Pakistan Solar Power: News & Updates

Mr X said:
the bottom line is, why pay 40,000 per month when you could spend 400,000 (in his case) or 1 million in most people's case and bring the bill down to 2500.
Click to expand...
The bottom line is, why did the govt negotiate such expensive and ever rising electricity bills with power producers in the first place? Why didn’t they look for cheaper alternatives like solar instead?
 
Last edited:
SoulSpokesman said:
When it is late afternoon in Pak, it is evening in Eastern India and BD. And the excess power in Pak can be wheeled to eastern part of the subcontinent. As and when IND-PAK relations stabilise, there is a large export opportunity waiting for PAK.
Click to expand...
My resident country Norway 🇳🇴 once had the cheapest electricity in entire Europe due to more than 90 percent energy production being done by local hydro power plants. Then our elected representatives (morons) had this "ingenious" idea to export it to our neighboring countries. It was sold to the gullible public as bringing more "efficiency" into the energy market. Guess what happened since then? Now a middle class Norwegian family can no longer afford the electricity bills without govt support because almost all electricity is exported out, causing energy prices to rise out of control. 🙄
 
@Forsvaret

How come people living in Pakistan’s neighboring countries afford rising electricity bills without moving to solar? Maybe, it has something to do with long-term energy contracts negotiated by the powers that be?

Don't know about other neighbours but can answer about India. In India the power costs haven't increased much over the last 20 years or so, mainly because of large scale capacity addition in coal followed by solar. Much of this capacity addition has taken place through competitive bidding which has kept costs under control. Plus, India has a lot of domestic coal available at low cost made available by a public sector entity called Coal India Limited, which is mandated to sell coal at cost plus prices and not international linked prices (which would be much higher).

Some of the success factors in India are a matter of careful policy but the coal availability is a matter of luck.

Regards

PS: Are you dear Norwegian sb from the old Forum?
 
Forsvaret said:
How come people living in Pakistan’s neighboring countries afford rising electricity bills without moving to solar? Maybe, it has something to do with long-term energy contracts negotiated by the powers that be?
Click to expand...

Bad deals are done by the government in every tenure. For example, on the PDF I used to argue that Pakistan signed a deal of solar power for 15-16 cents per unit with a foreign company and India in the same month signed a deal for 3 or 4 cents per unit. The same 15 cents back then were 15 rupees per unit, and now, after currency devaluation are 42 rupees. I am talking about year 2013 - 2015....

But the need of the hour was to install power projects as the loadshedding was happening for 18 hours a day.

Forsvaret said:
The bottom line is, why did the govt negotiate such expensive and ever rising electricity bills with power producers in the first place? Why didn’t they look for cheaper alternatives like solar instead?
Click to expand...
because solar was not that cheap back then.

The solar system costing 2.5 million to 3.5 million rupees about 10 years ago now costs 1.2 million rupees despite the currency devaluation from 100 rupees per USD to 280....
 
chinasun said:

Pakistan’s Solar Revolution: Who Really Benefits?​

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Pakistan’s Solar Boom: Now the 2nd Largest Power Source!​

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Pakistan's government-supplied electricity is costly, while household solar power is cheaper and environmentally friendly. Should distributed new energy gradually replace the national grid?
Click to expand...



solar energy cannot re-build dead characters and decay in any economy.

as I understand, reversing any damage, by solar energy use, would destroying a non-functioning economy and prove only to be ephemeral.

onus lies on capitalist and industrialists, it is their job to protect and build the economy. (which rarely happens)

so, the real cause of this rise, is short term profit making and opportunism, like every thing else in this country!

and this so called analyst, A. Habib, what an AH!

he should be discussing, how economy can destroy itself, even after usage of solar power rather he is hell bent on proving, the utility of solar (in our society!)

bec, he may have taken bribes or he is stupid!
 
