Eastern solar farm court battle heats up
text size

Eastern solar farm court battle heats up

SET-listed solar firm SPCG suing Provincial Electricity Authority for B3.7 billion in damages

Listen to this article
Play
Pause
SPCG's Solar Power Korat 1 plant in the northeastern province of Nakhon Ratchasima.
SPCG's Solar Power Korat 1 plant in the northeastern province of Nakhon Ratchasima.

The Central Administrative Court is being asked to examine a 3.7-billion-baht lawsuit filed by the listed solar farm developer SPCG Plc against the Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA) for allegedly unfairly discontinuing the company's solar farm project in the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC).

The PEA was asked by the EEC Office in 2019 to plan for a supply of clean energy in the three provinces covered by the EEC, which led to cooperation between the state utility, its wholly owned subsidiary PEA Encom International and SET-listed SPCG.

They jointly set up Set Energy Co, with SPCG as the largest shareholder, to develop and operate the solar farm with a power generation capacity of at least 500 megawatts.

Wandee Khunchornyakong Juljarern, chief executive of SPCG, accused the PEA of abusing its power and causing damage worth 3.7 billion baht because Set Energy had already spent money on land purchases and development, as well as hiring consultants.

According to SPCG, the PEA initially assigned PEA Encom International to work on clean energy development, but because of the large scale of the project that required 23 billion baht for investment and the PEA's budget constraints, SPCG was invited to participate.

The PEA, its subsidiary and SPCG later signed a memorandum of understanding to jointly develop the project.

In late 2020, the PEA made a power purchase agreement (PPA) with PEA Encom International, meaning the latter would produce electricity for the PEA. In 2023, the authority agreed to have its subsidiary transfer the power production rights to Set Energy.

The installation of solar panels is scheduled to be completed by Dec 31 next year.

A problem erupted when Set Energy was unable to continue its work because it is not considered to be a signatory of the PPA and thus cannot obtain a licence from energy officials to operate the solar farm.

The delay caused the company to ask the PEA to extend the installation period.

Doubts arose as the PEA rejected Set Energy's request, reasoning that the company is not a PPA signatory that can ask for changes in contract conditions, Mrs Wandee said.

The PEA also cancelled the transfer of the production rights, she said.

Do you like the content of this article?
0 17
COMMENT (3)

By continuing to use our site you consent to the use of cookies as described in our privacy policy and terms

Accept and close