Friday, March 28, 2008

The history , trends and the future of the power industry of

The history , trends and the future of the power industry of Srilanka
by Hasala Dharmawardena

Why cheap electrical energy ?

In this era of astounding development and unimaginable technological achievements, electrical energy has become a critical infrastructure for economic development and the improvement of the quality of life. Modern life is unimaginable without electricity. It lights houses, buildings, streets, provides domestic and industrial heat, and powers most equipment used in homes, offices and machinery in factories. In a poor country as ours availability of cheap electricity has become more a life and death struggle than a basic need for the common man . Improving access to electricity countrywide is a key factor in alleviating poverty. Our Nation's economic growth and prosperity depends on reliable, plentiful, and affordable electricity.

The economic and social aspects

The positive correlation of the gross domestic product(GDP) growth and the electricity consumption can be observed in any country which enjoys a high growth rate ( eg: India, China). Cheap electricity reduces the production cost of products thus making the products more competitive in foreign markets .This also gives a good leverage for the local producers against the foreign imports. Foreign investments will get attracted to our country due to low production costs. All this will create more jobs for our people. One new job created is said to feed four mouths. This will contribute to break the cycle of poverty at its very roots. Thus poverty will be alleviated .

On the other hand the repercussions are horribly disastrous if the electricity price goes sky high with respect to the buying power of a country. The production costs will increase exponentially, the local producers will lose their competitive edge, exports will decrease and foreign imports will flood the market. All this will result in closure of factories and relocation of investments of foreign and local investors to other countries. Unemployment will increase day by day. This will contribute to a more and more jobless, and hopeless common mass of people, fighting a great battle against poverty for their bare survival. The people will be more and more desperate .They will be seduced by evils such as robbing, murdering and peddling drugs etc. They will seek solace in self annihilating drugs and extremist political movements with the agenda of revolution through an armed struggle culminating in a blood bath of the whole country. These factors will contribute to the cycle of poverty and the degradation of the quality of life of our country. The country will start to fall to the “abyss” of anarchy and destruction.

Why is our electricity cost high

The Lakshapana complex supplied the initial power requirements of our country. Then the Mahaweli complex was implemented to supply the increasing demand due to the high rate of industrialization which occurred after 1977. All these were hydro power plants, so though they had a high cost for the infrastructure initially, they paid in the long run with a very low overall cost per unit. But after the construction of Samanalawewa hydro plant in 1992 , no major hydro power plant was constructed to counter the ever increasing energy demand. All the needed power was generated by new Thermal power plants which were constructed stage by stage from 1996 to the present time.

The energy generated from Oil has increased from 0% to ~60% within a short span of about 9 years.

The three thermal plants at Kelanitissa and Sapugaskanda run on auto-diesel, causing massive losses for the CEB daily. According to very conservative estimates, the Ceylon Electricity Board(CEB) incurs a loss of Rs. 17 on every unit produced at a cost of ~Rs. 25, which is in turn sold to the public at Rs. eight.
Auto diesel is not used by any developed or developing nation for power generation because of its high costs and unreliability of supply due to the volatile political situation in the Middle East. But sadly Srilanka may be the only non oil producing nation which relies on oil for power generation with a steadfast refusal for cheaper reliable fuels such as coal.

Fortunately the country has come to realize the great idioticy, and now coal power stations are being constructed with vigour . “Better late than never”

How to ensure a cheap diversified smooth flow of energy ?

Long term National policy

Though there was a long term policy on paper, called the “long term expansion plan” it was not implemented because of the half hearted approach of the policy makers and implementors due to law suits, political instability etc... They were not aware of the importance and they had shrugged off their responsibilities without thinking of the serious consequences the country will come to face in the future. Plans are, useless if they only exist in paper. They must be implemented with vigor by the relevant authorities. The plan should be rationalized as a national policy with a national consensus. This will ensure that it is carried on and implemented without hesitation, even if the governing political parties change. This is the procedure that we see in developed countries such as USA. If we have a practical long term policy then no haphazard decisions will be needed to taken in a hurry without proper protocol and procedure ( eg: for some combined cycle power plants the tender procedure was bypassed deviating from normal tender procedures). This will contribute to minimizing the corruption involved in such transactions.

Given the shortsighted way the policy implementors have worked there seems to be some hidden arm, with a hidden agenda working to instabilize our country and reap great profits, by using our energy instability. These organisations(mafia) and individuals should be identified and dealt with accordingly.

The proposed Norochcholai power plant was delayed from 1996 to 2006. According to Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya “ Norochcholai delay costs 84 million rupees per day , Protesters and NGO s, and perhaps some prospective power plant suppliers too, are doing their best to force further delays on these vital power plants. “ This estimate was done in 2006 now after two years this would have passed the 130 million mark. This money would have been better spent on development projects, but the country (the common peasant) will now have to pay a huge price for this, as the delay was not one day but ten long years. The monetary loss will top the 480 billion mark, but the effect it will have on our country will not be measurable using monetary terms, as the socialistic degradation will be devastating.

The path to self sufficiency in energy

Be it oil or coal we will have to rely on other countries for fuel. Given the importance of energy to a country, we must try to minimize our reliance on other countries.

That is why research is of paramount importance if we are to think of a future of self-reliance in energy. The research should be aimed at finding energy sources which are suitable to Srilanka. More money should be invested on research. The government must engage the universities and undergraduates to do research to find a viable solution from within our country rather than reaching for foreign experts, who more or less try to fool our officials to implement infeasible projects to extract huge sums of money for the so called “expertise”.

The question is that, those “experts” always propose “novel” schemes which even their countries have not implemented due to infeasibility. These hawks try to put those ideas to our officials and do their utmost to fool our officials to implement these projects, whose practicability has not even been proven in the lab. We must keep in mind, that over two thousand years ago our engineers made Dams with a technology , unimaginably sophisticated even by todays standard. That creativity of our ancestors runs deep in our blood. We must never forget the fact that we had engineers like D.J. Wimalasurendra.

The undergraduates, and alumni are willing, with fresh ideas, to help our nation find a solution and be self sufficient in our energy demands, but unfortunately the relevant authorities are not realizing the potential they have. Instead of relying on so called “foreign experts” and wasting money for totally useless feasibility surveys, they should give that money to the local engineers and universities if they are really sincere in their efforts.

