1. PRESENTATION
ON SUGAR COGEN
R.K.KAUL
Chief Energy Business
Saraya Industries Limited
New Delhi
rkkaul99@rediffmail.com ,rkkaul99@gmail.com
(M) 9810345642,
PUBLIC
PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIP
SUGAR COGENERATION ON BOOT BASIS
ISSUES , TECHNICAL & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
``ONLINE ``

2. CONTENTS
 ENERGY RESOURCES & SCENE IN INDIA
 COGEN / TRI GEN BASIC DEFINITION / RANKINE CYCLE
 PPP MODEL GIVE AND TAKE
 BOOT MODEL –PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
 BASIS OF PROJECTS EVALUATIONS- THE MILLS
 SUGAR BASE DATA – OPERATIONS-----REAL TIME ANALYSIS
 TECHNOLOGY / HEAT MASS BALANCE / POWER BALANCE/STEAM BALANCE
 REVENUES / COSTS / PBDIT / RETURNS/CASH FLOWS
 SUMMARY / WAY FORWARD

3. ENERGY RESOURCES
 BAGASSE
 OTHER BIOMASS
 RICE STRAW
 WHEAT STRAW
 MUSTARD HUSK
 SUBABOOL
 CANE TRASH
 WOOD CHIPS
 COCONUT SHELL
 COAL INDIAN
 COAL IMPORTED
IN SUGAR INDUSTRY
TOTAL RELIANCE ON
SUGAR OPERATIONS
NOT POSSIBLE

4. NATIONAL ENERGY DATA
POWER GENERATION RESOURCES-
MW
102,452.75
36,863.00
4,560.00
15521
THERMAL
HYDRO
NUCLEAR
RES
POWER GENERATION RESOURCES-
MW
93114
36158
4120
12194
THERMAL
HYDRO
NUCLEAR
RES
31-Mar-15
178341 69.75%
154170 60.30%
22971 10.89%
1200 0.57%
40867 19.37%
4780 2.27%
31692 15.02%
255680

5. NATIONAL ENERGY DATA
CONT…..

6. STATUS
 ENERGY NEED STANDS AT 2.75-3.00 LAC MW- NEXT 2-4 YRS
 SUPPLY STANDS AT 1.5 LAC MW
 GROWTH RATE >7.0 to 8.0 %
 DEMAND SUPPLY GAP WILL CONTINUE / INCREASE
 PRESSURE ON SAVING ENVIRONMENT
 SIZE OF BUSINESS BIG
 BUSINESSES KEEN TO HAVE A CUT OF THE BIG PIE
 RENEWABLE POWER – THRUST WORLD OVER
 HAVES & HAVE NOTS - GOVT/COOP/ PVT SEC
 OVERALL ENVIRONMENT CONDUCIVE
 PVT . SECTOR READY TO INVEST
BOOT IS
AN
OPTION
SUGAR
COGEN
HAS
POTENTIAL

7. SUGAR COGEN STATUS
 Total Sugar Mills 526 (OP) / 695(INST)
 Total TCD 2.5 Mn TCD
 Cogeneration potential – 8000 to 10000 MW
 Present Power Export - 3500 MW
 BALANCE POTENTIAL – 3000 TO 4000 MW
 INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY- 15000 CR
RS

8. PP MODEL BASICS…….
 BOOT – BUILD OWN OPERATE
TRANSFER
 ITS GIVE AND TAKE MODEL
 CPMPLETE TRANSPARENCY
 ADMINISTRATIVE / TECHNICAL HELP
 ACCURATE MEASUREMENTS
 TIMELY DOCUMENTATION

9. COGEN / TRIGEN DEFINED
 Cogen is Simultaneous generation and use of electricity and heat
 Tri Generation is simultaneous generation and use of electricity , heat ,
and cooling
 Both far superior in efficiency as compared to independent generation
 Should be used where all forms of energy are required
 ITS LIKE CO-EDUCATION –SAME TEACHER
( ENERGY)

10. PPP - BOOT ISSUES
 POLITICAL WILL
 ADMINISTRATIVE / BEUROCRATIC WILL
 LOCAL MILL BOARD WILL
 INVESTORS WILL
 PROJECT DEVELOPERS WILL
 PROJECT VIABILITY- FUEL / PRICING

11. PPP- BOOT MODEL:
 Operates its own sugar plant
as usual
 Invites Project developer to
setup cogen project
 Give designated land-lease
free of cost
 Gives Free water
 Gives Free Bagasse
 All legal
 Commits to set up cogen
 Does technical & legal deligence
 Brings all capital at its own cost
and risk
 Gives power & steam free for mill
operations
 Provide capital for mill
modernisation/capacity
enhancement
 Gets all legal clearances
The Mill The Project developer

