This discussion paper presents an alternate option for ...This discussion paper presents an alternate option for using solar energy for agriculture pumpsets. Electricity powered agriculture

This discussion paper presents an alternate option for usingsolar energy for agriculture pumpsets.

Electricity powered agriculture pumpsets is the mainstay foragriculture in Telangana and AP. This area has manychallenges for the farmer, Distribution Company and thestate government. Farmers invest heavily in well basedirrigation, but are unhappy with the poor quality ofelectricity supply. Distribution Company is unhappy withthe low revenue from a large number of consumers spreadover a large area. State has to bear the subsidy burden tosupport low tariff for the farmers.

Solar power offers some hope by way of providing qualityelectricity supply during the day time, which is convenientto farmer. Distribution Company also finds it attractive sinceit reduces the burden to allocate generation capacity foragriculture.It is environment friendly and reducesdistribution losses, if generation is distributed.

There are three possible solar options for agriculture pumping- large centralised solar plants, solar powered agriculturefeeders and solar pumpsets. All options need to beencouraged, but prioritised based on the strength andweakness of each option in different circumstances. We feelthat for states like Telangana and AP, solar poweredagriculture feeder is a more farmer-centric and equitableoption. In addition, investment burden on the governmentis lower, quality of supply is better and maintenance is easier.

Solar feeder is thus an investment program with good returns,compared to the subsidy driven solar pumpset program. Thispaper describes the solar feeder option and recommends thata few pilot projects be taken up to assess any fine-tuningaspects, before scaling up.

A Discussion Paper

Solar Agriculture FeedersAn Attractive Alternative compared to

Solar Pumpsetsin Telangana and Andhra Pradesh

Solar Agriculture Feeders : An Attractive Alternative compared toSolar Pumpsets in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh

A Discussion Paper

Published by Knowledge In Civil Societywith support fromCentre for World Solidarity, Prayas (Energy Group), People’s MonitoringGroup for Electricity Regulation, SWAPNAM

© Copyright: Any part of this paper can reproduced for non-commercialuse. We will be happy if you acknowledge KICS and drop us an email.

Authors:Sreekumar N- Trustee (KICS) and Member, Prayas (Energy Group)M Thimma Reddy– Convenor, People’s Monitoring Group for ElectricityRegulationBN Prabhakar– President, SWAPNAM, an NGO working on water andpower related issues

About Knowledge In Civil SocietyStarted in 2005 as a network to connect, share and discuss science,technology and society (STS) topics, KICS has been registered as a PublicTrust in 2010. The Board has Trustees who are from academic and civilsociety organizations with rich experience in policy and practice indifferent sectors. It is supported by professional staff competent in STSwork.

Knowledge in Civil Society (KICS)# 12-13-437, Street No: 1Tarnaka, Secunderabad - 500 017, IndiaWeb: www.kicsforum.netEmail: [email protected]

March 2016

Printed at :Charita Impressions, Azamabad, Hyderabad-20, Ph: 040-27678411

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Brief Overview of AgriculturePower Supply in Telangana and AP 5

3. Current Solar Initiatives inAgriculture Pumping 8

4. Solar Agriculture Feeder Alternative 14

5. Suggestions for Telangana and AP 25

Information sources 27

4Solar Agriculture Feeders

Acknowledgements

We thank KICS and CWS for providing an opportunityto present the solar feeder idea in the form of a discussionpaper. We have greatly benefited from the feedbackreceived during a presentation made at a KICS sharingsession on February 06, 2016 and also on an earlier draftpaper that was circulated. Villagers and organisations atChowdarpalli and Khajipuram have provided us valuablefield inputs. RVN Basaveswara Rao has helped with thecover design. Colleagues from KICS and Prayas have beenwith us during all stages of production.

We welcome comments from readers to develop thisalternative option further. Please direct them to KICS [email protected].

- Sreekumar N,M.Thimma Reddy,

BN Prabhakar

1 KICS

1. Introduction

Electricity based pumping is the backbone of agriculturein Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. These states havesignificant agriculture consumption and high populationof deep submersible wells. Agriculture consumption isreported to be 20-25% of the total electricity use in thesestates. Even with rationed release of connections, thereis a 5-6% annual growth in reported cumulativeagriculture connections. Free power announced in 2004was a welcome relief measure, but has its own share ofproblems. Distribution Companies (DISCOMs) neglectagriculture power supply leading to poor quality ofsupply, limited to non-peak hours. Rising consumptionand low tariff lead to increasing agriculture subsidyburden (to the tune of Rs. 2000 -3000 crores/year in eachof these states) on the state governments. Majority of thefarmers are marginal and small, who invest bareminimum in pump protection or efficiency, and are


unhappy with the quality of power supply. There isminimum attention on electricity or water useoptimisation. Thus agriculture sector is caught in a trap.All actors – farmer, DISCOM and state government -are unhappy with each other and with the state of affairs,but have no clue on how to escape from the trap.

