally

But is the situation really as rosy as it appears? The state govt. has indicated that the ESCOMs will appeal to the Appellate Tribunal for electricity industry against this ruling of KERC. The media also have reported that the state govt. has expressed its disapproval of the implications of the ruling by KERC. Next year, these supply companies will have another opportunity to seek price increase.

But for the paying public, who would expect a much better performance from the electricity industry in the state than that has been noticed since independence, there are many questions:

• will the ruling by KERC lead to much better overall performance of the industry?
  
• will it lead to adequate rate of decrease in technical and commercial losses experienced in the state?
  
• will it lead to higher revenue realisation for the energy supplied?
  
• will there be gradual elimination of cross-subsidies amongst various categories of consumers, as required under Indian Electricity Act 2003?
  
• will there be adequate improvement in the overall efficiency of the industry?
  
• can we hope to see a sense of security of energy supply even in next 10 years?
  
• will the power cuts and other supply restrictions be things of past even 10 years later?
  
• can we expect our precious natural resources to be harnessed on a sustainable basis?

We, as a society, need to ask ourselves and the concerned authorities some of these questions, if we are to hope for a sense of energy security on a sustainable basis.