Ladies and gentlemen, good day, and welcome to Q2 FY twenty-five earnings conference call of JSW Energy Limited, hosted by Investec Capital Services. As a reminder, all participant lines will be in the listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after the presentation concludes. Should you need assistance during the conference call, please signal an operator by pressing star, then zero on your touchtone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Anuj Upadhyay from Investec Capital Services. Thank you, and over to you. Thank you, Jessie. Good evening, everybody. On behalf of Investec Capital Services, I welcome you all to the Q2 FY twenty-five post result conference call of JSW Energy Limited. We have with us the leadership team from the company, including Mr. Sharad Mahendra, Joint MD CEO, Mr. Pritesh Vinay, Director of Finance and CFO, and Mr. Vikas Chaudhary, Head of Investor Relations and Treasury. And now, without any further delay, I will hand over the call to Mr. Sharad Mahendra for his opening remarks, which will be followed by Q&A. Over to you, sir. Thank you, Anuj. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for joining today's call. The quarter gone by has been very exciting for the power sector and especially for JSW Energy. The sector dynamics are evolving towards increased adoption of renewable energy due to the advent of low-cost energy and storage solutions also. This provides a blend of opportunities for developers like us to continue supporting the nation's goal towards sustainable growth. Given the resilient growth, growth environment, the GDP is estimated to increase by 7% or more in FY 2025, driven primarily by robust industrial and service sectors, and the expectation of higher government expenditure in the remaining quarters of the year. Before we delve into our quarterly performance, I would like to provide an overview of the current power demand landscape. The power demand for the country grew at 5.4% in the first half of fiscal year 2025. In quarter two, due to a higher base of 12.4%, year-on-year demand growth was, has seen a nominal growth of, of just over 1%. We continue to expect strong demand, power demand for the rest of the year, backed by robust economic activities in the country. The quarter witnessed a peak demand of 231 GW in September 2024. In line with the power demand growth, the country's generation increased by 5.8% year on year in FY 2025, and 1.6% in quarter two of, current fiscal. When we divide this, all India thermal PLF stood at 64.8% in the quarter, as compared to 66.7% last year, same quarter. The share of intermittent renewable in the total generation has increased to 15% in the quarter, as the country added 22 GW of renewable capacity, dominated by 19 GW of solar installation in last twelve months. Talking about the power capacity, the total installed capacity in the country has reached 453 GW, and has surpassed 200 GW mark in renewable energy, including large hydro. Year to date in the current fiscal, the country has added 10.7 GWs of power capacity. The net capacity addition in quarter two stands at 6.5 GWs, which compares, when compared with 3.5 GWs in quarter two of last fiscal, is a significant increase. Capacity additions in the quarter were driven by renewable capacity additions of 6.4 GWs, and so out of this, solar dominated this with a capacity addition of 5.3 GWs, while the wind capacity addition was 700 MW during the quarter. Moving on to the bidding activity, in the first half of the year, the total utility scale auction for approximately 22 GWs capacity happened, with a notable dominance of hybrid and FDRE projects. This trend underscores the growing emphasis on integrating multiple renewable sources and developing bespoke solutions for distribution companies. To effectively address challenges such as grid stability, RPO obligations, and supporting India's ambitious renewable energy targets, tailored solutions with energy storage are essential. We have seen remarkable progress made on energy storage in this quarter. The government has fast-tracked and has revamped the approval process for concurrence on the pumped hydro storage projects. I am pleased to share that our Bhavali Hydro Pump project in the state of Maharashtra is also one of the projects concurrence by CEA in September 2024. For this, we have signed the Power Purchase Agreement with MSEDCL for 12 GW hours of storage, and it will be delivered in the next 48 months. When we come to thermal, the coal prices, as we have seen, that have largely remained flat year on year, while strengthening on a sequential basis by marginal 2%. If we talk of a particular index like API 4, it stood at 110 in quarter two, as compared to $109 per ton in quarter two of last year. As we speak, API 4 coal prices are currently ruling in the same range at around $111 per ton. Within the domestic market, Coal India has taken sufficient steps to keep robust coal supply, and we have seen a low e-auction premium for domestic coal procurement, especially in Odisha and Chhattisgarh. Coming to the merchant market, we have seen a strong volume surge. The quarter gone by witnessed an approximately 27% increase in cleared volume at power exchanges due to a steady monsoon till September, leading to higher hydro and wind generation. However, the day ahead market prices have decreased 24% year-on-year to almost INR 4.50, versus INR 5.90, which was prevailing in quarter two of last fiscal. The merchant prices trended lower, while coal prices were flat year-on-year, resulting in lower spread for volumes sold in short term markets. For us, the merchant volumes were high year-on-year. However, the Dark spreads compressed due to a softer merchant market tariff. Coming to JSW Energy's performance in quarter gone by, we have commissioned 204 MW of capacity during this quarter, which is entirely wind capacity. This represents almost 29% of the total 700 MW wind capacity commissioned in the country during the quarter. Our net generation for the quarter rose by 14% year-on-year, reaching 