Connect with us

Features

Development of renewable energy projects: President’s concerns

Published

5 years ago

on

BY Dr Janaka Ratnasiri

Proceedings of a meeting held by the President on 15.12.2020 with the Power Minister, Renewable Energy Minister, officials of the two ministries as well as officials of institutions coming under the two ministries to discuss issues pertaining to the development of renewable energy (RE) were shown in newscasts of TV channels as well as reported in the print media recently. The purpose of this write-up is to elaborate on some issues raised by him.

 

PRESIDENT’S CONCERNS

According to a report in The Island of 16.12.2020, the President has said that “he is exploring the possibility of rapidly adding power from renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, to the national grid, and that many countries are turning to renewable energy sources for power generation. As per the “Saubhagyaye Dekma” Policy Statement, by 2030 the government expects to meet 70% of the total electricity demand from renewable energy sources”. He has further said that “the generation of renewable energy should be carried out expeditiously in a systematic manner with short-term as well as long-term objectives”. He was also heard saying that officials should be sincere and honest in this exercise.

 

REALIZING THE PRESIDENT’S TARGET

It may be recalled that the President first announced his target of achieving 70% of energy consumed for generation of electricity from renewable sources by 2030 at a meeting he had with the same audience on September 14th, more than three months ago. This was given in a press release issued by the President’s Media Division on the same day. See the website http://www.pmdnews.lk/70-of-electricity-demand-will-be-generated-using-renewable-energy-by-2030/.

In this press release, the President has emphasized that institutes with the authority to approve Development Projects should have feasibility reports stand by and the approval process should be expedited and that the Government has made the promotion of renewable energy a top priority. The President advised the Secretary to the President to issue a gazette calling for all the institutes to assist in this endeavour. But it appears that the President’s instructions have not been carried out.

The President would have convened the meeting on the 15th, probably because there has been no follow up on his announcement initiated during the last three months. Though he said once at a public meeting where officials were present, to take his word as a circular, things do not happen that way in the system. To give effect to the President’s target, the Secretary to the Ministry of Power, being the Cabinet Ministry, has to prepare a Cabinet paper seeking approval of the Cabinet for amending the Cabinet approved Guidelines for Electricity Industry by changing the target given in it from 50% to 70% as decided by the President.

This amended Guidelines document has to be presented to the Cabinet by the Minister and once approved, it has to be communicated to the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL), who will in turn direct the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) to prepare its Generation Plan to conform with the amended Guidelines. The writer’s understanding is that this process has not happened to date, for which the Secretary to the Ministry of Power should take the responsibility. Incidentally, the PUCSL was a notable absentee at the President’s meeting.

After the President made this announcement in September, the writer published an article in The Island of 02.11.2020 under the heading “Will CEB make an effort to comply?” referring to the President’s target. In this article he wrote “Being a matter concerning RE share in power generation, the relevant Cabinet paper will have to be presented to the Cabinet by the Power Minister. The general practice is for the Secretary to the Ministry to draft the paper in concurrence with the Minister. The question is how long the Power Ministry will take to attend to this” (https://island.lk/will-ceb-make-an-effort-to-comply/).

It appears that the Secretary to the Ministry of Power has failed to take any action towards incorporating the President’s target into the Guidelines to the Electricity Industry during the last three months which is a pre-requisite for adding RE systems into the grid. Hence the first thing the President should do to see that “generation of renewable energy should be carried out expeditiously” is to have a more efficient and dynamic person as Secretary who can take decisions independently. If he had a Secretary like that, the PUCSL by now would have directed the CEB to revise its Generation Plan to conform to President’s target.

 

RENEWABLE ENERGY SHARE IN THE POWER SECTOR

The CEB’s Statistical Digest for 2019 reports the total electricity generation in 2019 as 15,922 GWh, of which major hydro had contributed 3,784 GWh (23.8%), coal, 5,361 (33.7%), petroleum oil, 5,061 GWh (31.5%), Mini hydro, 1,011 GWh (6.3%) and other RE sources including wind and solar adding to 750 GWh (4.7%). This gives the RE share in the power sector as 35% in 2019. The challenge is to raise this share to 70% by 2030. According to the CEB’s draft Generation Plan for 2020-39, to meet the demand in 2030, approximately 31,700 GWh of electrical energy need to be generated. This means 70% of this amount or 22,000 GWh of electricity will have to be generated from RE sources in 2030. With the 2018 RE generation standing approximately at 5,545 GWh, this has to be quadrupled by 2030 by adding 16,400 GWh units of RE. However, this is subject to output from the major hydropower plants which varies with the rainfall. For example, in 2018, this share was 45% with the major hydro contribution of 5149 GWh and the shortfall was about 15,000 GWh.

