Sunday, October 3, 2010

मोहि माग्ने ढुग्रो लुकाउने

October 3, 2010

Paras Kharel


I am glad that you are following my writings.

There is a proverb in Nepaliमोहि माग्ने ढुग्रो लुकाउने
Most of the Indians and their agents in Nepal will never accept that Indian interest is in the downstream benefits, not electricity. They are happy to have our hydrocracy believe that India needs electricity from Nepal and not mention a word about the downstream benefit which they stand to get free of cost along with good quality power at cheap rate. They would even go on to add that Nepal should arrange to export before India starts generating nuclear power. Therefore, what you are proposing will require them to be honest and truthful which is not their wont.

One good example is 400 kV transmission line from Dhalkebar to Mujaffarpur. Nepal is borrowing form WB to build it in the belief that it will be used to import power from India to mitigate loadshedding problem in Nepal. In actuality, Mujaffarpur suffers from severe power deficit problem and this network will be actually used to evacuate power from Arun III and Tamakoshi 3 projects. In the normal course, investment in such infrastructure is the obligation of the importer (India in this case) or the project itself. But Nepal’s hydrocracy is so smart by half that we are investing in something, someone else should have invested.
With best regards,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, fca
Senior Water Resource Analyst

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: paras kharel <>
Date: Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:36 AM
Subject: query
Dear Ratna Sansar ji,

I follow your articles on issues concerning national interest, mainly through your blog. 

I would appreciate if I could get your take on the following (if and when you have the time):
If it is downstream benefits that the other side is really interested in from hydroelectricity projects here (as in the case of Upper Karnali or West Seti), then wouldn't it be wise for them to ask their proxy private sector to sell electricity to the Nepali market (since domestic demand is surely there) even as they appropriate the downstream benefits free of cost? Of course, ideally we need to be paid for the downstream benefits, but the scenario I mentioned looks better than what we current have -- exporting away our power as well as not getting paid for the downstream benefits. Why do you think the other side doesn't take the route that I just mentioned?

Best regards,
Paras Kharel

No comments: