印度铁路和煤炭-不可持续的相互依赖INDIAN railways and coal An unsustainable interdependency

印度的煤炭和铁路是高度相互依赖的。a） 2017财年，电网发电消耗的574公吨煤炭（包括进口煤炭）中（中央电力局，2017年），有341公吨（或60%）通过铁路运输（铁路局，2017年3月）。平均而言，铁路运输煤炭到火力发电厂的成本占到85%以上，因为许多发电厂都是坑口/煤矿附近，不采用这种运输方式。b） 煤炭占IR货运收入的44%，在其利润中所占份额甚至更高。印度铁路公司（IR）的商业模式是以乘客少付和运费多付为基础的。运费收入由以下三部分组成：运输吨、运输距离（其产品变成吨公里或TKm）和收费价格（卢比/TKm）。在过去五年中，国际航空公司从煤炭运输（称为“铅”）到火力发电厂（tpp）的平均距离下降了30%，这对收入产生了影响。这主要是由于煤炭联合合理化的一次性努力，以及电厂负荷系数（PLFs）的下降。相反，为保持总收入，2012财年至2017财年，国际货运煤炭运费增长超过批发通胀率的四倍。尽管在共享网络上的客运量较高，但印度的客货比最低，即客票和运费的比率为0.24，而其他几个国家包括日本（1.9）、德国（1.5）和中国（1.2）。这种有意识的政策选择，以保持乘客票价低导致运费超过其份额。今天，铁路部门明确将煤炭运价上调了约31%，以抵消其“社会责任”或辅导损失。2017财年，从煤炭到火力发电厂（约1080亿卢比或10800亿卢比）的“超额收费”使印度的电力成本平均每千瓦时增加约10派萨。对于铁路运输的煤炭，2017财年的平均值为0.21卢比/千瓦时。对于那些原本依赖铁路运输煤炭的偏远州的发电厂来说，这个数字可能高出三倍。布鲁金斯印度2030财年自下而上的煤炭需求模型1预测，在电力增长率下降、电厂效率提高（特别是超临界燃煤电厂的出现）和可再生能源崛起的共同推动下，该国煤炭总需求的增长速度将低于过去。由于预计煤炭铁路运输增长放缓，这一问题更加严重。虽然从绝对值来看，到2030财年煤炭需求继续增长，但其增长率却在下降。由于对铁路来说更重要的是煤炭需求的位置，国际铁路的情况可能会更糟。在太阳能和风能资源丰富的州，可再生能源的份额不仅会不断增加，而且会不成比例地增长，这与远离煤矿的州不谋而合。对于偏远地区，高压直流（HVDC）技术的兴起意味着通过电线输送电力比通过铁路运输煤炭更便宜、更高效。由于煤炭交叉补贴乘客，经济状况进一步恶化。6。与目前全国运力相对分布的情况相比，煤电厂的规划运力主要是坑口/煤矿附近或沿海地区。沿海电厂是为进口煤炭而设计的，虽然每吨煤炭价格昂贵，但在增加运输成本和税费后，价格仍然较便宜。对未来的预测和建模表明，完全基于交叉补贴模式来保持铁路的偿付能力，将导致运费上涨，从而使煤炭（以及热电）失去竞争力。如果旅客票价以4.5%的复合年增长率（CAGR）增长（与历史上2006-17财年相同），铁路继续按比例超额收取运费以弥补旅客损失，2030财年，每千瓦时的平均“超额支付”将在所有发电量的基础上增加至每千瓦时18派萨，相比之下，2017财年为每千瓦时10派斯。当然，名义上的成本要高得多，在遥远的地方也会更高。

Coal and railways in India are heavily interdependent.  a) In the Financial Year (FY) 2017, out of 574 MT of coal (inclusive of imports)  consumed for grid electricity generation (Central Electricity Authority, 2017), 341  MT, or 60 per cent, was transported through railways (Railway Board, March  2017). On average railways accounts for over 85 per cent of costs for transporting  coal to thermal power plants, as a number of power plants are pithead/near coal   mines and do not use this mode for transportation. b) Coal is 44 per cent of IR’s freight revenues and has an even higher share in its  profits. Indian Railway’s (IR) business model is based on passengers   underpaying and freight overpaying. Revenues from freight carried comprise a combination of the following three components:  tonnes carried, distance carried (whose product becomes tonne-kilometres or TKm),  and price charged (Rupees/TKm). IR’s average distance of coal transported (called  “lead”) to thermal power plants (TPPs) has fallen 30 per cent in the past five years  which impacts revenues. This has happened mainly due to a one-time effort towards  coal linkage rationalisation and also due to falling power plant load factors (PLFs). On  the contrary, to maintain total revenue, IR coal freight charges have grown more  than four times the wholesale inflation rate during FY 2012 to FY 2017. Despite higher passenger volumes on a shared network, India has the lowest fareto-freight ratio—the ratio of passenger fares and freight charges—of 0.24, compared  with several other countries including Japan (1.9), Germany (1.5) and China (1.2).  This conscious policy choice to keep passenger fares low results in freight overpaying  its share.  Railways today explicitly over-prices coal freight by about 31 per cent to offset  its “social obligation” or coaching losses. In FY 2017, this “overcharge” from coal  to TPPs (~Rs. 108 billion or Rs. 10,800 crores) increases the cost of power, on an  average, by about 10 paisa per kWh on the basis of all electricity generated in India.  For coal carried by railways, on average, this number is Rs. 0.21/kWh in FY 2017. For  power plants in distant states, which inherently rely on railways for coal, this number can be three times higher. A Brookings India bottom-up coal demand model1 for FY 2030 forecasts a  slower growth in total coal requirement in the country than the past, driven by a  combination of falling electricity growth rates, improved power plant efficiencies (especially the advent of super-critical coal power plants), and the rise of renewable  energy (RE). This issue is worsened by the projected slowdown in railway traffic growth  for coal. While coal demand continues to grow through FY 2030 in absolute terms, its  growth rate declines. IR may fare worse as what matters more for railways is the location of coal  demand. Not only will growing RE displace coal generation but the share of RE will  disproportionately grow in states with high solar and wind resources - coincidently  those far from coal mines. For distant locations, the rise of high-voltage DC (HVDC)  technologies has meant it can be cheaper and more efficient to send power over the  wire than transport coal by railways. The economics are further skewed due to coal  cross-subsidising passengers. 6. Planned capacity of coal power plants is mostly either pithead/near coal mines or  coastal, compared to now when capacity is relatively distributed across the country.  Coastal plants are designed for imported coal, which, although expensive per tonne, is  still cheaper after adding transportation costs and levies. Projections and modelling for the future suggest that to keep railways solvent  based entirely on the cross-subsidy model would result in a freight rise that would  make coal (and thus thermal electricity) uncompetitive. If passenger fares increase at a compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of  4.5 per cent (same as historical FY 2006-17) and railways continues to overcharge  freight to recover passenger losses pro rata, in FY 2030 the average “overpayment”  per kWh will increase to 18 paisa per kWh in real terms on the basis of all electricity  generated, compared to 10 paise per kWh in FY 2017. Naturally, the costs would be  far higher in nominal terms, and also higher in distant locations.