ON THE RECORD

PIYASVASTI DEFENDS POWER PLAN

Thailand needs to diversify its energy supplies, says minister

The revised Power Development Plan (PDP), a 15-year master plan directing the country's utilisation and development of electricity, has faced strong criticism from environmentalists and consumer advocates who recently boycotted a public forum on the issue. Unless there are major changes, the PDP will face a series of protests.

What is in the controversial plan that has drawn heavy criticism, and what factors does the Energy Ministry use to justify the plan?

Energy Minister Piyasvasti Amranand shares his views with Piyaporn Wongruang.

What does the plan look like, and what are the key arguments that arose from it?

In general, the plan mainly includes further development of natural gases and coal-fired power production, while promoting power purchases from small power producers and very small power producers who are to be encouraged to use mainly renewable energy by some financial incentives, and power purchases from neighbouring countries.

Central to the argument in the plan is whether the electricity forecast which has led to the revision of the plan is justified, and whether power production from coal is economically and environmentally viable.

I would say that sometimes we base our judgment on emotions.

On the matter of whether the current electricity forecast may be too high, I want to question how you can be so sure about that.

Our past forecasts have suggested that the forecast electricity must be closely matched with the actual use.

This is because we have updated the data for our forecasts all the time. I must say that nobody would know exactly how much electricity is needed. We have to have long-term planning to serve the need, and this can be wrong.

However, when it is time to make a decision, we have to do so with the best data we have, or it would be too late to find electricity to serve the need because to build a new power plant takes time.

The point is whether we take into account all possible options for our electricity production or not.

This is crucial, and at least those options should be looked into first. Whether you will take them or not is another matter.

The use of coal for electricity production, for instance, is also up to people as well. In fact, this new plan has reduced the proportion of the use of coal in electricity production. The point is, if you [the people] don't want this plan, we [the government] will just forget it and stick to the original version. For coal, let me say there has been some confusion about it. Coal itself is not bad, what is bad is poor management of coal-fired power production.

But since the use of coal has caused public concern, why don't we switch to more environmentally friendly sources of energy? What is the ministry's policy on alternative energy sectors, such as renewable energy?

Do you think I want to be criticised for introducing energy that people think is dirty? The fact is clean energy is expensive as we all know and it requires advanced technology to develop - taking as an example the case of solar energy production, which is costly.

The ministry has to some extent incorporated the use of renewable energy in the sector of small power production.

We have just introduced financial incentives to promote the production of electricity from rubbish, wind and small-scale hydropower plants, as well as solar energy. Combined together, we expect about 530 megawatts of electricity capacity from this. The rest would be from large-scale production and power production from neighbouring countries.

How can the diversification of energy ensure the country's energy security? And by taking power from neighbouring countries, how would energy be secured?

The key issue about energy security is that we just cannot rely on one particular type of energy because that would be too risky. That's the reason why we need energy diversification. Security can be achieved if sale prices are stable, and to make the sale prices stable, various options are needed that compete with one another in the market. Coal, for instance, will be another [option] in such a process, against popular natural gases.

Power from neighbouring countries accounts for 20% of the total needed electricity capacity in the plan. This is not high, and could still be increased.

The country in focus in the 10-year period is Laos, which we have made an agreement with to purchase electricity from its Nam Theun 2 Dam. Another two dams, the Nam Nguem 2 and 3 projects, may materialise in the next 10 years.

The relationship between the two countries is where our energy security is placed and secured from.

So what is different between this interim government's energy policy and that of the deposed Thaksin government?

The difference is that they [the Thaksin administration] just talked and did nothing, while we have tried to materialise energy plans with actions. For instance, we have come up with financial incentives to encourage small-scale power producers to make use of renewable energy. Successful or not, I don't know, but if we don't start now we will never know.

Bangkok Post

Saturday April 07, 2007