Sunday, August 31, 2014

माथिल्लो कर्णाली आयोजना नैं किन ?

माथिल्लो कर्णाली आयोजना विश्वकै सबभन्दा आकर्षकमध्येको आयोजना हो र अर्को यत्तिकै आकर्षक आयोजना दक्षिण अमेरिकि राष्ट्र कोलम्बियामा मात्र छ, विश्वमा ब्राजिल, भारत, चीनलगायतका अन्य कुनै पनि जलबिद्युतको प्रचुर सम्भाव्यता भएका मुलुकहरुमा छैन । अर्थात नेपालमा रहेका ६ हजार नदीनालामा निर्माण गर्न सकिने पचासौं हजार आयोजनाहरु मध्ये मात्र यो आयोजना आकर्षक होइन ।

निकासीमूलक आयोजना
विश्व बैंकको वित्तिय सहयोगमा नेपाल सरकारले गराएको १९८९ को अध्ययन प्रतिवेदन अनुसार यो आयोजनाको जडित क्षमता ३ सय मेगावाट (नदीको प्रवाहमा आधारित) बनाइएमा प्रति किलोवाट लागत ८ सय ३३ डलर पर्छ र जडित क्षमता ९ सय मेगावाट (नदीको प्रवाहमा आधारित) पु¥याउंदा लागत ५० अर्ब रुपैंया पर्ने कुरा जीएमआरले २ वर्ष अगाडी जनाएकाले प्रति किलोवाट ५ सय ५५ डलर मात्रै पर्छ ।

दुर्भाग्यवस यो आयोजनालाई निकासी मूलक बनाइएको छ । महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न उठ्छ कि यति सस्तो आयोजनाबाट उत्पादित बिजुली किन निकासी गर्ने ? त्यो पनि नेपालले बिद्युत अभावको समस्या झेलिराखेको बखतमा । नेपाली उपभोक्ता र नेपाल बिद्युत प्राधिकरणको थाप्लोमा महंगा आयोजनाबाट उत्पादित बिजुली र निकासी भने सस्ता आयोजनाको बिजुली ? नेपाली जनतालाई अंध्यारो र अविकसित राखेरै भए पनि निकासी गर्नैपर्ने बाध्यता छ भने सस्तोमा बिजुली उत्पादन हुने यो आयोजनाको बिजुली नेपाली जनतालाई उपलब्ध गराएर महंगो पर्ने बिजुली पो निकासी गर्नु तर्कसंगत हुन्थ्यो ।

६ वर्ष अगाडि सम्पन्न समझदारीपत्रअनुसार यो एउटा निकासीमूलक आयोजना हो । तर आश्चर्यजनक कुरा त के हो भने योे आयोजनाको निर्माण पूरा भएपछि नेपालको लोडसेडिंग निराकरण हुने घोषणा अर्थमन्त्री, राष्ट्रिय योजना आयोगका उपाध्यक्षलगायतका विद्वानहरुले गरेकाछन् । यस आयोजनाबाट सुख्खायाममा नेपालले निशुल्क प्राप्त गर्ने ३६ मेगावाट मात्र हो र यो आयोजना निर्माण सम्पन्न भएर बिद्युत उत्पादन हुने ६÷७ वर्ष पछिको समयमा नेपालको मांग २४ सय मेगावाटको हाराहारीमा हुने नेपाल बिद्युत प्राधिकरणको आकलन छ भने यस पंक्तिकारको आकलनमा १२ हजार मेगावाट आवश्यक हुन्छ । ३६ मेगावाट भनेको हात्तिको मुखमा जिरा जस्तै मात्र हो ।

बहुउद्देश्यीय आयोजना
माथि उल्लिखित प्रतिवेदन अनुसार सुर्खेत, दैलेख र अछाममा अवस्थित यो आयोजनास्थलको पूर्ण क्षमता जलाशययुक्त ४ हजार १ सय ८० मेगावाट हो, जसलाई बहुउद्देश्यीय आयोजनाको रुपमा निर्माण गरिनुपर्छ । एक पटक यो आयोजनास्थलमा नदी प्रवाहि ९ सय मेगावाट क्षमताको आयोजना निर्माण गरिएपछि पूर्ण क्षमताको बहुउद्देश्यीय आयोजना निर्माण गर्ने मौका सदाको लागि (पचासौ वर्षको लागि) गुम्ने छ ।

हुन त एउटा तप्का ३ सय मेगावाटको लाइसेन्स दिइएकोमा जीएमआरले क्षमता ९ सय मेगावाट पु¥याएर “नेपाललाई गुण लगाईसकेको” मान्यता राख्ने र यस्तो अवस्थामा चार हजार मेगावाट भन्दा बढीको कुरा गर्नु फजुल हो भन्न पनि पछि परेका छैनन् । तर नेपालको हित बहुउद्देश्यीय आयोजना निर्माण गरेर हुने हो भने एउटा लगानिकर्ताको भनाइमा राज्य लाग्न मिल्दैन । नेपालका राजनीतिकर्मी, कर्मचारीतन्त्र र बौद्धिक जमातले यो कुरा बुझ्न नसक्नु भने यो देशको र आगामि पुस्ताहरुको दुर्भाग्य हो ।

यो आयोजनालाई बहुउद्देश्यीय बनाइएमा सुख्खायाममा पनि खानेपानी र सरसफाइको तथा सिंचाइको लागि मनग्गे पानी उपलब्ध हुन्छ । जसको उपयोग गरेर मत्स्यपालन तथा पशुपालन गर्न सकिन्छ । बिजुली पनि चार गुणा बढी क्षमतामा उत्पादन हुन्छ, त्यो पनि उच्च गुणस्तरिय (नदी प्रवाहि आयोजनाबाट वर्षातमा बढी तथा सुख्खायाममा कम बिजुली उत्पादन हुन्छ र बिजुली उत्पादन नगरे उत्पादन क्षमता खेर जान्छ भने जलाशययुक्त आयोजनाबाट उत्पादन हुने बिजुली माँग भएको अवस्थामा मात्र उत्पादन गर्न सकिन्छ र अन्य समयमा उत्पादन क्षमता संचय गरेर राख्न सकिन्छ) ।

यो आयोजना स्थलमा बहुउद्देश्यीय आयोजना बनाइएमा काली गण्डकी आयोजनको जलाशयमा जलपरिवहन विकास भए जस्तै दैलेख, अछाम जिल्लाहरुमा जलपरिवहन विकास गर्न सकिन्छ जुन माध्यमबाट परिवहन गरिएमा इन्धन खर्च ८० प्रतिशत भन्दा बढीले कम ढुवानी लागत लाग्छ । यसका साथै आयोजनाको सुर्खेतमा निर्माण हुने जलबिद्युत गृह देखि बर्दियाको कोटियाघाट सम्मको तल्लो तटीय इलाकामा झण्डै १ सय ५० किलोमिटर जलमार्ग विकास गर्न सकिन्छ । यी क्षेत्रमा जलपरिवहन विकासबाट मात्रै पनि यो भेगको समृद्धिमा ठूलो अभिबृद्धि हुन्छ ।

