More important, there is no idea if it is voluntary by nature. One would think that an Act, by virtue of being one, is binding on the citizens, but the enforcing agency states that it is not for “an inspector Raj!”
The Act is intended to provide for efficient use of energy and its conservation and for related matters.
More serious is the fact that with five years having elapsed, it is incumbent upon the states to appoint inspectors to ensure compliance to the Act. But, the designated agencies are still waiting for clear instructions from the Centre. The Kredl (Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Limited) is one such agency. According to its MD, Dr Shivalangiah, the organisation has been conducting awareness programmes.
Nothing more, for want of clarity!Neither has there been any move to set up Appellate Tribunal for energy conservation. Without a tribunal in place, sections 17 (inspection) and 26 (penalty) can not be enforced.
To enforce the Act, the Bureau of Energy Efficiency was established in 2003. But, the governing council of the BEE is, according to an observer, “loaded with members belonging to the power sector under the MoP.”
The BEE is expected to constitute advisory and technical committees, neither of which has been done, according to S K Sood, president, Indian Association of Energy Management Professionals (IAEMP). It is expected to coordinate with designated agencies and consumers. Not much has been done.
Another discrepancy seems to arise from the watering down of the initial list of 15 designated consumers, or energy intensive, to a total of nine. Why has the energy intensive transport sector, comercial buildings sector, or the electricity transmission and distribution companies been left out of the initial purview?
“They have not been left out. We will keep adding to the list. All these designated consumers need to appoint energy managers. We don’t have enough of them. Even for these nine industries alone, we need 3000 managers while 2700 have passed the exam so far,” said Ajay Mathur, director general, BEE.
The notification has been issued in May this year and it is mandatory for the industries, he said, to comply.
The cut-off mark of energy consumption at an oil equivalent of 30,000 million tonnes is also seen as contrary to the objective of the Act. Conversion of electricity to oil equivalent confers an advantage on electricity consumers, says S K Sood.
But as Mathur explained, there are many factors that have to be considered. “The additional costs are high, especially for small companies. Many still do not have the means required.”
As to maintaining a list of accredited energy auditors, only a temporary list has been recommended. “There is much confusion on the qualification of energy auditors. On what basis was the exam conducted if now they are asking for additional experience of three years of audits,” asks Sood. The first exam was conducted by BEE in 2004 and since then four have been conducted, where 8000 candidates appeared and 4000 qualified.
The BEE shall grant temporary accreditation to energy auditing firms for a limited period up to three years and “not to individual auditors, since the quantum of work to be accomplished is complex and large and also requires sector specific expertise in the production process, utilities, thermal and electrical systems”, clarified Mathur.
The BEE is expected to suggest to government norms and energy consumption standards. This has not been done except for cement, pulp and paper. As to recommending particulars to be displayed on label of equipment, this has been done for frost free refrigerators and tube lights only. Dissemination of information is being done efficiently through its website. International cooperation programmes have also been started. National campaign on awareness, promoting R&D in energy efficiency have yet to take off.The objectives are laudable, but the achievements are a pointer to the fact that the BEE is, as the experts say, sorely short-staffed.There is much that can be achieved if the Act is acted upon.