9.8 billion units, driven by a 14% year-on-year increase in both renewable and thermal generation. Net generation from tied-up portfolio was up by 9% year-on-year in the quarter, while short-term generation increased by 68% year-on-year. Coming to the thermal, the generation increased 14% year-on-year, driven by strong performance by our Ratnagiri and Vijayanagar thermal plants, and an incremental contribution of almost 467 million units from JSW Utkal Unit One. The long-term thermal generation was up 7% year-on-year, while the short-term generation increased 51% year-on-year. The renewable generation increase was particularly driven by the addition of 619 MW of wind capacity and a 5.4% year-on-year increase in hydro generation due to better hydrology. If we speak of hydro, hydrology this year has been better, and for H1, the hydro generation for Pan India was up by 4.2%, while our hydro assets generated 21.6% year-on-year increase in the generation. Like other regulated hydro assets, our Karcham Wangto hydro power plant witnessed the revision and two-part tariff. As per the CERC regulation, there is a change in the rate of depreciation after 12 years, resulting in year-on-year decline in tariff and EBITDA. We are on track to reach our first target of 10 GW capacity by FY 2025, and 20 GW of capacity before 2030. We have secured new RE projects with 3.7 GW capacity in this quarter two, taking our total locked-in capacity to 19.2 GW. We also made significant progress on the energy storage front and have signed, as I mentioned earlier, a power purchase agreement for one of the largest pumped storage projects in the country of twelve GW hours with MSEDCL. This project is located in the state of Maharashtra, and the power supply will be to the state of Maharashtra. We are ready to start the work as this project is to be delivered in forty-eight months timeframe. Regarding our under construction projects, we are making significant progress on our under construction wind projects, which are on track for completion within the current financial year. Our Kutehr project site of hydro, which had suffered a severe landslide in the first quarter of the this current financial year, which washed away access roads impacting project activities. Now, the work has resumed, and I am pleased to share that we have completed the boxing of Unit Two also this quarter, and all three units are expected to be commissioned in the current financial year. The Utkal Unit Two had some teething issues and is expected to be synchronized in the third quarter, while Unit One has now stabilized well. Also, I am glad to share that we have signed long-term PPAs for two-third of our new projects, one in the calendar year, and have started construction activities at some of the projects. These projects are expected to be commissioned within the next twenty-four months. And for more details on our under construction projects, please refer to slide one three. On energy storage, we are constructing Asia's largest battery energy storage system with one GW hour capacity, which is partly tied up with SECI. It is scheduled for commissioning by June 2025. Additionally, for our green hydrogen plant of 3,800 tons of hydrogen, coupled with 30,000 tons per annum of green oxygen, the construction work has commenced in the previous quarter and equipment deliveries have started, and we expect this to be commissioned by March 2025. With our strong foundation and fundamentals, I am confident that JSW Energy is well positioned to excel in the coming quarters. Thank you very much. Should we begin the question and answer session, sir? Now I will hand over to Pritesh, who will provide more details on our financial performance. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Sharad. Very good evening to all the participants. You know, Sharad has already covered for the quarter, if you see our net generation was up by 14% YOY. But despite the net generation being up by 14%, the revenue for the quarter actually went up only by 2% on a year-on-year basis. And a large part of that is explained by you know, the change in depreciation at hydro business, that Sharad already talked about, which is consistent with what some of you would have seen in the previous quarter, that is, the first quarter. Which has led to a lower tariff and a lower EBITDA. EBITDA for the quarter stood at just over INR 1,900 crores. On a headline basis, it is actually down by 5% YOY. But if you look at the EBITDA bridge, which is there in the presentation on slide number nine. In last year's EBITDA for second quarter, there was a one-time truing-up impact at the hydro business due to a tariff order that had been received previously of INR 174 crores, which is non-recurring in nature. So adjusted for that, the underlying EBITDA was INR 1,834 crores. So on a like-to-like basis, the underlying EBITDA is actually up by 4% YOY. The profit after tax for the quarter was marginally up at INR 853 crores compared to INR 850 crores last year. If you look at the first half basis, the profit after tax is actually up by almost 20% at 1,375 crores. The balance sheet continues to be healthy. If you look at the net debt movement during the quarter, on a sequential quarter-on-quarter basis, the net debt went up by almost 1,500 crores and stood at about 24,875 crores, and the bulk of this increase is largely explained by the debt drawdown for the projects which are under construction. The net debt to EBITDA on a headline basis is at about 4.1x. But if you strip off the debt due to capital work in progress on an underlying, sustained, normalized basis, the net debt to EBITDA stands at a healthy 2.2 times, and the net debt to equity was at 0.9x. We continue to maintain a very strong liquidity profile with cash and cash equivalents of close to INR 5,700 crores at the end of the quarter. The receivables cycle continue to be, you know, range-bound in the 60- to 70-day range. So at the end of September, we were at about just over INR 2,500 crores of total receivables. Of this, only about 35% was overdue, and the balance amount was not due yet. Since then, since the end of the quarter, in the month of October till date, we've seen a healthy collection continue, and the overdue have actually come down as we. So, I think I'll stop there, and then we'd like to open the floor for Q&A please. Thank you very much. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use handsets while asking a question. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. We'll take our first question from the line of Noel Vaz from Union Asset Management. Please go ahead. Yes, thank you for the opportunity. I just have two queries. Firstly, on the slide, which talks about the installed capacity of nineteen GWs. Now, there is a reference to three point five GWs of pipeline. In the previous quarter slide, I think there it was a much larger figure. So is this due to the fact that all the PPAs that were signed in the quarter? And what is this remaining three point five? If you can give some color on that. Thank you. Yeah, Noel, you're right. You know, a significant part of the pipeline has been converted into a PPA. So if you look at the subsequent slide number thirteen, which actually gives a project-wide detail of, you know, PPA signed on the left-hand side and the balance LOA, LOI on the right-hand side, you'll be able to reconcile everything. Thank you. And lastly, relating to the energy storage around the total commitment that we have stated for by 2030 of doing about 40 GWs. There has been some element of battery energy storage that we have already started working towards, and we've already got about 16 GWs of PSP already signed up. Is it correct to assume that the remainder will all be PSP, or do we have some color on which will be battery energy storage? See, this will be basically a mix of both, because both battery energy storage and pumped storage complement each other based on the needs, what the discom or any buyer will need. For a shorter storage of two hours or four hours, battery energy storage with shorter lead time of commissioning the project to start getting the supply. So it will be a mix of both. Energy storage coupled with solar energy is something which we have seen happen started happening, the kind of bids which are coming. So both will coexist, and we will be definitely looking towards both the pumped storage as well as battery energy. Sorry, his line is disconnected. Ladies and gentlemen, to ask a question, please press star and one on your phone. The next question is from the line of Swati Jhunjhunwala from JM Financial PMS. Please go ahead. Yeah, thanks for the opportunity. So my question is around energy storage. So first is that the tariff that you have for each project, that tariff is sort of, can I say it's kind of a rental, irregardless of you-- if you do one cycle a day or two cycles a day in BSS or PSP? Is that correct, that it's sort of a rental? Yes, Swati, you are right. This is a rental per megawatt per month. This is a rental model, and which is... And the project is designed based on the need, what the buyer is asking for, but it's a rental model, yes. Understood. And the power input and output is the buyer's [crosstalk] Yes. -headache, model [crosstalk] Yeah, buyer has to provide the input power in normal, and they only take the output also. Understood. Understood. And, for BS and PSP both, once the projects are commissioned, what sort of cost will be there? Because, it was said to me that, you know, that, the cost will be minimal since, I mean, could you just highlight something on that? See, cost is something which is a matter, which is very dynamic. Maybe what is the cost of battery, what is the cost of cell, and comparing with pumped storage, which is, maybe four years, cycle to complete the project. So it is very difficult to give a number to the cost, but of course, the tariffs are in relation to what the project cost is, meeting the desired return. Understood. O&M operations and maintenance, if you are talking of, so it is two different, the kind of maintenance which is required in battery energy storage is limited, and pumped storage is more of a hydropower hydro project. Okay, so we can compare hydro PSP costs in relation to a normal hydroelectric power project? No, not really, because there are differences in that, in building a hydro project and the kind of work which is required in a normal hydro project. Here it is limited. So, it can it is not comparable. You can say, maybe a pumped storage is a subset of hydro, with some of the parts which is required in hydropower project is not a part of this. Understood. So costs will be lower, is what you're trying to say? Should be lower. Yes, yes, yes, yes, Understood. Understood. And debt to equity for both should be 80/20. Is that right? That will be pushing the envelope, Swati. You know i t actually is not one-size-fits-all, because it depends on the unit economics and the underlying cash flow. S o the lenders typically. I think eighty/twenty would be very aggressive. That would not be the number we should be working with. I think for these kind of projects, which have you know, long gestation period, a higher amount of construction risk, and a much, much longer asset life, it should be safe to assume either a 70/30 or at max, a 75/25. Understood. Understood. And, can you just give me a broad figure as to... So when the BESS, when the SECI first project had come in, that time the capital cost for BESS was much higher than, let's say, the latest tender that you've gotten. So, could you just highlight on the cost, maybe per megawatt basis or an overall project basis, you know, some color on the capital cost? No, Swati, we would not like to do that, you know, because as Sharad was saying, yes, you're right, the capital cost was different at the time of, you know, when the bids were happening, and it has since moved. And we also have examples where, you know, the reverse has happened. You know, at the time of the bid, you know, the equipment cost for some of the other projects, where X and