सुख्खायामको पानीको महत्व
बहुउद्देश्यीय आयोजनाको महत्व बिजुली भन्दा धेरै पानीको धेरै महत्व हुन्छ । बिजुली त पेट्रोलियम पदार्थ, कोइला, घाम, वायु देखि मानव मलमूत्रसम्मबाट पनि उत्पादन हुन सक्छ । तर पिउन र सरसफाइ अनि सिंचाइको लागि पानी अपरिहार्य छ, त्यो पनि स्वच्छ पानीको (समुद्री नुनिलो पानीले सिंचाई गर्न सकिन्न, न त पेट्रोलियम पदार्थबाट) । पानीको कुनै विकल्प छैन ।

सुदूर तथा मध्य पश्चिमांचल विकास क्षेत्रहरुमा विशेष गरेर स्वच्छ पानीको अभावमा जनता रोगी मात्र नभएर अल्पायुमा नैं मृत्युवरण गर्न बाध्य छन् । चिकित्साशास्त्रीहरुको भनाई अनुसार पिउन र सरसफाईको लागि स्वच्छ पानी उपलब्ध भएमा औषोधपचारमा लाग्ने खर्च आधैले घट्दछ । जस्तै अहिले नेपालले १ वर्षमा १० अर्ब रुपैयाको आयातित र ६ अर्ब रुपैयाको नेपालमा निर्मित ओखतिमूलो खपत गरिराखेकोमा पानीजनित रोगब्याधी नियन्त्रण गरिएमा ८ अर्ब रुपैंया मात्र खर्च हुनेछ । नेपाली जनता निरोगी, स्वस्थ र सबल भएर अल्पायुमा मृत्युबरण गर्नपर्ने बाध्यताबाट मुक्त भएर अर्थतन्त्रमा गर्ने योगदानको महत्व रुपैंयामा आकलनै गर्न सकिन्न ।
माथि भनिए झैं यो आयोजनालाई जलाशययुक्त बनाइएमा सुख्खायाममा (नेपाल पानीमा धनी नभएर ४ महिना बाढीमा र ८ महिना खडेरीमा धनी छ) सुर्खेत, बांके, बर्दिया, कैलाली जिल्लाहरुमा सिंचाई गरेर बहुवाली प्रणालीमा खेती (अहिले आकाशे खेती बिद्यमान रहेकोमा) गरिएमा कमसेकम यो भेगमा हुने अनिकालबाट मृत्यु इतिहांसको पानामा सीमित गर्न सकिन्छ । उपलब्ध आंकडा अनुसार धान वाहेकको पानी फारो हुने खेती गरिएमा यस आयोजनाको जलाशयबाट १५ लाख हेक्टरमा सुख्खायाममा सिंचाइ गर्न सकिन्छ, जुन परिमाणमा त्यस भेगमा खेतीयोग्य जमिनै उपलब्ध छैन र बांकी पानी उपलब्ध भएर भारतको उत्तर प्रदेश लगायतका क्षेत्र पनि लाभान्वित हुन्छ ।

बहुबाली खेतीको अर्को महत्वपूर्ण पाटो भने किसानको रोजगारी हो । अहिले किसानहरु धान रोपाइं र काट्ने बेलामा बाहेक बेरोजगार रहन्छन् । रोजगारीको लागि बिदेश पलायन हुन बाध्य छन् र श्रम शोषण देखि यौन शोषण सम्ममा पर्छन, अझ कमाएर ल्याएको धन पनि सीमा क्षेत्रमा लुटिन्छ । बहुवाली प्रणालीमा गए पछि किसानले वर्षै भरी खेतीमा काम पाउछन् र किसानी गरेरै समृद्ध तथा सम्पन्न बन्नेछन् ।

समग्रमा सुदूर तथा मध्य पश्चिमांचल विकास क्षेत्रहरुको कायाकल्प गर्ने क्षमता भएको आयोजना हो यो । तर यी दुई विकास क्षेत्रको समृद्धि नचाहनेहरुले यो आयोजनाको क्षमता घटाएर पानीबाट बहुआयामिक लाभ लिने अवसरबाट त्यस भेगको जनतालाई बंचित गर्ने षडयन्त्र गरिरहेका छन् ।

जलाशययुक्त आयोजना नबनाउनका अभिष्ट
कर्णाली नदी भारतको गंगा नदीको एउटा प्रमुख सहायक नदी हो र यसको पानीले नेपालमा सिंचाइ जस्ता पानी खपत हुने काममा उपयोग गरिएमा भारतमा बगेर जाने पानीको परिमाण घट्दछ भन्ने आशंकाले यो आयोजना स्थलमा केहि गरेर पनि जलाशययुक्त आयोजना निर्माण गर्न दिने पक्षमा भारतीय संस्थापन छैन । जसको फलस्वरुप भारतीयले भन्दा पनि भारतको भक्ती गर्ने केही नेपालीहरुले यस आयोजनालाई नदी प्रवाहि आयोजनै बनाउने पक्षमा छन् । तर वास्तवमा जलाशययुक्त आयोजना बनाउंदा पनि नेपालले सिंचाइ गर्न सक्ने खेतीयोग्य जमिन भन्दा बढी जमिनमा सिंचाई गर्न सकिने र सुख्खायममा थप पानी उपलब्ध भएर भारत पनि लाभान्वित हुने कुरा माथि उल्लेख गरिसकिए पनि एउटा तप्का यो तथ्यलाई नकारी रहेको स्थिति छ ।

लागतमा चलखेल
माथि उल्लेख गरिए अनुसार ९ सय मेगावाट क्षमताको जल प्रवाहि आयोजनाको लागत ५० अर्ब रुपैया मात्र भएकैले यो विश्वकै आकर्षक आयोजना हो । तर लगानी बोर्डले जीएमआरसंग मिलेमतोमा १ सय ४० अर्ब रुपैया लागत लाग्छ भनेर लागतमा चलखेल गर्ने षडयन्त्र गरिसकेको छ । भण्डाफोर गरिनुपर्ने कुरा के हो भने यसरी बढी लागत देखाएर लगानिकर्ताले ३५ अर्ब रुपैया पूंजी लगानि गरेको हिसाबमा देखाउने र १ सय ५ अर्ब वित्तिय संस्थाहरुबाट ऋण लिएर आयोजना निर्माण गरेको देखाउने । यथार्थमा ५० अर्ब रुपैया मात्र लागत लाग्ने हुनाले लगानिकर्ताले पूंजी लगानि गर्न नपर्ने र ऋण मध्येको ६५ अर्ब रुपैया चोखै बांकी रहने देखिन्छ ।
महाकाली सन्धी संसदीय अनुमोदन गर्दा कति रकम बांडियो भन्ने आंकडा नभए पनि बांड्दा भने जोखेर बांडेको भन्ने व्यापक प्रचार भएको थियो । यो आयोजनाबाट भने स्पष्टतः ६५ अर्ब रुपैंया बांडन मिल्ने देखा परेको छ । त्यस माथि राज्यले प्रति मेगावाट ५० लाख रुपैंया दरले अनुदान दिने भनिएकोले अर्को साँढे ४ अर्ब रुपैंया पनि बांड्नलाई उपलब्ध हुने देखिन्छ ।

कर, मशहूल छूट
यसका अतिरिक्त यो आयोजनालाई टर्बाइन, जेनरेटर जस्ता मेशिनरी पैठारी गर्दा भंसार महशूल १ प्रतिशत मात्र लिएर छूट दिने र मूल्य अभिबृद्धि कर पूर्ण रुपमा छूट दिने पनि व्यवस्था गरिंदैछ । यस्तै यो आयोजना संचालनमा आए पछि आयमा कर पनि नलाग्ने व्यवस्था गरिएको छ ।

