Results

Five findings shape the diagnosis.

Source-reported facts, reconstructed quantities and screening results are labelled separately so a modeled sensitivity is not presented as an observation.

Official / source-reportedReconstruction / sensitivityScope boundary

RQ1 · Historical balance

Electricity demand has risen materially.

Official broad consumption

FY2020–2122.54 TWh
FY2024–2529.31 TWh

Approximately +30% over four financial years.

Official annual evidence

External electricity remains structurally important.

Kerala's system balance depends on substantial electricity arriving through the wider Indian grid. That interconnection can be economically valuable; the engineering concern is dependable availability at stressed hours.

No single “import share” is reported because annual consumption, category sales, periphery input and SLDC import-energy series have different accounting boundaries.

RQ2 · Chronology & weather

The difficult hour cannot be inferred from annual energy alone.

Held-out shape reconstruction

Weather adds useful—but modest—information beyond clock time.

A sparse static shape already reconstructs reported intraday extrema well. Adding ERA5 weather improves the held-out error further.

Daily energy is known and conserved on held-out days. These are intraday-shape errors, not day-ahead forecast errors.

Held-out Jan–Mar extrema RMSE

Fixed shape477.9 MW
Sparse static162.0 MW
ERA5-sensitive155.2 MW

ERA5-sensitive MAE: 124.9 MW · correlation: 0.968.

Reconstructed peak5,923.3 MW

FY2024–25 proxy maximum.

Separate CEA contexts

5,904 MW ≠ 5,797 MW

5,904 MW is the generation-RA planning/calibration reference used by the proxy. 5,797 MW is the separately reported recorded FY2024–25 peak in the newer transmission-RA study.

RQ3 · Hydropower timing

The same hydro energy can have very different adequacy value.

Full-transfer reference case

Frozen daily-average hydro375.03 GWh
Same-day flexible hydro11.75 GWh

Same hydro energy; different timing. Modeled unserved energy falls 96.87% in this one case.

Benefit of same-day hydro flexibility

4,455 MW transfer−96.9%
3,564 MW transfer−48.4%
2,673 MW transfer−15.6%

Percentage reduction relative to frozen-hydro counterpart at each transfer ceiling.

Transfer ceiling1-day window3-day15-day30-day
4,455 MW11.751 GWh7.422 GWh0.160 GWh0.160 GWh
3,564 MW1,187.854 GWh1,167.909 GWh1,060.346 GWh965.093 GWh
2,673 MW5,571.388 GWh5,542.035 GWh5,468.566 GWh5,454.820 GWh
Interpretation: hydro flexibility is powerful when the system is primarily timing-constrained. It cannot manufacture missing annual energy or transmission capability.

RQ4 · Interstate transfer

Transfer availability is one of the strongest adequacy levers in the screen.

CEA reference4,455 MW

Current ATC reference; TTC 4,575 MW.

Stress sensitivity3,564 MW

80% of current ATC reference.

Stress sensitivity2,673 MW

60% of current ATC reference.

Reference-demand modeled unserved-energy fraction

4,455 MW · ref RE0.839%
3,564 MW · ref RE5.146%
2,673 MW · ref RE14.757%

Scenario outcomes, not forecasts. Directional sensitivity is the result: deep transfer constraints dominate many otherwise useful local flexibility measures.

RQ5 · Internal deliverability

The public network screen identifies a persistent Shoranur-area signal.

233source-backed primary lines
8extreme residual-import allocation cases
21lines above screening rating in all eight cases
12connected robust corridor groups

Strongest corridor cluster

Robust 110-kV and 220-kV screening groups meet around Shornur/Shoranur, including directions toward Koppam, Perinthalmanna, Melattur, Areacode and Elankur.

Independent CEA corroboration

Location survives the QA correction.

The historical model included a 2023 100 MVA transformer element. Current CEA reports 200+100 MVA existing transformation and still identifies Shoranur as constrained with reinforcement planned.

The geographic signal is stronger than the exact modeled loading magnitude. This is not operator congestion validation or an AC/N-1 result.

Synthesis

No single statewide annual-energy number explains the stress.

Demand timing & weather

When the difficult hour arrives.

+
Hydro timing & availability

How flexible in-state energy can respond.

+
External transfer

How much dependable supply can enter.

+
Internal deliverability

Whether the network can move power to where it is needed.

Study conclusion: Kerala's susceptibility to power-system stress is best treated as an interaction among these mechanisms. The study does not allocate causal shares to a specific 2026 restriction event.