subsequently the commodity super cycle happened, and X became X plus Y. So, you know, that is the part of the prudence, in terms of, you know, risks to be priced in from a, from a tariff, discovery and the discipline, you know, so are you, how aggressive you're going to be in a bid and all that. But yes, it is safe to assume that whatever you are seeing in the market is largely the kind of price that anybody would be paying at a certain point of time. Understood. All right. I'll get back in touch. Thank you so much. Thank you. We'll take our next question from the line of Puneet Gulati from HSBC. Please go ahead. Mr. Puneet Gulati, please unmute your connection. Yeah, hi. Can you hear me? Yes. Please, go ahead. Okay. Yeah, great. Yeah, thanks so much for the opportunity. My question is, you guys are, you know, the pioneers both on the battery side and pumped storage. How do you view the LCOE for both of them? What do you think is the storage cost on per unit basis for battery, two- to four-hour and pumped storage? So, Puneet, I'd like to take a stab at that one. See, they are not like-for-like comparison, right? One is a longer duration energy storage, and the second is, of course, you know, we are aware that a lot of experiments and a lot of lab work is happening in terms of even on the battery side to have longer duration energy storage, but the commercial viability of that is still to be planned out, right? So the way one has to look at it is that from the user point of view or from the offtaker point of view, right? And the offtaker, which typically is a grid, is looking at a mix of multiple sources of power. They could be gray, they could be green, multiple modes of generation. They are trying to solve either, you know, a peaking hour deficit, or a load-following solution, depending on, you know, which state, what kind of load profile they have. So these are meant for different kinds of solutions, you know? So I wish, you know, life was simpler, and for everybody, including us, if we could make it to a common size metric equivalent and do a plain comparison. But what is also happening is this, and I'm sure you are aware, and is that there's been a rapid, you know, decline in at least the lithium-ion battery prices- Yeah. -because of which, you know, the LCOS equivalent, if there were to be a terminology like that- Yeah. The gap is narrowing, right? Mm. Therefore, the cost of battery storage on a per unit basis would still be higher, you know, compared to PSP on a total cost basis, adjusting for the- What could those numbers be for you? But yeah, we can't do a like-for-like comparison. And also, Puneet, to add what Pritesh just said, there are two aspects we have to see. There is a stark difference between battery energy storage and the pumped storage. If any discom or any buyer is looking for a two-hour to four-hour solution, maybe it may be better in terms of the unit cost for them to buy, let's say, battery storage. We have to see the negative of that, that will be mostly it is coming in for twelve years, depending on the battery life. If it is a larger storage of six hours + or eight hours, the end of project of a forty years term, that is a better, more better, a better and economical solution in terms of the unit cost. So it is different depending on the use application. So, is there a way, I mean, if, if you were to allocate your time and capital, can you decide where, which direction would you go, tilt towards? Where would you allocate higher time and capital towards whether it's battery energy storage or pumped storage? Is there a way to think like that in your mind? See, if you see the time and the effort required to set up the plants, of course, battery energy, you start to complete in about eighteen months' time, and you start getting the returns. But you have to remember that, what is that the period for you are investing for twelve years, the PPAs. Here, maybe, and it's a very, very different skill set, as I told you. It is very, very difficult to either this or this. What the countries need is, especially when we are seeing that the peak hour demand growth is higher than the normal growth, bulk of the demand growth is coming in the during the peak hours, whereas the peak demand we reached 231 GW, which has already reached this year in September, which is likely to increase going forward. So this is a solution, which will be taking care for a larger duration. If I can add to that, Puneet, just bear with me for a minute. One important aspect that got missed out is, the underlying returns in the opportunity, right? So that will be the North Star, right? For us, from a capital allocation decision point of view, you know, till last year, we used to be asked, "Do you have anything against solar, and you have only wind in your portfolio and no solar?" Because, you know, an important element in all of this is the bidding behavior or, you know, how the tariff is being priced in terms of the competitor bids, right? So if, for example, in our view, the returns get eroded in both, so then we will not pursue either of them, right? So that is also an important metric to keep mind of, right? Understood. And for your MSEDCL, when are you likely to place contracts for equipment? We'll do that, you know, because the PPAs have been signed, which means that clock has started ticking, and- Yeah. We have already floated and, you know, all that is kind of, you know, mapped out, so we should be able to do that in the next few quarters. Understood. And in your contracts, especially on the SECI side, where there are both, you know, LOA is one, but PPA is not yet signed, would you foresee any of the contracts which are at the risk of not being signed at all, given the tariffs that have been discovered? No, Puneet, I think well, we if you see recall the whatever LOAs we have got is in last few months, only four to six months, and there has not been any very significant change in the tariff discoveries. So and today, we see that two-thirds of other LOAs what we received in last seven months, we