यसरी बिभिन्न कर तथा दै–दस्तूर छूट र थप नगद पनि अनुदान आदि सहुलियत दिइनाले यो आयोजनाले बिक्री गर्ने बिजुली सस्तो दरमा बिक्री गरिएपनि लगानिकर्तालाई पोषाउने हुन्छ । यो आयोजनाको बिजुली नेपाल भित्रै खपत गरिने भए यसरी बिभिन्न छूट दिएर जनताले वा प्राधिकरणले सस्तोमा बिजुली पाएमा यसरी छूट दिएको सार्थक हुन्छ । तर भारत निकासी गर्दा नेपाली जनता सस्तो बिजुलीबाट बंचित हुन्छन् भने राज्यले राजश्व पनि गुमाउने हुनाले नेपाली जनता र नेपाल राज्य दोहरै ठगिने हुन्छ ।

यो आयोजनाको लागत १ सय ४० अर्ब रुपैंया नैं लाग्ने भएमा भंसार महशूल र मूल्य अभिबृद्धि कर छूटबाट १७ अर्ब रुपैया जति राज्यले राजश्व गुमाउंछ र उल्टो साँढे ४ अर्ब रुपैया नगद अनुदानमा खर्च हुन्छ । अनि संचालनमा आए पछि वार्षिक ४ अर्ब आयकर गुमाउंछ (लागतको १५ प्रतिशत मुनाफा भएमा) । अर्थात निर्माण कालमा जम्मा २१ अर्ब रुपैया र संचालन कालमा वार्षिक ४ अर्ब रुपैया राज्यले राजश्व गुमाउंछ ।

भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री मोदीले १ सय अर्ब रुपैंयाको ऋण सहयोग घोषणा गर्दा कतिपय नेपालीहरु कृतज्ञताको भारीले दबिएको महसूस गरेका थिए, जुन १० वर्षमा उपयोग गरिए वार्षिक १० अर्ब रुपैंया मात्र हुन्छ जुन आर्थिक सहायता पनि होइन, सांवा र सस्तो दरमा ब्याज चुक्ता गर्नै पर्छ । तर नेपाल जस्तो सानो अनि आर्थिक हिसाबले सबल नभएको मुलुलले यो एउटै आयोजना निर्माण कालमा साँढे २१ अर्ब रुपैंया भारतलाई वस्तुत आर्थिक सहायता प्रदान गर्नेछ र त्यस पछिको अवधिमा वार्षिक ४ अर्ब रुपैया अर्को आर्थिक सहायता दिनेछ (अरुण तेश्रो जस्ता आयोजना कार्यान्वयन भएमा नेपालले भारतलाई दिने आर्थिक सयहोगका परिमाण अझै बढ्ने छ) ।
भारतबाट मात्र कति लिने, बरु भारतलाई दिने नैं मनसाय हो भने वाकायदा घोषणा गरेरै यी रकमहरु दिउं र भारतको कृतज्ञता प्राप्त गर्रौ, तर घुमाएर नाक छुनु मुर्खता मात्र हो (नेपालले आर्थिक सहायता नभनीकन दिंदा भारतले न सराहना गर्ने छ, न धन्यबाद नैं भन्ने छ) ।

बैदेशिक लगानिबाट लाभ
के पनि भनिएको छ भने यो आयोजना निर्माणमा बैदेशिक लगानि नेपाल भित्रिए नेपालको अर्थतन्त्र लाभान्वित हुन्छ । तर माथि वर्णन गरिए झैं निर्माण सम्पन्न हुनु अगावै लगानिकर्ताले लिने लाभको अलावा पनि संचालनबाट हुने लाभ (ऋणमा ब्याज र लाभांश) नेपालमा अड्दैन । त्यस्तै बिजुली भारत निकासी हुने हुनाले औद्योगिकरण, रोजगारी सृजना लगायतको विकास पनि भारतमै हुन्छ, नेपालमा हुन्न ।

यस्तोमा प्रकृतिले दिए भन्दा तीन चौथाई सानो बनाएर यो आयोजना निर्माण गरेर कसरी नेपाल समृद्ध हुन्छ भन्ने कुरा राजनीतिकर्मी, नेपाल सरकारमा कार्यरत तथा अन्य विद्वानले प्रकाश पारी दिएमा नेपाली जनता, त्यो पनि सुदुर तथा मध्य पश्चिम विकास क्षेत्रका जनता कृतार्थ हुने थिए ।
Ratna Sansar Shrestha
२०७१ भाद्र १५ गतेको अन्नपूर्ण पोष्टमा प्रकाशित

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

My role in signing Khimti PPA

Mr. Bijaya Man Sherchan, a prominent hydropower entrepreneur, has stated in his email circulated through NNSD that my role “as a signatory in the Khimti PPA has raised questions about both your credibility and your professed nationalism.”

But the statement seems to have been made without knowing full facts.

In the legal sense of the term “signatory”, I wasn’t a signatory of Khimti PPA at all. I had signed the document merely as a “Witness”. If there is an accident and some people happen to “see” it first hand and police investigating the accident will require those people that have witnessed the accident to sign a legal document that police will prepare as “witness” which will not make the people that witnessed the document responsible for the accident itself.

Similarly, in the legal world millions of documents (MoUs, agreements, contracts, etc.) are signed every minute and most of those documents have provision for signature by witnesses. The people that sign such documents as witness aren’t held responsible no matter what.

Moreover, at that time I was an employee of HPL as a Company Secretary and had “witnessed” the PPA in the capacity of a company secretary. The people in the corporate world including banking sector know full well what authority a company secretary possesses. It is never for the company secretary to decide what document should be signed, what rate should be fixed, etc. A company secretary is mainly and solely responsible to keep record of board resolutions, called minutes.

Late Mr. F Peter Harwood had signed Khimti PPA in the capacity of general manager of HPL. He is the signatory of Khimti PPA on behalf of HPL. However, the people in the corporate world also know that even CEOs, MDs, GMs etc. do not have authority in policy matters which are decided by the board of directors – pricing policy (tariff rate) also lies in the jurisdiction of Board of Directors and even HPL GM had to sign PPA according to what HPL board of directors decided.

In the corporate world when CEOs, MDs, GMs etc. differ with the board of directors they either get sacked or are forced to resign. This will also indicate what level of authority a company secretary holds when even CEOs, MDs, GMs etc. have no authority to disagree with the board of directors. Basically, it is the owners’ wishes, expressed through board resolutions that govern an important document like PPA.

Moreover, at that time Norwegian company Statkraft SF held 75% equity in HPL and everything including PPA was decided by Statkraft in Norway and HPL board merely had to implement the decisions made in Norway. It was the owners that called the shot as it always happens in the corporate world.

In this background holding a company secretary responsible for his “despicable” role in having witnessed Khimti PPA doesn’t sound logical.

Furthermore, I don’t hold any beneficial interest in Khimti or HPL (I don’t own any shares, don’t stand to gain or benefit or anything as such). The owners of HPL are still enjoying the fruits of so called bad PPA for NEA but nobody seems to hold them responsible.

I actually resigned in disgust from HPL on the matter of principle (which I will make public at appropriate time) in late 1998.