Unfortunately The technical universities are underfunded with the quality of education decreasing year by year due to insufficient funds for research and education. The government as well as the private sector must understand the importance of funding the undergrads and putting up new infrastructure and facilities. That is essential for the development our energy industry. That itself is a huge investment, with great profits, contributing towards Energy self sufficiency of our country.

We must also recognize the importance of finding a solution which is suitable to our country, rather than trying to customize solutions found out in other developed countries such as USA and Japan. We being a third world poor country, do not have the same resources, capital and money, as is applied to those countries.

We must try to implement an open energy market to bring a more robust and reliable energy supply. In the long run the local investors must also be given a chance to fund the projects to keep the industry competitive and healthy.

Why coal to fuel the Thermal power stations ?

Other resources like crude oil, coal bed methane, renewable energy sources etc. are meagre and not capable of catering to our energy requirements in the long run. Gas and crude oil prices are volatile in the international market and coal import is a much cheaper option than import of oil and gas , especially in a country like Srilanka which has world class ports and coastal locations . According to experts , coal is likely to remain main fuel in the world for energy generation till 2031-32.

Though there are powerful groups lobbying against coal power in our country, coal is one of the world’s most important sources of energy, fuelling almost 40% of electricity worldwide. In many countries this figure is much higher: Poland relies on coal for over 94% of its electricity; South Africa for 92%; China for 77%; and Australia for 76%. Also coal has been the world’s fastest growing energy source in recent years – faster than gas ,nuclear, hydro and renewable or oil .

Also as minimizing the risk of disruption to our energy supplies is becoming ever more important (with ever increasing conflicts in oil producing countries , oil is becoming a risky commodity) we need to get rid of our addiction to oil as a fuel for thermal power generation.

Though coal remains the world’s most abundant, safe and secure form of energy, the public's perception of coal-fired power plant is not favorable due to misconceptions. The coal industry is much older than many other energy industries. For many, coal still conjures up belching chimney stacks and smogs. Though the industry has made considerable improvements in cleanliness, efficiency and safety over the past forty years, the public is not aware of these improvements in environmental and social performance. Even UK is reverting back to coal for power generation. They recently passed a bill to construct a large number of new coal fired power stations. They heeded the warnings of their experts.

The future

The view of the past is now blurred, but by contemplating the past and correcting the mistakes, we will be able to think about a bright future. By this time the policy makers have put in to motion, the policies that lay dormant in paper for years. This is the beginning of a new horizon in the power sector of our country, which brings a bright ray of hope to a otherwise dark sky.

Friday, March 7, 2008


hi guys,
I am hasala dharmawardena an Electrical Engineering Undergraduate of University Of Moratuwa.

I believe that we professionals and intellectuals must stand up and put a stop to the social discrimination, bribery and corruption which is presently rampant in developing countries like sri lanka.

All comments are well come

power crisis Sri lanka

CEB says no tariff increase early in 2004

By Munza Mushtaq
Amidst claims by senior Ceylon Electricity Board officials and unions of a possible tariff hike, the board's chairman M. Zubair has assured that it will not impose a hike nor is it even contemplating imposing a price increase early next year.

Referring to the Daily Mirror's lead story, "CEB mulls shocking move", the chairman, in a press release, also stated that the impression created by the story and its headline is that electricity consumers will be subjected to a great deal of hardship and unbearable financial burden.

The Daily Mirror, however, did not confirm the tariff hike but only reported a possible one, due to several funding institutions requesting regular tariff revisions. The CEB has not denied this part of the story which was reported in Monday's lead story.

Even though the CEB in its reply has claimed that the present overdraft of the CEB is well below Rs. 3 billion, sources point out that the board is only taking into consideration the bank overdrafts but has forgotten to mention the long term loans which have been given from the Treasury for certain power projects.

The chairman has also said that 80% of the electricity consumers in the domestic category in Sri Lanka pay well below Rs. 15 per unit.

The CEB has reiterated that it is conscious of its duty by the nation and will not be forced into hasty decisions regarding the tariff or any other relevant matter. Power and Energy Minister Karu Jayasuriya has also stated that no price increase on the current tariff for electricity will be imposed.

Mr. Zubair said that Minister Jayasuriya has advised CEB officials to study the possibility of reducing the unit cost of electricity in order to lessen the financial burden on consumers.

Meanwhile Mr. Zubair also told the Daily Mirror yesterday that even though there is no plan to impose a tariff hike, a request has been made to the government to let the CEB revert hotels to the commercial category.

"At present we charge hotels the industrial tariff rate, but now with the hotel industry picking up, we have made a representation to the government to let us charge the hotels the usual commercial tariff," he said.

The press release issued by the CEB states:

"The attention of the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) has been drawn to the front page lead story of the Daily Mirror of Monday 22nd December, 2003. The 'story' is strewn with many inaccuracies and false statements. The impression created by this story and its headline is that the consumers of electricity will be subject to a great deal of hardship and unbearable financial burden. The CEB categorically denies that it will impose a 'hike' early next year or even contemplate such an increase.

"The CEB regrets that a responsible national newspaper resorts to innuendo and unsubstantiated statements to unnecessarily cause disquiet in a large part of the country's population. The only person identified in the article is Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya who is quoted as saying 'Currently users of more than 180 units pay Rs. 15 per unit'. Eighty percent of the electricity consumers in the domestic category in Sri Lanka pay well below Rs. 15 per unit. Totally incorrect statements about the CEB's overdraft facility have been made in the story. The correct position is that the present overdraft facility of the CEB is well below Rs. 3 billion. It should be borne in mind that the CEB's monthly turnover is about Rs. 4 billion.

"It is unfortunate that a recognized correspondent of the Daily Mirror has not taken the trouble to clarify the facts from responsible officials of the CEB, before launching on this highly speculative, damaging and insulting story.

"The Chairman and the senior officials of the CEB are always available at any time of the day or night to answer questions, whether they be from newspaper personnel or individual customers of the CEB.