have been able to sign the PPAs. So right now, we don't see this as a challenge that PPA is not getting signed. Understood. That's very helpful. And lastly, if you can comment upon, you know, your potential JV with Sany turbine, and what kind of competitive advantage do you see them giving to you in future, basically? Yeah. See, as stated earlier during last quarter also, that with Sany, we had entered into a technology license agreement for the 4 X platform, with the four megawatt WTG, sorry, three point six. Now we have upgraded, and we are going ahead with four MW platform from Sany. And also to de-risk, we are in the process of finalizing the technology license agreement for even manufacturing of blade in India, rather than importing the blades, and for which we are at advanced stage of finalizing the location and procurement of land has been completed almost. And we will be now going ahead with Sany for the technology license, and so that we can start the project work for manufacturing of blades going forward within India. So this is how we are taking care, and also we are working not only limiting to four MW. In case there is an opportunity, our technology understanding agreement with them will also. We will move ahead even to the 5 X platform, which is a five MW + platform. Turbines will still come from China, or is there a plan to assemble here as well? No, no, no. China, no. Sany already has the facilities in India. They will be supplying. It cannot be imported also. It, WTG is to be supplied from India only. Import is not permitted. Okay. I can make it next. Understood. That's very helpful. Thank you so much, and all the best. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, in order to ensure that the management is able to answer queries from all participants, please restrict your questions to two at a time. We'll take our next question from the line of Akhilesh Bhandari from Millennium Capital. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi, good evening. Thank you for taking my question. So firstly, on the overall target, so we have been touching distance of getting to a 19 GW in terms of the 20 GW target, in terms of the overall visibility. So any comments on if you're looking to, if you're aspiring for a higher target in terms of the overall generation capacity? And secondly, you also have the option of invest, and you are already investing in storage, and different segments have different equity IRRs. So in terms of allocation of incremental capital, what is the pecking order if you look at storage versus renewable generation? Akhilesh, I think the first one I'll just tell you, in terms of the overall locked-in capacity, what we have said, 19.2 GWs, and the first milestone of 10 GWs, as we have been saying, maybe for quite some time, that we will be reaching the first milestone of 10 GWs by end of current fiscal. And as we have said, that the PPAs which are in hand, and as we have been guiding, earlier also, so maybe we have a 24-month window, for the new projects and the PPAs which we have signed. So we are on track, to move in the timelines, and going forward we will decide. In terms of the capital allocation, Pritesh has already said earlier. Maybe Pritesh can add to this. Yeah, no, no, Sharad, you're right. So, you know, we'll again be driven by underlying returns, you know, because it's very difficult to crystal ball how future bids will play out and how the price discovery in future bids is gonna pan out, right? So we're gonna take each day as it comes and, you know, look at both the availability, the organizational capability, meaning the execution capability, and you know, the size of the opportunity and the underlying returns of the opportunity. So yes, storage is, you know, and with that precisely in mind, you know, if you recall, last year, we had laid out what we call strategy 2.0, where in addition to 20 GW of generation, we said now, we are confident that we will also pursue 40 GW hour of storage solutions also, right? So I think, that is all we'll be able to say at this point of time, you know. But, depending on how the underlying returns plays out, you know, we'll be calibrating that, progressively. Got it. And for the three point GW of PPAs, which are yet to be signed, by when are we expecting, you know, a completion, especially on the group captive, which is a significant portion of the pipeline? The group captive should be done within this financial year, yeah, before March 2025. The others, you know, I would want to be a bit more circumspect, you know, having seen, you know, what has happened in the past. So, I belong to the camp that nothing is done till it is done. So, so, you know, while we are reasonably confident, and the most important driver is, as Sharad mentioned, is a largely, you know, narrow range- or a range-bound behavior in terms of the tariff discovery and subsequent auctions, right? So you're not running a tail risk of, you know, the any potential off-taker being disincentivized to go for, the earlier PPA, right? So we are not in that situation thankfully. But, let's see how this plays out. Yeah. Sorry, just may ask you one more. But at the industry level, are we seeing any signs of delay in signing PPAs, given that a significant quantum of capacity has been auctioned over the last twelve to eighteen months? Any signs of delay, which we are seeing in PSAs or PPAs that have been signed at the moment? No, see, Abhishek, we have to see that, we have to remember that, maybe as we said, that in last seven, eight months, what LOAs we received, two-thirds of the PPAs have been signed, which is a significant percentage of the PPAs signed. And we don't see, because we have to remember that for each state, each discom, there is a RPO obligation which they have to reach by 2030. So keeping that in mind, and also coupled with the storage, it is also coming out, renewable energy is coming out as a replacement to the high power peak demand requirements, where for many of the discom states, we are in a state of shortage, where the