COAL POLICY

Stumbling blocks: Centre does not have much to show for its coal block allocations

The allocations cannot be ‘universally hailed to be a success’, as the government claims.

More than a year after cancelling the fourth round of coal block auctions for lack of sufficient interest from bidders, the central government intends to auction off six blocks to the iron and steel sector for captive use. In the two years since the Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015, was enacted, the government has allotted blocks to public sector companies besides auctioning them. As it embarks on yet another round of auctions, it is useful to review the auctions and allotments (together called allocations) done so far.

Fast off the blocks

The Coal Mines Act was the government’s response to the cancellation of over 200 coal block allocations by the Supreme Court in September 2014. Reacting rapidly, it passed the legislation and allocated nearly 70 coal blocks by March 2015. The urgency of action was justified by the coal minister who said in Parliament that if action was not taken quickly, production from captive blocks would come to a standstill, to the detriment of the country.

Under the framework of this legislation, winners of the auctioned blocks are expected to pay the government of the state where the block is located the bid amount and a “fixed rate” of Rs 100 per tonne of coal produced, while government-run companies allotted blocks have to pay a “reserve price” of Rs 100 per tonne. In addition, the framework envisaged tariff reduction for electricity consumers. Based on this, the government claimed that production from the allocated blocks over their lifetimes would result in a revenue stream of Rs 2.4 lakh crore to coal-bearing states, and tariff reduction benefits to the tune of Rs 69,000 crore to electricity consumers.

The Act also introduced amendments to existing laws that allow the central government to allocate blocks for mining of coal for sale. In this context, the proposed auctioning mechanism was expected to increase competition and deepen the market. Have these objectives of minimal disruption in production from captive blocks, enhanced revenue to states, reduced consumer electricity tariffs and greater competition been achieved?

Diminishing returns

Forty two of the blocks whose allocation was cancelled by the Supreme Court had been producing or were “about to produce” coal. Of these, the government later allocated 35 blocks for captive use. As of November 2016, only 10 of these were producing coal, and at much lower levels than before. Production from these blocks came down sharply from 31 million tonne in 2014-15 to just 12 million tonne in 2015-16, a fall of over 60%. Seventeen of the 35 blocks were allotted to government companies, of which 15 were reallotted to the same companies that had held them before the cancellation. Perplexingly, only two of these have restarted production even two years later.

The following charts summarise the allocation and the fall in production over the last two years. Analysts had warned that aggressive bidding by private companies to acquire blocks in the initial rounds of auction would render these blocks unviable. This combined with weak demand outlook for power, cement, etc, increased production from the public sector Coal India Limited and Singareni Collieries Company Limited, bureaucratic delays, and uncertainties over ongoing court cases could have caused the fall in production.

Low production has meant lower revenues for states. Proceeds from captive coal block production were only an estimated Rs 463 crore in 2015-16 and Rs 775 crore in 2016-17 until November. This is less than half of what they would have received (Rs 1,592 crore) had these blocks produced at even half their pre-cancellation levels.

Cost of power

While the Coal Mines Act framework held the promise of consumer electricity tariff reduction in principle, the mechanics of its implementation were never quite clear. Tariffs can be revised by electricity regulatory commissions, either on their own or on the direction of their respective governments. Although the central government wrote to all states to issue such directives back in April 2015, only one state (Madhya Pradesh) has actually done so. As a result, the regulatory commissions of only Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal (acting on its own) have revised tariffs downward. Rajasthan also uses coal from allotted captive blocks but its latest tariff process has not accounted for it. The situation with Odisha’s Talabira-I block in particular is confusing as its coal is seemingly used in GMR’s Raikheda power plant in Chhattisgarh, but that plant does not have a Power Purchase Agreement with any state utility. It is also understood that the Raikheda plant has submitted a bid of Rs 4.05 per kilowatt-hour in the latest round of power procurement by Uttar Pradesh which, according to our estimates, appears to be higher than what it ‘should be’ under the framework of the Act. Thus, the central government’s desire to reduce consumer tariffs by allocating captive blocks has not been realised so far.

