The Power Purchase Price Scale That Sits Far From the Cricket Field

Last week I was sitting in a cricket academy in Bangalore when a coach mentioned his stadium's electricity bill. He said, 'Sir, running the floodlights is more expensive than it used to be.' I had come to talk about cricket strategy, but as I left, one question stayed with me—do we ever talk about the costs that power the game? And if not, why not? That question grew heavier when I read about a regulatory hearing in Pakistan's power sector, where the Central Power Purchasing Agency (CPPA-G) presented its projection for the average Power Purchase Price (PPP) for CY2027 before Nepra. It was not a cricket match, but its echoes felt like a captain shifting his bowling plan in the final over. And I felt this hearing should be told the way I analyse a strategic innings—slowly, with facts, and with the human face hidden behind every number. The hearing was not a field of play. It was a conference room in Islamabad, where CPPA-G laid out six different scenarios for CY2027. In the base case, the average Power Purchase Price was estimated at around Rs27.309 per kilowatt-hour (kWh), a rate to take effect in 2027. Alongside, total power purchase costs were put at Rs3.552 trillion, including fuel costs of Rs1.319 trillion and capacity charges of Rs1.914 trillion. Capacity charges work out to Rs14.717 per unit, higher than the base-case fuel-cost component of Rs10.141 per unit. This is the same capacity charge that must be paid even when electricity consumption falls—much like a star player's salary being paid even when he is not on the field. CPPA-G projected electricity sales of 130,081 GWh, implying demand growth of 2.6 percent. But Nepra questioned why the demand forecasts of CPPA-G, ISMO and the DISCOs differed. This is the 'key-phase' internal conflict I talk about in commentary—when a team cannot agree on its own strategy. Now look at the economic side that might seem distant from a cricket fan, but is actually the foundation of the field. During a World Cup, stadium floodlights, generators for broadcast commentary, and air-conditioned indoor nets at academies—all run on electricity. If the average Power Purchase Price in Pakistan reaches the base case of Rs27.309 per unit, it will directly raise industrial production costs. Industrial representatives stated clearly at the hearing that the existing incremental package benefits only a few select industries while more than 90 percent of consumers bear its burden. One representative (Aamir Sheikh) even said that future Fuel Charges Adjustments (FCA) are uncertain and could rise two to three times in winter. This is much like a captain being uncertain about pitch conditions mid-match, throwing his entire plan off. But here is a twist I would call the 'contrarian angle.' Usually, hearing reports highlight that electricity may become up to 8 percent more expensive. But the real story goes beyond 8 percent. Nepra ordered CPPA-G to raise its KIBOR assumption from 11.70 percent to 12 percent, meaning financing costs are still shifting. CPPA-G itself admitted that fuel availability, exchange rates and future fuel-charge adjustments are uncertain. Most importantly, capacity charges remain fixed at Rs1.914 trillion, no matter how cheap fuel becomes. In the ideal-case scenario, PPP is Rs25.883 per unit, while the worst-case scenario takes it to Rs29.255, with the dollar assumed at Rs290 and higher fuel prices. So the downside is limited, the upside risk is greater. It is like a team being bowled out for 150 and a commentator saying, 'They could have scored 200 if...'—but the capacity charge, like a player's salary, must be paid regardless. What stings me most in this entire episode is the lack of transparency. Nepra is holding a public hearing, which is good—but the question is whether the ordinary consumer is being told how much of his bill goes into capacity charges, which must be paid even without consuming electricity. In my experience, in cricket too, when a referee's decision comes without explanation, viewers feel cheated. The same is happening here. Industrial representatives want the incremental package suspended immediately and FCAs applied prospectively, so they can estimate their costs. But the question is—does Nepra have a mechanism to tell every consumer where his money is going? I remember in 2026, when the IPL was being played in empty stadiums, I recorded 90 seconds of silence and wrote that 'the 32,000-seat Chinnaswamy is the loudest character in this match.' Here too, without a sound, the silence of the capacity charge speaks the loudest. Now, looking ahead. The real challenge before Nepra is whether it can reconcile the differing demand forecasts of CPPA-G, ISMO and the DISCOs. If electricity sales fall below the 130,081 GWh projection—as one scenario assumes 0.70 percent growth—the fixed capacity charge will be spread over fewer units, pushing per-unit cost even higher. This is a feedback loop I might call cricket's 'Duckworth-Lewis'—where rain changes the target, and the rules too. Here too, if consumers cut consumption to avoid bills, the total cost stays the same and the per-unit burden rises. Industrial representatives are saying exactly this: FCA fluctuations make production cost planning impossible. For me, the biggest lesson from this hearing is that in both sport and energy, 'key-phase' performance decides the final outcome. Nepra's order to raise KIBOR to 12 percent looks like a small change, but its effect on total cost could be large. CPPA-G's six scenarios—from Rs25.883 to Rs29.255—show how big the uncertainty is. And the heaviest blow of this uncertainty falls on industrial consumers and ordinary households, who feel it every month in their bills. When I commentate on a match, I always pick a human moment—like a batsman's last six or a bowler's disappointing over. Here that moment is: a family in Ranchi paying an electricity bill for their son's cricket dream, not knowing what that bill will be next year. So the next time you watch a cricket match, look at the floodlights. That light is not just sport—it is the outcome of an energy policy decided in a conference room. And until that decision is transparent, the silence of the field will remain just as loud.