Tantransco flags issue of outage of NLC units, affecting load balance
Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporation Limited (Tantransco) has flagged the issue of outage of NLC generation units, resulting in shortage of the State's power allocation from Central generating stations (CGS).
Tamil Nadu is losing a share of 745 MW out of the 1,999 MW due to forced outages in May, Tantransco Chairman J Radhakrishnan said in a recent letter addressed to NLC India Ltd Chairman and Managing Director.
'In the recent past years, NLC complex units are maintaining less generation citing various reasons due to which Tamil Nadu is getting less schedule against the allocated share there by facing much hardships in maintaining its 'Load-generation' balance, ', he said.
Tamil Nadu State Load Despatch Centre is facing much hardship to maintain load-generation balance especially during non-solar peak hours, Mr. Radhakrishnan said. He called for necessary immediate measures in long term perspective to rectify the outage and maintain full generation from NLC Complex units during the current summer period especially during non-solar peak hours.
Tantransco has also pointed out that there was a schedule shortfall of 219 MW from the available running units during the lighting peak hours on May 12, resulting in total affected share of 964 MW out of 1,999 MW.
Tamil Nadu grid faces 5 peaks namely morning peak, solar peak, evening peak, lighting peak and Air-Conditioned (AC) night peak. Presently, the solar peak and evening peak is being met through renewable energy sources, namely solar and wind in addition to other generators, as per the State Energy Department's policy note for 2025-2026.
Shortage of resources is faced during the morning peak, lighting peak and AC peak especially during the months of February, March, April and May. After meeting the demand with available sources viz., Thermal, Hydro, Central Generating Stations (CGS) share, Long Term Open Access (LTOA), Medium Term Open Access (MTOA) and Renewable Energy sources, the shortage in demand is met through short term tie ups such as Day Ahead Market (DAM), Day Ahead Contingency (DAC) Market, Long Duration contract (LDC) and Real Time Market (RTM), it added.
Challenges faced in grid management are thermal outages, CGS share outages among others, the policy note pointed out.
Tamil Nadu reached an all-time high peak power demand of 20,830 MW on May 2, 2024, and the record high daily consumption of 454.32 million units on April 30, 2024. Last month, Electricity Minister S.S. Sivasankar had said Tamil Nadu's power demand so far in the current summer has been lower than last year, due to rains in parts of the State.
India's energy consumption stood at 148.7 billion units in May 2025, marking a 4% decline compared to the previous year. Unseasonal rains and the early onset of the monsoon kept temperatures lower than usual, leading to reduced electricity demand, as per Indian Energy Exchange.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
"Devendra Fadnavis' government hit a sixer and cancelled the decision": Union Minister Ramdas Athawale on Maharashtra three-language policy
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Union Minister Ramdas Athawale welcomed the Maharashtra government's decision to withdraw the three-language policy and said that the Devendra Fadnavis government cancelled the policy even before agitations took to the reporters on his visit to Raipur on Tuesday, Athawale said, "There was a controversy in Maharashtra regarding the three-language formula. Hindi has always been our national language , and we respect it, but some people argued that there is no need to teach any other language in Marathi schools. Marathi people took an opposing stance. However, Devendra Fadnavis' government hit a sixer and cancelled the decision to (mandatorily) use the Hindi language even before any agitation took place."RPI chief Athawale's remarks come amid Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis ' announcement to withdraw the resolution on the three-language policy on June Maharashtra government came under fire on April 16, as it passed a resolution mandating Hindi as the compulsory third language in Marathi and English-medium in response to the backlash, the government revised the policy on June 17 through an amended resolution, stating, "Hindi will be the third language. For those who want to learn another language, at least 20 willing students are required."On June 24, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis stated that the final decision regarding the three-language formula will be taken only after discussions with litterateurs, language experts, political leaders, and all other concerned parties, which has now led to the cancellation of both the resolutions and the formation of a committee under Narendra asked about the Centre's decision to conduct a caste-based census , Athawale criticised Congress for not conducting one during their Athawale said, "Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Indian government have decided on the caste census, and this is a historic decision, as for many years it was demanded but was not conducted during Congress' rule. Rahul Gandhi was demanding it, but why did he not do it when his government was in power?""The Parliamentary committee will begin its work. The percentage of each caste will be known. We will get to know, after the independence, how much a caste has developed in terms of employment, and (participation in) agriculture and industries. And this will help the government to support the (backward) castes," he told the reporters.
Scroll.in
2 hours ago
- Scroll.in
Language and power: What Ambedkar and Periyar teach us about Maharashtra's Hindi debate
Since mid-April, Maharashtra became the centre of a major linguistic storm. The state government's decision to make Hindi a compulsory third language in Marathi- and English-medium schools from Classes 1 to 5 sparked a sharp backlash. Protests came from teachers, students, civil society groups and political parties across the spectrum. Although the government on Sunday eventually withdrew the policy, the episode exposed a deeper anxiety: is India drifting from its pluralistic roots toward a homogenised national culture? At the heart of the debate lies the question of who decides which languages matter in India's classrooms, and by extension, in its public life. This question has been asked before by the architect of the Indian Constitution BR Ambedkar, by Dravidian leader EV Ramaswamy 'Periyar' and even by Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci, each offering insights into how language relates to identity, democracy, and power. What Ambedkar knew BR Ambedkar, a native of Maharashtra, argued powerfully in favour of primary education in the mother tongue. Speaking in the Constituent Assembly on 2 September 1949, he said that education in a child's native language is not just pedagogically sound, but it is essential for democratic participation. This view finds echo in a 2025 Unesco report titled Languages Matter: Global guidance on multilingual education. It confirms how children learn best in their first language. In Maharashtra, where Marathi is the mother tongue for nearly 70% of the population (according to the 2011 census), imposing Hindi from the Class 1 risks disrupting that learning process – particularly for rural and marginalised students already struggling with access to education. Ambedkar also cautioned against making Hindi the national language. On September 14, 1949, during heated Constituent assembly debates, he warned that Hindi speakers, while a significant group, were still a 'minority of the population'. He pointed out that privileging one language over others risked alienating vast regions of India and fracturing its federal spirit. His later writings, especially Thoughts on Linguistic States (1955), championed the idea of reconstituting Indian states on linguistic lines to ensure administrative efficiency and cultural autonomy. The formation of Maharashtra in 1960, after the Samyukta Maharashtra Movement demanded a separate state for Marathi sapeakers, reflects this principle. Today, policies like compulsory Hindi in schools can take away the pride and dignity that past language movements fought hard to earn. The illusion of choice The National Education Policy 2020 reaffirms the old three-language formula (previously proposed by Kothari Commission in 1966): regional language, Hindi or English, and a third Indian language. On paper, this seems fair. In practice, however, it disproportionately burdens non-Hindi states. Tamil Nadu has long rejected the formula, sticking to its own two-language policy, which was a result of decades of anti-Hindi agitations. Paradoxically, in many Hindi-speaking states, schools do not actually offer any non-Hindi Indian languages. The result is an asymmetry: non-Hindi states must accommodate Hindi but not vice versa. This contradicts Ambedkar's idea of cooperative federalism, where cultural decisions like language policy should be made with consent and context, not by default. Maharashtra's rollback was thus not just political damage control, but it was a reassertion of federal balance. But as long as the New Education Policy eaves room for interpretation, the risk of cultural overreach remains. What Periyar fought against While Ambedkar believed in institutional safeguards, Tamil leader Periyar waged a more direct war against what he saw as linguistic oppression. In the 1930s and 1960s, Periyar led massive protests in Tamil Nadu against the compulsory teaching of Hindi. For him, this was not about curriculum, but it was about cultural dominance. He warned that compulsory Hindi would lead to 'linguistic slavery'. His fear was not hypothetical. It was grounded in the lived reality of Tamil speakers who saw their language, literature, and identity sidelined by an increasingly Hindi-centric nationalism. Periyar's critique resonates in Maharashtra today. Many there view the push for Hindi as an attempt to dilute regional identity and cultural autonomy. His message remains urgent: language policy is rarely neutral; moreover, it often reflects the power of some to define the identity of others. The language of power Italian philosopher and political theorist Antonio Gramsci never wrote about India, but his theory of 'cultural hegemony' helps us understand how language operates in complex societies. Gramsci argued that dominant groups do not just rule through laws or violence, but they shape what people see as 'common sense'. Language is one of the most powerful tools in this process. When a Marathi-speaking child from Vidarbha or Marathwada region is told to learn Hindi from Class 1, without any reciprocal push for Hindi speakers to learn Marathi, that child absorbs more than grammar. She internalises the idea that some languages (and by extension, cultures) matter more than others. This is the slow, often invisible work of hegemony. It does not always come from diktats. Sometimes, it arrives as curriculum reform. Beyond Maharashtra The controversy in Maharashtra is not unique or isolated. In 2017, Bengaluru witnessed the #NammaMetroHindiBeda campaign, opposing Hindi signage in the city's metro system. In Tamil Nadu, resistance to Hindi remains a political mainstay. West Bengal saw students protesting Hindi-only policies in scientific institutions. In Punjab, Panjab University students demanded respect for Punjabi in official communication. Even the North East – India's most linguistically diverse region – has pushed back. In 2022, the central government mandated Hindi up to Class 10 in all North Eastern states, prompting fierce objections from local cultural groups who saw the move as cultural erasure. Each of these movements' points to a deeper struggle: the protection of linguistic identities in a centralised nation-state. Who gets to decide? India's strength lies not in any single language or culture, but in its ability to hold many together. Ambedkar reminds us that language should be a tool of empowerment, not exclusion. Periyar shows that resistance is necessary when institutions fail. Gramsci teaches us to look beneath the surface of policy and ask: who benefits? The Maharashtra controversy is not just a local educational dispute. It is a national moment of reflection. Should language be used to unify, or to dominate? Should it reflect our diversity, or override it? And most crucially, who gets to decide? Aniruddha Mahajan is a doctoral researcher at the University of Edinburgh, UK. His research interests include caste inequalities, student activism, nationalism, regional and linguistic politics, and the intellectual history of South Asia.
The Hindu
12 hours ago
- The Hindu
Language row turns political: MVA, MNS claim victory as Maharashtra govt. backtracks
The rollback of Maharashtra's three-language policy in primary education has sparked a blame game, with the Bharatiya Janata Party accusing Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray of double standards, and his party's leaders defending Marathi pride. The Maharashtra government on Sunday (June 29, 2025) withdrew its controversial government resolutions (GRs) dated April 16 and June 17, which mandated Hindi as the third compulsory language in Marathi and English-medium primary schools. The decision follows strong political Opposition and widespread protests by civil society, journalists, educationists, and Marathi cultural organisations. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis announced that the State would set up a committee headed by educationist and economist Dr. Narendra Jadhav to study the issue and recommend an appropriate language policy. 'Until the committee submits its report, both government resolutions stand cancelled,' Mr. Fadnavis stated. The original April 16 GR had made Hindi mandatory as the third language for Classes 1 to 5. Following public resistance, the government issued a modified GR on June 17, offering conditional flexibility — but the backlash continued. The Opposition has hailed the government's decision as a victory for Marathi identity. 'Victory rally' Mr. Thackeray on Monday celebrated the reversal and said, 'We have smashed the heads of Marathi haters. This unity should be preserved as we prepare for future battles.' He added that a victory rally would be held on July 5. 'We appreciate the political parties which came together with us despite different stands. Temporarily, they (the government) have cancelled the GR. If they had not cancelled, they would have seen the protest on 5th July. Many leaders from Eknath Shinde's Shiv Sena and Ajit Pawar's NCP are going to join us. A new committee led by Dr. Narendra Jadhav will report on this issue. The government has appointed financial experts for the education sector's decision. We will stage a victory rally on July 5,' the former Chief Minister told journalists. Nationalist Congress Party (SCP) leader Jayant Patil said: 'Making Hindi compulsory did not work in Maharashtra. The withdrawal of its own decisions on Hindi imposition shows how alienated this government is from the concerns of the people. It also underscores the dysfunctionality of the administration.' MVA allies, including the Shiv Sena (UBT), NCP (SCP), and Congress, had held protests outside the legislature with banners reading 'Mi Marathi' (I am Marathi) and slogans denouncing the Hindi imposition. NCP (SCP) MLA Rohit Pawar said: 'We are not against Hindi, but against the compulsory teaching of Hindi at the cost of Marathi and local autonomy. Many political parties opposed the GR released by the Maharashtra government regarding the three-language policy. Marathi journalists and social organisations were also against it. When all of them got united on this matter, it overpowered the government, and finally, the State government decided to withdraw the GR on the three-language policy.' BJP counters, claims credit BJP Mumbai unit chief Ashish Shelar pushed back against Opposition claims and said, 'In reality, Maharashtra, the Marathi people, and the BJP have won this fight. Uddhav Thackeray is politicising a policy that began under his tenure.' Mr. Shelar claimed that the original recommendation for a three-language policy stemmed from the Mashelkar Committee report constituted under Mr. Thackeray's chief ministership. 'He formed the committee and included his own party representatives. Why deny it now?' Shelar asked. Minister Shambhuraj Desai also asserted that the GR was first accepted under the previous MVA regime. 'This is political opportunism, not policy critique,' he said. Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut lashed out at the BJP alleging that they are making false claims of former Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray accepting the Mashelkar committee's report on the three-language policy. 'Lying is the BJP's national policy. These people are working with this policy in Maharashtra. If Uddhav Thackeray had submitted a report on the Mashelkar committee, it should be made public. A committee report has been released and placed in the Cabinet. Can't this be discussed? You forcefully discussed Hindi with the Cabinet — you did it because it is a national policy. If any national policy comes before the State, then discussing it is very important. Devendra Fadnavis has become the Chief Minister three times, does he not have that much knowledge?' he said at a press conference. Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) chief Raj Thackeray said, 'People are trying to make the 150 to 200-year-old Hindi language as a national language superior to Marathi, which has a history of over 3,000 years. This is unacceptable, and I will not allow it. Hindi is not the national language to be imposed on other States. This kind of coercion is not right. Any attempt to place Hindi above Marathi will be opposed.' Aaditya Thackeray, MLA and son of Uddhav Thackeray, claimed the rollback was achieved due to people's pressure, not the government's goodwill. 'We will keep up the pressure until a written assurance is given.' Along with Leader of Opposition in the legislative council Ambadas Danve, Bhaskar Jadhav and other Opposition legislators, Mr. Aaditya Thackeray staged a protest on the steps of Vidhan Bhavan, holding placards that said, 'Mi Marathi' (I am Marathi). Mr. Danve said: 'We are happy that our demand has been partially met. But we are still sceptical of the Maharashtra government, especially since it has now formed another committee to study the matter further.' Chief Minister Fadnavis reiterated that the decision was not a retreat but a step toward broader consultation. 'The Narendra Jadhav committee will involve experts, stakeholders, and public input to decide the way forward.' As Maharashtra heads into the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections, language identity has emerged as a prominent electoral issue. The government is keen to avoid further unrest while Opposition parties are rallying around Marathi pride.
