What are the alternatives available?
Are there no alternatives to produce just 163 MW of power to cope up the peak loading time of just four hours? According to experts, there are.
1. Substitute for the present mode of domestic uses of power: The Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) after making a through analysis of the power situation in Kerala in 1996 reported that around two crores of 60W bulbs are used in Kerala for domestic purposes. If only 50 lakhs of them are replaced with 20W tubes and 25 lakhs with CFL lamps, the power saving at the peak loading period would be around 300MW. Such alternatives do not reduce the illumination. Even if they are given free of cost by the KSEB, the total expenditure will be less than 250 crores. The power to be generated from the proposed Athirappilly project is 163MW at an estimated cost of Rs. 650 cr. It would go several times high by the time the project work is completed.
2. Reduce the transmission loss: Currently the transmission loss, as per KSEB, is estimated at a minimum of 20%; according to known independent experts it could be around 30%. If just 10% of the loss is reduced, the Athirappilly could be saved for posterity.
3. Protect the power from theft: Power theft is reported to be a common phenomenon in Kerala. Thanks to some of the sincere diligent police officers, several cases of power theft, involving people in the higher echelons of the society have been booked recently. If the theft alone is completely stopped, probably the Athirappilly could be saved.
4. Make use of the power available from the already existing thermal plants: Records from the KSEB’s website show that the power available from the NTPC’s Thermal Power Plant at Kayamkulam with an installed capacity of 359.58 MW is under-used on the ground that the cost is too high. There are four more thermal power stations with a total installed capacity of 412.04MW. It is reported that they are also underused on the same ground – more expensive. Little do we realize that the cost of power from the proposed Athirappilly project would be much higher than that from the thermal sources especially when the cost of environment and ecology – ecosystem service values - are considered.
5. Introduce a differential tariff regime: The issue of the high cost of thermal power and its affordability should have been thought of before establishing such thermal plants that too with huge investments. To make good of the higher unit price, it may be advisable to fix different tariff rates; a lower rate for the poor and a much higher rate for those who use air conditioners, washing machines and other luxury items. Thus, if the total thermal power available from the existing plants (totally 771.62 MW) is used, the unique ecosystem of Athirappilly could be saved for ever.
Dr. Sathis Chandra Nair in his write-up on yet another KSEB - proposed project, the Pathrakadavu Dam, dwells on some of these issues and more
To cap it all, the honourable High Court of Kerala in its judgment made on 17 October 2001 directed the KSEB to “take all necessary steps to repair and restore to full capacity, all the existing Hydro Electric Projects to ensure that the generation of power as envisaged is obtained and also to take steps to ensure that transmission losses are minimized and that theft of energy is prevented and to the extent possible eliminated altogether.”