"The CEB reiterates that it is conscious of its duty by the nation and will not be stampeded into hasty decisions regarding the tariff or any other relevant matter. Minister of Power and Energy Karu Jayasuriya also states that no price increase on the current tariff for electricity will be imposed. In fact he has advised the officials of the CEB to study the possibility of reducing the unit cost of electricity in order to lessen the financial burden on consumers."

ceylon electricity board


MP John Amaratunge, Chairman of COPE, has said that CEB officials from its Chairman downwards have acted irresponsibly. This has resulted in numerous instances of waste, corruption and mismanagement. Gross malpractices on the awarding of tenders, pressurising of the tender board, delays in payments winning tenders and payment of millions of rupees without Cabinet approval are only a few of the CEB faulty management. But, what beats everyone is as to why the Minister in charge of the CEB remained deaf and blind while this public institution ran into rack and ruin. If the Ministry of Power and Energy did proper monitoring and checks and balances, this sad situation could have been prevented. Of what use is a government and representative of the public maintained at great public expense, if they cannot manage public institutions?

power production in srilanka

Reason for power cuts: Low rainfall or breakdown and delay of power plants

by Hemantha Withanage
Executive Director,
Environmental Foundation Ltd.
We refer to Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya’s article ‘Low Rainfall not the reason for power cuts’ that appeared in the ‘The Island’ of 21st August 2001 wherein he has accused Environmental Foundation Limited for obstructing the construction of power plants. While thanking Dr. Siyambalapitiya for updating the reasons for power cuts, we wish to place before the public the actual facts and relevant data about the power crisis.

We agree with Dr. Siyambalapitiya who correctly pointed out that low rainfall is not the reason for the present power cut. According to our information a 150 MW fiat power plant at Kelanitissa is not operating due to a recent breakdown. Also another 2 x 20 MW power plant is not in operation at Kelanitissa.

The total energy capacity lost due to these breakdowns is 190MW, which is about 75 per cent of the present shortage (according to Dr. Siyabalapitiya’s calculation).

Even though the CEB has promoted private fossil fuel power plants since 1996 everybody was aware that they failed due to the tender procedure and not because of the environmental lobby. Also, everybody was aware that the Aggriko was trying to use the electricity crisis to sign an agreement with the CEB to provide a unit for Rs. 13.50 even after getting free fuel. People are also aware that corruption led the CEB to interdict a few officers.

The Japanese OECF power plant and the AES Kelanitissa with a combined capacity of 300MW were also supposed to generate electricity by year 2000 but were delayed due to tender problems.

It is also a well known fact that the CEB will be the first as set to be privatised in the next privatisation wave under the IMF agreement and it has been deliberately bankrupted since 1996 to justify the privatisation.

Therefore Dr. Siyambalapitiya’s accusation cannot only be directed to the Bishop and Environmental Foundation but must encompass the CEB planners as well.

Further more, even if Upper Kotmale was not opposed by EFL on feasibility grounds it would have generated electricity only by year 2004 and the first phase of the coal power plant was supposed to generate electricity by year 2002.

Therefore it is too early for Dr. Siyambalapitiya to blame EFL and the Bishop for the present electricity crisis.

Though some people (including Dr. Siyambalapitiya) believe that coal is the cheapest source for electrical generation, recent studies have shown that natural gas is the best and cheapest.

In the face of the Kyoto Protocol negotiations, the green house gas emissions will be restricted soon. Therefore the coal industry is already losing its markets in developed countries.

Power Plant Lost Capacity Reason

Fiat power plant 150 Breakdown

Kelanitissa 2 x 20 Breakdown

OECF plant 150 Delay in construction

AES Kelanitissa 150 Delay in construction

Total 490

Therefore coal producers are now looking for developing countries who are still allowed to generate green house gases. Certain people who promote the coal power generation are the local agents for this new market. Australian Clean Coal Institute is one such entity, which looks for new markets in Sri Lanka and other third world countries.

However natural gas is becoming the world’s no 1 fossil fuel for generating electricity. Unfortunately, the Ceylon Electricity Board has so far not realised this.

Sri Lanka’s energy crisis is not the electricity crisis we face today. It is a very minor issue when compared to the lack of electricity for more than 50 per cent of the population.

They have no electricity from the national grid or from any other source. The real energy crisis is the mis-management of the entire energy sector.

In a real situation, biomass, fossil fuel and hydropower account for 70%, 25% and 5% of the energy respectively. Although this is the case, when compared with the efficiencies, they respectively give 38%, 25% and 37% of the energy. This does not contain solar energy, which is used for drying material (food and other stuff), use of gravity such as in the case of water distribution, use of animals in farming, transport etc.

Comparative analysis of various needs and the sources for such needs

Source: The Energy Crisis and solutions, Asoka Abayagunawardena

Cooking is again mostly dependent on biomass. Except in forest areas and some parts of the dry zone, firewood comes from the surroundings. Eighty per cent of the firewood normally comes from the surrounding.

Coconut 28%

Rubber tree 18%

Forest 20-25%

Home gardens 28-33%

This means that the biomass is still not a burden to the forests in Sri Lanka except in the dry zone. Therefore it does not play a major political role such as fossil fuel and electricity.

Industries also mainly use biomass (about 70%) for their energy needs. Only 30% of the industries use electricity for their energy. They are also newly introduced industries.

Tea Factories 33%

Small Hotels 15%

Brick and tile factories 13%

Coconut industry 11%

Tobacco industry 10%

Bakery 8%

Rubber Industry 6%

Other 4%

source: The Energy Crisis and solutions, Asoka Abayagunawardena

Sixty five percent of the people still use kerosene for lighting purposes.

In most rural households only a TV and a few bulbs consume electricity. However only 30% of the generated electricity goes to the households. Another 30% goes to the commercial sector and the Industrial sector gets another 40%. About 50% of the households in Sri Lanka get electricity and out of that 70% of the people use electricity only for lighting. Seventy percent of the energy distributed to the households is consumed by 10% of the population. A rural household consumes only 40 units per month and a semi urban household consume 81 units and an urban household consume 104 units per month. This shows the unequal consumption due to unequal distribution of electricity.

This shows that Sri Lanka has forgotten most of the energy sources in the energy crisis. When solving the energy crisis electricity will play a major role but electricity is not the only solution.

However, the present priority of the CEB is coal in solving the electricity crisis. The recent thermal projects are the second priority. Unfortunately, natural gas or renewables are not in the CEB list.

In the coal vs natural gas debate their argument is that the unit cost of natural gas is higher than coal. Here they do not consider the environmental cost of coal.

The unit price of hydro is always cheap. Coal comes next. However, when considering the environmental pollution, coal will be more expensive than wind, solar and natural gas.

