Satheesan, responding through a detailed Facebook post, said the government had acted to protect consumers and public finances. He challenged Vijayan to produce documentary evidence that the revised Himachal Pradesh offer had been formally communicated to the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB).
The Chief Minister cited an October 29 note by former KSEB chairman M G Rajamanickam stating that the proposed Rs 12.50 tariff could not be treated as confirmed without written acceptance from the competent Himachal Pradesh authority. Satheesan maintained that no such confirmation had reached the board.
Vijayan had alleged earlier on Friday that the government ignored a cheaper revised offer from Himachal Pradesh while favouring an arrangement through GNA Energy, a private electricity trading platform. He also questioned whether an electricity shortage had been artificially created to justify the transaction and demanded disclosure of the relevant files.
Satheesan said Himachal Pradesh had submitted a single confirmed tariff proposal of Rs 14.50 per unit through intermediary PTC India, whose margin was included in the quoted price. He questioned how a supplier offering Rajasthan electricity at Rs 15.50 per unit could have committed to supplying Keralam at Rs 12.50 without written confirmation.
The competing GNA arrangement, he said, offered electricity at Rs 8.63 and Rs 8.90 per unit. Satheesan had previously estimated that choosing the Himachal Pradesh proposal would impose an additional financial burden of approximately Rs 2,232 crore, although the competing assessments of total costs and peak-hour availability remain contested.
Vijayan argued that electricity available through the national power exchange at around Rs 5 per unit made the GNA prices excessive. He estimated an additional burden of about Rs 635 crore on purchases totalling 1,812 million units and questioned why the government had not pursued competitive procurement.
Responding to that comparison, Satheesan said the Opposition Leader had overlooked the much higher tariff proposed through PTC India. He also pointed out that the previous Left Democratic Front administration had purchased electricity through GNA, challenging Vijayan’s objections to dealing with a platform that does not itself generate power.
The Chief Minister rejected the suggestion that the state faced no genuine supply problem. He cited the former KSEB chairman’s October 29 warning that failure to arrange urgent purchases could necessitate prolonged power restrictions. The board, he said, had undertaken six tenders through the Union power ministry’s portal without securing sufficient electricity for its requirements.
Satheesan maintained that the government had considered the availability of electricity outside solar-generation hours, when demand creates particular operational difficulties. He said the GNA arrangement would provide 385 million additional units during non-solar hours compared with the Himachal proposal, according to the chairman’s note.
He said Himachal Pradesh’s average supply during the evening peak between 6.30 pm and 10.30 pm in December through March would be considerably below the 500 megawatts offered under the GNA arrangement. The different supply schedules and volumes have nevertheless become central to disagreements over the relative value of the proposals.
Satheesan further argued that the Himachal tariff exceeded the regulatory commission’s approved ceiling, potentially creating an additional liability for the government. He said extra daytime supplies under the GNA arrangement could also allow KSEB to conserve hydroelectric resources for summer demand.
(The article ‘CM disputes Vijayan’s claims’ appeared first on Free Press Journal.)
Follow Arabian Post
Select Arabian Post as your preferred source on Google and MSN News for trusted business news and Arab politics and updates.