There have been some initiatives to pull the sector out ofthis trap. Energy saving measures at pumpset locationswas made a pre-condition for free power. But there hasbeen no monitoring or verification on theimplementation of energy saving measures. As per thegovernment, High Voltage Distribution system (HVDS),being implemented across both states, is expected toreduce electricity losses for the DISCOM and improvequality of supply for the farmer. Small steps have beentaken towards feeder separation, which delinks ruralsupply from agriculture and improves consumptionestimates. Recently, pilot projects offering freereplacement of agriculture pumpsets with efficientpumpsets or solar pumpsets have been attempted. Theseare all important and need to be studied, but the focus ofthis discussion paper is on a solar feeder alternative foragriculture.

Debates and deliberations around climate change whichfocused on the need to reduce dependence on fossil fuelsand declining cost of solar power have opened up newopportunities for spreading solar power utilisation inagriculture sector, particularly in well irrigation. Whileagriculture needs power supply during day time, solarpower is also available during day time. Compared to

3 KICS

the present supply of power in two spells that includenight time, with solar power, electricity will be availableduring day time and inconvenience involved in nightpower supply could be avoided. This will also ease theburden on DISCOMs to make arrangement to purchasepower for agriculture. They can also include this capacityin Renewable Power Purchase Obligations. There arethree possible solar options for agriculture pumping. Firstis setting up large centralised solar plants, each with acapacity of a few hundred MW. Second, presented in thispaper, is the option of distributed mini solar plants, eachwith 1-2 MW capacity, powering one agriculture feeder.Third is solar pumpsets. All options need to beencouraged, while understanding the strengths andweaknesses of each option in different circumstances.

Centralised solar plants are being actively promoted andhave benefits, but have some disadvantages thatcentralised conventional power plants have. There is alsono way to ensure that the generated solar power isreserved for agriculture pumping. Solar power producednear the point of power consumption is better, since ithelps to reduce electricity losses as well as investment ontransmission and distribution. As for solar agriculturepumpsets, they are also being actively promoted in thepast few years, but with limited success.

In the last few years, programs to supply subsidised solarpumps have started across the country. Solar pumps arebeing promoted by Ministry of New and RenewableEnergy (MNRE) and are useful to replace diesel pumps,especially in areas with poor electricity infrastructure and


ground water availability at low depths (like Bihar,Jharkhand, UP etc). For states like Telangana and AndhraPradesh, with good grid coverage and high depthsubmersible pumps, the option of solar feeders foragriculture is a good alternative. This discussion paperpresents this option. The major benefits of this optionare:

Farmer gets quality power supply for 7 hours during daytimeDISCOM does not have the responsibility of purchasingpower for agriculture supplyState subsidy burden reducesReduces T&D losses and investment, due to distributedgeneration nearer to loadPromotion of sustainable renewable energy option tomeet livelihood and economic needsCompared to the solar pumpset option, this is better interms of cost and maintenanceGrid connectivity ensures optimal utilisation of solarcapacity and increases supply reliabilityImplementation possible in 12 months

Section 2 of this paper gives a brief overview of agriculturepower supply, Section 3 covers the existing initiatives insolar power for agriculture, Section 4 details the solarfeeder option and Section 5 gives suggestions forTelangana and Andhra Pradesh.

5 KICS

2. Brief Overview ofAgriculture Power Supply in

Telangana and AP

Well irrigation has emerged as an important source ofirrigation in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.Electrification of irrigation pump-sets contributedconsiderably to the spread of well irrigation in the state.While fast depleting ground water resources reflected indeclining water tables in all parts of the states indicatethe risk involved in depending on well irrigation on asustainable level, it is also important to acknowledge thecontribution made by well irrigation to food security,rural livelihoods and economic development in both thestates. Well irrigation has helped to insure the stateeconomy from vagaries of monsoons. Farmers turned towell irrigation to protect them from the crisis faced bydry land agriculture. As the quality of power supplydeteriorated and ground water levels depleted, wellirrigation also has many risks and is no more in a positionto provide that protection. Here it is to be noted that


unlike the case of surface irrigation, capital contributioncomes almost totally from farmers in the case of wellirrigation. Therefore the risk is entirely borne by thefarmers. Table 1 captures some key parameters ofagriculture power supply in Telangana and AP.

