Status Quo Wins Over Empirical Re-Design
Gujarat keeps the 7–11 AM To U morning peak not because the data proves a peak exists, but because removing it risks creating one.
APTEL wanted a clean, fresh, empirical re-evaluation of the morning peak classification.
Because when you look at load data in Gujarat 7–11 AM does not display a conventional peak.
So logically: if there is no peak, why keep the premium?
What GERC argued instead
The morning curve is flat because the penalty exists. The price signal itself is suppressing the possible peak.
If you remove that signal the peak may reappear.
This is stability-by-policy not natural equilibrium of consumption behaviour.
PGVCL’s framing
daily load curve in Gujarat is shaped over 20 years of ToU + agriculture feeder scheduling
HT industrial consumers have already shifted what can be shifted
stability is artificially engineered therefore cannot be treated as “evidence” against the peak
The Meghraj study angle
While the study wasn’t written to test the 7–11 AM block directly GERC used it as contextual validation.
Small load shifts matter. They prevent certain network reinforcements + avoid costlier procurement in stressed hours.
Industry argued the opposite
If the data doesn’t show a peak → the premium is legacy inertia.
GERC rejected that. Continuity wins.
Final result
Morning peak stays
ToU rates FY 2016–17 unchanged
No new empirical study ordered
The deeper India tariff reality
Once a demand smoothing tool embeds inside the system… unwinding becomes politically + grid-operationally high risk.
The price of stability → is postponing discovery.
We don’t know if the 7–11 AM peak is real anymore because we refuse to test it.
For more
For reference purposes the website carries here the following tenders: •Tender for supply of various electrical AC/DC MCB\'s ins
