Introduction
In India, a significant debate is underway over whether Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) paired with storage can achieve lower costs than coal for electricity generation. Proponents of VRE argue that falling costs of solar and wind energy, coupled with advancements in battery storage technologies, make renewable energy increasingly competitive. Recent auctions conducted by SECI (Solar Energy Corporation of India) have showcased record-low tariffs for solar and wind projects, even when integrated with storage for round-the-clock supply. Additionally, VRE offers environmental benefits by reducing carbon emissions and aligning with India's international climate commitments. However, coal advocates emphasize that coal-based power plants remain the backbone of India's grid, providing reliable, dispatchable power at relatively low costs, particularly in regions with abundant domestic coal reserves.
2. As India transitions
towards a sustainable energy future, the evaluation of electricity generation
sources becomes increasingly complex. Critics of VRE highlight the high costs
of storage systems, grid integration, and balancing, which can significantly
rise. As coal plants benefit from existing infrastructure and economies of
scale, many argue that they are more cost-effective for meeting India’s growing
energy demand in the near term. This debate is intensifying as policymakers
balance the economic, environmental, and reliability aspects of India's energy
transition but the challenge gets compounded on which metrics to select for
least cost resource adequacy?
In this context, standalone
metrics like the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) is used as the key
energy metrics which is defined as the cost per unit of electricity generated
accounting for construction, operation, and maintenance over the asset's
lifetime. LCOE Offers a baseline for comparing generation costs.
3. Limitations
of LCOE
a. Excludes
Grid Integration Costs: LCOE considers only the generation cost and ignores
expenses for transmission, storage, and balancing required to maintain grid
stability.
b. Ignores
Variability and Intermittency: VRE sources like solar and wind are intermittent
and require backup or storage to provide firm power, which LCOE does not factor
in.
c.
Overlooks Geographic and Temporal Mismatch: LCOE does not account for spatial
or temporal variations in energy availability versus demand.
d. Fails
to Reflect Total System Costs: As VRE penetration increases, additional costs
such as ramping, reserve margins, and frequency stabilization grow
significantly, which are missing from LCOE calculations.
4. However, in the context of
rising VRE integration, LCOE may not be a key metrics, and the Levelized
Full System Cost of Electricity (LFSCOE) provides a holistic perspective.
LFSCOE incorporates the costs of integration, storage, transmission, and grid
balancing, ensuring a comprehensive comparison of energy sources for firm,
dispatchable power on a 24x7 basis.
The
Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) has traditionally been a popular metric
for comparing electricity generation technologies. However, it does not fully
account for the real-world costs and operational complexities of integrating
different power sources into an electricity grid. The Levelized Full System
Cost of Electricity (LFSCOE) extends the LCOE by including all system-level
costs incurred to make the power generated usable, reliable, and dispatchable
on a 24x7 basis. These costs are particularly critical in the context of
increasing Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) penetration, such as solar and wind.
6. Advantages
of LFSCOE
a.
Comprehensive Cost Representation: LFSCOE incorporates all the costs required
to ensure firm, reliable, and dispatchable power at the point of consumption.
b.
Reflects Real-World Integration Challenges: It factors in the complexities of
integrating intermittent sources into the grid, including storage, backup
capacity, and transmission upgrades.
c.
Facilitates Better Policy Decisions: By providing a holistic view of costs, LFSCOE
enables more informed planning, particularly in balancing sustainability with
economic feasibility.
7. Components
of LFSCOE
a.
Generation Cost (LCOE): Base cost of building, operating, and maintaining a
power plant.
b.
Transmission and Distribution (T&D) Costs: Costs for expanding or upgrading
transmission infrastructure to connect generation sources with load centers.
c. Grid
Balancing Costs: Expenses incurred for maintaining grid stability, frequency
regulation, and managing variability.
d. Storage
Costs: Costs of deploying energy storage systems to buffer VRE variability and
ensure supply meets demand consistently.
e. Backup
or Reserve Capacity Costs: Costs of maintaining conventional power plants or
other dispatchable sources as a reserve for times when VRE output is low.
f.
Curtailment Costs: Costs arising from surplus VRE generation that cannot be
utilized due to grid limitations or demand mismatch.
g.
Environmental and Externality Costs: Costs associated with emissions, land use,
and other environmental impacts, often reflected in policy incentives or
penalties.