Mighty_Dragon_Strike said:
solar energy cannot re-build dead characters and decay in any economy… …so, the real cause of this rise, is short term profit making and opportunism, like every thing else in this country!
Click to expand...
Exactly! That’s suicidal behavior & thus NO different from treating a cancer patient with aspirin. It may "help" for the short time period, until ultimately…
 
Mighty_Dragon_Strike said:
solar energy cannot re-build dead characters and decay in any economy.

as I understand, reversing any damage, by solar energy use, would destroying a non-functioning economy and prove only to be ephemeral.

onus lies on capitalist and industrialists, it is their job to protect and build the economy. (which rarely happens)

so, the real cause of this rise, is short term profit making and opportunism, like every thing else in this country!

and this so called analyst, A. Habib, what an AH!

he should be discussing, how economy can destroy itself, even after usage of solar power rather he is hell bent on proving, the utility of solar (in our society!)

bec, he may have taken bribes or he is stupid!
Click to expand...

Pakistan has long grappled with frequent power outages and exorbitant electricity tariffs, severely hampering industrial and commercial output as well as agricultural modernization. According to data from Pakistan's National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA), the cost of solar power generation has plummeted to $0.034 per kilowatt-hour—a figure significantly lower than both grid electricity and diesel generation costs.

Enterprises adopting photovoltaics can slash electricity expenses by 60% to 90%, ensuring uninterrupted production. Case studies from textile mills indicate annual savings of approximately $500,000. Furthermore, agricultural irrigation powered by solar water pumps liberates farmers from diesel shortages, cutting irrigation costs by 80% and boosting farmers' income by 30%.

The distributed photovoltaic "self-generation and self-consumption" model enhances energy security. By providing stable, affordable, and clean power, it serves as a crucial engine for industrialization, agricultural upgrading, and broader economic recovery.
 
Last edited:
www.dawn.com

Net metering billing: Who pays the price for Pakistan’s new solar regime?

A poorly designed net-billing regime will push consumers to consume more of their own electricity, accelerating behind-the-meter behaviour and even prompting grid defections.
www.dawn.com

In a sudden move, the government recently terminated the existing net-metering regime for all existing and future net-metered solar consumers, known as prosumers, and replaced it with a net-billing regime for all.

The stated rationale behind this development — which could mean longer payback periods and lower overnight returns — is the need to address the technical, financial and equity concerns that have emerged from the mushrooming growth of solar power in Pakistan over the last couple of years. Under the changes, the buyback rate for electricity exported to the grid by solarised consumers has been reduced from the existing Rs26 per unit to Rs11 per unit. The new export rate broadly reflects the national average energy purchase price at which the government purchases electricity from power plants.

At first glance, this price reform appears overdue. Like most electricity tariff interventions, however, it is not merely a technical adjustment but carries significant long-term implications for consumers, electricity utility companies, and the power sector as a whole.

To understand these implications, we first need to have a look at Pakistan’s solarisation map. A study conducted by the Policy Research Institute for Equitable Development (PRIED) shows that solar deployment in the country has now surpassed 33 gigawatts (GW). While only a smaller portion of this deployment, around 6GW, is net-metered — that is, connected to the national grid — its much larger portion, around 27GW, is off-grid or behind the meter.

The net-metered deployment is mostly concentrated in urban communities, among higher-income households, and among commercial users. This rapid solar adoption has provided relief to hundreds of thousands of grid-connected consumers from high electricity tariffs, giving them greater energy independence and transforming them from ‘consumers’ to ‘prosumers’.

Besides that, as more people generate and consume electricity from solar power, it has greatly reduced daytime grid electricity sales, giving rise to the well-known “duck curve” in electricity demand and supply. This, in turn, results in underutilisation of the national grid.

Net-billing is being introduced as a key driver to tackle two concerns: (i) increase demand for grid-provider electricity (to address the duck curve phenomenon) and encourage self-consumption by grid-connected solarised consumers; (ii) reduce the cost-shifting impact of solarisation on non-solarised consumers.

This cost-shifting phenomenon occurs when a utility company — for example, a distribution company or Discos — is unable to recover its fixed costs from solarised consumers, so these costs are ultimately borne by non-solarised consumers. Traditionally, utilities recover much of these costs through the volumetric spread of electricity consumption based on total units (kWh) consumed. As an increasing number of consumers installs its own solar power to meet or supplement their electricity needs, these fixed costs must be spread over fewer units.

This will either raise the electric tariff or create a recovery gap.

The primary reason behind this regressive cost-shifting is our existing tariff regime, which does not distinguish between different tariff types in electricity bills. For example, it does not clearly separate the energy charges (marginal cost of producing electricity or the variable cost) and capacity charges (fixed charges including costs of maintaining the grid and transmission systems).

A large part of the latter cost is recovered through flat volumetric rates. These flat rates create a mismatch between how costs are incurred and recovered. When electricity consumers reduce their consumption due to solarisation, energy efficiency, or other changes, the money collected through volumetric charges falls short of covering the utility company’s costs. To recover this shortfall, utility companies raise prices for all their customers.

Under net-metering, a prosumer effectively shields themselves from these charges by exporting electricity from their solar installations at a price that matches the retail price the utility charges its consumers. Non-solarised customers, on the other hand, have to bear all the resulting increase in capacity as part of their electricity bill. As a result of the ongoing solarisation, more than 90 per cent of grid-connected electricity consumers are estimated to be facing a higher tariff burden.

With net billing, solarised consumers will not receive the retail rate for the electricity they export. The buyback rate for their exported electricity will, thus, come down to Rs9-Rs11 per kwh, helping Discos to recover more revenue from these prosumers.

Seen from this perspective, net-billing appears to be a fiscally rational act.

In practice, under a net-billing regime, solarised households will do two transactions with the utility company: one for the amount of electricity they will import from the grid, and second for the amount of electricity they will export to the grid — each at a different rate. This will improve cost recovery reflectivity, which is a core principle of efficient tariff design.

Secondly, net-billing will reduce cross-subsidisation of solarised consumers by non-solarised consumers. The former will pay the same electricity price as other consumers for the electricity they import, while receiving only a fraction of this price for the electricity exported by them. Thirdly, lower payments for the electricity exported by prosumers will provide short-term financial relief to Discos by helping stabilise their revenues. It will also spread the burden of fixed costs across all types of consumers equally.

Finally, net-billing can incentivise greater self-consumption and battery storage among solarised consumers, potentially aligning household behaviour with system needs by addressing the duck curve phenomenon — at least in theory.

These arguments, however, offer only a partial view. They ignore the fact that the real test of their validity lies in the implementation of the changes.

For instance, the regulations impose a flat rate on exported electricity regardless of the time it is exported. This creates two major inefficiencies. Firstly, even at a discounted buyback price of Rs11 per unit, households will continue exporting large volumes of electricity at noon — precisely when system demand will be at the lowest — because the solarised power output is highest at that time.

This, according to the evidence available from other countries, will do little to mitigate midday transmission and distribution congestion, reverse power flows, or local voltage instability. Flat export pricing offers no incentive to shift consumption from the evening peak hours, when the national grid faces its greatest stress (duck-curve), to off-peak hours. Studies on time-of-use (TOU) tariffs consistently find that consumer behaviour remains misaligned with system needs without time signals.

In addition to the flat export rates, restrictions on the system size introduce another layer of complexity. They revise the permissible sizing ratio of rooftop solar systems relative to the sanctioned load from 1:1.5 to 1:1. The intent is to limit surplus electricity exports to the grid. On paper, this will reduce operational stress and cost shifting. Yet this change also has broader implications.

The strict size cap reduces the surplus that households can export and does not adequately account for likely future electrification within homes: cooking, space heating, and electric vehicle charging, etc. By locking household system size to today’s sanctioned loads, the regulation may discourage long-term planning and constrain a household’s ability to electrify end uses that could otherwise reduce reliance on imported fuels.

Under net-billing regulations, lower export rates will lengthen payback periods for grid-connected solarised consumers, making solar power a less attractive option from an investment perspective. In comparison, systems designed primarily for self-consumption will offer shorter payback periods. This will create a real risk that consumers may choose to maximise self-consumption, using the grid only as a backup and, thus, effectively shifting to behind-the-meter mode. Such behaviour will further reduce the demand for grid-connected electricity and deepen the challenges of network underutilisation.

A poorly designed net-billing policy can also accelerate defections from the grid. If exporting electricity yields little value, particularly during high-demand evening hours, and fixed charges continue to rise, grid-connected solarised households may choose to install oversize solar-plus-storage systems and end their reliance on the grid altogether, further shrinking the consumer base for fixed-cost recovery. Beyond its impact on grid participation, net-billing also raises important questions about who can access and benefit from rooftop solar.

Rooftop solar adoption is already shaped by access to capital and, therefore, is being pursued more vigorously by high-income groups than by low-income ones. Lower returns on solar installations and their longer payback periods, especially when combined with taxation measures on solar panels and equipment, will certainly further disincentivise the low-income groups to move towards solar adoption, thus widening the inequity gap between them and those who have the capacity to finance new solar installations even after the regulations are enforced.

In other words, the policy will slow down solar diffusion and reinforce the current pattern in which distributed solar has become a technology primarily adopted by wealthier groups.

Net-billing is not inherently anti-solar; done well, it can correct an inefficient valuation of exports, reduce regressive cost shifting, and improve the financial sustainability of utilities.

But a poorly designed net-billing regime — especially one with flat export pricing and restrictive sizing caps — will push consumers into greater self-consumption, accelerate behind-the-meter behaviour, and even prompt grid defections. That outcome would deepen underutilisation and make fixed-cost recovery harder, not easier.

Pakistan’s real challenge is to modernise tariff design so the grid remains financially viable, technically stable, and economically attractive for all consumers — including prosumers. Net-billing can be part of that solution, but only alongside broader reforms that introduce time signals, transparently recover fixed costs and ensure equitable access so that distributed solar benefits all households, not just the wealthier ones.

Regards
 
chinasun said:
Pakistan has long been plagued by frequent power outages and high electricity tariffs, severely constraining industrial, commercial production and agricultural modernization. According to data from Pakistan's National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA), solar power generation costs have dropped to 0.034 per kilowatt-hour, significantly lower than grid electricity prices and diesel generation costs. Enterprises adopting photovoltaics can reduce electricity expenses by 60%-90%, ensuring production continuity, with textile mill cases showing annual savings of 500,000. Agricultural irrigation relying on solar-powered water pumps breaks free from diesel shortages, cutting irrigation costs by 80% and increasing farmers' income by 30%.

The distributed photovoltaic "self-generation and self-consumption" model enhances energy security, providing stable, affordable and clean power support for Pakistan's industrialization and agricultural upgrading, serving as a crucial driving force for economic recovery.
Click to expand...


sadly, in Pak. there is no large manufacturing capacity, there has been a significant decline in large production over the years, reduction of electricity cost is, at least, beyond my level of intellect and mind!

you are assuming, in Pak. everything happens on the books, I personally know 2 Sindhi MPA who have owned, private electricity production units (on paper!), like wise, many MPA would exist in other provinces as well!
(mind you, they were employees of WAPDA, as well)
no solar energy can fix this, in this entire universe!


if there is injustice in the society and dealing between individuals is entirely based on corruption, how can solar energy can fix this!

on its own, solar energy, can lead to reduction in costs, thats only theoretical, when other basic necessities are shorted almost on weekly or monthly basis!

if ones fixes, solar enegy, there will be crisis in wheat output, if that output is fixed, there will natural gas shoratge!

in Pak, every thing is sellable, including ones character!

sorry, I m used to speaking truth

now, I have spoken about problems, what is the solution!


1. separate, land ownership and give to poor farmer
2. improve fresh water supply
3. separate, decision to import from land owners and political leaders
etc etc

basically do everything that makes you better human being!
 
Last edited:
Waz said:
Pakistan sits in a high-irradiance zone (especially in Balochistan, Sindh, and southern Punjab) with long sunshine hours and high solar potential — estimates suggest solar could exceed millions of MW if fully exploited.
Click to expand...

China is building entire solar "farms" to harvest cheap/free energy ... so, why this isn't state policy in Pakistan also is crazy.

e360.yale.edu

Photos Capture the Breathtaking Scale of China's Wind and Solar Buildout

e360.yale.edu e360.yale.edu

 
Ali_Baba said:
China is building entire solar "farms" to harvest cheap/free energy ... so, why this isn't state policy in Pakistan also is crazy.

e360.yale.edu

Photos Capture the Breathtaking Scale of China's Wind and Solar Buildout

e360.yale.edu e360.yale.edu

Click to expand...

Because idiots rule Pakistan, and have done for large numbers of years.
The fact that the solar drive was initiated and the momentum remains with private consumption tells you everything.
 
@Fatman17 sb

All these knee jerk reactions are useless. Eventually batteries will become cheaper, and the con(pro)sumers who have already installed solar plants will put in battery storage and rather than export power to the grid will use it in non-solar hours. The solar movement in PAK has acquired its own momentum and is globally a success story.

Regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top