Most importantly the main PPA was signed in March 1994 in which provisions like USD denomination, escalation based in NY CPI and many more provisions, described now harmful to NEA were included in the original PPA. Whereas, I joined HPL only in May 1994, two months after signing of the PPA. What I had “witnessed” was merely an amendment which raised the tariff by 14% keeping all other “harmful” clauses intact.

Therefore, the allegation of my “despicable” role in Khimti PPA is not based on valid ground.

Monday, August 18, 2014

Re: Dissecting Laos model - will it lead Nepal to prosperity?

Dear colleague

Actually Bhutan is in a lot better position compared to Nepal, even Laos (which Nepal is about to emulate badly).

I waited till today to respond to you as last year’s annual report of NEA was to be made public yesterday, according to which industries of Nepal consumed 35.8% of electricity sold by NEA. In Bhutan the percentage of electricity consumption by industries is 80% of the electricity internally sold in Bhutan. This is one of the reasons why per capita income of Bhutan has surpassed that of many countries in South Asia. Most know that one unit of electricity consumed by the economy adds value to the economy by 2.5 times.

Moreover, there is another significantly different way Bhutan benefits from. All the hydropower projects that are in the pipeline in Nepal awaiting PDA and PTA are to be owned by respective “investors”. Whereas, the projects built with 60:40 grant-debt (soft) are fully owned by Bhutan government and any and all profit earned by such projects built in Bhutan goes into RGoB treasury. This also contributes significantly in the increase in per capita income.

If the projects that are to be built in Nepal are to be owned by GoN then the profit from these projects will accrue to treasury of GoN and will drive per capita income up significantly.

However, that is not to be. Indian government is pampering Bhutan as latter is former’s protectorate. People in Nepal are too strong headed to allow Nepal to become a protectorate of India.

Moreover, Indian finance ministry is already finding it difficult to sustain 60:40 grant-debt model of financing hydropower projects for a small country of about half a million people and is proposing to reduce it to 30:70 grant-debt. In order to result in similar impact on per capita income of Nepal with population close to 30 million, India would have difficulty in finding the kind of funding necessary.

With best regards,


Sincerely,

Ratna Sansar Shrestha, fca
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com


On Aug 13, 2014, at 10:58 AM, wrote:
No different from Bhutan model although Laos has 6 times more people than Bhutan

Sent from my iPad

On 13 Aug 2014, at 07:50, Ratna Sansar Shrestha wrote:

After it was proved that Bhutan model isn't replicable in Nepal, some people are now advocating replication of Laos model. In this backdrop, so called "Laos model" warrants a dissection.

Hydropower project built with foreign investment for export will result in apportionment of economic benefits in following manner:

* forward linkage benefit = zero (0) as electricity will be used in the neighboring country for industrialization and value addition will accrue to the user country's economy.

* investment linkage benefit = zero (0) as the return on investment will be repatriated by the foreign investor.

* backward linkage benefit = zero (0) as most of the construction materials and hydromechanical and electromechanical equipment is not produced in Laos.

* fiscal linkage benefit = depending upon royalty and other taxes levied by Lao government. If these add up to 25% then fiscal linkage benefit will be 25%

Therefore, benefit to Laos:

forward linkage 0/100
investment linkage 0/100
backward linkage 0/100
fiscal linkage 25/100

In total benefit to Laos will be about 25 out of 400.

Clear and better alternative for Nepal is to maximize benefit from forward linkage by using electricity internally and from investment linkage by mobilizing investment from domestic sources as far as is possible. Due to underdeveloped state of Nepal’s industries, increase in backward linkage will take couple of decades more. Increasing benefit from fiscal linkage is advisable for export-oriented projects only, not to project from which electricity will be internally used.

This scribe has conducted similar analysis of West Seti project, license for which held by SMEC has been cancelled and the paper was published in Issue # 5 (July 2009) of Hydro Nepal (journal of water, energy and environment). It can be accessed by following the link below:
http://www.ratnasansar.com/2009/09/erer.html

Saturday, August 16, 2014

Undiplomatic comment by Indian PM Modi re Hills and Hilly People

Indian PM Narendra Modi’s overnight visit turned out to be an euphoric one. His speech in the parliament was deemed mesmerizing by many and almost each sentence of his was followed by applause and seems to have been highly appreciated outside the parliament too. His affirmation that Nepal is a sovereign country and also that Buddha was born in Nepal has been the talk of the town as if there were doubts with respect to these even in the minds of people and parliamentarians of Nepal.

It is definitely true that he possesses great oratorical skill and he turned out to be such a smooth talker that “he could sell ice to Eskimos”, to use an old saying, with due respect to him. It is certain that he is fiercely patriotic and dedicated to his motherland. Actually most Indians are like that. They wouldn’t, like a good shopkeeper, mind to gloss over a few facts or doctor/tweak the numbers/calculations a little bit here and there to “sell” an idea or merchandise. A good example: Indians going about telling that Nepal benefits more than India from Pancheshwar project. In reality Nepal gets to irrigate only 93,000 ha while 1.6 million ha is planned to be irrigated in India to cite one example of India benefiting more than Nepal in contrast to the principle of equal water sharing enshrined in Mahakali treaty. But some Indians disagree with such shenanigan on the part of India and are in favor of fair deal without any sleigh of hand.

In Nepal too we have many fiercely patriotic people, only few of them are vocal and a large majority tends to remain mute witness to shenanigans. Then there is another segment of intelligentsia who not only knows and understands that India is trying to Sikkimize/Bhutanize Nepal’s water resources but accepts it as inevitable and behaves as if saying that “if rape (begging pardon for the use of rather strong word) is inevitable, one may as well lie back and enjoy it.” Similarly, there are some sincere people who believe whatever they are told by Indians or Nepali people working for Indian interest. One high official of nepal went about repeating that Nepal would earn Rs 250 billion a year in royalties by selling electricity from 10,000 MW which isn’t true. Nepal will earn a total royalty of Rs 4.9 billion/year only if hydropower projects are able to achieve plant factor of 50% and sold at US 6 ¢ – a rate at which India would be loath to buy.

On the other hand some people of Nepal are “more Indian than Indians”: Nepal citizens that feel patriotic towards India. This is what makes the life of patriotic people of Nepal a constant struggle and they even have to face uphill battle to ensure that Nepal’s interest isn’t traded away for some personal gain.

When Indian PM Modi sort of jokingly said, “youth (जवानी) and water do not stay in the hills” there was roaring laughter (and some giggles, too) as if in approval. The former actually amounts to a challenge on virility of Nepali men and procreating ability of women; it even amounts to insult. Instead of being outraged or taking umbrage, there were knowing smiles all around (I hope this doesn’t amount to admission that Nepali people lose their youthfulness prematurely).

If what he said about youthfullness had even an iota of truth Nepal would have been impelled to import people instead of exporting them to Arabian and East Asian countries (another tragedy) – a recent phenomenon; to Gurkha regiments to a number of countries including india since a few centuries.

As regards water, due to the very nature of water, which constantly flows downhill and “finds its own level due to force of gravity”, the second half of his statement is also untrue from the perspective of science. Because the water even doesn’t “stay” in Indian plains, either. It is the nature of water to flow and it keeps on flowing constantly – has been doing so since ages/eons: from hills to plains to seas to eventually oceans from where it transforms into cloud due to evaporation and it eventually comes back to including hills due to hydrologic cycle.

