Rajasthan Floats Consultancy Tender for 45 MW Renewable Energy Projects

Maharashtra Invites EOIs for 115 MW Floating Solar Project with Battery Storage

Odisha Amends Renewable Energy Policy to Support Wind, Storage

Inox Clean Raises ₹15 billion from Motilal Oswal Group

APTEL Upholds Capacity-Based Wheeling Charges for Captive Wind Project

Bihar Offers Rooftop Solar Subsidy Top-up of ₹10,000/kW Under PM Surya Ghar

Strong Solar Module Demand Drives Insolation Energy’s Q1 Revenue up 105%

India Adds Record 27 GW of Solar Capacity in First Half of 2026

Daily News Wrap-Up: DCR Push Triggers a Solar Module Supply Crunch

Gujarat Tenders 1 GW/4 GWh Standalone Battery Storage Projects

<table id="amazon-polly-audio-table">
						<tr>
						<td id="amazon-polly-audio-tab">
							<div id="amazon-ai-player-label">Listen to this article</div>
							<div id="amazon-ai-player-container">
			<audio class="amazon-ai-player" id="amazon-ai-player" preload="none" controls controlsList="nodownload" >
				<source type="audio/mpeg" src="https://cms.mercomindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/amazon_polly_102994.mp3?version=1786604508">
			</audio>
		</div>
							<div id="amazon-polly-subscribe-tab"></div>
							<div id="amazon-polly-by-tab"></div>
						</td>
						</tr>
					</table>India’s nascent floating solar market has struggled to scale amid high project costs, complex reservoir engineering, fragmented water-surface allocation, and limited technical standards.
The ₹50.7 billion (~$530.20 million) Pradhan Mantri Surya Sarovar Yojana (PM-SSY), recently <a href="https://www.mercomindia.com/cabinet-clears-%E2%82%B950-billion-pm-surya-sarovar-floating-solar-storage-program" target="_blank" rel="noopener">approved</a> by the Union Cabinet, could lower one of the biggest barriers &#8211; cost. But developers say scaling the market will ultimately depend on converting that support into bankable projects backed by workable tariffs, suitable sites, grid connectivity, and technically sound execution.
PM-SSY aims to support 5 GW of floating solar with at least 10 GWh of co-located energy storage. The program provides central financial assistance (CFA) of ₹10 million (~$104,841)/MW after commissioning and up to ₹5 million (~$52,420) per project for feasibility studies, including bathymetry, hydrography, and environmental assessments.
The combination of a dedicated policy, defined capacity target, and financial support could bring greater developer interest to a segment that has so far lagged far behind ground-mounted solar.
Can Subsidy Close the Cost Gap?
Floating solar involves costs that ground-mounted projects generally do not, including flotation systems, anchoring and mooring equipment, marine-grade cabling, reservoir surveys, specialized installation methods, and additional operations and maintenance requirements.
That cost premium can vary significantly from site to site. Water depth, seasonal drawdown, wind conditions, water velocity, anchoring requirements, installation access, and water chemistry can all influence project economics.
Industry stakeholders expect PM-SSY to significantly improve the investment case for floating solar. Prashant Mathur, CEO at <a href="https://saatvikgroup.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Saatvik Green Energy</a>, said the program could open a market several times larger than its current size. Floating solar <a href="https://www.mercomindia.com/daily-news-wrap-up-indias-floating-solar-potential-assessed-at-102-gw" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stands</a> at under 1 GW today, against a resource potential that the National Institute of Solar Energy pegs at over 102 GW.
Mathur described PM-SSY as the policy intervention that finally puts that potential to work. “With 5,000 MW of new capacity mandated alongside compulsory storage integration, this program is not incremental; it is structural,” he concluded.
Sunil Aggarwal, Managing Director at <a href="https://www.floatexsolar.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Floatex Solar</a>, believes the CFA can substantially narrow the cost gap. “The subsidy seems sufficient to bring floating solar on a par with ground-mounted solar.”
Deepak Ushadevi, CEO and Managing Director at <a href="https://ciel-et-terre.net/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ciel &amp; Terre India</a>, offered a more qualified assessment. He said the CFA could bridge a meaningful part of the viability gap, but developers will still have to absorb battery costs, higher aquatic O&amp;M expenses, financing risk, and future battery replacement costs. Since the CFA is released only after commissioning, developers must also carry construction and financing risks through the execution period.
The ₹5 million (~$52,420) feasibility support could prove equally important by reducing early-stage development risk. Detailed reservoir studies allow developers to weed out unsuitable sites before committing significant capital.
Ushadevi considers this early-stage de-risking particularly important for attracting lenders and investors.
Floating solar also sidesteps land acquisition, one of the more unpredictable elements of utility-scale project development. Developers cite modest generation gains from the cooling effect of water, although Aggarwal cautioned against overstating this benefit. Floating arrays may also reduce evaporation and, under certain conditions, limit algae growth.
Storage Improves Power Value but Raises Costs
PM-SSY&#8217;s mandatory two-hour storage requirement fundamentally changes the operating profile of floating solar projects.
Standalone solar generation is concentrated during daylight hours. Batteries allow part of this generation to be shifted to evening demand periods while absorbing electricity that might otherwise be curtailed.
Aggarwal described the resulting electricity as a “peak-hour product rather than surplus midday power.”
Storage can also support voltage and frequency management, improve system balancing, reduce curtailment, and make project output more predictable.
Ushadevi considers the two-hour requirement one of the program’s most consequential design elements because it allows projects to supply electricity when demand is higher and potentially more valuable. The trade-off is higher project cost.
Whether distribution companies (DISCOMs) are willing to pay for that additional value could ultimately determine project bankability. Storage-backed electricity will cost more than standalone solar, requiring procurement frameworks that recognize the value of peak-hour supply, flexibility, and avoided curtailment.
Aggarwal cautioned that higher storage-linked tariffs could make DISCOMs reluctant to sign power purchase agreements, potentially leaving awarded capacity without offtake.
Ushadevi feels storage sizing should also reflect grid conditions, regional demand patterns, reservoir characteristics, and the intended operating profile rather than applying the same configuration to every project.
Finding 5 GW of Suitable Sites
India’s estimated 102.18 GW technical potential suggests that identifying 5 GW of suitable water surfaces should be easy. The challenge is that technical potential does not necessarily translate into project-ready capacity.
A suitable water body must satisfy several conditions simultaneously. Developers need information on water depth, seasonal variation, bathymetry, wind and wave conditions, water velocity, geotechnical characteristics, sedimentation, water chemistry, debris flows, and reservoir operating rules.
Water-level variation is particularly important because anchoring and mooring systems must accommodate reservoir drawdown while maintaining array stability. Extreme weather can also impose significant mechanical loads on floats, anchors, mooring lines, and electrical equipment.
Industrial water bodies present a different set of risks. pH, salinity, biological activity, and contaminants can affect polymers, cables, connectors, and metallic components over a 25-year project life.
Biofouling, weed growth, and debris carried by monsoon inflows can further affect long-term operations. Developers must also assess assembly areas, launch zones, access roads, substation capacity, evacuation infrastructure, and maintenance facilities.
Environmental and operational constraints can further narrow the site pool. According to Ushadevi, water quality, aquatic ecosystems, fisheries, irrigation requirements, and competing uses of the reservoir may require continued monitoring and stakeholder engagement.
Aggarwal also stresses the importance of selecting experienced technology partners with marine and product expertise because the floats and anchoring systems must perform reliably for decades.
Better Reservoir Data Could Cut Development Time
Developers believe one relatively low-cost intervention could significantly reduce development timelines: making existing reservoir data accessible to developers.
Bathymetry, historical water levels, and drawdown records for many reservoirs are available with the Central Water Commission and state departments. Publishing these datasets in a usable format could enable developers to eliminate unsuitable sites before incurring additional survey costs.
Ushadevi proposed creating a national geographic information system (GIS)-based database of reservoirs and industrial water bodies covering water depth, seasonal variation, grid connectivity, and environmental constraints. Standardized survey methodologies could also give developers, lenders, and government agencies a common basis for project evaluation.
Reservoir Access Could Become a Bigger Bottleneck Than Cost 
Even if project economics improve, developers may still struggle to secure the water surface on which projects must be built.
