NEPRA’s FY26 tariff decision shows a puzzling divergence between consumer classification, electricity consumption, and solar capacity estimates. On the residential side, the number of protected consumers rises to 21.5 million from 17 million in the government motion.
The largest increase is in the 101–200 kWh slab, now counting 12.53 million consumers. Total consumption for this slab remains 3.89 billion kWh, translating to about 26 kWh per household per month. This is far below the lower bound of the slab and suggests administrative reclassification or policy-driven inflation rather than actual usage.
Households in the 1–100 kWh category average 163 kWh per month, consistent with low-consumption behavior. The mismatch compresses per-consumer allocations and raises questions about fairness in subsidy targeting.
On the commercial front, numbers are more consistent. Nepra lists 3.52 million commercial consumers, up from 2.97 million in the motion.
Total consumption remains unchanged. This aligns with 3.5 million consumers recorded in the July 2025 base tariff, suggesting a routine reconciliation of records. The contrast shows that residential slab anomalies are likely due to methodology or policy choices rather than systemic errors.
The decision also addresses solarization. It cites a Power Planning & Monitoring Company (PPMC) report estimating 12,629 MW of off-grid solar capacity, in addition to 6,539 MW of net-metered installations, for a total of nearly 19,000 MW.
The report is not public, and the cut-off date is unclear. Import data suggests that cumulative solar panel imports already amount to around 50,000 MW, far higher than the official estimate.
It is also unclear whether behind-the-meter residential or commercial solar is included. Nepra assumes this capacity will generate nearly 30 billion kWh outside the grid, based on 4.5 hours of daily irradiation, and estimates the impact on base tariffs at Rs3.5 per unit.
The key risk is that underestimating off-grid and behind-the-meter solar could jeopardize demand-side planning and grid management. If actual capacity is far higher than official estimates, the base tariff and subsidy framework may fail to reflect true consumption patterns, distorting financial planning and resource allocation.
The anomalies in residential slabs and the underestimation of solar capacity point to deeper challenges in Pakistan’s electricity planning. Inflated consumer counts in higher protected slabs dilute actual subsidy coverage.
At the same time, official off-grid and behind-the-meter solar estimates fall far short of what import data suggest. This misalignment risks distorting tariff calculations, weakening demand-side management, and complicating grid operations.
Without clear methodology and public access to underlying data, policy decisions may be built on assumptions that do not reflect reality, leaving households, utilities, and planners exposed to unforeseen costs and operational stress.
Comments