No load shedding in Bangladesh despite heat wave

[kaykay]

Same is true for BD. BPDB generate 8 GW. There are private producer not to mention we have millions solar panel in rural areas. Moreover we squeeze 500 MW from you.


Check out this website.It is official and authoritative of ministry of Power in BD.
http://www.bpdb.gov.bd/bpdb/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=126&Itemid=17

Thats maximum power generation man...like India generate power at roughly 75% efficiency ( roughly BD do same)....but plant load factor is what that matter to get actual power generation ( in that case its ~130 gw for india) as they can't operate 24 hours. Most of Indian plants run at 60-65% PLF. Figures in Billion unit term will be more accurate to actual power generation.

 

[Nilgiri]

Thats maximum power generation man...like India generate power at roughly 75% efficiency ( roughly BD do same)....but plant load factor is what that matter to get actual power generation ( in that case its ~130 gw for india) as they can't operate 24 hours. Most of Indian plants run at 60-65% PLF. Figures in Billion unit term will be more accurate to actual power generation.

Yes you will notice that average electricity power generation in Bangladesh was 6.6 GW in 2014 and may be around 7.3 for 2015....about 57.7 and 64 Twh respectively.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Yes you will notice that average electricity power generation in Bangladesh was 6.6 GW in 2014 and may be around 7.3 for 2015....about 57.7 and 64 Twh respectively.

64 TWh translate to 7.3 GW in 2015.So it is very likely to surpress average 8 GW now.India last year was 126 GW,This year might be around 135 GW.

Thats maximum power generation man

Maximum for BPDB is 8.4 GW. 8 GW is average.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

@Nilgiri ,@kaykay What I have found is that India's electricity generation and per capita consumption is unusually high relative to it's per capita income.India's per capita electricity consumption is more than Srilanka, a country that have 2 times per capita income and high human development relative to India.I guess this is due to presence of a lot of heavy industry in India which requires a lot of electricity like automobile,space,defence etc.No other smaller country with similar level income have that kind of heavy industry.So in BD and Srilanka, electricity consumption is much more household oriented. And I guess India's household electricity consumption is less than of Srilanka and not much more than BD?

 

[Nilgiri]

@Nilgiri ,@kaykay What I have found is that India's electricity generation and per capita consumption is unusually high relative to it's per capita income.India's per capita electricity consumption is more than Srilanka, a country that have 2 times per capita income and high human development relative to India.I guess this is due to presence of a lot of heavy industry in India which requires a lot of electricity like automobile,space,defence etc.No other smaller country with similar level income have that kind of heavy industry.So in BD and Srilanka, electricity consumption is much more household oriented. And I guess India's household electricity consumption is less than of Srilanka and not much more than BD?

Vietnam has a higher electricity per capita production than India with roughly the same level of per capita (nominal).

Ukraine has a much higher production at the same nominal per capita as well.

It depends on the industry profile like you said. If Bangladesh replicates more along the line of Vietnam industrialisation, then it would also have a higher electricity demand.

Comparing PPP may be more relevant given electricity is highly influenced by economies of scale. I would suspect India is more or less on par with its PPP peers in per capita consumption of electricity.

 

[asad71]

Actually in recent weeks there have been frequent power breakdowns. However overall power situation is improved. The main reason is that BAL has the Unions under control.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Vietnam has a higher electricity per capita production than India with roughly the same level of per capita (nominal).

Ukraine has a much higher production at the same nominal per capita as well.

It depends on the industry profile like you said. If Bangladesh replicates more along the line of Vietnam industrialisation, then it would also have a higher electricity demand.

Comparing PPP may be more relevant given electricity is highly influenced by economies of scale. I would suspect India is more or less on par with its PPP peers in per capita consumption of electricity.

Vietnam is an extraordinary case.This developing country's export is almost equivalent of total gdp volume.While in BD it is one-seventh.Vietnam's electricity use is mostly for their export oriented industries.

Ukraine is not suitable example either.That country's gdp per capita used to be much higher than what it is today.Massive economic decline there made their gdp per capita same as India's.Their life style more in line with eastern Europe than Sub-continent.

Srilanka's ppp per capita is also double that of India's.Still they have less electricity consumption.As I said earlier,India's heavy industry is making a difference.House hold electricity consumption in India is not much higher than BD.

 

[Nilgiri]

Vietnam is an extraordinary case.This developing country's export is almost equivalent of total gdp volume.While in BD it is one-seventh.Vietnam's electricity use is mostly for their export oriented industries.

Like I said, its the industrial profile of a country. For example China had roughly the same electricity consumption per capita as India does now (i.e around 1000 - 1100 kwh per capita per year) back in 2002/03....their GDP per capita was somewhat lower than what we have today (we are around their 2005/06 level)...so its another case like Vietnam where higher export based industrial profile (per capita) made up for this time difference w.r.t India.