peak demand. I think, we don't see any significant delay in signing of PPAs, because normally, SECI or any other agency which is calling for the bids, normally they also speak to various states, and then only they come out. So we don't see this as right now as a challenge. But yes, pure wind and pure solar, which I have been saying earlier also, has reduced. If we see more of hybrids, more of storage or more of solar plus storage, these kind of customized solution bids are going to take a larger percentage of the overall bidding rather than plain vanilla solar or vanilla wind. Got it. Thank you. I'll get back in touch. Thank you. We'll take our next question from the line of Rajesh Majumdar from B&K Securities. Please go ahead. Yeah, good evening, sir, and thanks for the opportunity. Sir, my first question was that we have commissioned around 495 megawatt only in first half, and we had a target of getting to 10 GW by December, and now you're talking about FY 2025. Is that correct, sir? Now, the ten GW operational capacity will be not December, but FY 2025? Yes, yes. FY 2025, yes. So my related second question was that, see, we normally do two-thirds of our EBITDA in the first half, and if you look at the EBITDA trends, they're more or less flat, and only 495 MW has come in the first half itself. So given this trend, will we see a year of consolidation in our business in terms of low growth as compared to what we have seen in the last two years? See, in terms of capacity, what you are talking of, we just wanted to share, which I said in my opening remarks, that the capacity addition to reach 10 GW out of this 350 MW of in Barath Utkal, and 240 MW of greenfield hydro is well on track, and we are sure that this will be achieved, commissioned within this year. So this takes us to maybe the 600. Over and above this, balance is the renewable energy projects, which are, we are in line to commission, which are at advanced stages. Yeah, I know that you don't give any profit guidance, but I'm just worried that, you know, our rate of growth is probably going to be slightly lower than what we had envisaged earlier, given the kind of normal delays that we are seeing in terms of the commissioning of the projects. Is that a right assumption, sir? So, Rajesh, I mean, it is arithmetic, right? I mean, you will be able to, I'm sure, model it that, you know, if, for example, we are sitting at close to just under seven point seven or seven point eight GW of operating capacity, and say the balance two point three or two point two is going to get completed between now and March, you will be able to figure it out. So we would not like to comment on, you know, any financial forward-looking guidance. You'll be able to derive what, you know, should be the numbers you should be looking at. Right, sir. And, just an added question. I just want some color on the short-term market, because we saw a dip in the short-term market in 2Q, and we are also going into a season where the demand will be lower. So, when do you expect the short-term market to kind of pick up in terms of pricing, if you can have a guess, sir? See, two things. If you see quarter one, the short-term market was good, the demand was there. It is only that in quarter two, we have witnessed this slowdown in the short-term market. We have to remember that the two factors: One is the hydro generation, which was much better than what it was in quarter two of last year, and also the wind capacity addition, which has taken place, and the wind season now getting over in quarter three, and sometime in quarter four, again, the wind season will start, so we are sure that the merchant market will be definitely, we expect it to be better. The demand also, keeping in mind the monsoons and the weather conditions going forward, the demand is expected to be better from quarter three onwards, is what we are seeing. Okay, sir. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Sumit Kishore from Axis Capital. Please go ahead. Good evening, and thanks for the opportunity. My first question is in relation to CapEx. Could you please discuss what have been the CapEx in first half of the fiscal, and what is your target, for the full year? And if you could also outline what is the remaining CapEx for the 2.1 GW to be commissioned, within FY 2025. Sumit, hi. For the first half, the total CapEx from a cash outflow point of view has been just shy of INR 4,000 crores. And our, if you recall earlier, we had talked about a INR 15,000 crore CapEx. Yeah. -for the full year. So we should be, we are targeting just over 11,000 crore of CapEx in the balance period of the year. Of this, the to-be spent for the ongoing projects in order to hit the 10 GW mark is roughly 4,500 crores. And the balance will be the CapEx for the future pipeline of projects that we will do. Okay, this is excellent. So, we should assume that the zero date for the contracted capacity of 5388 megawatt, you know, to be commissioned over a twenty-four month time frame has started? Yes, yes. Once the PPA gets signed, my clock starts ticking, right? Yes. Yes, yes, and in this INR 110 billion CapEx and the difference of INR 45 billion for under construction projects, how much is for the battery project and, you know, the green hydrogen project? Green hydrogen is a very small, right? It's really not. And that will get completed in March as well. So, that is not gonna move the needle. The battery project is going to be, I would guess, you know, closer to somewhere in the range of INR 1,800-2,000 crores, in that range, yeah. That, I think, should be the number. We are still, you know, we have a potential upside risk in terms of a lower cost out there, but, the worst case being conservative, you should work with that INR 1,800-2,000. That is also largely for FY 2025? That is targeted for completion by June, you know, so there'll be a spillover to the next fiscal year. Yeah. Partly one, two, partly two, two, because there'll be certain performance-based payments that will happen subsequently. And just one quick question