Dear Editor,
Kudos be heaped upon the Government of Guyana for reviving plans to realise the much-needed Amaila Hydro Project, that can potentially generate some 165MW of power. Simply out, it means that the capacity will be there to power approximately 200,000 households per month, depending on average household electricity consumption and the type of power generation. Overall, this means ‘hurry-up’ and get going, even if many ‘complain just for the sake of complaining.’
This long overdue project, once stymied by the previous APNU/AFC, will be via “The Build, Own, Operate, and Transfer (BOOT) model.” BOOT is often used often used in public-private partnerships, where a private entity finances, builds, owns, and operates a facility for a set period before transferring it to the public sector. This model is typically used for large infrastructure projects like toll roads or water treatment plants and allows the government to fund projects without upfront capital costs, yet eventually gaining exclusive control.
It was indeed a big setback when the project was stopped by the A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the Alliance For Change (AFC) coalition, back in 2014. But in its 2020 election manifesto, the PPP-administration noted that the project will be revived, and here it is about to happen.
The details concerning the AFHP are that “…. the Government of Guyana (GoG) will purchase the electricity from the private developer. As such, the RFP (Referral for Proposal) explained that government will select a suitable partner based on (i) lowest Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) price, engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) price, operating cost and capital amortization; (ii) timeframes to complete and (iii) ability to finance the project on a PPA basis. I gather that lots of brainstorming went into all of this and Guyana is likely to wetness another massive transformation project.
It is good to bear in mind that Guyana is not isolated in this kind of power generation as many countries do so, with China being the largest producer, followed by Brazil, Canada, the United States, and Russia. Other countries with significant hydropower generation include India, Norway, Turkey, and Vietnam. Some nations, such as Norway and Brazil, derive a very large percentage of their total electricity from hydro power. Let’s remember too that hydroelectric energy is a clean, renewable, and flexible power source with several advantages, including low-carbon emissions, long-term affordability, and the ability to store water for other uses like irrigation and flood control. Also, once a dam is built, operating costs are low, and the infrastructure can have a very long service life. Its ability to quickly adjust output makes it a valuable tool for grid stability and for meeting peak electricity demands. So, the advantages demand that the project be expedited.
Editor, even when the APNU+AFC coalition had abandoned the project, saying that it was too costly and the financial model unacceptable, the Norconsult Review: An independent study commissioned by the Norwegian government in 2016 (the Norconsult report) did conclude that “…. while developing hydropower was the only realistic path to an emission-free electricity sector, the specific AFHP plan had significant financial and technical issues, including a high price and potential capacity issues during the dry season.”
Now that these issues have been ironed out, I hope that there will be no ‘sillier’ impediment and that Guyana can quickly ‘get going’ as reliable and affordable power is quite foundation to any economy.