Oddly, I find this article as interesting as it is accurate. It is not for the faint-of-heart as it is extremely technical. The article should be read, not for what it says about Pakistan, but what is says and explains about grids in general and the myriad of problems in developing an electrical grid that is low carbon. Simon Pirani is one of the few on the socialist left who does understand the technical and engineering aspects of energy systems. He was, perhaps still is, a professional consult with his expertise on Russian natural gas infrastructure, if my decades long reading of some scattered article in any indication.
There in this article links to another article titled “Pakistan solar Q&A” ( https://peopleandnature.wordpress.com/2025/02/07/pakistan-solar-qa/ ). Both are worth reading to see the hurdles developing countries are having, albeit Pakistan is an extreme example of this, regarding operating a grid with large amounts of fossil fuel involved. The description Pirani gives of the regulatory environment is, to my knowledge, quite accurate, and IS applicable to many other countries where either state owned electrical grids exist transitioning to a deregulation of generation or in a regulated market (such as in the U.S.) where the same process started 30 years ago in California and then spread. He and I differ, a lot, over the "point" of all this. Pirani revolves his POV around the need to build out solar and wind (S & W). Mine is to build out nuclear. I think S & W are fraudulent in terms of fighting climate change (though, this is not the central point of his articles) as no country anywhere to my knowledge has *significantly* reduced their GHG emissions from building up S & W. Unlike those countries and regions that have gone nuclear. Still, if you want to understand the problems surrounding the "electricity market", read the article, you will learn something of these problems. On Pakistan. Pakistan is a bit like China with regards to building out their electricity infrastructure (grid/distribution/operation/financing/costs/transmission, etc.) in that both countries are expanding as rapidly as they can given financial and human resource limitations. Both have opted for all sorts of on demand power: build outs in coal, hydro, natural gas turbines, nuclear. Very few countries or regions have opted for "one thing". Everyone is building everything it seems. This is guided, in large part, for two reasons: to lift the industrial and scientific levels of their people to more developed levels and, to fit into the world Imperialist political economy. To do that they need lots and lots of generation. David -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#35119): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/35119 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/111070819/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
