Answering questions posed in the Parliamentary Sectoral Natural Resources Committee, subject Minister of the sector, APNU/AFC Government Minister Raphael Trotman, seemed to breathe new life in the Amaila Falls Hydro Electric Project (AFHEP), which Government had abandoned.
Objectively, few would deny it could be a central cog in our country’s transformation into a “green economy” in Government’s “Green State Development Strategy”; and from all indications, the shelving of AFHEP was more due to denying its conceptualiser, former President Bharat Jagdeo, credit. From that perspective, it was clearly a case of “cutting Guyana’s nose to spite its face”. All Guyana has lost from the project, which would have been on stream by now if the initial plans had been consummated.
Before assuming office, APNU and AFC’s refusal to endorse AFHEP forced the main developer, Sithe Global, to walk away from the project. APNU and AFC claimed they were awaiting an evaluation from the IDB, which was in receipt of US$80 million from Norway that was specifically committed to AFHEP. But with no developer, the IDB declared an investigation was moot. The Government, as it might be doing once again, ducked AFHEP, while seeking to use the US$80 million for other projects.
However, after attending COP25 in Paris, Minister of Natural Resources, Raphael Trotman, announced, “…the Ministry of Finance and Cabinet considered it the best option for an objective re-assessment (of AFHEP).” If he is to be taken seriously, Minister Trotman should refer to the Report by Norconsult, an engineering and design consultancy firm out of Norway, which was contracted by the Government of Norway for an “objective and facts-based” assessment, which was released in December 2016.
Just before the report was made public, the Government of Guyana, through Minister David Patterson, issued a statement claiming that the Norconsult consultancy justified Government’s position that the Amaila Falls Hydropower Project was not financially viable for the country, and would be a burden to the people of Guyana.
But when the report was made public, its conclusions and recommendations were the complete opposite, and declared that “the only realistic path” for Guyana moving towards an emission-free electricity sector and achieving its 2025 Green Agenda commitment was to develop its hydropower potential in general, and maintain the Amaila Falls Hydropower Project in particular.
Soon came further confirmation of the Government’s willingness to expose itself to international derision, as it sought to get its hands on the US$80 million lodged with the IDB without committing itself to AFHEP. A year ago, Per Fredrik Pharo, Special Envoy and Director of the Norwegian International Climate and Forest Initiative, was forced to issue a statement bluntly pointing out, “retired Rear Admiral Gary Best (Presidential Advisor on the Environment) presents a number of misleading arguments about the Guyana Norway Agreement.
“The cornerstone of our partnership is the original Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) from 2009. The MoU establishes that results-based funding from Norway is to be used to implement the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS), the core of which was forest protection and a renewable energy transition, with the Amaila Falls Hydropower Project at its heart. This is also reflected in our Joint Concept Notes (JCN) from 2012 and 2015.”
The Special Envoy of Norway presented the Government of Norway’s position on AFHEP very clearly: “We strongly defend the right of a government to set the development path of its country. But if that development path were to deviate from that which was the basis for our partnership, then it is not the right of a government to retain the benefits of a partnership based on commitments it no longer intends to fulfil.” In other words, reading between the lines: no AFHEP, no Norway money.
The envoy did say if the Government can present “a concrete, realistic and cost-effective plan for Guyana’s energy transition,” – presumably without AFHEP – Norway would be inclined to support it. One would have to assume that the Government’s volte face is because they could not. They should be big enough to admit they had miscalculated.