But its another general case of a relatively low GDP per capita having a higher electricity consumption per capita than one would expect. You will see this in most industrialising countries (like in ASEAN, South America etc) when they were at the income level (esp PPP) of India today.

Ukraine is not suitable example either.That country's gdp per capita used to be much higher than what it is today.Massive economic decline there made their gdp per capita same as India's.Their life style more in line with eastern Europe than Sub-continent.

Good. I wanted you to highlight that. Look at their PPP. It has not drastically declined like their nominal (which has more than halved). It is a classical illustration of PPP being a much better measure than nominal...as it seeks to reflect actual on the ground consumption rather than using another currency as an intermediary (and bringing in valuation problems).

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft...ntry&ds=.&br=1&c=926&s=NGDPDPC,PPPPC&grp=0&a=

Srilanka's ppp per capita is also double that of India's.Still they have less electricity consumption.As I said earlier,India's heavy industry is making a difference.House hold electricity consumption in India is not much higher than BD.

Fair enough....though you will need to find the figures for those countries to back that up.

For India the consumption profile is as follows (for 2011):

• Over 2010–11, India's industrial demand accounted for 35% of electrical power requirement, domestic household use accounted for 28%, agriculture 21%, commercial 9%, public lighting and other miscellaneous applications accounted for the rest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_India#Demand

CEA profile is a bit different: Industry is roughly 42% and domestic household around 24%, agri around 18%.

If you can find similar demand breakup for Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, we can compare the domestic household consumption.

Its worth noting that a huge increase in India is coming from the rural households getting connected to the grid right now, so its not like household consumption and growth is insignificant compared to industrial.

For example at independence till about the 60s, industry made up about 70 - 75% of the total demand for electricity....and households were 7 - 10%. Now industry is half that percentage and households are more than double. This will continue to skew towards domestic consumption as India develops more and consumers gain more purchasing power w.r.t industry.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Good. I wanted you to highlight that. Look at their PPP. It has not drastically declined like their nominal (which has more than halved). It is a classical illustration of PPP being a much better measure than nominal...as it seeks to reflect actual on the ground consumption rather than using another currency as an intermediary (and bringing in valuation problems).

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft...ntry&ds=.&br=1&c=926&s=NGDPDPC,PPPPC&grp=0&a=

I am aware about ppp per capita is being the best indicator of living standard.If BD tomorrow suddenly devalue taka by 50 percent relative to dollar doesn't mean BD's half of agricultural,industrial and service sector production will be vanished in the air.But what I am bothered about is that BD,Myanmar and Pakistan have neck to neck nominal GDP per capita,But BD's ppp is only 3841 USD while theirs are 5000-6000 USD.I don't think BD essential goods and service are much more costly then theirs,Then why is this drastic difference? Is IMF,world bank is missing something in case of BD?

 

[Nilgiri]

Myanmar and Pakistan have neck to neck nominal GDP per capita,But BD's ppp is only 3841 USD while theirs are 5000-6000 USD.I don't think BD essential goods and service are much more costly then theirs,Then why is this drastic difference? Is IMF,world bank is missing something in case of BD?

I think I mentioned the potential factors for this in another thread:

https://defence.pk/threads/dhaka-un...ies-with-pakistan.413238/page-18#post-8148557

I don't know the exact sampling pattern of ICP when it comes to gathering the price level data for Bangladesh.

It is well known that PPP is somewhat artificially depressed in China because they have only allowed price level for their cities (as opposed to say India where much rural price level data are incorporated).

So maybe if the sampling is only within Dhaka and Chittagong, the PPP multiplier is also depressed because of it...but I am unsure because when I last read the ICP in depth, China was the only notable "exception" w.r.t sampling strategy. I mean it is done by BBS in the first place and then vetted by IMF through ADB etc.:

http://www.bbs.gov.bd/PageWebMenuContent.aspx?MenuKey=189

The main reasons (if its not the sampling pattern) I think may be a) access to natural resources (incl agri) b) dominance of RMG industry in Bangladesh exports/industry. c) land cost

i.e more import reliance and export price sensitivity...which do not imprint on PPP that much since the first takes away from GDP in solid US dollars (and hence impacts local price levels all across the production chain like a domino effect since you are paying the extra margins to an outside party for the base resource) and the 2nd is a large chunk of production that earns USD in the end and not local Taka within the economy (i.e the economies of scale have a greater impact externally rather than internally).

All in all there maybe should be some sort of composite measure since there are pros and cons for both PPP and nominal. But for now we will just have to quote them side by side and understand the limits of each.

It will be interesting exercise to know the cost of staple food items within Bangladesh and we can try compare some of the issues ourselves. I would imagine per unit area land value (general rural and outside suburb land) is also on average much higher in Bangladesh, this is a big big factor in PPP since access to cheap land has a huge multiplier effect in price levels of industrial goods and consumables since the land rent/cost must be recuperated through the pricing of the goods made on the land. So Bangladesh population density may play a big role in the end.