Table 1: Overview of agriculture power supply in Telangana andAP (2015-16)

Telangana APGross area irrigated by wells 2014 (lakh hectares) 23 16Gross area irrigated by wells 2014 (%) 74 40No of pumpsets (lakhs) 21 15Agriculture consumption (MU) 10,658 9,956Total consumption (MU) 41,602 47,387Agriculture Consumption (%) 26 21Govt subsidy (Rs. Cr) 2,635 3,186Govt subsidy/pumpset (Rs) 12,843 21,342Source: Tariff orders of Telangana and AP states 2016, Statistical abstracts ofTelangana and AP, 2015

In Telangana 23 lakh hectares of gross area was cultivatedunder wells in 2014. This accounted for 74% of the totalgross area irrigated in Telangana state. During the sameperiod, 16 lakh hectares was irrigated under wells inAndhra Pradesh, accounting for 40% of gross areairrigated in this state. Well based irrigation iscomparatively more critical in Telangana state. In 2005,gross area irrigated under wells in undivided AndhraPradesh stood at 26 lakh hectares, accounting for 51% ofthe gross irrigated area in the undivided state. Duringthe last 10 years gross area irrigated under wells increasedby more than 50% in this region.

7 KICS

Increase in area cultivated under wells is accompaniedby increase in number of electrified agriculture pumpsets.In 2005 there were nearly 21 lakh agricultural services inundivided Andhra Pradesh state. In 2016 Telangana statealone has 21 lakh agricultural services. Andhra Pradeshstate has another 15 lakh electrified pumpsets. Further,increase in number of electrified agriculture pumpsets isfollowed by higher power consumption in agriculturesector. Electricity consumption by agriculture sector was13,392 MU in undivided Andhra Pradesh in 2005. Thishas increased to 20,614 MU in 2016 (Telangana 10,658MU, AP 9,956 MU). This shows that during this periodpower consumption in agriculture sector increased by54%.While power consumption in agriculture sector in2016 in Telangana state was 26% of the total, it was 21%in AP. As power supplied to agriculture sector is nearlyfree, it entailed significant subsidy from the stategovernments. In 2016 Telangana government contributedRs. 2,635 crore and the AP government contributed Rs.3,186 crore towards subsidy for supply of free electricityto agriculture pumpsets. This amounted to Rs. 12,843subsidy per pumpset in Telangana and Rs. 21,342 subsidyper pumpset in AP.


3. Current Solar Initiatives inAgriculture Pumping

There are many initiatives at the national and state levelto promote solar power in agriculture.

National initiatiNational initiatiNational initiatiNational initiatiNational initiativvvvveseseseses

At the national level, renewable energy is seen as the keyelectricity supply option, given its rapidly falling costsand its contribution to enhancing energy security at atime of ever-rising fossil fuel imports. Climate mitigationis a key added co-benefit. Recognizing this, theGovernment of India in 2015 had announced anambitious target of 175 GW of renewable energy capacityaddition by 2022. Solar power (100 GW) forms themainstay of this target. This is further divided into largescale centralized power plants (50 GW) and distributedsmaller scale projects (40 GW of rooftop mainly used byindustrial, commercial and residential consumers and 10

9 KICS

1 As reported in Economic Times, August 3, 2015: 34,941 solar water pumps have beeninstalled so far in the country as against the 1,38,267 sanctioned, Parliament wasinformed today.

GW grid-connected tail-end plants). The government hadalso announced a massive program of solar pumpsets (forirrigation and drinking water), with a plan to add 1 lakhpumps in 2015 to reach a target of 10 lakhs by 2021. Thisis being implemented through state nodal agencies forrenewable energy and NABARD. There is 30 - 40%capital subsidy from the central government and statesoffer an additional 40-50%. The progress has been slowwith around 35,000 solar pumpsets installed in thecountry1. Ministry of New and Renewable Energy(MNRE) announced a new proposal in 2015 forunemployed youth and farmers wherein around 10 GWof grid connected tail end solar PV plants (0.5-5 MW)will be connected to the distribution substation. Powerfrom these projects would be bought by the DISCOM atthe rate decided by the state. MNRE is willing tocontribute Rs. 0.5 crore/MW (~ 8% of the capital cost),provided the state sets up a committee and institutes apolicy for transparent selection and allocation of projects.State-wise targets were also indicated by MNRE, withtargets of 467 MW for Telangana and AP states. Finally,in the National Tariff Policy announced in 2016, the solarrenewable energy purchase obligation target is set at 8%by 2022 and MNRE has indicated solar generationcapacity target of 4457 MW for Telangana and 5357 MWfor AP, by 2022.


