Amaila Falls hydro lacks reliable water data

When Kaieteur News published a photograph of a dry Amaila Falls the nation suddenly began to ask a series of questions. One question now is whether this was the best possible site for US$1 billion hydroelectric project. This project was to have seen Guyana get 165 megawatts of power, more than the present need of the country. The reason for its apparent demise at this time has been ventilated in the media over time. For one, the opposition parties could not agree with the government on a number of issues, not least among them the cost of the project and the details of the various loan arrangements. The contractor then said that it needed consensus from all the political parties if it would have continued with the project. That consensus was not forthcoming. For its part the government said that it made available to the opposition parties every bit of information on the project. The opposition denied this statement. And it would seem that the opposition parties were correct because when the photograph of a dry Amaila Falls was published they were taken by surprise. One opposition politician said that in his discussions with the contractor, Sithe Global, his party did hear that the flow of water over the falls would be diminished at certain times but that no one told him that this flow would be reduced to a trickle. The press did ask about feasibility studies and got numerous answers. The first question about feasibility study was asked of Winston Brassington and dealt with the construction of the road to the dam site. Brassington said that the entity providing the Performance Bond would have conducted the feasibility study. That entity, Hand in Hand Insurance Company never did a feasibility study. Brassington had lied. It transpired that the Performance Bond was made possible because there was a government guarantee. The next question about a feasibility study centered on the construction of the hydroelectric dam and the entire project. The government said that many agencies had conducted the studies but for some strange reason these studies were never made public. We know that the Inter American Development Bank was conducting its own feasibility study even though the government had stated that such a study was done. Then there was another study that culminated in a plane crash that killed the two pilots. Was there a study that revealed that both the Kuribrong and Amaila Rivers run bone dry from time to time? The public is now left to wonder whether there would have been extensive periods of blackouts despite the massive expenditure on the project. For certain the government never told the nation about any blackouts so that the general opinion was that the Amaila Falls would have provided a continuous flow of water. It is a good thing that these things are happening now that the project has collapsed. But what does this mean for the nation? For one there have been massive expenditures on projects leading to nowhere. For example, some US$30 million is being spent on a road to nowhere. That money could have done so much more for the coastal infrastructure. Similarly, the government is spending another wad of money on the communication cable from Brazil. This cable should have been operational by now but we hear that there are problems bringing the cable. This cable was to have funded the e-governance programme and support the One Laptop per Family project. Government has spent similarly large sums on the latter. With these things happening even as the largest project to be completed by the government failing to work, one is forced to wonder at the saying that a willful waste makes a woeful want. The government has not been able to stem the rising tide of illiteracy and the corresponding hike in criminal activity. These sums could have done so much to recruit the necessary teachers and help keep the skills at home. Is it that the projects are not properly thought out? Or is it that the government is reckless with money from the

Document no.: 1 Version ... Since 2009 Norwegian International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI) has supported Guyana's efforts for protecting its rainforest from exploitation and degradation and for changing its currently oil fuelled electricity sector to emission-free power generation. As reward for Guyana's endeavours towards these goals, Norway in 2014 deposited USD 80 million in the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) earmarked for Guyana's equity share in Amaila Falls Hydropower Inc (AFHI), a Special Purpose Company for realising the 165 MW Amaila Falls Hydropower Project (AFHP) as a public/private partnership BOOT project supported by IDB. Sithe Global, the private partner and main sponsor in AFHI, withdrew from this position in August 2013 after the Guyanese National Assembly did not vote unanimously in favour of a proposition presented by Sithe Global for certain project features, including raising the ceiling for maximum annual payment by Guyana Power and Light (GPL) as power off-taker. Thereafter, efforts continued, supported by IDB, to establish a new main sponsor in AFHI. This came to a standstill after a new coalition government created by the earlier opposition parties took power after the parliamentary elections in May 2015. The new government has confirmed its devotion to the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS), which was introduced in 2009 by the former government and confirmed by its updated LCDS declaration in 2013. ... On June 20 th 2016 NORAD (Norwegian Agency for Development Co-operation), in support of NICFI signed an agreement with Norconsult AS for carrying out an initial analysis. Main conclusions and recommendations are presented below: ... Norway's Ministry of Climate and Environment and its International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI) have supported Guyana's rainforest conservation efforts since 2009, including Guyana's commitment to the transfer of its oil fired energy generation to renewable sources, as outlined in Guyana's Low-Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) document issued first in 2009 and confirmed in a revised version in March 2013. As a reward for Guyana's successful efforts to preserve its rainforest since 2009 and follow-up of its low carbon development strategy, Norway has since 2010 paid about USD 150 million to Guyana, based on Guyana's results in keeping a low deforestation rate and improving forest governance ... Of this amount Norway in November 2014 signed an agreement to deposit USD 80 million in IDB, available for a larger part of Guyana's equity share in ... AFHI (or in another SPC that may substitute AFHI) for realising the Amaila Falls Hydropower Project, conditional on acceptance by IDB for continuing its role in establishing a loan operation for the project financing. Norway is awaiting Guyana's decision on whether to move forward with the AFHP before a decision is taken by the end of 2016 on how to allocate the USD 80 million in line with Guyana's LCDS. ... 09 the former Government issued a Low ... Strategy (LCDS), reconfirmed in 2013, stating its commitment to switch most of Guyana's current oil fuelled energy generation to renewable sources with implementation of Amaila Falls as the front runner component of such transition ... The LCDS commitment is confirmed by the current Government in its document "Intended Nationally Determined Contributions" presented to the United National Framework Convention on Climate Change ... 2015. From page six of this document is quoted: "---, with the provision of adequate resources 10, Guyana can increase its share of renewable energy by 100% by the year 2025 ... issued its updated version ... 013, ... studies have been made on the generation system expansion in Guyana ... (1) "Initial Study on System Expansion of the Generation & Transmission System" of July 23 th 2014, and (2) "Guyana's Power Generation System Expansion Study" of June 2016.