Reservoirs can fall under the jurisdiction of multiple agencies such as water resources and irrigation departments, hydropower corporations, and municipal bodies. Leasing procedures and approval requirements can vary between states and even between reservoirs.
India does not currently have a uniform national process for allocating water surfaces or establishing rental charges.
Aggarwal said a developer could win capacity through a national tender but then spend months determining which authority is empowered to execute the reservoir lease.
Developers favor state-level single-window mechanisms, standardized water-surface leasing policies, and defined approval timelines. They also call for clearer accountability and regular review mechanisms among central agencies, state governments, reservoir operators, utilities, developers, manufacturers, and financiers.
Hydropower Reservoirs Offer Additional Value
Existing hydropower reservoirs could offer some of the strongest opportunities under the program because much of the supporting infrastructure may already be in place.
Such locations may already have roads, substations, transmission lines, operating staff, and established grid connections. Reusing this infrastructure can reduce both capital requirements and development time.
The generation profiles can also complement each other. Floating solar can supply power during the day while hydropower generation is reduced, conserving water for evening demand. Batteries can manage shorter fluctuations and shift solar output into higher-demand periods.
“The reservoir becomes a second store, the battery handles the sharper ramps,” Aggarwal noted.
Ushadevi also sees potential in combining floating solar, battery storage, and hydropower. Hydropower can respond to solar variability, while daytime solar generation can reduce hydropower discharge and preserve water for evening generation, irrigation, or downstream use. Shared transmission assets can also improve infrastructure utilization and provide grid operators with a more predictable output profile from one location.
Scaling such configurations would require clear rules for shared grid connections, scheduling, metering, and coordinated operation.
Scaling 5 GW Will Test the Supply Chain 
Adding 5 GW of floating solar will create demand across floats, anchoring systems, marine-grade cables, electrical equipment, reservoir engineering, surveys, installation services, batteries, power conversion systems, and O&amp;M.
Developers expect modules and conventional solar equipment to be relatively accessible given India’s manufacturing expansion. Floatex currently has 600 MWp of annual float manufacturing capacity and plans to add another 500 MWp in 2027.
Battery storage could pose a larger localization challenge. PM-SSY implies at least 10 GWh of storage demand, while some marine-grade components and advanced O&amp;M technologies also require further localization. Ushadevi recommended phasing domestic-content requirements to prevent localization targets from slowing near-term deployment.
Equipment quality will become more important as volumes rise. Aggarwal suggested creating an approved list of float manufacturers and Bureau of Indian Standards specifications covering float-grade polymers, ultraviolet stabilization, and mooring design.
Both Ushadevi and Aggarwal also called for standards and safety codes covering floating structures, anchoring systems, marine-grade electrical equipment, corrosion protection, and storage integration.
Stakeholders also propose demonstration projects to record anchor loads, wave behavior, structural performance, and material degradation. Such data could improve engineering assumptions and give lenders and insurers better information on long-term project risks.
Grid Readiness
Grid planning must also precede project awards. Developers said reserving substation capacity and identifying necessary upgrades early could prevent otherwise viable projects from stalling at the connectivity stage.
Execution Will Decide the Outcome
PM-SSY addresses one of floating solar&#8217;s biggest disadvantages by narrowing the cost gap with ground-mounted projects. But the harder challenge begins after financial support is available.
Reservoir allocation, detailed surveys, mooring design, environmental assessments, grid connectivity, and statutory clearances make floating solar inherently more complex to develop than projects on prepared land. Monsoons, dam-safety requirements, reservoir operations, and wildlife clearances can add further uncertainty to project schedules.
Reaching 5 GW will therefore depend on more than subsidy support. The real measure of PM-SSY&#8217;s success will be whether India can create a pipeline of bankable, technically standardized, grid-ready reservoir sites, and build a procurement framework that adequately values the flexibility provided by storage-backed floating solar.

India’s Floating Solar Push Hinges on More Than Subsidies

pm-surya-sarovar-yojana

Get the most relevant India solar and clean energy news.

RECENT POSTS