ON EDGE. Sited near a waterbody for cooling, coal power plants face high exposure to flooding | Photo Credit: RAJESH N

In recent days, power plants across India are working overtime to meet peak power demand almost daily — an obvious consequence of much of India currently feeling like the inside of an oven. The likely impact of climate change is on top of mind too. But have you ever wondered how the functioning of power plants may be impacted by climate change?

A paper titled ‘Differentiated impacts of climate physical risks on the Indian power sector’, published recently in the iScience journal, looks at how climate-induced flooding can lead to catastrophic consequences for the country’s electricity infrastructure. And how protection against such flooding can vastly lower the risk of shutdowns.

India ranks 13th globally for flood exposure, with 80 per cent of its districts vulnerable to climate disasters. The usual models miss risks that have low probability but can be disastrous if, and when they occur. These worst-case risks are called ‘tail risks’ (such as an extreme flood that occurs once in 100 years). The study analysed 424 power plants, which account for more than 90 per cent of India’s power capacity across coal, gas, nuclear, oil, and bioenergy fuel sources.

Most researchers traditionally watch transition risks (for example, the cost of moving from fossil fuels to green energy). However, because global clean energy transition is delayed, physical climate risks are gathering momentum.

The authors simulated severe floods over a 25-year horizon under a high-emissions climate future and found that no protection against floods would mean that the average power sector losses exceed 19 per cent of asset value, while worst-case tail risks wipe out more than 24 per cent. On the other hand, building protection with a 100-year flood in mind helped cut average losses to below 1 per cent and tail risks below 2 per cent.

Location matters

It’s interesting that even when a power plant manages to avoid a shutdown during a flood, its utilisation rate drops significantly — stored coal getting wet or fuel in transit not reaching on time are ‘dampening’ factors in the efficient running of the plant. The Bongaigaon power plant, located in a flood-prone area, survives unaffected because of its local topography and water flow lines.

There are regional differences too. Coastal and heavy river basin states face the worst-case risks. Kerala is the most exposed, facing estimated losses at about 58 per cent. Arunachal Pradesh (55 per cent), Nagaland (55 per cent), Puducherry (49 per cent), and Himachal Pradesh (48 per cent) bring up the subsequent slots. And where melting glaciers drive risk, states such as Gujarat (45 per cent), Odisha (41 per cent), Karnataka (40 per cent), and Andhra Pradesh (35 per cent) are vulnerable.

Regions that are dry or located further inland, such as Rajasthan, Delhi, and Haryana, are tallied with the lowest tail risks, staying under 17 per cent.

The differences in risk stack up not only in terms of region but also the choice of fuel source for power generation. Sited near water for cooling, coal and gas power plants face high exposure, but 100-year flood walls eliminate 97 per cent of the risk. Nuclear-fuelled power plants are typically located in highly exposed coastal cooling zones, and hence these are vulnerable to extreme situations. However, such plants are normally built to stringent standards that help bring down the remaining risk to near zero. Bioenergy- and oil-based plants retain risk of 4.16 per cent even with flood walls. They are heavily concentrated in districts with low flood protection, which means they would need strategies such as placing critical machinery at a certain height.

Insurance cover

To check for preparedness, the authors used data on losses from historical floods and found that India’s current defences were highly unequal. Existing medium to high protection is concentrated in historically hard-hit eastern coastal states, the North-East, and central India. So, major plants are naturally situated in moderately protected districts. Northern districts show dangerously low infrastructure protection.

The authors also evaluated insurance protection but cite it as being complementary and not a substitute for core protection. Without flood walls, buying full insurance only pushes down tail risk from about 24 per cent to 22 per cent, while failing to prevent physical damage or operational freezes. But with physical walls that could block minor floods and prevent damage, power plants would benefit from lower insurance costs, with tail risk plummeting to 1.2 per cent.

It’s interesting that simple protection of the grid does not require huge funding. The authors advocate that even planning for 25-year flood defences helps move the risk-reduction curve from zero to modest and the worst-case industry risk collapses from 24 per cent to about 4.8 per cent.

Published on May 25, 2026