Government asks for help from technicians it ignored
Sergio Bajay, from Unicamp, takes over as director of Energy Policies
and supports his criticisms

TATIANA FÁVARO

The same government that had been ignoring, for at least two years, the warning of economists and energy planning technicians about an imminent crisis in the sector, is now calling for the help of these experts to try to bring the country out of the darkness. Seeking energy generation – and, therefore, investments – is an arduous task. Mainly faced with another need, considered immediate by some and fundamental by the team designated to manage the crisis: it is necessary to compulsorily reduce consumption.

In an attempt to remodel an energy planning structure that, in the opinion of economists, was dismantled due to the country's submission to international monetary policy, the government has gathered experts such as professor Sergio Bajay. A graduate of the Department of Energy at the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering (FEM) at Unicamp, Bajay assumed the directorship of the National Department of Energy Policies of the Ministry of Mines and Energy with the concern of, among other measures, inhibiting the excessively high costs of the so-called “energy new".

The researcher and consultant at the Interdisciplinary Center for Energy Planning (Nipe) at Unicamp states that it is necessary to prevent the undisciplined opening to new energy sources, even in the face of the crisis. Especially because the burden of the increase in the cost of energy in the country, in the not so distant future, will inevitably be passed on to the consumer.

“Regardless of the technology – new hydroelectric plants, new gas thermoelectric plants, new coal thermal plants, nuclear, wind, whatever – the generation costs will be higher than those of so-called 'old energy'. From 2003 onwards, when initial contracts will begin to expire, the cost of 'new energy' will be transferred to tariffs. This energy will be more expensive, which cannot be avoided”, predicts Bajay. “It is necessary to look for a mix of technologies that results in a minimum tariff increase. The cost will be higher, but it cannot be very high”, he assesses.

According to the professor, the greatest evil will come if, to guarantee the generation of electricity as quickly as possible, the government surrenders to the lobby of powerful entrepreneurs and their respective technologies. As a result, we will have the approval of expensive works and the triggering of a new social crisis. Despite now being part of the team that advises the government, the researcher maintains his criticisms and reveals some concerns: “The government is not homogeneous, it is made up of several areas, each with its own interests. The Energy Policies sector, here at the Ministry, is taking care to signal to other sectors of the government about the need to block technological alternatives that could contribute, at first, to ending the energy deficit, but subsequently with a large impact on the tariff deficit”.

The recently installed director of Energy Policies does not deny that the Fernando Henrique government lacked an investment policy in the electricity sector, that this failure contributed decisively to the current crisis, and that the country is suffering the consequences of privatization in the sector. He couldn't even deny it, because as a professor at Unicamp he always criticized the change from an almost completely state-owned model to one that sees almost absolute private participation.

“Even as a collaborator, I maintain criticism. This government was extremely bold and unrealistic in the way it handled things. So much so that, in practice, there is a mixed model, but coexistence between the two 'partners' is not covered by a regulatory system,” he notes. “It is, in fact, one of the challenges I am facing: modifying the model to formally foresee this coexistence and seek a relationship that makes the two forms of capital complement each other. The risks detected are great. This analysis will be in-depth in a report that will reach the president”, adds Bajay.

-------------------------------------------------

The alternatives under study

The quota with penalties for those who do not reach the electricity rationing target established by the government, the bonuses for those who manage to reduce consumption by more than 20% and the possibility of cuts in supply are, for professor Sergio Bajay, “natural” . “The cuts are the second and worst instance, because there are more negative effects associated with them than with the other system,” he says. And he adds that other discussions – such as taking social problems into account, thinking about low-income consumers and studying the flexibility of this quota system for the industrial sector so as not to reduce the number of jobs so much – “are details”.

One more aspect, under analysis by the Energy Crisis Management Chamber (CGCE) and highlighted by the researcher as an alternative solution to the crisis, is the need to make it mandatory for manufacturers of electrical equipment, household appliances and, eventually, some gas equipment, compliance with minimum efficiency. The National Congress witnessed the presentation of a bill that would allow the imposition of these standards, an initiative of President Fernando Henrique himself, at the time occupying a seat in the Senate. The same president who two months ago said he was not aware of the chaotic situation in which the energy sector found itself.

Finally, Bajay points to increasing energy supply as a necessity for the country to overcome the crisis. And this depends on two possibilities: in the short term and at a relatively high cost, it is possible to opt for the use of diesel engines coupled to electric generators and diesel engines or gas turbines operating in an open cycle, to increase cogeneration.

“In times of emergency, this is a reasonable solution. In the long term, the idea is to make thermal and hydroelectric plants viable. Taking into account that the lifeline is not just the implementation of gas thermoelectric plants, because gas has become expensive, and that large hydroelectric plants require very high investments, with the aggravating factor that the State does not currently have the same access to financing in the 70s and 80s to boost these enormous works. Furthermore, the private sector has restrictions on investing in the sector, as it is a capital-intensive and long-term venture. Therefore, imagining hydroelectric plants as salvation and following the trend of the past is also not realistic”, assesses Bajay.
“I defend investment in diversified matrices for the supply of electrical energy. And I agree that there is potential for operational improvement in the system to be explored”, he adds.