An important point that needs to be remembered is that it is because water flows downhill that electricity gets generated (as “head” gets created), which isn’t possible in the plains. While he was just out to “seduce” Nepali people, as a good/effective salesman, to let India use high quality electricity from Nepal at dirt-cheap tariff.

Similarly, it is in the hills where rainy season water could be stored in reservoirs thereby resulting in flood control in the lower riparian areas during wet season and also enabling temporal transfer of water – producing lean season augmented flow which India needs very badly. Hence, the importance of reservoir projects like Pancheshwar and Koshi High Dam for India.

In sum, he is off the mark when he made this particular comment – which when contemplated coolly was both ridiculous and ludicrous. But he apparently has succeeded in his mission temporarily to an extent to persuade gullible few in Nepal to allow India to use lean season augmented flow without having to recompense Nepal for negative externalities that she will suffer from, if reservoir projects are built.
He also succeeded to have MPs of Nepal beaming when he said that Nepal could spread light in India, which is impossibility. It is incontrovertible truth that Buddha has indeed succeeded to spread the light of wisdom in India and many other countries in the world. But with India needing 800,000 MW, it isn’t possible for Nepal to “spread” light in India (it will be just a drop in the “starving” ocean). This is the rhetoric which even Nepal’s hydrocrats are found repeating often.

He also attempted to link mitigation of Nepal’s trade deficit with hydropower export in the lines of hydrocrats of both of these countries, which essentially is incorrect.

On the other hand he failed to acknowledge the importance of water for India for it’s multidimensional uses (also including in Bangladesh) if reservoir projects were to be built – for the purposes ranging from water for drinking and sanitation to irrigation, navigation, etc. Although his strategic target was water while making people in Nepal believe that he was targeting power; very smart for an Indian PM with eyes on high quality cheap power with lean season augmented flow of water as bonus. Wish politicos of Nepal are as smart/astute and are able to ensure benefit for Nepal in this manner.

His pronouncement related to formation of Pancheshwar Development Authority was also greeted with applause. But those applauding seem to have forgotten that there is provision for formation of Mahakali River Commission in the Treaty under which project specific institutions were to be set up. With his assistance a son/daughter (PDA) will take birth even before the father/mother (MRC) is conceived.

From these it is clear that he is committed to implement Pancheshwar project. But it can only be built when India agrees to recompense Nepal for India using Nepal’s share of 251.17 m3/s in excess of India’s entitlement (half of the augmented flow pursuant to Mahakali Treaty) which comes to Rs 22 billion/year if the recompense amount is computed on the basis of formula used under agreement between Lesotho and South Africa.

(Abridged version of my writing that I posted on August 10, 2014 was published by People's Review in Vol XXIV, No 5)

Friday, August 15, 2014

ADB also to float bond in nepal to invest in Nepal!

Now it is ADB's turn to mop up fund (Rs 50 billion) from Nepal to invest in Nepal and charge a hefty fee doing it (IFC has decided to charge 5.5%), copying IFC.

http://enayapatrika.com/business/3306.html

This should be stopped right away. Both IFC and ADB are out to swindle Nepali people who have saved their hard earned money. I wonder how could people in finance ministry and central bank of Nepal fail to understand things like these.

South Korea a few decades ago collected people's savings including from remittances, paying interest at a decent rate, and invested in infrastructure projects heavily. That is why Nepali youth are fighting to go there instead of working for their own motherland as Nepal has dismally failed to generate employment.

With best regards,


Sincerely,

Ratna Sansar Shrestha, fca
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com


On Jul 2, 2014, at 5:13 AM, RATNA SANSAR SHRESTHA wrote:
What I have come to understand is that they would collect money from within Nepal by floating bond and then loan money for projects.

It should not be difficult to establish what modality is being followed by checking with Yuba Raj Khatiwada at NRB or Yuba Raj Bhusal at MoF.

Please Let me know what you are able to find out such that there is no confusion in the mind of likes of us.

With best regards

Sincerely
Ratna Sansar Shrestha

sent from iPad

On Jul 1, 2014, at 12:52, LeelaMani Paudyal wrote:

Thank you for information, in my mind they would provide loan in nepali currency to nepali enterprise without collecting money from nepali people. for example if i need one crore nepali rs, ifc would bring 105000 us$ or equivalent to one crore nepali and convert that to nepali currency and lend, the burrower will pay interest and installment in nepali and ifc would will recover in nepali and convert that to USD for repatriation. the risk associated with possible devaluation of nepali currency can be covered by heading or by insurance for foreign currency risk in international market. how is your opinion about my impression? is not it workable?
regd
leela



From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 1 July 2014 12:16 PM
Subject: Fwd: IFC permitted to issue Rs 50 billion in local currency bonds

Dear colleague

I have learnt that IFC is proposing to “charge” a spread of 5.5% on local currency bond. Which means it will pay about 8-9% to people in Nepal who buy such bond and it will use same money to lend for projects in Nepal at 13.5-14.5%.

It basically mean that those who buy such bond will get 5.5% less than what the borrowers pay or the borrowers will pay 5.5% more than who buy the bond.

It is almost like the Hindi proverb: जिसकी जुती, उसकी सर

I wonder how can an multilateral like IFC justify such a thing. What is more distressing is the fact that ADB is also waiting in the wings to pull wool over eyes of the nepali people, who save their hard earned money, in similar fashion.

With best regards,



Sincerely,



Ratna Sansar Shrestha,

Monday, August 11, 2014

Let’s take stock in the wake of Modi-phoria

After a week of Indian PM Modi’s visit, it is high time for us to take stock to determine where we the people of Nepal stand after a euphoric, overnight visit of Indian PM Narendra Modi, 17 years after another Indian PM’s visit. Trust my write up would not be deemed throwing cold water over the euphoria and it is also time to think coolly as to what actually did he mean by whatever he said and what could be in his mind when he said those things that were deemed mesmerizing. According to “Simplify 360o,” a social media analytics site, there were more than 80% positive comments and only 5% were negative. I trust one additional “negative” comment from me will not change the result drastically.

He addressed Nepal’s parliament and the way almost each sentence of his was followed by applause, it is certain that what he apparently said “extempore” was highly appreciated (outside the CA too he has “earned” many admirers). His affirmation that Nepal is a sovereign country and also that Buddha was born in Nepal has been the talk of the town as if there were doubts with respect to these even in the minds of people and parliamentarians of Nepal.

It is definitely true that he possesses great oratorical skill and he turned out to be such a smooth talker that “he could sell ice to Eskimos”, to use an old saying, with due respect to him. It is certain that he is fiercely patriotic and dedicated to his motherland. Actually most Indians are like that. They wouldn’t, like a good shopkeeper, mind to gloss over a few facts or doctor/tweak the numbers/calculations a little bit here and there to “sell” an idea or merchandise. A good example: Indians going about telling that Nepal benefits more than India from Pancheshwar project. In reality Nepal gets to irrigate only 93,000 ha while 1.6 million ha is planned to be irrigated in India to cite one example of India benefiting more than Nepal in contrast to the principle of equal water sharing enshrined in Mahakali treaty. I also know of some Indians who disagree with such shenanigan on Indian part and are in favor of fair deal without any sleigh of hand.