8. How and
Why LFSCOE Increases with VRE Integration?
a.
Variability and Intermittency: Solar and wind are inherently variable and
cannot be dispatched on demand. As their share increases, the need for grid
balancing and storage grows, escalating costs.
b.
Overcapacity Requirements: To meet the same demand, a higher installed capacity
of VRE is required because of their lower capacity factors. This increases
capital and infrastructure costs.
c. Grid
Upgrades: High VRE penetration necessitates significant investments in
transmission lines, substations, and grid reinforcement to handle spatially
distributed generation.
d. Storage
and Backup Needs: The grid must compensate for periods of low or no VRE
generation. This requires storage systems or firm backup sources (e.g., coal,
gas, or hydro), raising LFSCOE.
e.
Curtailment and Inefficiencies: Excess VRE generation during low-demand periods
often leads to curtailment, wasting potential output and increasing overall
costs.
f.
Ancillary Services: Managing voltage, frequency, and reactive power becomes
more complex with high VRE penetration, increasing operational costs.
g. Reduced
Efficiency of Conventional Plants: Conventional power plants operated as
backups run at suboptimal efficiency, leading to higher operational and
maintenance costs.
9. (a) The major cost
difference between Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) and traditional energy
sources arises from grid balancing costs, high storage costs and backup
capacity costs. Grid balancing costs refer to expenses incurred to
maintain grid stability as supply and demand fluctuate, particularly with the
integration of intermittent VRE sources like solar and wind. These costs
include ancillary services such as frequency regulation, voltage stabilization,
and reactive power management. The need to ramp up or down dispatchable
generation to compensate for rapid changes in VRE output further adds to
operational challenges and expenses. As VRE penetration grows, balancing costs
escalate due to increased variability, necessitating investments in advanced
forecasting tools, real-time control systems, and grid upgrades to ensure
uninterrupted and stable electricity supply.
(b) Backup capacity
costs are associated with maintaining dispatchable power sources to ensure
reliability when VRE output is insufficient to meet demand. These include
capital investments in backup generation facilities such as gas turbines, coal
plants, or hydropower, as well as operational expenses for fuel, maintenance,
and standby readiness. Backup systems are essential for handling extended
periods of low VRE generation during cloudy days, windless nights, or seasonal
variations. However, backup plants often operate at suboptimal efficiency due
to their intermittent usage, leading to higher per-unit generation costs. As
VRE integration increases, the demand for reliable backup capacity grows,
driving up overall system costs.
(c) Storage costs, a significant
component of VRE's total system costs, remain high compared to recent prices
discovered in SECI's IV tranche of Firm Renewable Energy (FDRE) auctions with
an 80% demand fulfilment ratio. Despite technological advancements and
declining storage prices, these costs still represent a major hurdle to
achieving cost parity with conventional energy sources.
10. Detailed and Comparative Calculations
for LFSCOE at 20%, 40%, and 60% VRE Penetration
This document provides detailed calculations for the Levelized Full System Cost of Electricity (LFSCOE) at 20%, 40%, and 60% Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) penetration levels, assuming the same Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) for solar and wind in 60:40 ratio across all scenarios. A comparative table is included for ease of reference.
a. Storage costs for solar energy are higher
than for wind due to differences in their generation profiles and variability
characteristics. Solar power generation is concentrated during daylight hours,
leading to significant overgeneration in the afternoon and requiring
large-scale storage systems to shift energy to evening and nighttime. This
necessitates long-duration storage solutions, which are more expensive. In
contrast, wind energy generates more evenly across the day and night, requiring
shorter storage durations and reducing costs.
Solar’s variability is more
abrupt due to weather changes, requiring fast-response storage systems, which
are costlier. Additionally, solar faces higher seasonal variations and
curtailment risks during midday peak production, further increasing the need for
extensive storage capacity. Wind energy, on the other hand, often complements
solar by generating at night and during seasons when solar output is low,
reducing reliance on storage.
As a result, storage costs for
solar & wind escalate significantly with higher penetration levels, rising
from ₹ 0.80/kWh at 20% penetration to ₹2.40/kWh at 60%. (detail calculations
placed in para 12 to 14)
b. Grid Integration cost= Transmission Infrastructure+ ancillary
services+ curtailment management
system balancing+ forecasting and scheduling + congestion management costs.
Solar has higher grid integration
costs due to its midday generation profile, more abrupt variability, and higher
curtailment risks compared to wind. Wind benefits from a steadier generation
profile and better spatial distribution, requiring fewer additional grid
upgrades and lower balancing costs.
c. Assumptions
1. Total electricity demand: 1,000 GWh/day or 365,000 GWh/year.
2. VRE shares:
- 20% scenario: Total VRE generation =
73,000 GWh/year.
- 40% scenario: Total VRE generation =
146,000 GWh/year.
- 60% scenario: Total VRE generation =
219,000 GWh/year.
3. Breakdown of VRE: Solar = 60% of VRE, Wind = 40% of VRE.
4. LCOE for Solar: ₹2.5/kWh; Wind: ₹2.8/kWh.
5. Cost Parameters:
- Storage costs: ₹4.0/kWh for solar (6
hours storage), ₹4.0/kWh for wind (4 hours of storage required) detailed
costing at Annexure-A.
-
Grid integration costs:
₹0.8/kWh
for solar, ₹0.5/kWh for wind (20% VRE);
₹1.2/kWh for solar, ₹0.8/kWh for
wind (40% VRE);
₹1.5/kWh for solar, ₹1.0/kWh for
wind (60% VRE).
- Backup costs:
₹1.0/kWh
for solar, ₹0.7/kWh for wind (20% VRE);
₹1.5/kWh for solar, ₹1.0/kWh for
wind (40% VRE);
₹2.0/kWh for solar, ₹1.5/kWh for
wind (60% VRE).
11. Storage Costs Increase with Higher VRE
Penetration
As Variable Renewable Energy (VRE)
penetration increases from 20% to 60%, the associated storage costs grow
significantly. why storage costs increase with different VRE penetration is
clarified below through detailed calculations for both solar and wind energy.
12. Reasons for Increasing Storage Costs
a. Greater Variability: At higher
penetration levels, the mismatch between supply and demand increases, requiring
larger storage capacities to buffer the variability of solar and wind
generation.
b. Longer Duration Requirements: Higher VRE penetration means storage systems
must provide energy over longer periods, especially during extended low-output
conditions (e.g., cloudy days, windless periods, or seasonal lulls).
c. Marginal Cost of Additional Storage: The cost of adding incremental storage
capacity rises disproportionately because the storage systems must handle
increasingly rare but extreme events (e.g., long periods of low generation).
d. Overcapacity to Avoid Curtailment: To minimize curtailment of surplus VRE
during peak production, higher penetration levels necessitate more storage to
capture and utilize excess energy.
13.Storage Cost Calculations for Solar with
changing VRE share
20% VRE:
- Solar Generation = 43,800 GWh/year
- Storage Needed = 20% × 43,800 = 8,760 GWh/year
- Storage Cost = 8,760 × ₹4.0 = ₹35,040 Crore/year
- Cost Per kWh = ₹35040 ÷ 43,800 = ₹0.8/kWh
40% VRE:
- Solar Generation = 87,600 GWh/year
- Storage Needed = 40% × 87,600 = 35,040 GWh/year
- Storage Cost = 35,040 × ₹4.0 = ₹1,40,160 Crore/year
- Cost Per kWh = ₹140,160 ÷ 87,600 = ₹1.6/kWh
60% VRE:
- Solar Generation = 131,400 GWh/year
- Storage Needed = 60% × 131,400 = 78,840 GWh/year
- Storage Cost = 78,840 × ₹4.0 = ₹315,360 Crore/year
- Cost Per kWh = ₹315360 ÷ 131,400 = ₹2.4/kWh
14.Storage Cost Calculations for Wind with
changing VRE Share
20% VRE:
- Wind Generation = 29,200 GWh/year
- Storage Needed = 20% × 29,200 = 5,840 GWh/year
- Storage Cost = 5,840 × ₹4 = ₹23,360 Crore/year
- Cost Per kWh = ₹23,360 ÷ 29,200 = ₹0.80/kWh
40% VRE:
- Wind Generation = 58,400 GWh/year
- Storage Needed = 40% × 58,400 = 23,360 GWh/year
- Storage Cost = 23,360 × ₹4 = ₹93,440 Crore/year
- Cost Per kWh = ₹93,440 ÷ 58,400 = ₹1.6/kWh
60% VRE:
- Wind Generation = 87,600 GWh/year
- Storage Needed = 60% × 87,600 = 52,560 GWh/year
- Storage Cost = 52,560 × ₹4.0 = ₹210,240 Crore/year
- Cost Per kWh = ₹210,240 ÷ 87,600 = ₹2.4/kWh
15. Storage costs increase with higher VRE penetration
due to the need for greater capacity to handle variability and meet
longer-duration requirements. For solar & wind both, storage costs rise
from ₹0.8/kWh at 20% penetration to ₹2.40/kWh at 60%. This exponential rise
highlights the challenges of integrating high shares of VRE into the grid and
underscores the importance of technological advancements to reduce storage
costs.