The total committed solar power systems as announced by the government from time to time amounts to about 1,400 MW and assuming a plant factor of 20% based on the performance of existing systems, they could generate about 2,400 GWh of energy a year. Similarly, the committed wind power systems will add up to 650 MW yielding about 2,000 GWh of energy assuming a plant factor of 35%. Dendro and waste to energy projects could add another 1,300 GWh of energy. This makes a total of 5,700 GWh of RE energy to be generated within a few years’ time beyond the existing plants. This means there will be a shortfall of about 10,000 GWh of RE energy for generating 16,400 GWh by 2030 to meet the President’s target.

One problem here is that the quantities of RE generation from such sources as hydro, wind and solar have hourly, daily, seasonal and annual variations. In particular, the hydro power contribution, both from major and mini, could vary widely depending on whether the year is a dry year or a wet year. If the 70% target is achieved in a wet year, it does not mean the target is achieved in a subsequent dry year. Hence, it is necessary to have a surplus of energy from other sources such as wind and solar to accommodate any drop in the hydro contribution due to adverse weather conditions. This could issue could become prominent in the future under climate change.

 

CEB’S RESPONSE FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY PROPOSALS

A previous regime launched in 2017 a programme named “Soorya Bala Sangramaya” (SBS) to be implemented in four phases, with a view to accelerate the utilization of solar power in the country. Under Phase I, it aimed to generate 1 GW from one million solar rooftops, each with capacity of 1 kW. Phase II of the programme relates to building 150 solar power plants each with capacity 1 MW to be built by the private sector on build, own and operate (BOO) basis in two stages of 60 and 90 plants each of 1 MW capacity. The entire cost including land acquisition and extension of the grid as well as getting clearances has to be met by the investor and tenders were called in 2017/18. However, there is no information as to how many of these projects were accepted and commenced.

In 2020, another tender was floated inviting investors to build solar power plants with capacities in the range 3-10 MW amounting to a total of 150 MW at specified locations where gid substations are available, under Phase III of SBS programme. Though in 2017 the Cabinet approved building an aggregate of 1,000 MW of large solar power plants under Phase IV of the SBS programme, comprising 800 MW solar park at Pooneryn, 100 MW solar park at Siyambalanduwa, 100 MW solar system on Maduru Oya Reservoir, no firm action has been initiated by the CEB to proceed with these proposals during the last three years. The lack of enthusiasm to develop RE projects is understandable as the fuel, that is, solar radiation and wind, are available freely for RE projects unlike for thermal power plants for which the CEB has spent in 2019 a sum of LKR 50 Billion for oil and LKR 46 Billion for coal (CEB’s SD 2019).

The CEB publishes once in two or three years a Long-Term Generation Expansion (LTGE) Plan incorporating the capacities that need to be added annually for the 20-year period to the future to meet the future demand for electricity and specifying the type of corresponding generation units including their fuels that would generate electricity at least cost. The RE capacities to be added up to 2030 as included in the CEB Plan are 165 MW of mini-hydro systems, 555 MW of wind systems, 880 MW of solar systems and 55 MW of biomass systems. These are far below the capacities already approved by the Cabinet from time to time for installation in the short term which means that the CEB’s Plan does not fall in line with the government requirements. The CEB is not even responding to requests made by PUCSL to revise its Generation Plan to conform with the Cabinet approved present Guidelines which says that minimum of 50% of electricity has to be met from RE sources. Obviously, this calls for a change in management of the CEB.

 

SRI LANKA SUSTAINABLE ENERGY AUTHORITY

Sri Lanka commenced its RE programme in early seventies, about 50 years ago, when it established an integrated RE village at Pattiyapola in the Hambantota District with the assistance from UNDP. Its objective was to provide energy requirements of the village from RE sources including wind, solar and biogas generated from cow-dung amply available in the village. However, with the extension of the grid to the village a few years later, the project was abandoned.

 

The availability of international funding for the development of solar-home systems and the large number of sites suitable for setting up of mini-hydro systems associated with waterways in the Central, Sabaragamuwa and Uva Provinces, prompted the expansion of the RE systems in the country in an ad-hoc manner.

In order to regulate and promote the RE industry, the Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority Act, No. 35 was passed in 2007. Though the Board of the Authority comprises 21 members, mostly Secretaries to various Ministries, surprisingly there is no representation of the CEB in its Board. Under the following Articles in the Act, the SLSEA is required to prepare a comprehensive RE Development Plan and have it gazetted after receiving comments from the public and stakeholders.

