On April 5, 2020, India stood in solidarity to pay tribute to the frontline warriors of COVID-19
pandemic as a response to the appeal made by country’s prime minister Mr Narendra Modi two days
earlier to turn off lights at every house for nine minutes at 9 pm to display country’s collective
endeavour to fight the virus. Undoubtedly a noble mission, however left the Power System Operation
Corporation Ltd. (POSOCO) with an enormous and unprecedented challenge on how to ensure power grid
stability when handling such massive jumps nationwide within very small window of time.
...
In order to best realize the true nature of the concern, one must first understand how the operational
power grid works. The most critical task of the grid operators is to match the power demand on the
consumption side to the power produced on the supply side at all times. Indian power grid operates at
a voltage of 50 Hz which is a critical aspect for grid’s stability. Any deviation beyond the range of
49.5 - 50.2 Hz can cause the power grid to collapse, damaging equipments and leaving a large number
of people without electricity. This is what happened in July 2012, when two separate events of massive
power transmission failures submerged around 700 million people in darkness. Ever since then, system
engineers are extremely cautious of any event that may cause rapid changes in mismatch between power
demand and power generations. Any remaining mismatch must be covered in real time without compromising
the grid frequency beyond its permitted limits.
While it is possible to estimate or forecast the changes in demand from a drop in electricity demand
in the residency sector, modulating the production side in a coherent manner against such high ramps
in not easy. This is mainly because of the inertia in thermal power plants. Most of them function as
base load plants (which means their production does not vary much over time in response to the demand,
but they cover a substantial share of demand coverage) and if shut down, they require a couple of hours
before they can get operational again.
Apart from these technical issues, there were a few other problems, which caused deeper concerns to
the management. The power grid infrastructure in India is not state-of-the-art, its resilience is
often questioned, many appliances connected to the grid are outdated and poorly maintained. Additionally,
India lacks adequate spinning reserves for ancillary services which are suitable for balancing operations
in real time. Also, smart grids are not yet widely deployed in India. In most cases, they have been
envisioned, projects are running, but implementing them to be operational will still require another
decade or so. And then, to make matters worse, there is the problem with social media that grossly
exaggerated the potential for a nation-wide grid collapse, the risk of damaging the appliances if left
connected to the grid during blackouts and introduced more panic among the mass. The speculation of
possible damage of electric equipments led people to turn off refrigerators, fans, and other electrical
appliances alongside with the lights in their home. This created a massive gap between what was
precedented by POSOCO for a power drop exclusively by turning off the lights as appealed by the PM and
the actual power drop. Based on the detailed information available from consumer data, load composition
etc, POSOCO estimated a power drop around 14 GW, but it turned out to be around 31 GW, more than twice
as big as predicted. It is a pity how mainstream media often disregard the facts and publish news based
on hypes instead of reaching out to actual experts on the field. Thankfully, POSOCO had set a wide margins
of error into their projections as accurately predicting the behaviour of 1.3 billion people is inherently
a complex task and this allowed them to meticulously plan the grid management accordingly.
The government officials were optimistic about the impact of this event on the state of the national grid.
It was highlighted that the ongoing nation-wide lockdown had already reduced the demand by 30% from its
peak. Even so, the remaining mismatch was too high to be mitigated with conventional generation facilities.
The hydropower stations, which account for roughly 10% of India’s electricity demand, have played a key
role in carrying out the entire endeavour due to its inherent flexible nature to ramp up/down its production
within minutes.
POSOCO carried out the entire operation by gradually reducing power from the thermal plants close to minimum
before the onset of the event and relied on the flexible nature of hydro power plants. The hydro power
generation was first maximised at 8:45 PM, and then between 08:45 PM to 9:10 PM, the generation was reduced
from 25559 MW to 8019 MW, a drop of 17543 MW, in response to the reduced demand. The hydro generation was
again ramped up to 19012 MW by 09:27 PM since demand started to come back after the passing of the event.
During the whole time, grid frequency was successfully maintained within a band of 49.7 to 50.26 Hz. The
management of this entire event was carried out step-by-step in an excellent way with synchronous efforts
from power system operators, utility scale generators, and even those from the private sector. The sharing of
information between national and state-level agencies have also facilitated better decision making in real time.
While the original idea was to support those fighting against the corona virus, I think it is also essential
to applaud those who were involved in the operation of the power grid during those critical 9 minutes and
ensured a successful and smooth execution of an extremely challenging task. This achievement should have a
positive impact on India’s green energy trajectory. In spite of all the problems we know we have in India,
to our surprise this astounding nation has once again proved that Indian power grid is ready for a new-era
heading towards a fossil-fuel free, sustainable clean energy system.
Kabitri Chattopadhyay March, 2021
Jevons paradox: An efficiency predicament
Let’s begin with a simple thought experiment. The way we lit up our houses has changed
vastly over the past few decades - from the old-style incandescent bulbs which cost a lot
of money in usage and maintenance to the LED and/or CFL lamps which are less expensive
and much more energy efficient. Yet we now use more resources to lighten up our homes and
gardens and the road-sides than we ever did in the past. Does that mean the attempt to
reduce energy consumption by making the light bulbs more energy efficient and cheap ultimately
fails because we are offsetting any efficiency gain by buying more appliances and larger houses?
...
This counterintuitive effect, known as the Jevons paradox, was first coined by the British
economist William Stanley Jevons in his 1865 book The coal question. Amidst industrial revolution,
England started using more fuel-efficient steam engines expecting to facilitate longevity of
Britain’s coal reserve. When James Watt’s steam engine became operational, it quintupled the
energy efficiency of its predecessor, requiring much less coal to be burnt to carry out similar
operations. The grand success of Watt’s steam engine indicated coal usage to significantly drop
down if the technology is widely adopted in Britain. Much to his dismay, Jevon found that annual
coal production in Britain had increased from about 5 million tons annually shortly before the
invention of the Watt steam engine to over 100 million tons annually in 1865. This happened due
to the fact that highly efficient Watt’s steam generated more opportunities for its new usage and
rapidly proliferated in different industrial applications, enhancing the chances of profit and
economic growth, which lead to even higher demand for coal than ever before. Jevon observed this
counterproductive outcome and predicted that over a long period of time, this effect can strongly
offset the original gains from energy efficiency.
This appears to be a serious concern to energy economists and policy makers as it points to the
fact that in our attempt of making things more fuel efficient, we may cause more consumption,
and hence rapid exhaustion, of the same fuel. An interesting supposition. Although the original
version of Jevons paradox was based on the usage of coal, it has later been extended to apply to
other commodities, including cars, aviations, and electricity.
Intrigued by this counterintuitive effect, I decided to take a closer look into this paradox and
assess its applicability in today’s world. While Jevon was correct to predict the role of the energy
efficient steam engine in leading to an over-consumption of coal, I think the interpretations are
not that simple given the complex nature of this problem. The very first point is that increased
efficiency is not the problem but it can initiate the issue if it is associated with a price drop.
For example, the discovery of internal combustion engines has offered a much efficient way of burning
the fuels, but their demand didn’t spike up until the car companies figured out how to mass produce
these vehicles and bring them to public at an affordable price. Secondly, the degree of adopting
energy efficient appliances depend on multiple factors - its proper availability, delivery channels'
trustworthiness, people’s attitude towards the usage of the product etc - and not only on its economic
attractiveness. It is important to understand that the sensitivity towards the cost of input can vary
extensively with the hike in the commodity’s demand. If the reduction in price create a large increase
in demand, then the demand is considered ‘elastic’. On the other hand, if the effect of reduction in
price does not affect the demand much, then the demand is considered ‘inelastic’. The example chosen
by Jevon was an extreme case where the processes involved in the operation of the steam engine was highly
sensitive to the cost of coal. All cases need not necessarily exhibit this high degree of cost sensitivity.
An excellent example is the case of California where per-capita electricity usage has been kept flat for
the last 30 years while increasing per-capita income by almost 80%.
In mainstream economics, Jevons paradox is considered an extreme case of the more generalised ‘rebound
effect’. Energy-related demand curves are often quite inelastic as for most of their components, energy
is just one of many inputs, so they are less sensitive to the cost of energy. Since these effects are
consistently minor than the ‘backfire’ effect proposed by Jevon indicate that his postulates are real
but less important in the context of energy services. While efficiency is one of the tools for a
sustainable future energy system, it is not the only one. There are other strategies and policies for
reducing demands for fossil fuels, such as carbon tax, applying systems like cap-and-trade, using
time-of-use pricing, promoting electricity generation from renewables, requiring automakers to improve
fuel economy standards, etc.
Back in 1865 when Jevon came up with his famous paradox, the world was unaware of the development of
energy substitutes for coal, the value of crude oil in shaping economy, and most importantly, the
climate issue and how it is impacted by burning fossil fuels. While Jevons observations were impressive,
its conclusions require some additional modifications. It must be understood that a reduction in price
of an excellent appliance definitely increases its market value, but does not guarantee its wide-spread
adaptation.
Jevons’ proposition that with more wealth in hand, people will tend to spend more on unnecessary things
than they would have done otherwise - deeply concerns me. This statement discourages any innovation that
involves economic growth, technological advancement and improved efficiencies. Efficiency saves us time,
brings more prosperity to our lives. It should be emphasized here that one must realize that investing
more in energy-efficient appliances will not solve the energy problems, but it is definitely the first
step. It is imperative that we must keep our endeavours to achieve further improvements in efficiencies.
I believe the remaining problems can be solved by educating people to better understand the ideas of
resource limitations, the social and environmental impact on over-consumption of products, and the ethics
of buying stuff based on minimal requirements. Discouraging the progress of civilization is simply
atrocious and disturbing.
However, Jevons paradox has managed to emerge out every few years and be the highlight of news, conference
meets and policy decisions mainly due to its very simple nature. Time after time, some people, mostly
politicians, have wrongly interpreted and misconstructed Jevons paradox to undermine policy efforts aimed
at promoting energy efficiency. What’s even more baffling is that esteemed and popular magazines, like
The New Yorker, also often promote this type of thinking. These people often use Jevons paradox to explain
why investing in efficient appliances can be a wastage of both time and money and opt for ‘inaction’
via citing this paradox. This is extremely appalling. We now live in a world where we are constantly
bombarded by severe threats like rapid climate change, increased global warming, rise of sea level,
extinction of life as we know it. We have already reached a tipping point with 400 ppm in our atmosphere
and the only way to ensure sustainability of human life is to bring immediate action against climate change.
The consequence of any form of delayed action on climate change can be catastrophic. In this delicate period,
we need to be careful about interpreting the ideas like the Jevons paradox put in front of us.
Kabitri Chattopadhyay
I am a computer programmer, writer and a philanthropist, dedicated my life in
analyzing complex real world problems to make improved decisions for a better
tomorrow. Trained in meteorological applications in energy system studies, I
have an extensive background working with a variety of datasets and using
advanced statistical and numerical models. My lifelong desire to learn more
about different cultures has driven me from India, to Germany, then to Denmark,
and now to the USA. Everyday, I try to learn something new, whether that be
about energy systems, artificial intelligence or some miscellaneous fact about
the universe.