on, you know, we have seen how the technology improvements and, you know, overall price reductions for modules are happening. So for a new build solar project, what is the new thumb rule for CapEx per megawatt? And what sort of CUF would you be assuming at a reasonably, you know, sunny site? See, in terms of the CapEx, the module is only a part of the overall project. So module prices coming down will may be difficult to give an exact number or approximate number for a project cost. Module prices definitely have moderated, so giving an exact number. But there are lots, many factors. Module is only one of the element. So, and regarding CUF, again, it depends from geography to geography. It can range from 26% to 28%, depending on where the project location is. So all these factors are considered before maybe the overall as Pritesh has already said, that maybe the benchmark high team returns is the benchmark. So all those factors during the assumption, a conservative assumption of maybe in case of solar, where the P75 is considered rather than going aggressive. So all those factors we consider, but this is what they look like. Module has definitely moderated, but overall project cost needs to be seen. There are many other things. How far is the project from the connectivity? How much is the transmission line the developer has to put? So there are very variable factors on this. Sure. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Sudhanshu from JM Financial. Please go ahead. Mr. Sudhanshu, your line is unmuted. Uh, yeah [crosstalk] Please go ahead. Yeah. Am I audible now? [crosstalk] Just a moment. Good evening. Hold on, please. Ladies and gentlemen, please stay connected. We've lost the management connection. We have the management team back on the call. Mr. Sudhanshu? Yeah, good evening, sir. Congratulations on winning the first large pumped hydro storage project. Sir, just comparing to some of our industry peers, we are more focused on the wind and our renewable portfolio. I just wanted to understand what is the thought process behind this? The first question. Second is, with as we are seeing the battery energy storage prices are reducing so sharply, so in our FDRE projects going forward, are we going to see more of a mix from the solar rather than the wind? Thank you. Sudhanshu, you know, probably you joined this call a bit late. You know, earlier there was a question, in which I actually gave a specific example that, we used to get asked this question that, you know, why are we more leaning in favor of wind, compared to solar? But, you just corrected me. It is not that we were asked that question earlier, we are still being asked that question. That was on a lighter note, you know. But.. Hmm You see, we are driven by underlying returns, right? So, it's a function of, you know, also the competitive intensity or the, what we would want to call a rationality of behavior in terms of the price discovery in any competitive bid. So it so happened that when we were building the phase one of our greenfield projects, you know, to what appeared to us, and we could be wrong, the returns were more, in wind projects compared to, you know, the solar projects, which were a function purely of the tariffs being discovered in solar auctions relative to the cost to build, right? And when that equation changed, say, from the beginning of this calendar year onwards, then we have actually gone the other way around. If you look at our pipeline of projects beyond the 10 GW, it is solar heavy, right? Four GW of the pipeline is actually solar, right? So therefore, the limited point we want to make is this: we are, how should I put it? Fuel type or source type agnostic, right? But we will more be driven by underlying returns in any opportunity. That's point number one. The second question that you asked, in terms of FDRE and storage, and Sharad actually mentioned it, a few minutes ago, that, you know, in our view, more and more, the share of, you know, load-following solutions or, you know, solutions which will require, solving for a specific problem, which could be either meeting peaking hour deficits, et cetera, which will need more and more of, you know, a generation plus a storage combination that is going to be there, and that is what we also see to be playing out, you know, largely in the last few months. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. We'll take our next question from the line of Nikhil Abhyankar from UTI Mutual Fund. Please go ahead. Thank you, sir. Thanks for the opportunity. So, sir, can you talk about your land bank and connectivity for all the new projects that you have won and, the projects which, for which you have signed any PPAs? Do you see any kind of cons, and a lag in getting transmission connectivity or the transmission projects getting completed, not today, but two years down the line? Yeah, yeah, Nikhil, in fact, I just want to tell you that, as we said, that we have signed the PPAs in excess of almost 5.7 or 5.8 GWs of PPAs, which we have signed. Almost 80% of these PPAs, the connectivity we have already been successful to secure. So connectivity, we don't see, and balance 20% also going forward is in pipeline. So we don't see right now for this PPA signed, the connectivity as a challenge. 