In Nepal too we have many fiercely patriotic people, only few of them are vocal and a large majority tends to remain mute witness to shenanigans. Then there is another segment of intelligentsia who not only knows and understands that India is trying to Sikkimize/Bhutanize Nepal’s water resources but accepts it as inevitable and behaves as if saying that “if rape (begging pardon for the use of rather strong word) is inevitable, one may as well lie back and enjoy it.” Similarly, there are some sincere people who believe whatever they are told by Indians or Nepali people working for Indian interest. One such example is Dr Shankar Sharma, a close friend of mine since early 1970s, who came back from Washington recently after completing his tenure as Nepal’s ambassador to US and prior to that he was VC of NPC. He has admitted with me in electronic correspondence held through NNSD publicly in December 2008 that “I was in Patna Mr TN Thakur of PTC India said in the public meeting that Nepal would earn Rs 250 billion by exporting 10,000 MW.” He even repeated that Nepal would earn Rs 250 billion a year in royalties even in formal program with PM Prachanda in attendance as chief guest in 2008. I had to point out to him publicly that he was wrong by a magnitude: Nepal will earn a total royalty of Rs 4.9 billion/year only if hydropower projects are able to achieve plant factor of 50% and sold at US 6 ¢ – a rate at which India would be loath to buy.

On the other hand some people of Nepal are “more Indian than Indians”: Nepal citizens that feel patriotic towards India. This is what makes the life of patriotic people of Nepal a constant struggle and they even have to face uphill battle to ensure that Nepal’s interest isn’t traded away for some personal gain.

My writing these lines could be deemed a sacrilege and it is also certain that many a feathers will get ruffled. However, I am not going to be deterred by such niceties and express what I strongly feel in the interest of our motherland, and without mincing words.

When Indian PM Modi sort of jokingly said, “youth (जवानी) and water do not stay in the hills” there was roaring laughter (and some giggles, too) as if in approval. The former actually amounts to a challenge on virility of Nepali men and procreating ability of women (it even amounts to insult). Instead of being outraged or taking umbrage, there were knowing smiles all around (I hope this doesn’t amount to admission that Nepali people lose their youthfulness prematurely). I for one am very upset and also sure that there are many more who share my feelings. If what he said had even an iota of truth Nepal would have been impelled to import people instead of exporting them to Arabian and East Asian countries (another tragedy) – a recent phenomenon; including to Gurkha regiments in a number of countries since a few centuries.

As regards water, due to the very nature of water, which constantly flows downhill and “finds its own level due to force of gravity”, the second half of his statement is also untrue from the perspective of science. Because the water even doesn’t “stay” in Indian plains, either. It is the nature of water to flow and it keeps on flowing constantly – has been doing so since ages/eons: from hills to plains to seas to eventually oceans from where it transforms into cloud due to evaporation and it eventually comes back to including hills due to hydrologic cycle.

An important point that needs to be remembered is that it is because water flows downhill that electricity gets generated (as “head” gets created), which isn’t possible in the plains. While he was just out to “seduce” Nepali people, as a good/effective salesman, to let India use high quality electricity from Nepal at dirt-cheap tariff.

Similarly, it is in the hills where rainy season water could be stored in reservoirs thereby resulting in flood control in the lower riparian areas during wet season and also enabling temporal transfer of water – producing lean season augmented flow which India needs very badly. Hence, the importance of reservoir projects like Pancheshwar and Koshi High Dam for India.

In sum, he is off the mark when he made this particular comment – which when contemplated coolly was both ridiculous and ludicrous. But he apparently has succeeded in his mission temporarily to an extent to persuade gullible few in Nepal to allow India to use lean season augmented flow without having to recompense Nepal for negative externalities that she will suffer from, if reservoir projects are built.
He also succeeded to have MPs of Nepal beaming when he said that Nepal could spread light in India, which is impossibility. It is incontrovertible truth that Buddha has indeed succeeded to spread the light of wisdom in India and many other countries in the world. But with India needing 800,000 MW, it isn’t possible for Nepal to “spread” light in India (it will be just a drop in the “starving” ocean). This is the rhetoric which even Nepal’s hydrocrats are found repeating often.

He also attempted to link mitigation of Nepal’s trade deficit with hydropower export in the lines of hydrocrats of both of these countries, which essentially is not correct and my article on the topic was published by Annapurna Post daily last Friday (http://www.ratnasansar.com/2014/08/blog-post.html)
On the other hand he failed to acknowledge the importance of water for India for it’s multidimensional uses (also including in Bangladesh) if reservoir projects were to be built – for the purposes ranging from water for drinking and sanitation to irrigation, navigation, etc. Although his strategic target was water while making people in Nepal believe that he was targeting power; very smart for an Indian PM with eyes on high quality cheap power with lean season augmented flow as bonus. Wish politicos of Nepal are as smart/astute and are able to ensure benefit for Nepal in this manner.

His pronouncement related to formation of Pancheshwar Development Authority was also greeted with applause. But those applauding seem to have forgotten that there is provision for formation of Mahakali River Commission in the Treaty under which project specific institutions were to be set up. With his assistance a son/daughter (PDA) will take birth even before the father/mother (MRC) is conceived.

From these it is clear that he is committed to implement Pancheshwar project. But it can only be built when India agrees to recompense Nepal for India using Nepal’s share of 251.17 m3/s in excess of India’s entitlement (half of the augmented flow pursuant to Mahakali Treaty) which comes to Rs 22 billion/year if the recompense amount is computed on the basis of formula used under agreement between Lesotho and South Africa (this scribe has written an article on the topic which can be accessed by following this link: http://www.ratnasansar.com/2014/07/implementing-pancheshwar-project-in.html).

Sunday, August 10, 2014

Re: Developing Megawatts to Brighten Nepali Future

Mr Anil K Shah
CEO, Mega Bank

Anil jee

Thanks a lot for your appreciation. However, I can see a tragedy inherent in your perception that my “lines of thought (are) becoming more flexible and (I am) moving to a middle ground” now. What you are saying implies that I used to be “negative” and am now getting mellowed down. It is unfortunate that I am perceived as a negative person even by the educated circle without trying to understand the depth of where I am coming from.

It isn’t true at all (this is the only courteous way to contradict you that I know of (unfortunately, I am having to contradict you once more and I don’t know any other way to do so. I request my friends Kiran Joshi and Kanak Dixit to understand my difficulty in having to contradict you once more).

Due to constraint of space provided for articles, I need to use up most of the space critiquing – thereby sounding negative. However, it amazes me that even intelligentsia fail to see my recommendations and alternative avenues that are embedded in my critique.

This time I jumped straight into the way forward that I felt like recommending from the perspective of Nepal’s interest without spending precious resources (in terms of my time and energy and space of newspaper) in terms of principles that have to be enshrined in a treaty on water resources between nepal and india. If Indians are ready to accept the principles that I have enunciated, all the “negative” comments that I have made throughout my life will be redressed/mitigated. However, the principles are such that it will not yield the disproportionate benefit that India is hankering after and I would be surprised if they would accept/agree.


With best regards,


Sincerely,

Ratna Sansar Shrestha, fca
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com


On Aug 1, 2014, at 12:11 AM, Anil Shah anilkesharyshah@gmail.com [NNSD] wrote:

Very good to see lines of thought becoming more flexible and moving to a middle ground!

The destination of the development of hydro power in Nepal has to achieve the objective of inclusive economic and social development of all Nepalis trans Nepal.

It is not an issue of chosing the developimment of power for domestic consumption or export, it is a question of formulating agreements that forges a balance where we can use foreign and domestic capital and know how to construct projects that are financially viable through a percentage of the power being consumed domestically and a certain percentage being exported. With export rates being higher so as to subsidise domestic consumption to a certain extent.