|
VRE % (Solar: Wind=60:40) |
Solar Costs (₹ Crore/year) |
Wind Costs (₹ Crore/year) |
Total VRE Cost (₹ Crore/year) |
Total VRE Generation (GWh/year) |
LFSCOE (₹/kWh) |
|
20.0 |
223.34 |
157.76 |
381.1 |
73000.0 |
5.22 |
|
40.0 |
595.66 |
416.64 |
1010.3 |
146000.0 |
6.92 |
|
60.0 |
1103.76 |
762.14 |
1918.4 |
219000.0 |
8.52 |
Table-2: Approximate Breakup of LFSCOE
Components for Solar and Wind
|
Component |
20% Only Solar |
40% Only Solar |
60% Only Solar |
20% Only Wind |
40% Only Wind |
60% Only Wind |
Coal |
|
Generation Cost (₹/kWh) |
2.50 |
2.50 |
2.50 |
2.80 |
2.80 |
2.80 |
4.50 |
|
Storage Cost (₹/kWh) |
0.8 |
1.6 |
2.4 |
0.80 |
1.6 |
2.4 |
0.00 |
|
Grid Integration Cost (₹/kWh) |
0.80 |
1.20 |
1.50 |
0.50 |
0.80 |
1.00 |
0.30 |
|
Backup Cost (₹/kWh) |
1.00 |
1.50 |
2.00 |
0.70 |
1.00 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
|
Environmental Cost (₹/kWh) |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
1.0 |
|
Total LFSCOE (₹/kWh) |
5.1 |
6.8 |
8.4 |
4.80 |
6.2 |
7.7 |
5.80 |
(Disclaimer: While every effort has been
made to ensure accuracy, this analysis is illustrative and may not reflect
actual costs incurred in real-world scenarios.)
16. Analysis of LFSCOE with VRE Penetration
The analysis of the Levelized Full
System Cost of Electricity (LFSCOE) for variable renewable energy (VRE)
penetration levels, assuming a solar-to-wind ratio of 60:40, reveals critical
cost dynamics. As VRE penetration rises from 20% to 60%, total electricity
generation increases, with corresponding costs escalating. Solar energy incurs
a higher cost share due to its 60% contribution in the mix, and storage and
integration costs grow substantially with higher penetration levels.
The LFSCOE of 60:40 Solar Wind VRE increases from ₹5.22/kWh at 20% VRE to
₹8.52/kWh at 60% VRE, driven by the rising costs of energy storage, grid
integration, and backup power systems. These trends highlight the necessity for
a balanced strategy in renewable energy deployment. To manage costs
effectively, a focus on optimizing storage technologies, enhancing grid
flexibility, and implementing demand-side management is essential as VRE
penetration increases.
17. Challenges
and Cost Comparisons among Energy Sources
Incorporating
higher levels of variable renewable energy (VRE) significantly increases clean
energy generation but also leads to steep rises in system costs, particularly
for storage, grid integration, and backup systems. The cost dynamics between
coal, solar, and wind underscore the complexities of the energy transition:
a) Coal: With a
relatively stable Total LFSCOE of ₹5.80/kWh, coal remains cost-competitive due
to the absence of storage and backup requirements. However, it incurs
significant environmental costs estimated at ₹1.0/kWh.
b) Solar
and Wind: While solar and wind have low generation costs—₹2.50/kWh for solar and
₹2.80/kWh for wind—these escalate substantially with higher penetration levels.
At 60% penetration, the Total LFSCOE reaches ₹8.4/kWh for solar and ₹7.7/kWh
for wind, exceeding coal costs and highlighting the challenges of maintaining
reliability at higher renewable shares.
