Kamal Ghorui
Tamil Nadu’s announcement of 200 free units every two months for 1.46 crore households, at an additional cost of ₹1,730 crore annually, arrives at a strange moment in global energy politics.
No, not because such welfare schemes are new to Indian politics. In fact, subsidised electricity has existed for decades across states, especially for agriculture and low income households.
Political parties across ideological lines have used cheap or free electricity as a tool of social protection and electoral mobilisation.
What makes this moment different is the global backdrop against which such announcements are now being made.
The world is once again staring at energy market instability. The ongoing US-Iran conflict has revived fears around oil supply disruptions, shipping vulnerabilities, and price volatility across global fuel markets. For countries like India, which remain heavily dependent on imported crude oil, LNG, and even thermal coal in certain periods, energy is no longer just an economic input. It has become a strategic vulnerability.
This is where and why the Tamil Nadu government’s announcement becomes bigger than state politics.
The problem is not simply fiscal. It is communicational, psychological, and strategic.
Because governments do not merely distribute subsidies. They also shape public attitudes toward resources.
And in moments of geopolitical uncertainty, signalling matters.
Across the world, countries facing energy stress usually communicate three things to their citizens: restraint, preparedness, and collective responsibility.
During Europe’s energy crisis following the Russia-Ukraine war, governments openly urged citizens to reduce consumption, improve efficiency, and prepare for difficult winters. Public campaigns framed energy conservation not as deprivation, but as participation in national resilience.
India’s situation is obviously different. We are not facing immediate rationing. Our power system is larger, more diversified, and relatively stable compared to many vulnerable economies.
But the underlying reality remains uncomfortable.
India imports nearly 88 per cent of its crude oil requirements. Global fuel price shocks eventually travel through the economy, affecting transportation, manufacturing, fertiliser production, electricity generation, inflation, and state finances. Even when electricity itself comes from domestic coal, the broader energy ecosystem remains globally exposed.
This is why electricity pricing can no longer be treated as disconnected from geopolitics.
And yet, political communication around power in India still behaves as though electricity is an infinite social entitlement that exists outside economic reality.
That is the deeper strategic communications mistake in such announcements.
A large scale free power scheme, especially when framed primarily as political generosity, unintentionally sends the message that electricity is consequence-free. That consumption carries no strategic cost. That the state will absorb everything indefinitely.
But the burden never disappears.
It shifts.
To state DISCOMs already struggling with debt.
To delayed infrastructure upgrades.
To taxpayers.
To future tariff corrections.
To weakened investment capacity in renewable integration and grid modernization.
India’s power sector has spent years trying to recover from precisely these distortions. State electricity distribution companies continue to face structural financial stress because tariffs often fail to reflect costs, losses remain high, and political compulsions discourage rational pricing.
Meanwhile, electricity demand itself is rising rapidly.
India’s peak power demand touched record highs in recent summers due to extreme heat, increasing appliance ownership, urbanisation, and industrial growth. Air conditioning demand alone is expected to transform India’s electricity consumption patterns over the next decade.
This means the country is entering an era where energy discipline will matter more, not less.
That does not mean welfare should disappear.
There is a legitimate argument for targeted energy support. Electricity is closely tied to dignity, health, education, and quality of life. For vulnerable households, affordable power is not a luxury. It affects whether children can study at night, whether families can survive heatwaves, and whether small livelihoods remain viable.
But there is a difference between targeted social protection and politically framed limitless entitlement.
The distinction matters because communication shapes behaviour.
A government could announce household energy support while simultaneously communicating:
• efficient consumption
• rooftop solar adoption
• energy efficient appliances
• smart metering
• grid resilience
• peak demand management
• financial sustainability of utilities
That would position the scheme inside a larger national conversation about energy security.
Instead, when free electricity is framed primarily as electoral delivery, the message becomes narrowly transactional.
Take from the state. Consume freely. The system will somehow manage.
But energy systems do not run on political slogans. They run on investment cycles, transmission infrastructure, fuel availability, balancing capacity, payment discipline, and long term planning.
This is where India’s political discourse around electricity often feels trapped in an older era.
Electricity is still treated as a symbolic welfare commodity rather than strategic infrastructure.
That mindset may have emerged when power shortages defined public anger and grid expansion itself was the primary goal. But today’s challenge is different. India is trying to simultaneously expand energy access, decarbonise, industrialise, electrify transport, manage climate risks, and reduce import vulnerability.
Those objectives require enormous financial and behavioural discipline.
Every political signal around energy therefore matters.
Especially now.
Because the coming decade will not merely test whether India can generate enough electricity.
It will test whether the country can build a public culture that treats energy as a strategic national resource rather than an endlessly distributable political freebie.
END OF ARTICLE