Further more we need to listen to new voices and new ideas, if we only keep listening to the same points of view and expert opinions that have given us over 14 hours of load shedding I think the only thing we will see going up is the hours of domestic darkness. We need to listen to people who are able to see the forest and not just the leaves on the tree. For example why not explore looking at not just exporting electric power but using the trade treaties we that already exist to attract industries that are power intensive to set up large scale manufacturing units in our Terai by offering subsidised power rates making it more profitable for them to manufacture in Nepal for the North Indian markets. Also let us not forget that we are a nation of framers so the construction of high dam projects need to be built with an integrated vision of irrigation in Nepal and water sharing with India to the advantage of farmers of both nations. The potential for cooperative benefit for the people of both nations is limited only by our imagination.

And that is where we need to have faith in the young minds and thoughts in the government, public and private sector, so that we can find new paths to walk on together and reach destinations that generations before could not! The people who sit for negotiations from both nations need to do so without a 'pre-occupied' mindset, not with suspicion and distrust but confidence and hope!

Seeing mindsets opening up in the political, beuracratic, public and private sector is encouraging and as a Nepali I am hopeful that this time round we will move forward...

Anil Shah
Posted by: Anil Shah

Dissecting Laos model - will it lead Nepal to prosperity?

Hydropower project built with foreign investment for export will result in apportionment of economic benefits in following manner:

* forward linkage benefit = zero (0) as electricity will be used in the neighbouring country for industrialization and value addition will accrue to the user country's economy.

* investment linkage benefit = zero (0) as the return on investment will be repatriated by the foreign investor.

* backward linkage benefit = zero (0) as most of the construction materials and hydro mechanical and electromechanical equipment is not produced in Laos.

* fiscal linkage benefit = depending upon royalty and other taxes levied by Lao government. If these add up to 25% then fiscal linkage benefit will be 25%

Therefore, benefit to Laos:

forward linkage 0/100
investment linkage 0/100
backward linkage 0/100
fiscal linkage 25/100

In total benefit to Laos will be about 25 out of 400.

Clear and better alternative for Nepal is to maximize benefit from forward linkage by using electricity internally and from investment linkage by mobilizing investment from domestic sources as far as is possible. Due to underdeveloped state of Nepal’s industries, increase in backward linkage will take couple of decades more. Increasing benefit from fiscal linkage is advisable for export-oriented projects only, not to project from which electricity will be internally used.

This scribe has conducted similar analysis of West Seti project, license for which held by SMEC has been cancelled and the paper was published in Issue # 5 (July 2009) of Hydro Nepal (journal of water, energy and environment). It can be accessed by following the link below:

http://www.ratnasansar.com/2009/09/erer.html

Friday, August 8, 2014

बिद्युत निकासी गरेर ब्यापार घाटा घट्दैन

नेपाल सरकारद्वारा प्रकाशित आर्थिक वर्ष २०७०/७१ को आर्थिक सर्बेक्षण अनुसार यस आर्थिक वर्षको पहिलो ८ महिनामा निकासी झण्डै रु ६१ अर्ब थियो भने सोहि अवधिमा पैठारी करिब रु ४ खर्ब ५८ अर्ब हुनाले ८ महिना अवधिको मात्र ब्यापार घाटा रु ३ खर्ब ९७ अर्ब थियो, जुन यहि प्रकारले बढ्ने हो भने पूरा आर्थिक वर्षको ब्यापार घाटा रु ६ खर्बको हाराहारीमा पुग्नेछ ।

भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री नरेन्द्र मोदीको नेपाल भ्रमणको पूर्व संध्यामा फेरि ब्यापार घाटाको चर्चा चुलियो र अपवाद वाहेक अधिकांश ब्यापारी÷व्यवसायी, कर्मचारीवर्ग, राजनीतिकर्मी (यी सबै तप्कामा बुद्धिजीविको कमी छैन) र बुद्धिजीविले समवेत स्वरमा बिजुली निकासी गरेर मात्र यसबाट त्राण पाइने निदान गरे र त्यो पनि भारतसंग अत्यधिक हुनाले भारतमा बिजुली निकासी गर्दा समस्या समाधान हुने ठोकुवा गरे ।

जलबद्यिुत निकासी
अब बिजुली निकासी गरेर यो घाटा कति पूर्ति गर्न हुन्छ कि हुन्न बिबेचना गरौं । यदि १ हजार मेगावाट क्षमताको जलबिद्युत आयोजना निर्माण गरेर ५० प्रतिशत क्षमतामा बिजुली उत्पादन गर्ने हो भने एक वर्षमा औसत ४ अर्ब ३८ करोड युनिट बिजुली उत्पादन हुन्छ । जुन रु ५ प्रति युनिटमा निकासी गरिएमा (टिप्पणीः भारत कुनै हालतमा यति महंगो दरमा बिजुली पैठारी गर्न तयार हुनेछैन) जम्मा रु २१ अर्ब ९० करोडको बिद्युत निकासी हुनेछ । यस सन्भर्दमा यो पनि स्मरण गर्नुपर्ने हुन्छ कि यति रकमले नैं नेपाललाई फाइदा हुने होइन; जसरी पूर्व प्रधानमन्त्री माधव नेपालले पंचेश्वरबाट नेपाललाई रु ३५ अर्ब फाइदा हुन्छ भन्ने कुरा फजुल ठहरिए जस्तै । फाइदा त के कति खुद मुनाफा हुन्छ त्यतिले मात्र हुन्छ, त्यो पनि लगानिकर्तालाई न कि आयोजना स्थल रहेको देशलाई ।

शोधनानन्तर घाटा पूर्तिमा योगदान
अब परिक्षण गरौं के उक्त आयोजनाबाट बिजुली निकासी गरेकोले नेपालको ब्यापार घाटा झण्डै रु २२ अर्बले कम हुन्छ त ? सरलताको लागि पहिले शोधनानन्तर घाटाको कुरा गरौं, जुन ब्यापार घाटाबाट प्रत्यक्ष प्रभावित हुन्छ । नेपालमा लगानि गर्ने क्षमताको अभावमा उक्त आयोजना बिदेशी लगानिबाटै निर्माण हुनेछ, केहि पूंजी नेपालमा परिचालित गरिए पनि र नेपालका बैंक वित्तिय संस्थाहरुमा यो क्षमताको आयोजनाको लागि ऋण दिने क्षमता नहुनाले । अब अझ बुझ्ने सरलताको लागि मानौं सम्पूर्ण लगानि बिदेशबाटै प्राप्त हुन्छ ।

जब लगानिकर्ता बिदेशी हुन्छ र निकासी पनि भारतै गरिन्छ, तब निकासी गरिएको बिजुलीको रकम बिदेशी लगानिकर्ताले आफ्नै मुलुकमा राख्छ वा भारत सरकारले बाध्यात्मक परिस्थिति बनाएमा भारतमा रहनसक्छ । सामान्यतया उक्त रकम नेपाल ल्याउन पर्ने अवस्था नैं रहंदैन । एकछिनलाई मानौं नेपाल सरकारले नैं निकासीबाट प्राप्त रकम नेपाल भित्रका बैंकमा नैं राख्नैपर्ने बाध्यात्मक शर्त राख्यो र निकासीबाट प्राप्त रकमले नेपालमा प्रवेश पायो ।

स्पष्ट छ उक्त आयोजनाले ऋणको सांवा ब्याज तिर्नुपर्छ; संचालन, मर्मत सम्भार, व्यवस्थापन लगायतको खर्च व्यहोर्न पर्ने हुन्छ र यी सबैको लागि ७५ प्रतिशत भन्दा बढी रकम बिदेशमा खर्च हुनेछ (नेपाली मुद्रामा तलब न्युन रकममा मात्र खर्च हुन्छ) । बांकी रकम लाभांशको रुपमा पूंजी लगानिकर्ताले फिर्ता लाने छ । यसरी हेर्दा नेपालमा सम्पूर्ण रकम प्रवेश गराउनै पर्ने भएपनि नेपाल सरकारलाई तिर्ने ५ प्रतिशत भन्दा कम रोयल्टी मात्र नेपालमा अड्ने देखिन्छ भने नेपाल प्रवेश गर्ने अनिवार्यता नभएमा नेपाल सरकारलाई तिर्न पर्ने रोयल्टी रकम मात्र नेपाल प्रवेश गर्ने देखिन्छ ।

ऋण चुक्ता भए पछि त ठूलै रकम बांकी रहन सक्छ, तर जति ठूलो रकम बांकी रहन्छ लाभांश पनि त्यहि अनुपातमा धेरै बांडिने हुनाले नेपालमा अड्ने वा प्रवेश गर्ने रकम भनेको नेपाल सरकारलाई तिर्ने रोयल्टी मात्रै हो । तसर्थ रु २२ अर्बको बिजुली निकासी गरिएमा रु १ अर्ब १० करोडले मात्र नेपालको शोधनानन्तर घाटा पूर्ति हुन्छ, निकासीको सम्पूर्ण रकमले होइन । १५ वर्ष पछि बढी दरमा रोयल्टी लाग्ने हुनाले अंदाजी १५ प्रतिशतले मात्र शोधनानन्तर घाटा कम हुन्छ ।

ब्यापार घाटा
बिजुली निकासी गर्दा निश्चय पनि निकासीको आंकडा भने रु २२ अर्बले बढ्ने छ । तर सार्थक रुपमा ब्यापार घाटा घट्न उक्त निकासीले देशको अर्थतन्त्रमा कति मूल्य अभिबृद्धि ग¥यो भन्नेमा निर्भर गर्छ । यसको लागि स्टिल छडको उदाहरण लिऔं । यदि कुनै अवधिमा रु ५ अर्बको स्टिल छड निकासी गरियो तर छड निर्माण गर्न रु ४ अर्बको फलाम आयात गरिएको छ भने खूद ब्यापार घाटा रु १ अर्बले मात्र कम हुन्छ । त्यसै गरेर जलबिद्युत आयोजनाबाट नेपालको अर्थतन्त्रमा मूल्य अभिबृद्धि हुने भनेको नेपाल सरकारले पाउने रोयल्टी (आय कर लगायत कुनै पनि कर नलाग्ने हुनाले) र नेपाली मुद्रामा बांडिने तलबको हद सम्म मात्र हो । त्यसकारण तात्विक रुपमा पहिलो १५ वर्ष ब्यापार घाटा निर्यातित बिजुलीबाट आर्जित रकमको ५ प्रतिशत जति मात्र घट्छ र १५ वर्ष पछि बढी दरमा रोयल्टी लाग्ने हुनाले अंदाजी १५ प्रतिशतले मात्र तात्विक रुपमा ब्यापार घाटा पूर्ति हुन्छ ।

ब्यापार घाटा कसरी घट्छ ?
ब्यापार घाटा किन हुन्छ भन्ने सबैलाई थाहै छः आयात धेरै निर्यात कम भएमा । त्यसकारण नेपालले आयात प्रतिस्थापन गर्न सके पनि ब्यापार घाटा घट्न सक्छ भने निर्यात बढाउन सके पनि ब्यापार घाटा घट्न सक्छ । यी दुवै कामको लागि नेपालमा उत्पादन बृद्धि नगरी सम्भव छैन र उत्पादन बृद्धि औद्योगिकरणमा निर्भर गर्छ ।

अहिले संचालनमा रहेका उद्योगहरु ५० प्रतिशत भन्दा पनि कम क्षमतामा संचालित छन्; विशेष गरेर लोड सेडिंगको कारणले । अझ रोजगारी सृजना हुने गरेर नयाँ उद्योग स्थापनार्थ आवश्यक बिजुली नैं छैन, जसको फलस्वरुप नेपाली युवा रोजगारीको लागि बिदेश पलायन हुन बाध्य छन् । बिदेशमा पनि सुबिस्ताका साथ आय आर्जन गर्न पाएका छैनन्, आर्थिक मात्र नभएर शारिरिक तथा यौनिक शोषणमा परेकाछन् ।
त्यसैले अत्यधिक बिद्युत उत्पादन गरेर युद्ध स्तरमा नेपालको औद्योगिकरण गरेमा ब्यापार घाटा मात्र कम हुने नभएर रोजगारी पनि सृजना हुन्छ । विश्व प्रसिद्ध अर्थशास्त्रीहरुले रु १ को बिजुली उद्योगमा उपयोग गरेमा अर्थतन्त्रमा रु २।५० (२ सय ५० प्रतिशत) ले मूल्य अभिबृद्धि हुन्छ भन्ने धारणा राख्दछन, तर नेपालका अधिकांश विद्वान अर्थशास्त्रीहरु भने यस सन्दर्भमा अपवादमा पर्छन । तुलना गर्ने हो भने बिजुली निकासी गर्दा अर्थतन्त्रमा ५ प्रतिशत (१५ वर्ष पछि १५ प्रतिशत) ले मूल्य अभिबृद्धि हुन्छ भने बिजुली नेपालको औद्योगिकरणमा उपयोग गरिएमा २ सय ५० प्रतिशतले मूल्य अभिबृद्धि हुन्छ । तसर्थ निकासी गरेर धनी हुन्छ भन्ने भ्रमको खेती गर्ने कि देशको औद्योगिकरण गरेर रोजगारी समेत सृजना गर्ने भन्ने निर्णय गर्न ढिलो भैसकेको छ ।

यातायातको बिद्युतिकरण
ब्यापार घाटाको अर्को प्रमुख कारक पेट्रोलियम पदार्थको पैठारी हो । नेपाल आयल निगमको वार्षिक प्रतिबेदन अनुसार आर्थिक वर्षमा २०६९।७० मा रु १ खर्ब २ अर्बको पेट्रोलियम पदार्थको पैठारी भएको छ । नेपाल जस्तो मुलुक जहां एक थोपा पनि पेट्रोलियम पदार्थको उत्पादन हुंदैन तर जलबिद्युतको अपार सम्भावना छ भने नेपालले यातायातलाई बिद्युतिकरण गर्नु पर्दछ र यसो गरेमा पनि ब्यापार घाटा तात्विक परिमाणमा घट्दछ । यस अतिरिक्त पेट्रोलियम पदार्थबाट उत्पादित उर्जा बिद्युतिय उर्जा भन्दा ७५ प्रतिशतले सस्तो पर्ने हुनाले ढुवानि लागत समेत कम भएर अर्थतन्त्रमा अझ बढी मूल्य अभिबृद्धि हुनेछ ।

२०७१ श्रावण २३ गतेको अन्नपूर्ण पोष्टमा प्रकाशित