80% of the connectivity has already been secured. Regarding the land, we have been working on this. Regarding the wind also, maybe almost 60%-70% of the locations already in possession, and it is a daily work, it is a continuous work which is ongoing. So we don't see this as a challenge for this PPAs what we have signed. We are confident of executing within the PPA timeline. Okay, sir. And sir, for this 12 GW-hour PSP project. What kind of return should we expect? Are these purely based on ROE, or fixed ROE PPAs? Are these fixed ROE PPAs? No, no, Nikhil, these are not regulated return projects. This is not a cost plus ROE. This is a competitive bid base price discovery, right? So there was an auction that was conducted, and there were multiple people quoting for tariffs, and that was how the price was discovered. So you don't have an assured ROE, ROE. That's point number one. Like any competitive bid project, you know, from our point of view, as we've been consistently maintaining that if our hurdle rate is a mid-teen levered equity IRR. So suffice to say that if we've gone ahead with the project and signed the PPA, we are reasonably confident of getting a return which is meeting the hurdle rate. Understood. And sir, you earlier also mentioned about green hydrogen. So we have also signed MOUs for larger capacities, around 80-90 thousand tons per annum. So any progress on that? See, Nikhil, as I said some time back, that our first, which is country's largest, maybe it is only 3,800 tons of green hydrogen. See, it is that, yes, there is, that our group company, steel, also moving towards the green steel, definitely have plans, but as we all are aware, that we are waiting for the right economics to work out and also to have a reasonably long-term PPAs, we are waiting for the right time. But presently, if you ask me in immediate terms, we have guided this till 2030. The number what we have said, the MOU which we have signed, maybe in terms of execution, we are waiting, maybe, the, till the economics work out. And the way technology is evolving, we are... The confidence level is high that even the cost of equipment and everything will be moderating. And also the power cost at these levels, maybe it's a matter of time when the technology allows to be a techno-economic solution for green hydrogen. So till then, we see that maybe for some time, but this execution of this project is going to be as a pilot project, as a learning for us, as JSW Energy, as a supplier. It's going to be a good learning, and for the user also, to blend the green hydrogen in their steel manufacturing. So we will be future ready after the commissioning of this project, ongoing project by March 2025, and we'll wait for the right time when the economics work and the returns are protected, then only we'll be moving ahead. Sure. Sure. So just a final question. The FDRE project that we have won recently is 240 MW. So we are setting up a capacity of 330 MW for it. If you look at, if we compare it with the peers, this capacity, this ratio of 1.5 is far lower than what the peers are quoting. Can you mention about the configuration that you are using for this project? See, as we see that this project, when it is there, again it depends on various things, that what is the solution the buyer is asking for? What is the geography which we are, and then the breakup between the wind and solar. Somewhere, maybe if it's a very high area where the solar, the CUF is 28% as compared to majority of the locations of 26%-27.5%. So it is a design which we do, which we have a dedicated team which works out on the most economical option to maximize the returns or the tariff in this case. So it is very difficult to say that this is the ratio others are following. It's because geographical location, the kind of equipment, if I'm using a four-megawatt machine for wind or five-megawatt or someone is using 2.7. So there are a lot of variables in this. So based on which is the best option, we decide on the breakup. Sure, sure, sir. Thank you, and all the very best. Thank you. Thank you. We'll take a last question from the line of Anuj Upadhyay from Investec Capital Services. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi, sir. Majority of the questions have been answered. Just need one clarification on the module sourcing part. So this three plus GW of solar capacity which we are adding, would the module be sourced through the captive arrangement? As earlier, we had discussed plan to set up a module capacity. So would this be sourced through our own captive arrangement or through the third party? See, for modules, right now, what we are doing is that there is a lot of capacity which is there in India, which is again not getting utilized. So what we have done is that the cells we have tied up with the suppliers, and we'll be importing the cells, and we have blocked the capacities on a conversion basis, and that is how we will be taking care of our module requirements from the capacities, enough capacities which are available and are not getting utilized in India. The arrangement is with a single supplier, or we have a multiple supplier through which we are doing? [crosstalk] Multiple tier one suppliers. After technical due diligence from our team, once the supplier is approved, then we go ahead with it. Okay [crosstalk] We have already finalized. Got it, sir. And you mentioned about the INR 15,000 crores of CapEx this year. Any numbers you want to throw for next year? That is FY 2026 or 2027. It's premature now, Anuj. We'd like to wait, you know, for the last quarter of the year, and at that time we'll be in a better position to give you a more crystallized number. Fair enough, sir. Just last one, if I may chip in. Apart from Maharashtra, any other states actively coming out with the PSP tender? Yes, there is an ongoing tender which the State of Uttar Pradesh has already called for. Again, that is also a large PSP tender, and other states also are actively considering. We understand Rajasthan also is in advanced stage of discussion for pumped storage. There are various states who are now looking towards pumped storage. That is helpful, sir. Thank you for this. Thank you. Wish you all a very happy Diwali, sir. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, and same to you. Thank you. Thank you. Sir, any closing comments? Well, thank you, everyone, and I think it has been a good interaction. In case there are any other questions which come later, please you can write to our investor relations, to our investor relations team. We will definitely get the answers from our side, and wish you all a very, very happy and prosperous Deepavali from our side. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. On behalf of Investec Capital Services, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines.