PRESENTATION ON ELECTRIC TRACTION ON INDIAN RAILWAYS- CHANGING PERSPECTIVES & ISSUES Ghanshyam Singh CELE/NR

SOME HISTORICAL FACTS First Electrification - Mumbai – Kurla, 15 RKms in 1925 at 1500 V Electrified RKms prior to independence SNCF design adopted First Section at Howrah-Burdhwan in 1958 volts DC First section electrified- Rajkharswan - Dongaposi on 25 kV AC in 1960 Present electrification RKms

Cumulative Progress of Railway Electrification on IR

CURRENT PLANS FOR ELECTRIFICATION Sanctioned work of electrification in various stages of progress 1362 RKms Works anticipated sanction during RKms Anticipated electrification projects during XI plan 3048 RKms

Impact on Present Working Expense  30% of ordinary working expense on account of fuel/energy consumed annually for traction purposes.  2/3rd of freight traffic and 1/2 the passenger traffic being hauled on electric traction. {Energy bill of over Rs.4000 crores}  Remaining 1/3rd of freight traffic and 1/2 the passenger traffic moved on diesel traction. {Fuel bill of over Rs.6000 crores-- expected to go up further to Rs crores at the present rate of HSD of Rs }.

Impact on Present Working Expense (Contd.)  Electrification of Route Kilometers (RKms).  Past total outlay Rs.5890 crores.  Present traffic hauled by electric traction, if hauled by diesel traction---additional cost Rs crores annually  Investment of about Rs.6000 crores till now towards electrification resulting in a saving of Rs.3800 crores annually  Instrumental towards the surplus generated presently

Criteria for Railway Electrification and the Changing Perspective :- Inescapable for Suburban trains/ Metro requiring high acceleration :- Haulage requirement for graded sections and high throughput by adopting heavier/longer loads :- Requirement for high density mixed (passenger/ freight) routes onwards:-  Carbon credit, environmental impact & energy security issues along with financial justification on the basis of traffic density.

Criteria for Railway Electrification and the Changing Perspective (contd.)  Economics and commercial requirements of lower fuel/ energy cost for minimal working expense  Network Solution and not sectoral route solution

Network Planning 1.Backbone Network:- Golden Quadrilateral (present) Dedicated Freight corridor (future) 2.Other Networks:- Other routes connecting major production and consumption and export gateways. Missing links and spurs in the existing electrified network

Future Perspective 1.High speed:- Technical compulsion because of high power/ high acceleration requirements. Electric traction is imperative 2.Heavy Haulage Reduced requirement of number of locomotives because of feasibility to pack higher horse power for the maximum permissible axle loads. Diesel – 6, 000 HP Maximum (6 axle, 32 ton/axle) Electric – 10,000 HP Maximum (6 axle, 22.5 ton/axle)

Perceived Limitations/issues of Electric Traction LIMITATIONS/ISSUESCOMMENTS Double Stack Container(DSC) not feasible under wire. No where in the world DSC is operated on Electric traction OHE designs have no limitation. US Rail Road & Chinese Rly are already operating DSC under wire. Change of traction created on the route after electrification affecting flow of traffic at jns. where it can not be done under the shadow of other activities (crew change, cleaning, catering, parcel) Electrification on a route primarily for major streams, traction change for minor streams can be addressed by adopting network electrification approach within the limits of viability. Shunting on unwired lines and last mile access to accident and breakdown sites Adoption of dual traction/ battery operated locomotives as shunters in electrified territory. Additional time required for restoration of OHE after accident Can be minimized to the time required for Tower Wagon checking.

LIMITATIONS/ISSUESCOMMENTS Requirement of Diesel Locos in electrified territory to sustain train services after traffic disruption. Network approach to RE takes care (e.g. Patna-Gaya, Bhusawal-Surat) Difficulties in restoration activity at accident sites Can be addressed by re-engineering of restoration methodology and breakdown tools and tackles. Expandability of Maximum Moving Dimensions (MMD) after electrification of a section. Minimum fixed dimension as per Schedule of Dimension (SOD) is the limiting factor and not OHE. Electric loco not suitable for shuntingFactually incorrect Increasing cost of electrical energyElectricity Act 2003 provides various options which shall result into a cheapest energy to Railways. Perceived limitations/issues of Electric Traction (contd.)