EDIT: Here is a good publication I just found:

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2010/cr1056.pdf

This picture presents the issue in a nutshell:

i.e the price level in Bdesh is increasing faster w.r.t per capita GDP compared to the average worldwide rate. The factors of production must be more dear in Bangladesh (raw inputs with the exception of labour)....and exposure to US dollar price level higher because of dependence on RMG export. As Bangladesh diversifies and bulks up (and does the harder economic chain development through human capital improvement), I would imagine it will smoothen out (i.e a large part of the price level increase basically got shoved into the beginning, so the benefits will come with time I think)

 

[Homo Sapiens]

I think I mentioned the potential factors for this in another thread:

https://defence.pk/threads/dhaka-un...ies-with-pakistan.413238/page-18#post-8148557

I don't know the exact sampling pattern of ICP when it comes to gathering the price level data for Bangladesh.

It is well known that PPP is somewhat artificially depressed in China because they have only allowed price level for their cities (as opposed to say India where much rural price level data are incorporated).

So maybe if the sampling is only within Dhaka and Chittagong, the PPP multiplier is also depressed because of it...but I am unsure because when I last read the ICP in depth, China was the only notable "exception" w.r.t sampling strategy. I mean it is done by BBS in the first place and then vetted by IMF through ADB etc.:

http://www.bbs.gov.bd/PageWebMenuContent.aspx?MenuKey=189

The main reasons (if its not the sampling pattern) I think may be a) access to natural resources (incl agri) b) dominance of RMG industry in Bangladesh exports/industry. c) land cost

i.e more import reliance and export price sensitivity...which do not imprint on PPP that much since the first takes away from GDP in solid US dollars (and hence impacts local price levels all across the production chain like a domino effect since you are paying the extra margins to an outside party for the base resource) and the 2nd is a large chunk of production that earns USD in the end and not local Taka within the economy (i.e the economies of scale have a greater impact externally rather than internally).

All in all there maybe should be some sort of composite measure since there are pros and cons for both PPP and nominal. But for now we will just have to quote them side by side and understand the limits of each.

It will be interesting exercise to know the cost of staple food items within Bangladesh and we can try compare some of the issues ourselves. I would imagine per unit area land value (general rural and outside suburb land) is also on average much higher in Bangladesh, this is a big big factor in PPP since access to cheap land has a huge multiplier effect in price levels of industrial goods and consumables since the land rent/cost must be recuperated through the pricing of the goods made on the land. So Bangladesh population density may play a big role in the end.

EDIT: Here is a good publication I just found:

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2010/cr1056.pdf

This picture presents the issue in a nutshell:

i.e the price level in Bdesh is increasing faster w.r.t per capita GDP compared to the average worldwide rate. The factors of production must be more dear in Bangladesh (raw inputs with the exception of labour)....and exposure to US dollar price level higher because of dependence on RMG export. As Bangladesh diversifies and bulks up (and does the harder economic chain development through human capital improvement), I would imagine it will smoothen out (i.e a large part of the price level increase basically got shoved into the beginning, so the benefits will come with time I think)

Good post.But have to disagree in one point.I don.t think land price is the significant variable in ppp calculation.Many high density developed countries have higher per capita than low density developed country,Consider the case of city state Singapore they have ppp per capita 86000 dollar with 7600 people/per sq. km while Canada a sparsely populated resource rich country have 46000 dollar ppp.Same example can be drown in case of developing countries.

 

[Nilgiri]

Good post.But have to disagree in one point.I don.t think land price is the significant variable in ppp calculation.Many high density developed countries have higher per capita than low density developed country,Consider the case of city state Singapore they have ppp per capita 86000 dollar with 7600 people/per sq. km while Canada a sparsely populated resource rich country have 46000 dollar ppp.Same example can be drown in case of developing countries.

I'm talking specifically for developing countries with low human capital development. Singapore has advanced its human capital to such a degree that the common inputs I am talking about do not apply. It also is able to artificially extract lower price levels by importing foreign labour for its construction industry/civil projects etc....whereas this is a significant cost in Canada (fully unionised and local labour).

When a country is developing at the 1st level (say getting from 1000 per capita to 5000 per capita)...cheap available land is a big factor to getting low price levels for industrial and agri products. If it is able to internalise consumption of this production, the PPP multiplier will naturally be higher since it will not be a large impact on USD nominal conversion. Conversely if it mostly exports these products, a large portion of the PPP "potential" will be activated in the nominal measure.

The effects of trade is an interesting topic regarding PPP.

 

[Stannis Baratheon]

BS from the Awami League lapdogs.

 

[BDforever]

already had 3 times load shedding in last 2 days lol

 

[bongbang]

already had 3 times load shedding in last 2 days lol

The news is of April 12. Around that time there were no load shedding.