Apr 19, 2011|
Zonal tariff: Blockage in the gas pipeline?
Transmission tariffs (charges for gas transmission along the pipeline) are a key component of gas prices at the consumer end. Normally, it accounts for around 25% of the end price of gas. Needless to say, for city gas distribution (CGD) to become a success story in India, the tariffs need to be fair and reasonable. But , does current system of Zonal tariff along major pipelines in India fit the bill? We don't think so .
Zonal tariffing : An illustration (rates in Rs per mmbtu)
What is Zonal tariffing system?
Under zonal tariffing system, the pipeline network is divided into zones of 300 km each. All customers in the same zone pay the same tariffs. The tariff keeps rising at every next zone moving away from source to destination. Hence, the consumers located beyond 300 km of the gas source pay higher transmission tariff vis a vis the ones located within.
||EWPL (East west pipeline of RGTIL)
|Zone 1 (closest to gas source)
|Zone 5 (farthest from gas source)
It implies that RGTIL will charge different fee for supplying gas to users in Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat, depending upon their distance from the gas source. So, users in Maharashtra, for e.g , Dabhol Power Plant (which is closer to gas source) will have to pay less than those in Gujarat.
What is wrong with Zonal tariffing?
As per the earlier system, all the states /consumers paid same tariffs along a pipeline. This system is also known as Postalized tariff system.
- It leads to imbalance in economic growth. It promotes investments and market development close to gas sources. This will lead to concentration of industrial investments in states like Gujarat, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh at the cost of other states. Simply because they happen to be home/ closer to natural gas reserves. We should not forget that social problems for e.g. Naxalism exist in our country due to such disparities only.
- The retail consumers located far from the gas source will pay higher tariffs vis a vis their competitors who are located close. This will be like unfair penalty on them.
- The move renders the industries that are located far from gas sources uncompetitive as far as cost management is concerned. Especially because final products from all companies have to compete in the open market only.
- Such a system may lead to irrationally priced gas. To give you an insight, KG-D6 ( a prominent domestic gas field) gas consumers in Delhi pay a tariff which is about 70% of the gas price at source ($4.20 per unit). Infact, the fuel costs 100% more in Punjab and extreme north. This certainly does not make sense. These tariffs have already been passed to consumers.
- Variable tariffs also apply to CNG/PNG*. For users located far from fuel sources, such a system will make CGD unviable. Hence, this system doesn't bode well for India's plans to allocate CGD licenses for over 200 cities. Especially, for the PNG segment that already has to compete with highly subsidized LPG.
Arguments against Postalized tariff system
- Such a system where distances from the gas sources don't impact tariffs may lead to investments that don't make much economic logic. It may end up in non optimum allocation of capital and wrong siting decisions.
- Uniform tariffs, if taken a closer look at, are same as 'Freight equalization'** policy that imposed huge economic costs and had to be done away with.
PNGRB's*** flawed logic in favor of Zonal tariffs....
PNGRB defends Zonal tariffs saying that a similar system exists for other sectors as well like railways, civil aviation and power transmission. However, we don't think that this analogy makes much sense. The dynamics of the other sectors are different. The share of operating costs for the other sectors is much higher than natural gas sector. Any kind of uniform pricing for other sectors will demand huge subsidies. However, in gas transmission, capital costs weigh way more and uniform pricing is a feasible option.
The other reason cited by PNGRB is that even developed nations have gone for zone based tariffs. All we can say is that as when it comes to natural gas sector, India is still at stage of infancy compared to others where such markets are stable. We should take a holistic view and should not blindly ape the systems outside.
As an offshoot of non uniform pricing, the weighted average rate of upgraded HVJ gas pipeline would be higher than the non upgraded by more than 100%. Hence, the existing consumers will pay the lower tariffs. On the other hand, the new ones in the same zone and using gas from same source will pay more than double. Such pricing defies all logic and is silly to say the least.
