The Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission recently reviewed the performance of the state’s three power distribution companies—APSPDCL, APCPDCL, and APEPDCL—for the financial year 2024–25. This review compared the planned targets with actual performance and highlighted key gaps and trends in the power sector.
One of the major observations was a decline in industrial electricity consumption across all three DISCOMs. Officials explained that this drop was mainly due to the closure of some industrial units and a rising shift of large consumers toward open-access power and captive solar generation. At the same time, electricity use in the agriculture sector increased, especially in the APSPDCL region. Poor rainfall forced farmers to depend more on groundwater pumping, which increased power demand.
On the renewable energy front, all three DISCOMs performed well in meeting their Renewable Purchase Obligation targets. Each utility achieved around 25% renewable energy share, which is higher than the required 20%. However, performance under the Renewable Consumption Obligation was mixed. APCPDCL met its target of 29.91%, but APSPDCL and APEPDCL fell short. To manage this gap, the companies used internal trading of Renewable Energy Certificates.
During the hearings, delays in the SECI 7,000 MW solar project were also discussed. DISCOMs stated that although developers have made good progress, the power cannot be fully used due to delays in central transmission infrastructure. As a result, the expected supply from some projects has been pushed to May 2029. Stakeholders raised concerns that such delays could lead to higher costs for consumers in the future.
Capital expenditure also remained below expectations. All three DISCOMs spent less than what was originally approved. For example, APEPDCL spent only ₹1,058 crore compared to the approved ₹3,293 crore. The companies cited reasons such as the Election Code of Conduct, shortage of labor, and right-of-way issues that delayed infrastructure projects like substations and transmission lines.
Despite these challenges, the Commission noted that such differences are common in the early years of a control period. Chairman P.V.R. Reddy stated that approvals were based on actual assets created. While APSPDCL suggested revising future investment plans, the Commission said it was too early to make such changes. The DISCOMs have been asked to provide more detailed cost data in the next cycle to improve transparency and planning.
Discover more from SolarQuarter
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