TelanTelanTelanTelanTelangggggana initiatiana initiatiana initiatiana initiatiana initiativvvvveseseseses

In the state of Telangana, there have been many initiativesin the area of solar power and solar pumpsets. There wasa massive plan to install solar pumpsets, but the tenderfor solar pumpsets was cancelled in November 2014,reportedly due to high costs. The Telangana Solar Powerpolicy was announced in May 2015. It aims to realise andharness the vast solar power potential of the state andpromote decentralised and distributed generation. Thereis a mention of gradual replacement of conventionalpumpsets to solar powered pumpsets. A multi-department committee for solar pumpsets was set up inJuly 2015, but the report is not yet available.

The government has been promising nine hour qualitypower to agriculture during day time from April 2016,which defeats one of the major advantages of solarpumpsets. According to a report in The Hindu datedFebruary 26, 2016, the Telangana New and RenewableEnergy Development Corporation Limited (TNREDCL)has decided to install 10,000 solar water pump systems inthe state by the year end. Tender for this has been releasedand as of now, the last date for submission of financialbids is in April 2016. The Power For All agreement signedby Telangana government with Government of India hasmany programs for solar and agriculture pumps. Asagainst a solar capacity of around 400 MW, there is aplan to reach 6135 MW by 2019. It mentions a plan ofinstalling 20,000 solar pumps per year starting from 2016.It also mentions a plan to replace all pumpsets in

11 KICS

Telangana with energy efficient pumpsets by 2021,starting with 20,000 pumpsets in 2016.

AP initiatiAP initiatiAP initiatiAP initiatiAP initiativvvvveseseseses

AP Solar Policy announced in February 2015 recognisedthe importance of introducing solar power in agriculturesector. According to the policy, solar power can helpshift the agriculture load and meet the power demandduring the day time. One of the objectives of this policyis to deploy solar powered agricultural pumpsets and meetpower requirements of farmers during day time.Government of AP in collaboration with the centralgovernment agencies will undertake measures to enablegradual replacement of conventional pumpsets to solarpowered pumpsets through subsidy support. New andRenewable Energy Development Corporation of A.P.Ltd (NREDCAP), the designated nodal agency willfacilitate with government agencies for availing subsidies,grants and/ or incentives. The policy envisaged that50,000 solar powered pumpsets will be operational inthe state in the next five years without any additionalfinancial burden on the farmers. On an average, 10,000conventional pumpsets are to be replaced with solarpowered pumpsets annually. Similar targets are given inthe Power For All program, signed by the governmentof AP with Government of India in 2014. A pilot programfor replacing around 2500 pumpsets with efficientpumpsets was started in 2015, and there is a plan to replace6.14 lakh pumpsets by 2019.


According to the guidelines issued by NREDCAP in thepast (November 2014) the ground water in bore well ofthe applicant farmer shall be available at a less than 200feet depth. The guidelines issued subsequently (February2015) did not mention this but it noted that officials ofNREDCAP and DISCOMs would carry out jointinspection of farmer’s site to certify the depth of groundwater. Farmer will receive a total subsidy up to 89%.3hp and 5hp pumpsets will be covered under thisprogramme. The cost of a 5hp pump set is pegged at Rs4.90 lakhs, out of which farmer has to pay Rs 55,000 andthe remaining Rs. 4.35 lakhs will be covered under thecentral and state government subsidy. Similarly, in thecase of a 3hp pump the cost is Rs 3.20 lakhs for whichfarmers have to pay Rs 40,000 as their contribution. Thesesolar powered pumpsets will operate off grid and willnot be connected to the grid.

AP had set a target to install 7,000 solar agricultural pumpsets in the state during the first year, but this did notmove forward successfully. Against the target of 7,000pumpsets by the end of this financial year, until nowabout 1200 solar pumpsets were installed in the state.Oneof the important problems could be that the pumpsetscould be installed only in the case where depth of borewell is not more than 200 feet. But now a days a largenumber of bore wells are more than 400 feet deep. Besidesthis, though utility records show that most of thepumpsets are powered by 5 hp motors, in reality most ofthe motors’ capacity is in the range of 7.5 to 10 hp. Inthe delta areas of Penna, Krishna and Godavari rivers

13 KICS

water is available at 30 feet or below. Here mono blockpumpsets are suitable and farmers at present are usingthese pumpsets only. But under the present solarpumpsets policy these farmers are being forced to usesubmersible pumpsets being supplied by the contractors.On the one hand farmers have to incur additionalexpenditure to make their wells suitable to submersiblepumpsets and on the other quantum of water deliveryhas come down. Earlier they used to get 3 inch waterand this has come down to 2 inch water. Added to thisthere are some limitations with individual solar pumps(as mentioned in the next section) that come in the wayof successful implementation of the programme. As wewrite this, there are indications that the insistence ondepth and type of pumpsets are being removed.


4. Solar AgricultureFeeder Alternative

As seen in the previous section, national and stategovernments have ambitious programs to install solarpumpsets for agriculture. The progress has been slow dueto many reasons. There is also a concern that solarpumpsets may increase ground water extraction, unlessthere is an option to sell excess power to the grid atattractive tariff. As of now, the solar pumpsets are notdesigned for grid connection and there are many doubtsif grid connected operation at tail end of agriculturefeeders will be feasible. Some limitations of solar pumpsetoption are given below.

· Upfront cost is as high as Rs. 5 lakh/pump and farmershave to put in 10-11% of the cost, which can be high atRs.50,000. Policy does not adequately benefit small andmarginal farmers due to high upfront costs even afterfactoring subsidy provided by the governments.

15 KICS

· Current capital subsidy structure discourages innovationsto reduce cost of solar pumps.

· In many situations, solar pumps complement electricpumps but are unable to completely replace them. In otherwords there is the possibility of continued use of electricpumps.

· Storage of unused solar energy and connecting to theconventional grid is a challenge, resulting in significantunder-utilisation of the high cost solar system when notin use.

· Individual solar pumps means additional maintenancework for the farmer and greater need for vigilance giventhe possibility of theft of the solar panels.

· The warranty extended by the manufacturers of the solarpumps is limited to 5 years and will be a burden to thefarmer after 5 years, since the life of the pump is typically20-25 years

· Most policies (apart from a Karnataka tender in July 2014)do not specify the use of efficient BEE 5 Star ratedpumping systems. This increases the cost of solar system.

Concept ofConcept ofConcept ofConcept ofConcept of solar a solar a solar a solar a solar agggggriculturriculturriculturriculturriculture fe fe fe fe feedereedereedereedereeder

As we have seen, solar pumpsets have many limitationsand it will be good to search for alternative solar options.The alternative proposed here is the solar poweredagriculture feeder to meet electricity needs of thepumpsets connected to the distribution transformers(DTs) under a feeder. Unlike the individual solarpumpsets which are off grid, these plants will beconnected to the grid. Considering around 400 pumpsetson a 11 kV feeder, MW-scale solar plants could be usedeffectively to meet agricultural power demand. In areas


with feeder separation, 1-2 MW tail-end solar plants(representative of a typical feeder load) would beinterconnected to the 33 kV substation. Such feederswould be kept load shedding-free during the day timefrom 8 am to 5 pm to primarily meet agriculture load. Itis best to implement this system where feeder separationis in place, but can also be implemented in other locationssince agriculture constitutes 80% or more of the load onmost rural feeders. It is best to locate the plant near the33 kV substation, since interconnection and maintenancewill be easier, but the option of locating the system mid-way on the 11 kV feeder could also be explored, basedon land availability. A 1 MW solar plant will requirearound 5 acres of land.

Agriculture load will be given assured supply during 8am- 5 pm. In case there is no demand/low load conditions

Figure 1: Schematic of the solar agriculture feeder option

17 KICS

(say in monsoon), solar power generated will flow backto the utility grid. In case load is higher than solar powerbeing generated, the differential will be provided by theDISCOM. If there is some problem with the solar plantor if there is need for supply during night, DISCOMwill supply the power. With a view to reduce the capacityof the solar plant, and to make the option more attractive,it is better to replace all the pumpsets with energy efficientpumpsets. Programs for this are already under way inAP and Telangana, as mentioned in the previous section.Figure 1 gives a schematic of the option with energyefficient pumpsets.

There are several potential benefits from this approach –both qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative benefits aregiven below.

Assured and reliable hours of supply to agricultureImproved quality of supply (essentially better voltageprofiles) resulting in potentially less pump burn outsSolar agriculture feeder option is significantly more cost-effective and manageable as compared to individual solarpumps. For the farmer, the challenges of safety andsecurity associated with solar pumpsets is absent in thisoptionReplacement of existing in-efficient pumps with 5 star orbetter efficiency pumps can make the scheme even morecost effective. Efficient pumps, if integrated into this solarfeeder scheme, can bring down the effective cost of solarpower for agriculture by about 25 per cent (afteraccounting for cost of new pumps, which can reducepower requirement by 30-40 per cent). Considering thefixed cost of solar generation (over 20-25 years) and the


increasing cost of grid supply, solar feeder with efficientpumps would be cheaper than grid supply in just 2 years.From the state’s point of view, it significantly reduceson-going subsidy for agriculture, while accounting forsolar RPO at the same time. Field surveys show thatfarmers use pumpsets for about 200 days in an year andafter taking in to account cloudy days these farmers willnot be using power from these solar plants for about 100days. Unused solar energy from these plants can be fedin to the grid and as such brings down subsidy burden onthe government. The state government can avail thisbenefit for 25 year period, the life of the solar powerplant.

FFFFField surield surield surield surield survvvvveeeeey obsery obsery obsery obsery observvvvvationsationsationsationsations

Field survey was taken up in 2015, in Telangana and APto assess the ground level issues related to solar feedersfor agriculture. Chowdarpalli village of YacharamMandal, Rangareddy district in Telangana andKhajipuram village of Bestavaripet Mandal, Prakasamdistrict in Andhra Pradesh were selected for the survey.

According to the list provided by the local DISCOMstaff, there are 151 agricultural services in Chowdarpallivillage and 134 agriculture services in Khajipuram village.During the field survey in both the villages it was foundthat some authorised agriculture services (with servicenumbers) do not find place in the official list. To theseone has to add unauthorised services to get completepicture of electricity consumption in agriculture sector.

In Chowdarpalli village average depth of bore wells is about200 feet. Encountering granite strata at these depths might

19 KICS

have discouraged farmers to go for greater depths. Thesebore wells may be amenable for individual solar poweredpump sets.In Khajipuram village average depth of borewells is about 450 feet. There are some bore wells thathave gone up to 800 feet. Individual solar pumpsets maynot be suitable for these bore wells and alternatives likefeeder level solar plants may be needed. In both the villagesvariety of crops are being grown. These include castor,chillies, corn, cotton, guava, horse gram, jowar, mango,paddy, tomato, and vegetables in Chowdarpalli village andbajra, chillies, corn, cotton, guava, jowar, mango,mulberry, paddy, red gram, sunflower, sweet lime/orange,tomato, sesame in Khajipuram village. In this village areaunder mulberry crop is increasing. In both the villagesvegetables are grown throughout the year, but on a limitedarea. In both villages water intensive crops like sugar caneare not grown. Paddy is grown in a limited area mostlyfor self-consumption.

The villages identified for this study represents – in termsof cropping pattern and water usage - a part of the areaunder well irrigation, albeit a larger part ,if not total area.Pumpsets are used for a maximum of 180 days, except inthe case of vegetables or horticulture crops like mangoand mulberry. An important problem faced by farmers inboth villages and that will have implications for feederbased solar plants is related to availability of technical helpat the village level. Both villages face problems related tolow voltage, neglect of DT maintenance and low hangingconductors.


While some farmers are for feeder based solar plantsothers want individual units. The latter argue that if it iscommunity based no one will pay attention to it. If it isindividual based each one will take care of their units. Ifvoltages improve and cost of pumpset maintenance comesdown in terms of rewinding burnt motors andreplacement of starters farmers may be ready to sharelarger responsibility. But the issue is to instil and maintainconfidence in farmers. Farmers would also like to put inplace a mechanism for operation and maintenance of thesolar plants as well help/guidance in maintaining the solarpump sets. Solar feeder option will need community levelwork. Farmers need to be educated and organised. It willbe good if all the farmers in the village come togetherand take it as community activity.

PrPrPrPrPreliminareliminareliminareliminareliminary analy analy analy analy analysis ofysis ofysis ofysis ofysis of quantitati quantitati quantitati quantitati quantitativvvvve benefitse benefitse benefitse benefitse benefits

Preliminary economic analysis, based on typicalparameters for Telangana and AP states is presented inthis section. The key assumptions are given in Table 2.

A 11 kV feeder with 20 dedicated agriculture DistributionTransformers (DTs) each with 20 pumps (5hp each)having an average use of 1200 hours/year is considered.Assumptions are made of average losses, cost of gridpower and annual escalation, cost of solar power, cost ofefficient pump, life of pump (over which period allcomparisons are made) and discount rate. Distributioncost is not considered since it is present in all options.Key results for a typical feeder are given in Table 3.

21 KICS

Table 3: Key resultsFactor DISCOM Solar Solar and

power Efficientpumpset

Capacity (MW) 1.49 1.16 0.81Energy/year (MU) 1.93 1.93 1.35Cost (Rs.Crore/Year)* 0.77 0.97 0.84NPV for 15 years (RsCrore) 7.72 7.35 5.15Break-even with DISCOM power (year) NA 5 2* Cost of DISCOM power is for year 1, it increases at 5% per year

Table 2: Key assumptions for analysis

No of Distribution Transformers (DTs)/feeder 20No of Pumps/DT 20Average Pump capacity (hp) 5Total Load on a DT (kW) 74.6Total Load on a feeder (MW) 1.49Hours of operation/year 1,200Energy consumed/year (MU) 1.79Technical loss on 11 kV and LT feeder (%) 8%Energy supply required per feeder/year (MU) 1.93Cost of DISCOM power (Rs/U)* 3.6Escalation of DISCOM power (%/year) 5%Cost of solar power (Rs/U) 5Efficiency improvement for pump 30%Capacity of efficient pump (hp) 3.5Cost of efficient pump (Rs) 35,000Discount rate (%) 10%Life of pump (years for comparison) 15* This is the current cost. At 5% annual increase, this will be Rs 4/Unitfor year 1, when the project is operational


For this feeder with 400 pumpsets, each of 5 hp capacity,the total load requirement is 1.49 MW and compensatingfor the 8% line losses, 1.93 MU would be needed perfeeder. Cost of DISCOM supply will be Rs.0.77 crore/year, for year-1, increasing at 5% per year. This gives aNet Present Value (NPV) of Rs. 7.72 crore for a 15 yearperiod, used for comparing options.

Solar plant is sized based on energy requirement andcapacity utilisation factor of 19%. As can be seen, thesolar plant capacity of 1.16 MW meets the energyrequirement of all pumpsets. If all pumps operate at thesame time, DISCOM can provide the extra powerrequired. Assuming a solar power cost of Rs.5/unit, theannual cost of solar power is Rs. 0.97 crore/year. This isconstant for the lifetime of the solar plant and NPV forthis cost over 15 years is Rs. 7.35 crore. This is lowerthan Rs. 7.72 crores, the NPV for DISCOM supply.

Benefits increase if pumps are replaced with efficient ones.Replacement cost of 5hp pump with 5 star energy efficientpump is assumed to be Rs. 35,000 / pump with 30%reduction in energy consumption. Replacing all 400pumps with 5 star pumps would incur upfront cost ofRs. 1.4 crore. Reduced energy requirement would meanreduction in energy consumption to 1.35 MU. For this asolar plant of 0.81 MW capacity will be sufficient. In thiscase too, any extra requirement of peak power will besupplied by DISCOM. This would result in a yearlypayment to the solar power generator of Rs. 0.84 crore,giving a NPV of Rs. 5.15 Cr for 15 year period. As canbe seen, this is much lower than the option with only

23 KICS

solar power, even after considering the cost of replacingpumpsets.

Assuming DISCOM power supply cost of Rs. 4/unitfrom year 1, escalating at 5% per annum, and solar powerfixed at Rs. 5 / unit for over 15 years an integrated solarpowered feeder with efficient pumps would be cheaperthan grid supply in just 2 years. If there is no pumpsetreplacement, break-even happens a little later at 5 years.This is shown in Figure 2.

The above analysis clearly shows the higher cost-effectiveness of the solar powered agriculture feeder incomparison to DISCOM power. The benefits willincrease if solar tracking is employed2. Another importantfactor which will reduce the cost and assist inimplementation is the participation by farmers in land2 Solar tracking can increase the energy output by around 15-20%, but would imply

around 10% increase in capital cost and marginal increase in maintenance cost

Figure 2: Break-even for solar option


identification, construction and maintenance. However,what is presented is a first cut preliminary analysis andneeds fine-tuning based on better assumptionssupplemented by field conditions.

25 KICS

5. Suggestions forTelangana and AP

The previous sections have explained the concept of solaragriculture feeder and presented a preliminary cost benefitanalysis. This option has significant benefits over the solarpumpset option, for which the government (central andstate combined) is providing nearly 90% subsidy. Ascompared to solar pumpsets, which is a subsidy drivenprogram, solar feeder option is an investment program,with good outcomes. The idea of solar feeder has beendiscussed in various fora from 2014. Maharashtra andGujarat states have shown interest to implement a fewpilot projects to prove the concept. We suggest a similarapproach in Telangana and AP.

There are two DISCOMs in Telangana and two in AP.Two pilot projects each could be planned in eachDISCOM, thus covering 8 feeders from both states.Benefit of the MNRE announced tail end solar projects


could be utilised. Selection of feeder could be based onavailability of solar radiation, around 5 acres of land,feeder separation (preferred) or having high agricultureload, good quality of supply, crops which need 7-8 hoursof water, ground water availability and farmercooperation. Areas where water optimisation (by use ofdrip irrigation, optimal cropping pattern etc) could begiven preference. Implementation and management ofthe project could be by different agencies like stategeneration company, farmer cooperatives or privatecompanies.In both states, there are plans to replacepumpsets with energy efficient pumpsets in the next fewyears. Solar projects could be planned in areas where suchreplacement is being planned, especially since theseprojects also seem to include improvement of pumpprotection mechanisms, mobile based start/stop etc.