LIMITATIONS/ISSUESCOMMENTS Availability of EnergyElectrical – Average shortage of 8% and peaking shortage of 11% (against 30% in the past) will be bridged with initiatives taken in the power sector. Diesel- Shortage of 70% being met by imports Depleting global resources. Global developments (war etc.) Exorbitant rise in Green House Gases in atmosphere Any Other ???????????????Technology knows no limitation. Perceived limitations/issues of Electric Traction (contd.)

Conclusion  Electrification on IR has been the most debated developmental input for Rail transport leading to fluctuating pace of electrification as compared to other inputs e.g doubling, gauge conversion etc.  The debate is primarily driven by internal organizational conflicts arising out of historical evolution of traction development and perceived career prospects in specific pockets  Prevalence of non institutional operational fancies deprived of sound financial, economic, developmental and strategic appreciation.  With initiative in power sector & adoption of appropriate strategy for power procurement, cost of electrical energy is expected to go down. ELECTRIFICATION OF IR SHOULD BE DONE ON PRIORITY ON NETWORK SOLUTION & FINANCIAL VIABILITY PRINCIPALS

Strategies which needs to be looked into & evaluated for adoption on IR  Creation of Energy Management Organization Creation of Energy Management Organization  Creation of PSU as Distribution licensee Creation of PSU as Distribution licensee  Captive Generation Plan Captive Generation Plan  Deemed Captive & Distributed Generation Deemed Captive & Distributed Generation  Power Purchased from IPP/PTC through Open Access Power Purchased from IPP/PTC through Open Access  Power Purchase through State Utility(present model) Power Purchase through State Utility(present model)  Representations before SERCs & Appellate tribunals for reasonable tariffs Representations before SERCs & Appellate tribunals for reasonable tariffs  Power purchase from central generating units. Power purchase from central generating units.  Demand side management Demand side management

TREND OF AVERAGE UNIT RATE

Creation of Energy Management Organization Creation of Dedicated Energy Management Cell at Divisional, Zonal & Board’s level. Objectives of the organization  Analysis of consumption pattern and exercise control over consumption & quality of power consumed.  Evaluate various options of purchase of cheaper energy.  Analysis of ARR/tariff orders of State Utilities.  Filling objections.suggestions to SERCs.  Filing appeal with Appellate Tribunal.  Regulate contract demand with distribution licensee as per consumption pattern & anticipated traffic.  Energy conservation measure.

Creation of PSU as Distribution licensee Cost of generation of BUS2.10 CTU STU Railway PSU as Distribution licensee Level of payment In many cases may not be required Level of availing power supply by Railways PSU as distribution licensee may file its own ARR & obtain a cheaper tariff for Railways.

Captive Generation Plan Indian Railways may install its own captive generation plant Cost of generation 2.10 Level of availing power supply by Railways CTU STU Level at which payments to be made by Railways

Deemed Captive & Distributed Generation Railway may become 26 % equity holder in various generation companies & acquire status of captive generation plant by consuming 51 % energy generated by the plant. Cost of generation 2.10 Level of availing power supply by Railways CTU STU Level at which payments to be made by Railways

Power Purchased from IPP/PTC through Open Access Cost of energy at generator bus2.10 CTU STU own region STU (Inter region) 0.25 * 2.85 State wheeling charges & loss compensation Cross subsidy Level of payment by Railways Level at which power supply is availed by Rlys * Theses layer may not be there in some of the load points

Power Purchase through State Utility ( Present model) Cost of purchase by utility 1.95 CTU (PGCIL) (Wheeling charges+loss compensation) STU (Wheeling + loss compensation) O & M+Distribution loss+ inefficiency Surcharge (Cross subsidy to other consumers) Payment is made by Railways Level at which power supply is availed by Railways

Representations before SERCs & Appellate tribunals for reasonable tariffs Regular representation to SERCs in a professional way Following table showing the trend of average unit cost as a result of regular representation to SERCs

POWER PROCURED THROUGH CENTRAL GENERATING UNITS Level at which payment is made Level at which power supply is availed by Railways 3.66 To NTPC as extra surcharge as per commitment Surcharge by state utility Rly network-Wheeling+ loss compensation CTU (PGCIL) Cost of power from NTPC 2.20

Demand Side Management Correct estimation of contract demand. On line monitoring of actual maximum demand. Ensuring high load factor. Load balancing through transfer of sections between feeding zones. Installation of power factor correction equipment. Real time on line coordination with Traffic.