Though there is a lobby of Dr. Siyambalapitiya for Coal within the CEB, unfortunately natural gas lacks such a lobby. The high commission paid by the coal producers may be the reason for such a lobby.

Dr. Siyambalapitiya vehemently accused Environmental Foundation Ltd for blocking energy projects, which is not at all correct. If EFL is so powerful, people will not face these environmental problems today. EFL is a non-profit, public interest law group working for the conservation for the environment. Any success of EFL is the success of the Sri Lankan public.

EFL was not against using coal as a source but was against the construction of a coal power plant in Trincomalee on environmental grounds. The National Aquatic Resources Agency and many other environmentally concerned groups were also against this project. EFL took the CEB to courts regarding the approval process of Norochcholai and it is the CEB which stated that it did not wish to proceed with the Norochcholai coal power plant and would be looking for an alternative site.

It stated that they would not locate this plant as Norocchcholai due to the cabinet decision, which we never asked for.

Our only request was that the Central Environmental Authority be appointed as the Project Approving Agency because it has the capacity for monitoring. We stated that the Coast Conservation Department or the North-Western Provincial Environmental Authority has no capacity to monitor the project.

A coal power plant with a 900 MW capacity can be very highly polluting if no proper control measures are taken. The air pollution, water pollution, soil pollution, ash dumping and release of hot water, are serious environmental hazards from a coal plant. Can anybody say that asking for better monitoring and control is not important?

The facts on Upper Kotmale given by Dr. Siyambalapitiya are totally incorrect and misleading. The project was rejected twice by the Central Environmental Authority and once by the Secretary to the Ministry of Environment in an appeal filed by the CEB. Another Secretary approved it in 1998 due to political pressure without any public hearing. EFL filed a case against this decision and the secretary agreed to hear the case and it was settled. But that was not a public hearing. After the hearing the project was again approved. The approval stated that a hydrological study should be done and that a monitoring committee be appointed. Now the monitoring committee is functioning and soon you will see a reduction in the seven waterfalls, including St. Clair and Devon.

We are a public interest organisation and we fought for the rights of the present and future generations. The present generation in the name of development does not have the right to destroy the natural heritage.

Although Dr. Siyamabalapitiya cannot understand the present electricity crisis he does not admit it.

If there is no governance issue, there will be no corruption in the CEB and an electricty crisis will not occur.

Unfortunately, bad tender procedure, purchasing of power at a higher rate and mass scale corruption destroyed the savings of the CEB and all these were done to pave the way of privatisation. The present electricity crisis is a creation of the CEB’s decision makers and neither the public nor the NGOs can be blamed for such actions.

The environmental impacts due to Norochcholai and Upper Kotmale were not considered at the planning stage. When Upper Kotmale project is implemented, the negative environmental impacts about which we protested will be seen.

However, if Dr. Siyamabalapitiya is successful in convincing the decision makers, people can experience the impacts of a coal plant.

However, we still have to consider whether we need a natural gas power plant, which is more environmentally and economically sound. We also have potential for renewable sources such as a small hydro of 180 MW. These schemes can supply the electricity need of 53 per cent of the population who are not connected to the national grid and who have no power cuts at present. The discrimination today is not the power cut of 2 1/2 hours but the power cut forever. Can Dr. Siyamabalapitiya provide electricity to those people even if Norochocholai and Upper Kotmale are implemented?

The implementation of present proposals will only increase the consumption of the existing users and do no justice to the majority which has to sacrifice its natural heritage and face environmental pollution. Can Dr. Siyamabalapitiya and CEB do justice to them?

Oil Mafia - 4

Need for timely decisions on power projects
By Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya
(These are extracts of a presentation make at a recent seminar on the power crisis).

The process of making decisions on new projects to generate electricity is most unnecessarily politicised in Sri Lanka. Even within the presently established rules, the Ceylon Electricity Board Act No.17 of 1969 says in Article 11(2),
".... It shall be the duty of the Board...
(c) to generate or acquire supplies of electricity.
(d) to construct, maintain and operate the necessary works for the generation of electricity by all means..."
However, what is seen in our electricity sector repeatedly are the following symptoms:

(1) Appointing various committees to oversee or co-ordinate the function of generation of electricity, while the accountability still appears to remain with CEB. Between 1992 and 2001, the mechanism of undermining the decisions on generation projects was known as the "Power Committee". Presently the mechanism of making decisions which should be made by the CEB and the Ministry of Power and Energy is known as the "Power Supply Committee".

(2) The Board of Directors of CEB keep watching passively when their functions are being taken-over by other ad-hoc committees, who are probably not accountable to the financial and technical consequences of such decisions. In simple terms, in the case of future power crises, such Committees will fade away with all parties refusing to assume responsibility.

(3) Politicians make decisions (or appear to be making decisions) on the size, capacity, location and fuel types used in power plants, usually different from what is required for the system.

(4) Politicians decide when and how the electricity prices should be adjusted, or increased. Presently, as a result of non-implementation of the new generation projects on time, the production and delivery cost of electricity is averaging around 8 Rs/kWh. The present average selling price is 5.60 Rs/kWh. Price increases to match these costs too are blocked by the political establishment.

Cost of decisions
There is no better method to examine the importance of timely decisions on generation projects, than to examine how the demand for electricity was to be served today, in year 2002 in the plans prepared ten years ago, and what happened to the decisions on each project. We will then examine the decisions required to be made today to meet the demand over the next ten years.

The two major projects in the plan of 1991 (Mawella and Trincomalee) were not implemented by the decision-makers. As it can be seen, even with non-implementation of the plan, the generating system still has surplus capacity, but the surplus is inadequate to:
(a) Meet the demand in a dry year.
(b) Allow for the outage of the largest generator and to allow for typical forced (i.e. unexpected) outages of other generators.

For the Sri Lankan hydrothermal system to operate comfortably, repeated assessments indicate that a capacity surplus of about 500 MW is required in the generating system, by way of thermal power plants. This surplus is presently not available, which is the reason for the capacity crisis in the generating system. This surplus capacity is not available because decisions were not taken on time and/or because wrong decisions were made.

Let us consider one example of a decision, not made on time. Following the suspension of the Mawella project by the president in 1991, against all technical advice specifically on the costs of the delay, the Ministry of Planning shifted the site to Puttalam. That single decision is presently causing the losses to the electricity customer.

The long-term plan published seven years ago (in 1994), specified that the Upper Kotmale hydroelectric project should be operational by year 2001. The feasibility study for the project was completed by 1995, and a six-year construction schedule was feasible. The conceptual design of the project was challenged in a court action by Environmental Foundation Limited (an environment NGO), and has been recently approved for implementation, exactly on the original concept of 1995.

The clear sequence of events that caused CEB to enter a permanent financial crisis is as follows:
- Indecision on power plant projects caused a capacity shortage in the system
- Government and the CEB resorted to expensive thermal generation
- Government was unwilling to pass the high costs of expensive thermal generation to customers
- CEB goes bankrupt owing to high costs of generation
- CEB cannot raise any more finances for new generation projects owing to financial status.

The crisis in the power sector can be solved only with a series of decisions. Each decision is important and urgent. All decisions must be made immediately and simultaneously. These decisions are not mutually exclusive. They compliment each other, to ensure Sri Lanka;
(a) has no more blackouts in the future,
(b) provides electricity to the customers at the lowest possible cost,
(c) the fuel mix in electricity generation will be broad-based for security against supply constraints and price increases.

The viability of the use of coal for electricity generation in Sri Lanka and its contribution to hold electricity price low, has been established. However, there is a misconception that Sri Lanka needs only one coal-fired power plant, and that the debate is about finding a site for the coal plant. The optimal plan for the expansion of generation presently requires:

(a) The first coal power plant to be developed immediately, to produce electricity from January 2008. (It requires a total of six years to finance and build the power plant).

(b) The second coal power plant to be developed to produce electricity from January 2013.

(c) The third coal power plant to be developed to produce electricity from January 2016.

This development plan will support a GDP growth of 5% per year. If the economy accelerates further, the start-up dates should be advanced.

Therefore, the issue is that Sri Lanka needs to develop and produce electricity from three coal-fired power plants over the next fifteen vears, each rated nominally at 900 MW.

The actual decision to build a coal-fired power plant is now late by about fifteen years. This grave error and injustice to our economy and the society must be corrected now, without any further delay. Presently there is concern about four sites for coal power development.

Based on the status of sites and financing realities, it is inevitable that decisions should be made in the following manner, to ensure that coal power is added to the system as soon as possible. All projects have their strengths and weaknesses, and the underlying principle should be to add coal power to the system as soon as possible, through a secure financial package.

Decision 1: Immediate decision to implement Puttalam (Norochcholai) Coal-fired Power Plant to ensure that electricity can be produced from January 2008. Phase 1 must be implemented with Government participation to avoid delays in securing finances.

Concerns about the Norochcholai project
While several teams of international consultants have established that coal can be delivered to the site via a jetty or a barge transfer system, several individuals have expressed concern about the practical limitations of both options. This issue can only be resolved by calling for bids to deliver coal to the power plant, where the coal supplier would design and develop the delivery system, and the price will be known at the time of bidding. If the project overall economics do not fall within acceptable limits, bids should be rejected. The acceptable limits should be defined prior to the calling for bids.

Decision 2: Immediately confirm the siting area for the second coal-fired power plant, and complete the feasibility study and the EIA process. Complete this process not later than March 2004. Ensure construction begins no later than January 2005. The second coal-fired power plant should be producing electricity not later than January 2012.

The major issues to be considered in deciding on the siting area of the second coal-fired power plant are;
(1) Availability of coastal land and relocation issues.
(2) Coal unloading facilities.
(3) The site should be acceptable to prospective financiers, both state and commercial.
(4) If decided as an IPP, developers should be provided with a clear site.
(5) Should match with other infrastructure development plans of the government.
power plants
Decision 3: Expedite the implementation of the Upper Kotmale hydroelectric project with vigorous action to establish the staff, select contractors, finalise the design and proceed with construction.

The decision to proceed with the project was recently taken, six years behind schedule. The delay of the project is causing a loss of an average of 1.5 GWh/day, presently causing an expenditure of at least Rs. 6 million per day for fuel. The project is expected to cost about Rs. 27,000 million, and will save at least 1000 tons (typically 2000) of sulphur per year, presently released to Colombo air as Sulphur Dioxide.

Decision 4: Immediately review the status of Uma Oya and Broadlands Hydroelectric projects, and decide within six months. Uma Oya requires a decision about diversion Vs in-stream development. Broadlands requires finances, including a possible Government-private partnership.

Although coal power plants are essential to establish fuel diversity, fuel security and to stop the increase of electricity prices, it is unrealistic to expect coal power plants to be available before 2006, but typically 2008.

Therefore, interim power plants have to be established to ensure adequate supplies are available to meet the growth in demand.

Decision 5: Expedite the work to establish the Kerawalapitiya Power Plant, to be operational not later than January 2005.

The establishment of this power plant, which will operate on diesel, was required owing to the continuing delay in the decision to proceed with the Puttalam (Norochcholai) coal-fired power plant.

The decision to proceed with the project was recently made, two years behind schedule.

The project was required to produce electricity from January 2004, which is no longer realistic.

Decision 6: Calculate the new generation capacity requirements (these are already available in CEB planning documents) between now and 2005, and immediately establish emergency capacity to meet the demand.

The investment commitment for any coal-fired power plant out of the three sites (Puttalam, Trincomalee and Hambantota) will be about US $400 million for Phase 1.
For a BOT project in Sri Lanka, this will be the first such large investment. The currently largest BOT project in the power sector is estimated to have cost about US $100 million, which required about two years for financing and a larger portion of that being finally provided by the ADB. In fact, the delay of this BOT project caused the decision-makers to delay decisions of another similar project for which financing was available, and caused both projects to be delayed, which is the cause of the present power crisis.

Decisions on major power plants cannot be delayed. The costs of indecision are usually several thousand million rupees per year per power plant. All major decisions must be made simultaneously, and vigorously implemented with dedicated staff.

Three coal-fired power plants are required for development until 2016 to support a GDP growth of 5% and to ensure electricity price stabilise around 7.50 Rs/kWh.

Oil Mafia - disguised in environmental protection


A reply to Dr.T. Siyambalapitiya —
Electricity Crisis and the Environmental Foundation

By Ravi Algama,
Chairman, Environmental Foundation Ltd
Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya has, through a number of articles, accused Environmental Foundation Ltd. (EFL), of causing the blockage of most power projects in this country. According to him it is at our dictates that these projects are halted. He credits us with such power. How easy it would be for environmentalists, if things were that simple. His favourite example is the Upper Kotmale Hydropower Project (UKHP). What Dr. Siyambalapitiya conveniently omits to mention in all his one-sided articles is the fact that this project was THRICE REJECTED by the government authorities themselves, as upon evaluation it was found that its disadvantages far outweighed the benefits.

Furthermore, it is interesting that Dr. Siyambalapitiya keeps increasing the capacity of UKHP with each new article. Perhaps if he keeps energetically at his writing, UKHP will be able to provide electricity to the whole island!

It is true that EFL made various submissions against the UKHP (Readers may be aware that the thrice rejected UKHP was finally approved through an appeal made by the CEB to the Secretary to the Ministry of Environment). In this debate EFL represented the interest of the VOICELESS PUBLIC. Many people in Sri Lanka as well as foreign tourists were concerned about this project because they want to continue to view the beauty of the waterfalls and to save these natural assets for the benefit of future generations. Tourism brings in (or used to, at the time) a large percentage of foreign exchange to the country.

We would like to address the other concerns of Dr. Siyambalapitiya who unfortunately seems to see every thing in Rupees, Cents and Giga watt-hours. We would suggest that engineers like Dr S. should learn to respect social values, not merely in terms of money. He is so caught up in this web of profit and loss that he actually suggests that we block power projects for "whatever benefits to us". He should know that while EFL as a public interest institution has nothing to lose or gain, yet the people of Sri Lanka will soon lose forever, the beauty of waterfalls such as Devon and St. Clair’s. The future generations including the children of the CEB engineers and former C.E.B. engineers such as Dr Siyambalapitiya will never know such beauty.

We believe that the present generation cannot be denied the right to this beauty. This is especially unfair when this beauty is to be sacrificed for a relatively ineffective project, which definitely would not solve the power crisis in Sri Lanka.

EFL is happy about our efforts to protect our waterfalls. Although Dr S. does not accept EFL’s protests, the project proponents have made several changes to the project as a direct result of our intervention. Originally it was supposed to destroy 7 waterfalls but now there will be a water release. Originally there was no hydrological plan and resettlement plan; this has now changed. That EFL has been invited to the Monitoring committee is another achievement of the public. The Ceylon Tourist Board too has started showing their interest in keeping the beauty of the waterfalls. This is a good intervention and we believe that many other agencies should join them.

Also there will be a monitoring plan and the funding agencies, approval agencies, construction companies and also the public became very concerned about the project due to the intervention of the EFL. Therefore, we would dismiss Dr Siyambalapitiya’s baseless allegations against EFL as just a spiteful outpouring of pent-up feelings.

Despite the foregoing, Dr Siyambalapitiya still maintains that we have not gained anything. That would mean all the promises in this process which were given during the hearing and in the order of the Appeal and in the monitoring committee (the Readers’ attention is also invited to the article written by Shavindranath Fernando of the CEB "Japanese tax money to save Sri Lanka’s Heritage" in the Island of 26th February 2001) seem to be lies of the CEB. We believe that the CEB should inform the public of their plans to protect the beauty of the waterfalls because they assured that they will not harm the beauty of the waterfalls in power generation. This was the main reason for EFL’s participation on the monitoring committee.

As Her Excellency the President rightly pointed out during the discussions on the CEB crisis about two months back, these projects bring money from Japan (which is Japanese tax money, which we pay back from our taxes and therefore have all the right to raise our voice when we see it going in the wrong direction) and other sources for the C.E.B. to continue its malpractices and bribes. It is the CEB officers who should get the blame for BANKRUPTING the C.E.B., paving the path for privatisation and for the CEB crisis including increasing of the price of electricity for other consumers whilst not recovering payments from major government users/institutions).

The Electricity Crisis is part and parcel of this CEB crisis. The so-called CEB long-term generation plan is not a practical document at all. That gives only the "dreams" of the CEB Engineers and such documents are baseless since they have no understanding of the real ENERGY CRISIS in the country.

However, contrary to the picture painted by Dr S., the UKHP is not the only project which was delayed in the pipeline of the CEB projects. Two 150 MW power plants, which got the approval in 1996 and 1997, have still not been started due to the problems of TENDER PROCEDURE. Therefore even if the approval was granted in time, there is no guarantee that the power plant will be operated on time.

Even of the CEB had carried out the UKHP (530 GWh) this is not clean energy and not even cheap as Dr Siyambalapitiya believes. Dr Siyambalaptiya does not consider the cost of the land, cost of the beauty, cost of the erosion, cost of upsetting the social structure, cost of re-settling people, but pretends that hydropower is cheap. This is simply not true. Although we do not include these costs into the bills, we will somehow have to pay for them.

We have never advocated establishing the so-called diesel or oil power plants. Those are the decisions of the CEB at the cost of the environment and poor consumers. As Her Excellency the President openly pointed out recently, these projects are involved in bribes and the CEB is reeking with corruption. The project money only allows CEB officials to buy new luxury vehicles, put up luxury holiday bungalows and pay themselves luxury salaries.

It is far better to remove the silt from the lower Kotmale than constructing a new Upper Kotmale. Lower Kotmale has already lost about 40% of the capacity and Victoria about 25% of the capacity. Unfortunately, the CEB has no money for dredging but they have money for new projects such as UKHP as well as for carpeting their luxury office rooms.

Also even if the CEB produces extra electricity using newly introduced diesel generators, that does not contribute to development as that is the energy used by the 10% of the energy consumers in Sri Lanka to maintain their luxury life style. So far the CEB has not provided electricity to 42 % of the households in the country, representing more than the 50% of the population. If we see that generation of more and more power for the consumption of less than half of the population why should the other half suffer from electricity related problems. This points not to lack of power generation but to the inequity of distribution

Although the CEB engineers do not heed our opinions, we have always advocated the increase of efficiency, reduction of transmission and other technical losses (which are more than 25% of the generation) generation of more environmentally sound energy through renewable sources, equitable distribution, and provision of electricity to the people in the rural areas through small renewable power generation units, bio gas, micro hydro etc.

Also we submit that electricity is not the only energy source. The use of biomass is still the major source of energy in Sri Lanka although we do not have such an Agency to look after energy in general. The CEB’s monopoly over energy generation does not mean that electricity is the only source for energy. Unfortunately we have no energy policy in Sri Lanka.

Dr Siyambalapitiya again gives an exaggerated figure on the release of sulphur dioxide to the air but strangely on the other hand, supports coal, which contains very high sulphur levels. If he is very concerned about sulphur he should promote Natural gas and not coal power. But we cannot expect him to do so due to his vested interest, being employed as a Consultant in the coal sector. His allegations against EFL are therefore just to demoralise the organisation and environmentalists in general.

Readers should understand that EFL is not the decision maker in these projects. Any toxic gas emission, delaying or cancellation of projects etc. is the responsibility of the CEB. EFL can only protect the public interest and their rights in the decision making process. That is how the democratic system works. If EFL has fought and won issues on a legal basis, that is because justice was on our side, and not because of any benefit to us, as Dr Siyambalapitiya alleges. On the other hand, it is almost amusing to see how those who have lost such benefits, use the media to give vent to their frustrations.

Oil Mafia - 3

The urgent need for alternate energy sources

Fuel subsidies it is argued discourage the entry of renewables into existing markets

By Dilrukshi Handunnetti

With increasing energy consumption the world over calling for policy initiatives to switch from fossil fuel based energy resources to renewables largely to save this planet from threatening carbon emissions, Sri Lanka’s commitment to exploring alternative energy sources remains a low priority.

With some two billion people in the developing states expected to benefit if the world undertakes a serious renewable energy drive, despite standing to benefit, Sri Lanka’s focus is on dealing with an impending power crisis.

At present, there are some 3.3 million grid connected households with the energy demand growing at an annual rate of 8%.

According to Chairman, Central Environmental Authority (CEA), Udaya Gammanpila, "It is about policy, programmes and commitment to improving the ecological status of the world." "Wherever renewables have been successful, the state policy has been supportive," he says.

Situation in Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka however does not view renewables as a viable option for base load supply or for efficient supply mechanisms. It is largely the "consciousness" about green energy that makes the island encourage private sector development of alternative energy.

According to energy expert Tilak Siyambalapitiya, renewables could best serve rural consumers through small-scale community based projects.

Though the developed world is making serious commitments to generate 10% of their entire power supply with renewables, detractors argue that fossil fuel resources will be the cheapest source of clean energy for the next century.

The policy so far, according to Power and Energy Minister John Seneviratne, has been a state commitment to clean energy by encouraging private sector investment in Build, Operate and Own (BOO) and Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) clean energy initiatives. "For renewable projects, unsolicited proposals were accepted," he explained.

The renewable thrust goes back to 2002 when some importance was attached to this as a "green conscious" step. In the government’s policy statement on ‘Economic and Social Objectives of the Power Sector Restructuring 2002,’ it was stated that Sri Lanka wished to reduce dependence on imported energy, supported energy diversification and the optimisation of indigenous energy resources such as hydro electricity, biomass, wind, solar etc.

Economical means

"Renewable energy has been now accepted as an economical means of supplying rural areas with electricity. The initial cost of generation and installation of grids in villages may cost, but on the long term, they could produce power at a lower rate," noted energy expert Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya.

In Sri Lanka, the most popular source of alternative energy is solar, though it is wind power that is now receiving state patronage in a big way.

A consumer purchasing a solar home system should pay the full cost up front at present but the savings from fuel costs come only later. By contrast, a consumer connected to the grid does not bear the generation or grid installation costs as they are borne by the government or spread over a large number of consumers.

"To popularise, initially, a policy of aggressively supporting renewables is a must. But after about 20 years, it will be the more overall economic solution," adds Siyambalapitiya.

According to the Energy Managers of Sri Lanka (EMSL), fossil fuels for transport are heavily taxed, both at the point of production and heavily at the point of consumption in most countries. "It will only require some adjustments in policies and subsidies to give renewable energy a significant boost," argues Siyambalapitiya.

"In the long run, costs could be brought down and renewable energy would become the natural choice in developing countries, whether on or off grid," he says.

Commercial popularisation

Yet for countries like Sri Lanka, grappling with an impending power crisis and shifting to coal based energy to seek urgent solutions, it is difficult to think green.

According to Minister Seneviratne, the state should create opportunities for renewables. Further, there should be commercial popularisation after the initial introduction, as it happened with the solar PV systems, he says.

However, he believes that despite heavy lobbying, renewable energy technologies have failed to merge as a prominent component of the energy sector here and elsewhere.

"For the developed states, the story is different. They already have the technology and capital. They only need the political will to make a commitment to generate a sizeable amount of energy through renewables which is a policy concern," he says.

Developing states have as yet, made very little investment in the renewable energy sector. By 2020, the world power generation capacity is expected to reach 5915 gigawatts (GW) but it has benefited just one alternative energy source — wind which has become one of the fastest growing energy sources post 1990.

The biggest obstacle in the way of renewable technologies is low fossil fuel prices. Next is the fuel subsidies that discourage the entry of renewables into existing markets. There is also little research and development on alternative energy.

"Creating conducive economic conditions is a must. Renewables can sway markets with government support. In the long run, they can also lead to much lower energy investments compared to fossil fuels," notes Tilak Siyambalapitiya.

According to case studies conducted by the UN, Sri Lankan projects have demonstrated the initial viability of a ‘micro finance model’ in which solar home systems have fared well.

Government assistance lacking

Then again, private establishments like Sarvodaya have championed the cause of solar energy on their own steam. There has been no government assistance in subsidising or popularising the concept.

In 2000, the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) undertook to complete a national survey on the availability of commercial biomass, mini hydro potential and the wind regimes, and popularise the use of renewables such as solar PV systems, micro hydro systems and wind farms. The other undertaking was to popularise solar powered home systems, which is supported by the energy sector for community based off grid generation purposes.

According to Ministry statistics, there are 130 community owned village hydro schemes presently supplying electricity to about 6000 households in rural communities. Approximately, 17000 remote and rural households are supplied with solar PV systems.

At present, the CEB has identified the wind potential in Narakalliya near Puttalam where a 30 MW wind farm is to be set up. Sri Lanka’s total wind potential is assessed to be around 250 MW. A few households are also supplied by off grid wind turbine systems mainly in southern Sri Lanka.

At present, fuel wood based Dendro projects are also supported by the government. Meanwhile, Minister John Seneviratne’s belief is that there should be more emphasis on greater energy efficiency to conserve energy.

Garbage for power generation

While solid waste is an ever-increasing problem in Sri Lanka, the island will soon have its first power generation project based on Colombo’s solid waste.

Ravi Wijeratne, formerly of Burns Environmental Technologies Pvt. Ltd. had formulated a concept to generate 10-15 MW of power from garbage. The daily requirement of solid waste for this purpose is about 1000 tonnes of garbage. Feasibility assessments have been completed for this Indian technology driven project which is currently awaiting the final stamp of approval.

Oil Mafia - 2

Power crisis rings alarm bells amongst investors

By Chanakya Dissanayake
Sri Lanka is heading for a major power crisis in 2004 due to delays in commissioning of proposed power plants including the Norochcholai coal-fired plant, business analysts said.

Alarm bells rang in almost all sectors of the Sri Lankan economy last week with the CEB's announcement of prolonged power cuts. Analysts are already factoring the devastating impact of possible 8-hour power cuts up to December this year.

"No foreign investor will be interested in Sri Lanka until the government solves the recurring power crisis," said a leading analyst.

The last major power crisis in 1996 was mainly due to the delay in commissioning the Sapugaskanda diesel power plant. " We were able to predict the 1996 crisis way back in 1992. By 1994 even the power cut hours were calculated. When power plants are not commissioned during the planned period, calculating power cuts is simple mathematics", said Dr Tilak Siyambalapitiya, leading power industry expert. Even if the government decides to go ahead with the coal power project immediately, the commissioning will take six more years and the plant would be ready only by 2007. This is mainly due to the Japanese funding pledged for the project being withdrawn due to government's indecisiveness on whether to implement the project, analysts said.

"We need to bridge the gap from year 2004 to year 2006, until the coal power plant is commissioned," said Dr Siyambalapitiya. He emphasised the need for the diesel fired plants aimed at bridging this gap to be on schedule, in order to avoid continuous power crisis.

However, Aitken Spence's 20-mega watt Anuradhapura diesel power plant which was originally scheduled to join the national grid in February 2002, was thrown off schedule due to political and religious pressure on the site selection.

Analysts say Sri Lanka is experiencing a dangerous trend of major infrastructure projects including expressways and power plants being delayed by various pressure groups, even after the foreign funds are obtained.

The bulk of the impact from the power crisis will be on the manufacturing sector. Analysts say that there is a strong co-relation between the manufacturing sector growth and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) to Sri Lanka.

"In the past majority of the FDI's were factory related. If the manufacturing sector becomes uncompetitive due to the power crisis, FDI's will dry up causing a slowdown in growth for many years," said a research analyst at a leading stock brokerage.

Dr. Dushni Weerakoon, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, said the adverse impact of the power crisis will be less than in 1996 due to many companies being geared to meet the crisis with generators.

However, the increase in cost of production due to generator usage will affect Sri Lanka's competitiveness in the face of lower cost producers in the region, she added.

Oil Mafia - 1

They say (the oil mafia) that coal is dirty power! but is it . hear is Energy Expert Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya.


Coal-fired power plants: heed expert advice
Dr. Tilak Siyambalapitiya in his article, Norochcholai delay and your electricity bill in 2004, in The Island on Thursday attributes the ever-increasing electricity prices to the failure of the government to have implemented two major coal-fired power projects – the Mawella and the Norochcholai plants. Had these projects, which have been shelved by the government due to protests from some quarters been constructed in time, the people would not have been burdened with spiralling prices of electricity, he says.

A person who consumes 150 units of electricity today, he points out, has to pay as much as Rs. 772. But if the Mawella plant had been in operation, he would have had to pay only Rs. 538 – the balance Rs. 234 being the price he pays for the government’s blunder. But for the rampant corruption in the CEB, it could be argued, prices would come down further.

The suspension of the Mawella project, Dr. Siyambalapitiya argues, has also deprived the south of an investment of US$ 500 million. (Why the cash strapped Southern Development Authority has let go of this opportunity is anyone’s guess.)

The heavy dependence of the CEB on other fuels for power generation owing to the Mawella not being operative, he says, has resulted in the country having to cough up an extra Rs. 9000 million for power generation. The production costs of electricity at present range from Rs. 3.50 to Rs. 10.50 whereas if the national grid was augmented with electricity from the Mawella project as pointed out by Dr. Siyambalapitiya, the fuel cost per unit would be Rs. 1.60.

The question posed to the Treasury bigwigs is why they are so silent on this additional sum of US$ 100 million spent on oil-guzzling power plants. Coming as it does from an expert on power generation formerly attached to the CEB, this is a very pertinent question that cries for an answer from these worthies. Dr. Siyambalapitiya also draws our attention to the fallout of the suspension of the Norochcholai project. Various reasons have been given by the critics of the project, prominent among them the Bishop of Chilaw for its suspension. But the loss incurred as a result he says, will be US$ 200 million in 2006.

The Norochcholai plant was to come into operation by 2004. Unless immediate action is taken to at least install some cheap oil plants, all 2264 units that were to be produced by the Norochcholai plant will have to be produced by mobile power plants burning auto diesel, Dr. Siyambalapitya warns. This, he says, will cost Rs. 20,150 million, and the public will have to foot the bill.

Dr. Siyambalapitiya’s contention is that it is the non-implementation of these two projects rather than the corruption and mismanagement of the CEB that has led to the present crisis. He advocates immediate implementation of these projects and wonders why the government should drag its feet with a crisis staring it in the face.

It is high time serious thought was given to the development of the power sector. The country’s heavy dependence on diesel for power generation has proved too expensive and is an unwanted burden on the people. New avenues must be explored to produce cheap electricity like in other countries. Hence the pressing need for the government to heed the advice of experts like Dr. Siyambalapitiya and act immediately.

My aims cont

After about 3 months of blogging , i still haven't being able to put up a new article.
sorry dudes but will fill it up in the holidays.

what i hope to do

1. do some research on
1. nano technology
2.renewable energy sources feasibility survey

2.article on why toastmastering (public speaking) is important to a professional engineer

3.join the ieee as a student member

4.put article on how to multiboot in linux with grub(comprehensive tutorial) to setup linmodem in linux /article.

6.put my view (a good article) on the FOSS movement and the obligations of LKLUG on how to
advertise it and popularize it within the young population.

7.Put my idea of inviting kelaniya - uok gavel to speak olympiad finals

8.Do article on socialism

9.Do article on the terrorism problem in srilanka and put forward my prospective