Pilot projects will help demonstrate technical andimplementation feasibility as well as the benefits tofarmers in terms of quality supply. Based on thisexperience, the idea could be scaled up to 100-300 ruralfeeders, or 5-15 feeders/district in each state. This willalso further reduce the cost of solar power and henceincrease benefits of this option. Based on theseexperiences, plans can be made to expand the coverageof solar feeders to more agriculture pumpsets in bothstates.

27 KICS

InfInfInfInfInfororororormation sourmation sourmation sourmation sourmation sourcescescescesces

1. Andhra Pradesh Solar Policy, Government of AP, 2015,available at: http://www.nredcapswc.ap.gov.in/NREDCAP/Downloads/GOS/Solar%20Policy%202015.pdf

2. Telangana Solar Policy, Government of Telangana, 2015,available at: http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/state-power-policies/Telangana-Solar-Power%20Policy.pdf

3. Tariff orders of Telangana 2015, and Andhra Pradesh 2015,available atthe websites of the respective ElectricityRegulatory Commissions:http://tserc.gov.inand http://aperc.gov.in

4. Annual revenue requirement submissions of TelanganaDISCOMs 2016 and AP DISCOMs 2016, the websites ofthe respective Electricity Regulatory Commissions:http://tserc.gov.inandhttp://aperc.gov.in

5. Websites of Telangana New & Renewable EnergyDevelopment Corporation Ltd(http://tnredcl.telangana.gov.in) and New and RenewableEnergy development Corporation of Andhra Pradesh(http://www.nredcapswc.ap.gov.in)

6. Power for All program joint initiative between theGovernment of Telangana and Government of India 2016,available at: http://powermin.nic.in/upload/pdf/Power_For_All_4_12_Final_Telangana_Signed.pdf

7. Power for All program joint initiative between theGovernment of AP and Government of India 2014,available at: http://powermin.nic.in/upload/pdf/joint_initiative_of_govt_of_india_and_andhrapradesh.pdf

8. Allocation of central grant of Rs. 470 crores to states/UTsagainst scheme for unemployed youth and farmers, MNRE,May 2015

9. Karnataka’s Smart, New SolarPump Policy for Irrigation,Tushar Shah, Economic & Political Weekly, November 29,2014


10. Solar-Powered Pump Irrigation and India’s GroundwaterEconomy – A preliminary Discussion of Opportunities andThreats, Tushar Shah and Avinash Kishore, IWMI waterpolicy highlight - 26, 2012

11. A ray of hope for solar-powered agriculture,AshwinGambhir and Shantanu Dixit, Hindu Business Line,July 8, 2015

12. Cost benefit analysis of the solar agriculture feeder optionby Prayas (Energy Group), Pune, 2015-16

13. Inputs received during field visits in Telangana and AP(2015), as well as during a sharing session on the topicorganised by KICS at Hyderabad, February 06, 2016

14. Mini solar plants to address the agriculture power supplycrisis, Internal note prepared by Sreekumar N and BNPrabhakar, 2014

This discussion paper presents an alternate option for usingsolar energy for agriculture pumpsets.

Electricity powered agriculture pumpsets is the mainstay foragriculture in Telangana and AP. This area has manychallenges for the farmer, Distribution Company and thestate government. Farmers invest heavily in well basedirrigation, but are unhappy with the poor quality ofelectricity supply. Distribution Company is unhappy withthe low revenue from a large number of consumers spreadover a large area. State has to bear the subsidy burden tosupport low tariff for the farmers.

Solar power offers some hope by way of providing qualityelectricity supply during the day time, which is convenientto farmer. Distribution Company also finds it attractive sinceit reduces the burden to allocate generation capacity foragriculture.It is environment friendly and reducesdistribution losses, if generation is distributed.

There are three possible solar options for agriculture pumping- large centralised solar plants, solar powered agriculturefeeders and solar pumpsets. All options need to beencouraged, but prioritised based on the strength andweakness of each option in different circumstances. We feelthat for states like Telangana and AP, solar poweredagriculture feeder is a more farmer-centric and equitableoption. In addition, investment burden on the governmentis lower, quality of supply is better and maintenance is easier.

Solar feeder is thus an investment program with good returns,compared to the subsidy driven solar pumpset program. Thispaper describes the solar feeder option and recommends thata few pilot projects be taken up to assess any fine-tuningaspects, before scaling up.

Documents

This discussion paper presents an alternate option for ...This discussion paper presents an alternate option for using solar energy for agriculture pumpsets. Electricity powered agriculture