Renewables
like solar and wind exhibit economic advantages at lower penetration levels due
to their low generation costs. However, the rising expenses associated with
storage and grid integration make high VRE penetration economically
challenging. Conversely, coal maintains stable operational costs but is less
appealing due to its environmental impact. This underscores the need to balance
costs by improving storage technologies and grid infrastructure to enable
economically viable VRE adoption at higher penetration levels.
18. Key
Takeaways for Renewable Energy Deployment
The
findings highlight the need for a holistic approach to VRE adoption. A
well-balanced energy strategy should focus on advancing storage technologies by
developing cost-effective and efficient energy storage solutions, enhancing
grid flexibility through improved infrastructure to manage variability and
ensure reliability, and promoting demand-side management with measures to
optimize energy use and reduce peak demand pressures. Such a comprehensive
approach is crucial to mitigating cost escalations and ensuring the sustainable
growth of renewable energy in the energy mix.
The
analysis further indicates that renewables are cost-effective primarily at
moderate levels of integration. As the share of VRE in the grid increases,
their appeal as a firm and dispatchable generation source diminishes due to
rising costs. This underscores the critical need for technological advancements
in storage, grid integration, and balancing solutions to lower system-level
costs and achieve cost parity with coal at higher levels of renewable
penetration.
While LCOE provides a simplified comparison of generation costs, it
fails to capture the systemic challenges of integrating electricity into the
grid. LFSCOE fills this gap by accounting for all costs required to deliver
reliable, dispatchable power. As VRE penetration rises, LFSCOE becomes critical
for evaluating the true economic and operational implications of different
energy sources. By emphasizing LFSCOE over LCOE, informed decisions to balance
affordability, reliability, and sustainability in India's energy transition can
be made by stake-holders.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annexure- A
Calculation
of Storage Costs for Solar and Wind
Following
is how storage costs for solar (₹4.0/kWh) and wind (₹4.0/kWh) has been
calculated, considering factors such as capital costs, operational expenses,
efficiency losses, and storage duration requirements.
Assumptions
1. Grid
Scale BESS Cost: =$ 150 per KWh= ₹150*86= ₹1.29
Crore/MWh for lithium-ion storage.
2. Round-trip Efficiency: 90% (10% energy loss during charging/discharging).
3. System Lifetime: 15 years.
4. Discount Rate: 6% (used to annualize costs).
5. Storage Duration: Solar requires 6-8 hours; Wind requires 4-6 hours.
Storage
Cost Calculation for Solar (₹4.0/kWh)
1.
Energy Stored Per Day:
- Assume a 1 MW system with 6 hours of
storage.
- Energy stored = 1 MW × 6 hours = 6
MWh/day.
2. Total Capital Cost:
- Cost of storage = 6 MWh × ₹1.29
Crore/MWh = ₹7.74 Crore.
3. Annualized Cost:
- Annualization factor = 0.1057
(calculated for a 15-year system at 6% discount rate).
- Annualized cost = ₹7.74 Crore ×
0.1057 = ₹0.8181 Crore/year.
4. Efficiency Loss:
- Efficiency loss = 10% × 6 MWh/day =
0.6 MWh/day.
- Additional cost = 0.6 MWh/day × 365
days × ₹2.5 (solar LCOE) = ₹5.475 Lakh/year.
5. Total Cost Per Year:
- Total cost = ₹0.8181 Crore +
₹0.05475 Crore = ₹0.87285 Crore/year.
6. Cost Per kWh:
- Total energy stored annually = 6
MWh/day × 365 days = 2,190 MWh/year.
- Cost per kWh = ₹0.87285 Crore/year ÷
2,190 MWh/year = ₹3.98/kWh ~₹4/KWh
Storage
Cost Calculation for Wind (₹4/kWh)
1.
Energy Stored Per Day:
- Assume a 1 MW system with 4 hours of
storage.
- Energy stored = 1 MW × 4 hours = 4
MWh/day.
2. Total Capital Cost:
- Cost of storage = 4 MWh × ₹1.29
Crore/MWh = ₹5.16 Crore.
3. Annualized Cost:
- Annualization factor = 0.1057
(calculated for a 15-year system at 6% discount rate).
- Annualized cost = ₹5.16 Crore ×
0.1057 = ₹0.5454 Crore/year.
4. Efficiency Loss:
- Efficiency loss = 10% × 4 MWh/day =
0.4 MWh/day.
- Additional cost = 0.4 MWh/day × 365
days × ₹2.8 (wind LCOE) = ₹4.088 Lakh/year.
5. Total Cost Per Year:
- Total cost = ₹0.5454 Crore +
₹0.04088 Crore = ₹0.5863 Crore/year.
6. Cost Per kWh:
- Total energy stored annually = 4
MWh/day × 365 days = 1,460 MWh/year.
- Cost per kWh = ₹0.5863 Crore/year ÷
1,460 MWh/year = ₹4.02/kWh~₹4/kWh
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annexure- B
LFSCOE for 20%% VRE with Solar: Wind= 60:40
Solar Costs:
- Generation cost: 43800 GWh × ₹2.5 = ₹109.5 Crore/year
- Storage cost: 20% × 43800 GWh × ₹4.0 = ₹35.04 Crore/year
- Grid integration cost: 43800 GWh × ₹0.8 = ₹35.0 Crore/year
- Backup cost: 43800 GWh × ₹1.0 = ₹43.8 Crore/year
Total Solar Cost = ₹223.34 Crore/year
Wind Costs:
- Generation cost: 29200 GWh × ₹2.8 = ₹81.8 Crore/year
- Storage cost: 20% × 29200 GWh × ₹4 = ₹23.36 Crore/year
- Grid integration cost: 29200 GWh × ₹0.8 = ₹23.4 Crore/year
- Backup cost: 29200 GWh × ₹1.0 = ₹29.2 Crore/year
Total Wind Cost = ₹157.76 Crore/year
Total Costs for 20%% VRE:
- Total VRE cost = ₹381.1 Crore/year
- Total VRE generation = 73000 GWh/year
LFSCOE = Total Cost ÷ Total Generation = ₹5.22/kWh
LFSCOE for 40%% VRE
Solar Costs:
- Generation cost: 87600 GWh × ₹2.5 = ₹219.0 Crore/year
- Storage cost: 40% × 87600 GWh × ₹4.0 = ₹140.16 Crore/year
- Grid integration cost: 87600 GWh × ₹1.2 = ₹105.1 Crore/year
- Backup cost: 87600 GWh × ₹1.5 = ₹131.4 Crore/year
Total Solar Cost = ₹595.66 Crore/year
Wind Costs:
- Generation cost: 58400 GWh × ₹2.8 = ₹163.5 Crore/year
- Storage cost: 40% × 58400 GWh × ₹3.5 = ₹93.44 Crore/year
- Grid integration cost: 58400 GWh × ₹1.2 = ₹70.1 Crore/year
- Backup cost: 58400 GWh × ₹1.5 = ₹87.6 Crore/year
Total Wind Cost = ₹416.64 Crore/year
Total Costs for 40%% VRE:
- Total VRE cost = ₹1010.3 Crore/year
- Total VRE generation = 146000 GWh/year
LFSCOE = Total Cost ÷ Total Generation = ₹6.92/kWh
LFSCOE for 60%% VRE
Solar Costs:
- Generation cost: 131400 GWh × ₹2.5 = ₹328.5 Crore/year
- Storage cost: 60% × 131400 GWh × ₹4.0 = ₹315.36 Crore/year
- Grid integration cost: 131400 GWh × ₹1.5 = ₹197.1 Crore/year
- Backup cost: 131400 GWh × ₹2.0 = ₹262.8 Crore/year
Total Solar Cost = ₹1103.76 Crore/year
Wind Costs:
- Generation cost: 87600 GWh × ₹2.8 = ₹245.3 Crore/year
- Storage cost: 60% × 87600 GWh × ₹4 = ₹210.24.0 Crore/year
- Grid integration cost: 87600 GWh × ₹1.5 = ₹131.4 Crore/year
- Backup cost: 87600 GWh × ₹2.0 = ₹175.2 Crore/year
Total Wind Cost = ₹762.14 Crore/year
Total Costs for 60%% VRE:
- Total VRE cost = ₹1918.4 Crore/year
- Total VRE generation = 219000 GWh/year
LFSCOE = Total Cost ÷ Total Generation = ₹8.52/kWh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