Zonal tariff can put the CGD story to an abrupt end. It questions the viability of PNG. Also, it does not provide a level playing field to same industries located in different areas. The states having natural gas resources already get revenues from royalty on onshore (on land) fields. There is no reason to offer them double returns by such a system. It just doesn't go well with concept of pooling gas prices to ensure uniform pricing. The current system is at odds with Gas utilization policy as well wherein the gas is allocated to the priority sectors at a fixed cost with a purpose to address the gap in demand and supply. As far as question of economic logic is concerned, if consumer goods companies in India can ensure uniform prices for their products irrespective of raw material sources, taxes and logistics costs and can remain viable, it should not be that daunting a task for gas transmission companies.
*CNG/PNG : Compressed Natural Gas ( fuel for vehicles) and Piped Natural Gas (for cooking etc.)
** Freight equalization policy implied that a factory could be set up anywhere in India and the transportation of minerals would be subsidized by the central government. Thus, factories were set up all along the ports or around big cities except Bihar which was one of the richest in mineral resources . The policy simply destroyed Bihar's huge competitive advantage of holding minerals. Though, the policy has been removed now but, presently Bihar lacks the infrastructure to compete with other states.
***PNGRB : Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board
More Views on News
Mar 27, 2017
GAIL (India) Ltd has announced results for the quarter ended December 2016. reported 9.4% year on year (YoY) decline in sales, while bottom-line grew 45.4% YoY.
Mar 17, 2017
ONGC has announced results for the quarter ended December 2016. The company has reported 9.2 % year on year (YoY) growth in sales, while bottom-line grew 197% YoY.
Jan 24, 2017
Oil India Limited announced results for the quarter ended September 2016. The company has reported an 6.5% and 7.8% Year on Year (YoY) decline in sales and net profit respectively during the quarter.
Dec 3, 2016
GAIL (India) Ltd has announced results for the quarter ended September 2016. The company has reported 16 % year on year (YoY) decline in sales, while bottom-line grew 180% YoY.
Nov 3, 2016
ONGC has announced results for the quarter ended September 2016. The company has reported 10.3 % year on year (YoY) decline in sales, while bottom-line grew 6.3% YoY.
More Views on News
Aug 7, 2017
The data tells us quite a different story from the one the government is trying to project.
Aug 4, 2017
The small-cap space is full of small players that are clear proxies to great growth stories and Indian megatrends.
Aug 8, 2017
Bharat-22 is one of the most diverse ETFs offered so far by the Government. Know here if you should invest...
Aug 12, 2017
The India VIX is up 36% in the last week. Fear has gone up but is still low by historical standards.
Aug 7, 2017
Raksha Bandhan signifies the brother-sister bond. Here are 7 thoughtful financial gifts for sisters...
Copyright © Equitymaster Agora Research Private Limited. All rights reserved.
Any act of copying, reproducing or distributing this newsletter whether wholly or in part, for any purpose without the permission of Equitymaster is strictly prohibited and shall be deemed to be copyright infringement. LEGAL DISCLAIMER:
Equitymaster Agora Research Private Limited (hereinafter referred as 'Equitymaster') is an independent equity research Company. Equitymaster is not an Investment Adviser. Information herein should be regarded as a resource only and should be used at one's own risk. This is not an offer to sell or solicitation to buy any securities and Equitymaster will not be liable for any losses incurred or investment(s) made or decisions taken/or not taken based on the information provided herein. Information contained herein does not constitute investment advice or a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual subscribers. Before acting on any recommendation, subscribers should consider whether it is suitable for their particular circumstances and, if necessary, seek an independent professional advice. This is not directed for access or use by anyone in a country, especially, USA or Canada, where such use or access is unlawful or which may subject Equitymaster or its affiliates to any registration or licensing requirement. All content and information is provided on an 'As Is' basis by Equitymaster. Information herein is believed to be reliable but Equitymaster does not warrant its completeness or accuracy and expressly disclaims all warranties and conditions of any kind, whether express or implied. Equitymaster may hold shares in the company/ies discussed herein. As a condition to accessing Equitymaster content and website, you agree to our Terms and Conditions of Use, available here
. The performance data quoted represents past performance and does not guarantee future results.SEBI (Research Analysts) Regulations 2014, Registration No. INH000000537.
Equitymaster Agora Research Private Limited. 103, Regent Chambers, Above Status Restaurant, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021. India.
Telephone: +91-22-61434055. Fax: +91-22-22028550. Email: email@example.com. Website: www.equitymaster.com. CIN:U74999MH2007PTC175407