My answer applies to state-run electricity corporation. I think that if it breaks even, then it is fine. If it wants profit, then it has to be marginal. This can be done if a small percentage is added to the electricity bill under an acceptable context such as maintenance. This allows for extra money to cover expenses & to extract little profit.

Professor Kamal, you are giving a strong point. I do really hope that there is a fast move towards alternative renewable energy resources. In many countries, electricity is "expensive".

I tailored the above contribution to exactly meet what the scholar asked about !

A state electricity company can follow what other electricity companies follow: maximize its profits, but subject to social constraints, ie providing cheap electricity to weak social classes by a suitable way. It is not so difficult. Of course, corruption and other phenomena will lead it not to be a profitable company.

Here is the situation in Serbia! Net Loss is expected in 2014! "If the state enabled electric power industry to operate under market principles and handed the company over to professional managers, EPS would soon become one of the most successful regional companies. – It would be feasible to introduce the policy of allocating some percentage of the price of kWh for funding the construction of new energy facilities."! Of course, situation after flood damages will force and urge market behaviour!

http://serbia-energy.eu/eps-has-no-time-to-lose-ljubodrag-savic-phd-professor-at-the-faculty-of-economics-belgrade/

http://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFL6N0M02HX20140303

Prevent electrical theft.

Proper load flow.

and optimize generation.

......... All this can make corporation in Profit.

A power plant, independently if the plant is public or private, can generate profit if it can produce electricity at a cost below the ones that are included in the following paragraphs:

•Biomass: (US$ 0.029-US$ 0.09/kWh): Cost estimates vary depending on the combustion method used. In solid waste landfills, naturally occurring anaerobic digestion creates methane used to generate electricity. Similarly, waste generated by lumber mills provides fuel that is essentially free. A slightly more costly source of biomass energy is the anaerobic digestion of animal manure. Conventional combustion technology is the most flexible, but also the most expensive to implement and operate. Although these types of renewable energy resources can eliminate waste products while generating electricity, biomass fuels are bulky and expensive to transport far distances. And unlike other renewable resources, the cost of biomass fuels is not being driven down by technological innovation.

•Wind: (US$ 0.038-US$ 0.06/kWh): The use of lightweight, but durable materials and more aerodynamic designs have significantly lowered the production cost of the wind turbine. Cost alone is not the only concern when considering wide-scale deployment of wind farms. Susceptibility to failure from mechanical fatigue, the inability to function well in the rain or in cold climates, and the noise created from vibration, should all be taken into account when considering the true cost of using this abundant energy source. Despite the substantial upfront investment required for the generator, it requires a marginal operating cost of less than US$ 0.01 per kilowatt-hour.

•Geothermal: (US$ 0.039-US$ 0.30/kWh): The considerable variability of costs for this type of renewable energy resource comes largely from the type of plant constructed and the depth of drilling required. Boasting incredible uptime of more than 97 %, geothermal plants can operate more efficiently and consistently than coal plants with uptimes of around 70 %. In comparison to natural gas, the annual reserves available are quite low. Binary geothermal plants (currently the preferred technology) are small, and can be built in a variety of different places, including acreages and rural farmland. Even though they are smaller, they still carry a higher initial investment than natural gas plants. Despite the sustainability of its free fuel source, the high cost of well drilling and pipeline construction prevent many of these plants from ever being built.

•Hydro: (US$ 0.051-US$ 0.11/kWh): Accounting for 16-20 % of worldwide energy production, hydropower is the most practical and universal of these five types of renewable energy resources. While they can only be built in a limited number of places due to the extraordinary amount of space required, hydropower plants are the most efficient source of green electricity and contribute no waste or emissions into the environment. Environmentalists argue that large hydroelectric power projects destroy marine ecosystems and disrupt fragile habitats. In response to these protests, governments and private enterprise have developed several cutting-edge technologies such as hydrokinetic power systems that generate power without the need for dams.

•Solar: (US$ 0.15-US$ 0.30/kWh): Solar power systems include photovoltaic, which convert the sun’s energy directly into electricity, and solar concentrating thermal which uses solar energy to heat water in residential and commercial applications.

The high cost of these types of renewable energy and nuclear energy is largely due to the high price of silicon crystals. Silicon prices continue to rise as their widespread production applications are leading to supply shortages. However, newly developed alternative materials could bring the cost down below US$ 0.05/kWh in the near future. The environmental benefits of using green electricity unarguably outweigh any financial drawbacks. Nonetheless, it’s still prudent to consider the real financial viability of each of these leading types of renewable energy resources as a real alternative to fossil fuel-based energy.

•Nuclear: (US$ 0.108 kWh). In 2013, the US Energy Information Administration estimated the levelized cost of electricity from new nuclear power plants to be $0.108/kWh.

Some reason (commercial and / or unaccounted loss) which cause which cause state electricity corporation running in loss are given below.

1. Sluggish meters

2. Non functional energy meters

3. Meter tempering

4. Meter reading errors

5. Errors in estimation of unmetered energy.

6. Unauthorized extraction of electricity by direct tapping from the Distribution lines/ Theft of electricity.

7. Other malpractice as to extraction of electricity from service mains.

8. Billing deficiency.

9. Collection deficiency.

Dear Professor @Kamal Eddin Bani-Hani

At present TSECL company has its own generation station based on solar energy. It’s only have 5MW capacity. The cost per unit is more compared to hydro or gas based thermal. Looking up energy crisis in future this renewable energy has been set up. The project is under construction. The main problem here is to connect this power with grid. Very soon the work will be completed. In future we will set up more number of such generating station.

A company producing and distributing power shall be managed in order to make a profit. This is the only viable option and it must be clearly written in its status. If not it becomes the puppet, either of its workers or of the politicians.

The problem of the access to its poducts is another issue, which must be addressed by the government by the usual ways (taxes, entitlements,...) under democratic supervision.

Every individual is responsible for saving electricity.

But now-a-dyas no body bothering to switch their fans and light when it is not in use.

We must replace with energy saving lamps such LED's