Business Recorder
EDITORIAL: A summer power plan built on load-shedding, tariff hikes and emergency fuel switching may be unavoidable, but without targeted conservation and administrative discipline it risks becoming another exercise in managing symptoms rather than stabilising the system. The government’s proposed hybrid strategy reflects real constraints triggered by the Middle East conflict, yet the structure of the response suggests more reliance on burden-sharing than on efficiency. The scale of the disruption is clear. LNG supplies are expected to fall to near zero from next month, removing a source that contributes more than one-fifth of total power generation. Coal availability is also under pressure, jointly affecting close to 30 percent of supply. The fallback option, furnace oil, comes at a steep cost, with generation expenses significantly higher than gas or coal-based alternatives. These are structural shocks that no policy can fully offset in the short term. Against this backdrop, a combination of two to three hours of daily load-shedding, higher tariffs and conservation measures appears inevitable. Yet the effectiveness of this approach will depend less on its design and more on its execution. Passing costs to consumers and cutting supply address the arithmetic of shortages, but these factors do little to improve how electricity is used or wasted across the system. This is where the current plan appears incomplete. Conservation is being invoked as a principle, but the absence of clearly defined, enforceable measures raises questions about its seriousness. Simple steps such as mandating early market closures or restricting high-consumption commercial lighting are neither novel nor difficult to implement. They have been used in the past with measurable impact. Their omission from the core strategy suggests that the burden of adjustment may fall disproportionately on households and industry rather than on inefficient consumption patterns. The economics of the proposed fuel mix further complicates the picture. Furnace oil-based generation, already expensive under normal conditions, has become even costlier amid disruptions in key shipping routes and regional refineries. Estimates indicate a significant increase in per-unit costs, which will feed directly into tariffs. While officials acknowledge that the full burden cannot be passed on to all consumer categories, particularly industry, the gap will still have to be absorbed somewhere within the system, adding to fiscal or circular debt pressures. More concerning is the role of domestic mismanagement in exacerbating the crisis. Disputes between Pakistan Railways and key coal-fired power plants have placed 1,500 to 1,800 megawatts of generation at risk. This is not an external shock; it is an entirely avoidable disruption. Coal transport bottlenecks, refusal to load wagons and delays in logistical coordination are undermining plants that are critical for grid stability. The fact that these issues persist in the middle of a supply crunch points to deeper administrative weaknesses. The consequences are immediate. Reduced coal supply threatens additional load-shedding beyond what is already planned, while also increasing reliance on more expensive fuels. At the same time, Pakistan Railways stands to lose a significant portion of its freight revenue, creating a situation where inefficiency damages multiple parts of the system simultaneously. There is also a broader pattern at play. Energy crises in Pakistan are often framed as external shocks, whether driven by global fuel prices or geopolitical tensions. While these factors are real, they tend to overshadow persistent domestic issues, including poor coordination, delayed decision-making and a lack of accountability. The current situation reflects both elements, but the latter is within the government’s control. A more effective response would combine unavoidable measures with targeted interventions that deliver immediate savings. Enforcing strict timelines for commercial activity, curbing non-essential consumption and ensuring uninterrupted fuel logistics for existing plants would reduce pressure on the grid without imposing uniform hardship. These are practical steps that require administrative will rather than additional resources. The hybrid plan, as it stands, recognises the scale of the challenge but does not fully address the efficiency gap that defines Pakistan’s power sector. Without closing that gap, the country will continue to cycle through shortages, tariff adjustments and emergency responses. The immediate crisis may have been triggered by external developments, but its severity will ultimately be determined by domestic choices. Managing demand intelligently and eliminating avoidable disruptions are as important as securing fuel supplies. Without that balance, the system will remain reactive, and the cost of each crisis will continue to rise. Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Go to News Site