12. PPP- BOOT MODEL:…cont..
 Allows Connectivity to system
 Agree on mill modernisation-work as
well as costs
 Terms if steam/power norms not
followed
 Pass Board resolutions as per need
 Agree on concessation period,
revenue sharing/royalty on cane
crush
 Complete project development
including design, order, erection
and commissioning
 Procures balance of fuel
 Share revenue as per agreement
 Operate plants to optimum
capacity
 Hands over the plant to mill at
ZERO COST after concessation
period
The Mill The Project developer

13. BOOT ISSUES CONT……
 GUARANTEE FOR BAGASSE AVAILABILITY-MINIMUM QUANTITY
 MINIMUM DAYS OF SEASON OPERATION
 EXCESS POWER / STEAM DRAWN BY SUGAR PLANT
 REVENUE SHARING v/S CANE CRUSH ROYALTY
 PRICE FOR EXTRA STEAM / POWER- PSEB /EXCHANGE RATES
 FUNDING FROM SDF – GOVT. HELP/ POLICY CHANGE
 SENSITISING BANKING FOR THESE PROJECTS-DEDICATED FUNDS
 MORTGAGING OF ALLOTED MILL LAND
 BOOT PERIOD – 15/20/25/40 YEARS
 MORATORUIM FOR RETURNS TO SUGAR 2-3 YEARS
 ENHANCED RATE OF POWER TO GRID – some development -CE
 TIME FOR IMPLEMENTATION
 INTEGRATION OF SUGAR / COGEN/ CAPACITY ENHANVEMENT –
 PAYMENT GUARANTEE BY GRID

14. BASIS OF EVALUATION
 MILL PERFORMANCE OVER LAST 6-8 YEARS
 ACTUAL CANE CRUSH AND BAGASSE AVAILABILITY
 NO OF DAYS OF OPERATION IN A YEAR - SEASON & OFF SEASON
 PRESENT / FUTURE STEAM & POWER CONSUMPTION
 COGEN & MODERNISATION COST
 COST OF MONEY, RETURNS TO SUGAR PLANT
 SELLING POWER COST & CDM / REC BENEFITS
 TECHNOLOGY / PLANT PARAMETERS / INTEGRATION
 POWER OFFTAKE / CONNECTIVITY/DISTANCE TO GRID SUB STATION
 STANDARDISATION OF PLANT CONFIGURATION
 MILL MODERNISATION POTENTIAL
 PROJECT DEVELOPERS INVESTMENT PHILOSOPY
 INVESTORS RISKS INVOLVED

15. YEARLY CANE CRUSHED
3.34
3.73
3.41
3.16
1.944
1.22 1.234
2.182
2.4
1.80
2.00
2.80
5.1
4.4 4.3 4.4
3.27
2.48
2.83
3.417 3.52
2.80
3.50 3.50
2.56
2.732
3.118
2.7
1.66 1.64
1.858
2.6 2.7
2.50
2.80 2.80
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
99-00 00-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
MORINDA
NAWASHAHR
GURDASPUR
AJNALA
BATALA
PROJECTED
AREA UNDER CULTIVATION - HECTARES
10885
11679
13446
11584
8280
4689
5122
6860
8152
6000
7500
8000
13718 13596
14084
13373
10615
5960
7022
8089
9549
12000
13000 13000
8364
9825
10902.4 10948
8084.4
5912.4
7520
8172
10231
11000
12000
11500
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
99-00 00-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
MORINDA
NAWASHAHR
GURDASPUR
AJNALA
BATALA
PROJECTE
D

16. ANNUAL BAGASSE GENERATION
86840
96980
88660
82160
50544
31720 32515.9
57124.76
65016
50400
56000
78400
153000
131010 128400 131070
99179.1
68026.4
82098.3
101245.71 102291.2
81200
101500 101500
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
180000
99-00 00-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
MORINDA
NAWASHAHR
GURDASPUR
AJNALA
BATALA
PROJECTE
D
DAYS OPERATION
130
150
132 127
79
52
68
88
107
80
120 120
192
165 166 169
128
98
110
145
154
122
155 155
128
137
161
146
91 91
100
138
152
120
150 150
0
50
100
150
200
250
99-00 00-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
MORINDA
NAWASHAHR
GURDASPUR
AJNALA
BATALA
PROJECTE
D

17. ANALYSIS…..
5
5
2
4
3
5
4
5
3
3
3
0
1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL CULTIVATABLE AREA
CONSISTENANCY OF CANE
CRUSH
BAGASSE GENERATION
CANE YIELD
AGE OF PLANT
PLANT AVAILABILITYINFRASTRUCTURE
CAPACITY COMFORT
TECHNICAL BACKUP AT
SITE
SPACE AVAILABILITY
FARMER CONTROL
Series1
GURDASPUR SCORE
0
2
4
6
8
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
GURDASPUR SCORE
MORINDA SCORE
7.5
6.5
7
7.5
7
7.5
7
8
6
7
6
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
MORINDA SCORE
7.08
8.32 8.45
7.38 7.19
6.50
8.50
MORINDA NAWANSHAHRGURDASPUR AJNALA BATALA
S1
MILLS COMPARITIVE RATING
Series1

18. NAWANSHAHR SCORE
0
2
4
6
8
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
NAWANSHAHR SCORE
AJNALA SCORE
7
6
7
7
8.5
7.5
8.58
8
9
5
0
2
4
6
8
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
AJNALA SCORE
BATALA SCORE
0
2
4
6
8
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
78
9
10
11
12
13
BATALA SCORE
DECISION MAKING
PROCESS

19. Prefeasibility / DPR/Financial Closure
Pre Feasibility AnalysisPre Feasibility Analysis
•Establish Mill capacities/operating parametersEstablish Mill capacities/operating parameters
•Establish Fuel availability-season & Off seasonEstablish Fuel availability-season & Off season
•Establishing Capacity viabilityEstablishing Capacity viability
•Technology choicesTechnology choices
•Basic Flow ChartBasic Flow Chart
•Fuel flexibility and mixFuel flexibility and mix
•Water quality and availabilityWater quality and availability
•Ash handling and DisposalAsh handling and Disposal
•Environmental concernsEnvironmental concerns
•Capital cost estimatesCapital cost estimates
•Cash Flow requirementsCash Flow requirements
•Financial analysis-Loan repayments,IRR,DSCR,Taxes,BalanceFinancial analysis-Loan repayments,IRR,DSCR,Taxes,Balance
sheet,P&l statements etcsheet,P&l statements etc
•Sensitivity analysiscSensitivity analysisc
Detailed Project ReportDetailed Project Report
Power Purchase AgreementPower Purchase Agreement
Information MemorandumInformation Memorandum
Debt Syndication/Financial Closure/Cash FlowsDebt Syndication/Financial Closure/Cash Flows

20. REAL TIME INTEGRATED ANALYSIS
 Sugar Operations data
 Heat & Mass Balance Diagram
 Power & Steam Balance- Exports
 Capital Cost Estimation
 Revenue Generation & Sharing mechanism
 Expenses
 Depriciation calculation, Taxation,Loan
repayments
 IRR & DSCR Calculations
 Balance Sheet,Cash Flows
 Break Even point
 Sensitivity Analysis
 Project Summary ……………

21. ON LINE ANALYSIS
 SUGAR OPERATION PARAMETERS
 COGEN CAPACITIES / PARAMETERS
 HEAT & MASS BALANCE
 PROJECT COSTS
 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
………..FOLLOWS

22. BASIC SUGAR PLANT DATA

23. BASIC RANKINE CYCLE
 There are four processes in the Rankine
cycle, each changing the state of the
working fluid. These states are identified
by number in the diagram to the right.
 Process 1-2: The working fluid is pumped
from low to high pressure, as the fluid is
a liquid at this stage the pump requires
little input energy.
 Process 2-3: The high pressure liquid
enters a boiler where it is heated at
constant pressure by an external heat
source to become a dry saturated
vapor.
 Process 3-4:
The dry saturated vapor expands through a turbine, generating power. This decreases the te
 Process 4-1: The wet vapor then enters
a condenser where it is cooled at a
constant pressure and temperature to
become a saturated liquid. The pressure
and temperature of the condenser is
fixed by the temperature of the cooling
coils as the fluid is undergoing a phase-
change.

25. COGEN HEAT MASS BALANCE- OFF SEASON

26. BALANCE OF POWER

27. Balance Of Bagasse

28. Balance Of Steam

29. PROJECTED CAPITAL COST

30. KEY PROJECT PARAMETERS….cont

31. PROJECT REVENUES / CASH FLOWS

33. PROJECT RETURNS

34. IDC

35. ADVANTAGES TO SUGAR PLANT
1. The Cooperative Mill gets complete power plant at ZERO cost
2. Mill gets modernized in terms of power & Steam consumption
3. Plant gets reliable power steam –Improved quality and better
efficiency
4. Improvement in crushing capacity –improved revenues
5. Additional revenue by way of sharing/Royalty on cane crush
6. Improved Pollution Control with ESP
7. Employment to Local people
8. Better returns to cooperative members
9. Other biomasses used- revenue to farmers
10. Environment protection – as crop residue may not be burnt

36. SUMMARY WAY FORWARD
 NEED FOR MORE CLEAN POWER IN THE COUNTRY
 RENEWABLE ENERGY FOCUS
 POLITICAL/ADMINISTRATIVE /LOCAL ``WILL`` REQD
 BOOT A WIN WIN PROPOSITION IF IMPLEMENTED
PROPERLY ..TRANSPARENCY …UNDERSTANDING
 BOOT PROCESS TO BE STANDARDISED
 FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS UTMOST IMPORTANT
 ALL ISSUES PRE DOCUMENTED & AGREED
 GO FOR IT WITHOUT LOOSING TIME

37. GO FOR IT WITHOUT LOOSING TIME
THANK YOU