Powering a nation

A TINY window has reopened for Sri Lanka to fast track its expansion into more eco-friendly energy with Indian President Narendra Modi reportedly responding positively to a request by President Maithripala Sirisena to swap the coal power plant in Sampur to a Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) facility. But the change of mind will come with several challenges.

Coal, as everyone knows, is negative for several reasons. It cannot be denied that coal leaves behind harmful byproducts upon combustion. These by products cause a lot of pollution and contribute to global warming. The increased carbon emissions brought about by coal fired plants has led to further global warming which results in climate changes. 

Coal also generates millions of tonnes of waste and emissions that cause acid rain, health issues and lead to overall environmental degradation. One of the key points expounded by environmentalists is the massive damage a coal power plant would do to the seas around Sampur and the resulting acid rains could reach several hundred kilometres inland, even up to heavily populated areas like Anuradhapura. Dozens of families displaced from Sampur have been living in camps for nearly a decade due to the coal power plant and if the fresh proposal carries the day then not only would it be possible for them to go home, their livelihood of fishing would also be protected. 

Yet coal remains enduringly popular for obvious reasons. It is a proven technology that is reliable, cheap and available in abundance. But for a country like Sri Lanka that does not mine its own coal, long term it could fail to be cost effective. The experience of the Norochcholai power plant has also not been inspiring with controversy over many breakdowns, faulty machinery and allegations of corruption in the coal tender process surfacing sporadically. 

LNG, by contrast, presents a different set of challenges. As compared to petroleum or coal, natural gas causes less damage to the environment. It is made up of methane and results in less carbon emissions. In fact emissions of carbon dioxide are 45% lesser than other conventional fuels and 30% less than oil.  It is relatively abundant compared to other fossil fuels, burns cleaner and is easy to distribute. But it is non-renewable and likely to be exhausted at some point in the future. 

LNG can also be extremely toxic and flammable, as anyone with a gas cooker knows. That means any power plant will have to have the strongest safeguards in place, which would be doubly difficult as it will be a relatively new technology for Sri Lanka.  Burning of natural gas also releases carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and other carbon compounds which are greenhouse gases that cause global warming. 

The complex process of importing, storing and using LNG would likely make it more expensive. Moreover the Sampur power plant has been in the pipeline for years whereas a new LNG plant could take more time to go from concept to implementation. Such a delay would be difficult given the increase in power demand faced by the economy. High power prices have also been a hindrance to attracting investment and if major projects such as electricity-powered railway systems are to be implemented as part of the Megapolis venture, Sri Lanka would need more power soon. 

Clearly Sri Lanka needs to take another look at its energy policy and find a combination with renewable power that works for its needs as efficiently as possible.