7. (1) The Director-General shall within six months of the appointed date, cause a survey and a resource assessment to be commenced of all renewable energy resources in the country and prepare a renewable energy resources inventory and a renewable energy resource map in respect of each Development Area.

8. (1) The Director-General shall not later than three years after the appointed date, submit to the Board a comprehensive Renewable Energy Resource Development Plan (hereinafter referred to as “the Plan”) based on the results of the survey and the renewable resource assessment carried out under section 7.

(5) Upon approval of the Plan by the Cabinet of Ministers, the Minister shall cause such Plan to be published in the Gazette and it shall come into operation on the date of such publication or on such later date as may be specified therein.

It is interesting to find out whether such a Plan has indeed been prepared by the SLSEA and gazetted, and if so, the President should be aware of it. Otherwise, it is time its management too is changed if the President wishes to see that “generation of renewable energy should be carried out expeditiously”.

 

SRI LANKA’S POTENTIAL FOR RE SYSTEMS

Sri Lanka has a large number of reservoirs both ancient and recently built. Those in the North, North Central and Eastern Provinces where the solar insolation is high with area more than 1000 ha add up to more than 50,000 ha. Since solar PV panels require about 1 ha for every 1 MW of installed capacity, installation of solar panels covering at least 10 % of the area of the reservoirs has the potential to install 5,000 MW of capacity generating about 8,800 GWh of electricity annually.

An all-island Wind Energy Resource Atlas of Sri Lanka developed by National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) of USA in 2003, indicates that nearly 5,000 km2 of windy areas with good-to-excellent wind resource potential exist in Sri Lanka. Using a conservative assumption of 5 MW per km2, this windy land could support almost 20,000 MW of potential installed capacity (SLSEA Website). Even if 10% of this amount or 2,000 MW capacity is utilized, it will generate about 5,200 GWh of energy annually.

It is clear therefore that Sri Lanka has the resources to develop more than 14,000 GWh of energy from RE projects, solar and wind alone above what has been already committed. In addition, it is possible to develop modern technologies to utilize biomass energy more efficiently in industries reducing the demand for oil. With these RE resources, the amount required to meet the 70% share in total electricity generation by 2030 could be achieved comfortably. Coordination and cooperation among stakeholder institutes such as the CEB, SLSEA, PUCSL, Irrigation Department and land authorities are prerequisites for realizing this target.

 

FUNDING FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS

The CEB has not shown any interest in utilizing funding for the development of RE systems offered by foreign sources. Under the International Solar Alliance, India has offered a USD 100 million credit line for the development of solar projects and has assigned a company in India to help Sri Lanka to build a solar park. This is a good opportunity to get one of the two planned solar parks built. Apparently, the CEB has not expressed any willingness to accept this offer.

Under the Paris Agreement, funding is available to developing countries for building RE projects that will save Carbon emissions. However, it is necessary for the host institution to prepare a suitable project proposal and submit it to the Secretariat of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) through the Ministry of Environment, which is the National Focal Point of UNFCCC, to seek the funding. The Writer’s understanding that neither the CEB nor the SLSEA has taken any initiative to prepare a proposal to seek funding for this purpose. The Environment Ministry’s Climate Change Secretariat is partly responsible for this lapse.

 

CONCLUSION

The President has clearly given his targets for achieving RE share by 2030 as 70% in the power sector. In order to achieve this target, the country has to generate 22,000 GWh from RE sources in 2030. Regrettably, the CEB or the SLSEA has taken only a lackadaisical attitude towards developing RE projects rather than an aggressive approach necessary to meet the President’s target. However, the country has enough RE potential to meet this shortfall comfortably, provided necessary regulatory system is in place and the responsible professionals are enthusiastic in developing them.


Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines

Published

3 hours ago

on

2026/03/13

By

Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.

Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.

Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.

Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.

Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.

The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.

The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:

=Joint planning across operational divisions

=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making

=Continuous cross-functional consultation

=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates

Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.

Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.

By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst

Continue Reading

Features

Why Pi Day?

Published

3 hours ago

on

2026/03/13

By

International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow

The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.

Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.

Archimedes

It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.

Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.

Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.

π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)

The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.

π = 9801/(1103 √8)

For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.

It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.

This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.

Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.

Happy Pi Day!

The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.

by R N A de Silva

Continue Reading

Features

Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink

Published

1 day ago

on

2026/03/12

By

A combined US-Israel attack on Iran.(BBC)

The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.

As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.

It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.

Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.

Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.

Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.

The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.

While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.

On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.

Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.

Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.

Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.

Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.

Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.

However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.

Continue Reading

Trending