Slow race

While the initial rounds of auction drew reasonable response (see table), subsequent rounds have seen diminishing interest. In the third round of auctions, there were only three bidders on an average per block. In the fourth round, this came down to fewer than two bidders per block, leading to cancellation of the round. Similarly, the only round of allotments to government companies too elicited muted interest – less than four applicants per block – compelling the government to subsequently allot these blocks on a more discretionary basis.

The diminished interest is not limited to captive coal blocks. It is also reflected in the poor response of state government companies to acquire mines for commercial mining, response to the auctioning of coal linkages and Coal India’s struggles to find buyers for its produce. Clearly, there is insufficient competition and/or interest in the coal sector currently and going by the predictions of low coal demand in the draft National Electricity Plan, this is likely to continue.

The verdict

The government’s objectives of minimising disruption in production, enhancing revenue for states, reducing consumer electricity tariffs and deepening competition in the sector have clearly not panned out. In addition, there are concerns about transparency in the allocations and legal and regulatory ambiguities. It is, therefore, fair to conclude that the allocation of captive blocks cannot be “universally hailed to be a success” as claimed by the government. This, together with likely reduced demand for coal going forward, should give the government pause as it forges ahead with another round of auctions and major new initiatives like commercial mining.

Saumya Vaishnava, Ashok Sreenivas and Rutuja Bhalerao are with Prayas (Energy Group).

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

India’s urban water crisis calls for an integrated approach

We need solutions that address different aspects of the water eco-system and involve the collective participation of citizens and other stake-holders.

According to a UN report, around 1.2 billion people, or almost one fifth of the world’s population, live in areas where water is physically scarce and another 1.6 billion people, or nearly one quarter of the world’s population, face economic water shortage. They lack basic access to water. The criticality of the water situation across the world has in fact given rise to speculations over water wars becoming a distinct possibility in the future. In India the problem is compounded, given the rising population and urbanization. The Asian Development Bank has forecast that by 2030, India will have a water deficit of 50%.

Water challenges in urban India

For urban India, the situation is critical. In 2015, about 377 million Indians lived in urban areas and by 2030, the urban population is expected to rise to 590 million. Already, according to the National Sample Survey, only 47% of urban households have individual water connections and about 40% to 50% of water is reportedly lost in distribution systems due to various reasons. Further, as per the 2011 census, only 32.7% of urban Indian households are connected to a piped sewerage system.

Any comprehensive solution to address the water problem in urban India needs to take into account the specific challenges around water management and distribution:

Pressure on water sources: Rising demand on water means rising pressure on water sources, especially in cities. In a city like Mumbai for example, 3,750 Million Litres per Day (MLD) of water, including water for commercial and industrial use, is available, whereas 4,500 MLD is needed. The primary sources of water for cities like Mumbai are lakes created by dams across rivers near the city. Distributing the available water means providing 386,971 connections to the city’s roughly 13 million residents. When distribution becomes challenging, the workaround is to tap ground water. According to a study by the Centre for Science and Environment, 48% of urban water supply in India comes from ground water. Ground water exploitation for commercial and domestic use in most cities is leading to reduction in ground water level.

Distribution and water loss issues: Distribution challenges, such as water loss due to theft, pilferage, leaky pipes and faulty meter readings, result in unequal and unregulated distribution of water. In New Delhi, for example, water distribution loss was reported to be about 40% as per a study. In Mumbai, where most residents get only 2-5 hours of water supply per day, the non-revenue water loss is about 27% of the overall water supply. This strains the municipal body’s budget and impacts the improvement of distribution infrastructure. Factors such as difficult terrain and legal issues over buildings also affect water supply to many parts. According to a study, only 5% of piped water reaches slum areas in 42 Indian cities, including New Delhi. A 2011 study also found that 95% of households in slum areas in Mumbai’s Kaula Bunder district, in some seasons, use less than the WHO-recommended minimum of 50 litres per capita per day.

Water pollution and contamination: In India, almost 400,000 children die every year of diarrhea, primarily due to contaminated water. According to a 2017 report, 630 million people in the South East Asian countries, including India, use faeces-contaminated drinking water source, becoming susceptible to a range of diseases. Industrial waste is also a major cause for water contamination, particularly antibiotic ingredients released into rivers and soils by pharma companies. A Guardian report talks about pollution from drug companies, particularly those in India and China, resulting in the creation of drug-resistant superbugs. The report cites a study which indicates that by 2050, the total death toll worldwide due to infection by drug resistant bacteria could reach 10 million people.

A holistic approach to tackling water challenges

Addressing these challenges and improving access to clean water for all needs a combination of short-term and medium-term solutions. It also means involving the community and various stakeholders in implementing the solutions. This is the crux of the recommendations put forth by BASF.

The proposed solutions, based on a study of water issues in cities such as Mumbai, take into account different aspects of water management and distribution. Backed by a close understanding of the cost implications, they can make a difference in tackling urban water challenges. These solutions include:

Recycling and harvesting: Raw sewage water which is dumped into oceans damages the coastal eco-system. Instead, this could be used as a cheaper alternative to fresh water for industrial purposes. According to a 2011 World Bank report, 13% of total freshwater withdrawal in India is for industrial use. What’s more, the industrial demand for water is expected to grow at a rate of 4.2% per year till 2025. Much of this demand can be met by recycling and treating sewage water. In Mumbai for example, 3000 MLD of sewage water is released, almost 80% of fresh water availability. This can be purified and utilised for industrial needs. An example of recycled sewage water being used for industrial purpose is the 30 MLD waste water treatment facility at Gandhinagar and Anjar in Gujarat set up by Welspun India Ltd.

Another example is the proposal by Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) to recycle and reclaim sewage water treated at its existing facilities to meet the secondary purposes of both industries and residential complexes. In fact, residential complexes can similarly recycle and re-use their waste water for secondary purposes such as gardening.

Also, alternative rain water harvesting methods such as harvesting rain water from concrete surfaces using porous concrete can be used to supplement roof-top rain water harvesting, to help replenish ground water.

Community initiatives to supplement regular water supply: Initiatives such as community water storage and decentralised treatment facilities, including elevated water towers or reservoirs and water ATMs, based on a realistic understanding of the costs involved, can help support the city’s water distribution. Water towers or elevated reservoirs with onsite filters can also help optimise the space available for water distribution in congested cities. Water ATMs, which are automated water dispensing units that can be accessed with a smart card or an app, can ensure metered supply of safe water.

Testing and purification: With water contamination being a big challenge, the adoption of affordable and reliable multi-household water filter systems which are electricity free and easy to use can help, to some extent, access to safe drinking water at a domestic level. Also, the use of household water testing kits and the installation of water quality sensors on pipes, that send out alerts on water contamination, can create awareness of water contamination and drive suitable preventive steps.

Public awareness and use of technology: Public awareness campaigns, tax incentives for water conservation and the use of technology interfaces can also go a long way in addressing the water problem. For example, measures such as water credits can be introduced with tax benefits as incentives for efficient use and recycling of water. Similarly, government water apps, like that of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, can be used to spread tips on water saving, report leakage or send updates on water quality.

Collaborative approach: Finally, a collaborative approach like the adoption of a public-private partnership model for water projects can help. There are already examples of best practices here. For example, in Netherlands, water companies are incorporated as private companies, with the local and national governments being majority shareholders. Involving citizens through social business models for decentralised water supply, treatment or storage installations like water ATMs, as also the appointment of water guardians who can report on various aspects of water supply and usage can help in efficient water management. Grass-root level organizations could be partnered with for programmes to spread awareness on water safety and conservation.

For BASF, the proposed solutions are an extension of their close engagement with developing water management and water treatment solutions. The products developed specially for waste and drinking water treatment, such as Zetag® ULTRA and Magnafloc® LT, focus on ensuring sustainability, efficiency and cost effectiveness in the water and sludge treatment process.

BASF is also associated with operations of Reliance Industries’ desalination plant at Jamnagar in Gujarat.The thermal plant is designed to deliver up to 170,000 cubic meters of processed water per day. The use of inge® ultrafiltration technologies allows a continuous delivery of pre-filtered water at a consistent high-quality level, while the dosage of the Sokalan® PM 15 I protects the desalination plant from scaling. This combination of BASF’s expertise minimises the energy footprint of the plant and secures water supply independent of the seasonal fluctuations. To know more about BASF’s range of sustainable solutions and innovative chemical products for the water industry, see here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of BASF and not by the Scroll editorial team.