The hydrology for Amaila Falls Hydropower Project is not very well established since continuous series of direct flow measurements in Kuribrong River at the project site do not exist. Flow records from the gauge station at Kaieteur Falls in the neighbouring Potaro River provided the basis for the Feasibility Study in 2001, as well as for later stages of project planning. For simulation of energy production at AFHP average monthly flows at Kaieteur Falls for the period 1950-90 have been used with a fixed transposition factor of 0.3. Simultaneous flow measurements were carried out in Kuribrong River at Amaila Falls project site and at Kaieteur Falls in June-July 1975 (pre-feasibility study phase) and in June-August 2001. These measurements were used for selecting the transposing factor of 0.3. The records during these brief periods of measurement showed great variation in the ratio between the simultaneous flows in Kuribrong River at Amaila Falls and in Potaro River at Kaieteur Falls. The measurements in June – August 2001 showed a variation in the different 10% percentiles (10% through 90%) of the monthly average flows in the range 0.276 – 0.439, with a median factor estimated at 0.383. The Halcrow Group's Hydrology Review Report of June 2011 indicates the selected factor 0.3 to be somewhat conservative (on the safe side) as regards the production potential. The same view, even stronger, especially in periods of low flow, is opined in the IE's Due Diligence Report of 2013. A conservative transposing factor (0.3) and the moderate installed capacity compared to the medium inflow to the reservoir means that the risk for not achieving the foreseen production potential is low. Therefore the hydrological uncertainty of having scarce series of direct flow measurements cannot be concluded to be a threat to the soundness of the project. For reducing the present hydrological uncertainty, which is especially desirable in the low flow season, longer periods of direct measurements in Kuribrong River at the project site are required. The main benefits would be verification of the believed underestimate of the water flow in the dry season and thereby more reliable estimates of the low season energy production and improved basis for planning the required low season back up capacity. Supported by IDB, SG started a program for continuous simultaneous measurements in 2011 at Amaila Falls and Kaieteur Falls. This program was discontinued in 2013 after SG withdrew as sponsor. A planned review of the hydrology based on the additional data acquired so far, is suspended. We recommend that the programme for continuous water flow measurement is resumed as soon as possible and before a new main sponsor would be ready to take the front seat. 2-3 additional years of continuous flow data would provide a more reliable basis for an updated energy production simulation and thereby reduce the risks for both parties related to the PPA. Based on the same improved flow data the design flood capacities of the dam spillway and flood levels of the reservoir should be reviewed as well. In addition to flow records we recommend a continuous sediment sampling program of at least one year's duration to get a picture of the seasonal variation. As per today only a limited number of spot measurements of sediment transport exist and the project design does not include any facilities for future sediment handling. Probably, siltation of the reservoir may not create any problem during the first 20 years of plant operation. Sedimentation may therefore not be a concern for the private investor in the BOOT perspective. GPL, as operator beyond the BOOT period, should pay closer attention to this issue. Direct flow records in the period until commissioning of the project would provide a valuable ... base for planning the plant operation during the first years of operation and as a ... installed capacity in a ... stage development.

The environmental and social impacts of AFHP are well established in the performed studies. No resettlement is required and there is limited human activity in the area directly affected by the project. About 23 km 2 of rainforest is inundated by the power plant's reservoir. The live storage volume is small compared to the annual water flow and the plant will be operated mainly as a run-of-river plant with little impact on the downstream river hydrology, except for the about 4 km stretch of the river between the intake dam and the tailrace outlet from the powerhouse. The most serious threat to the environment that may result from the project is the access road, which is almost completed and has already, while the ... progress of the ... itself is uncertain, created ... access for mining ... exploitation of the forest along its alignment. ... strict control regime is ... obstructing such activities ... parties as soon as resuming the project preparations ... The live storage capacity in the AFHP reservoir is limited. The operation of AFHP will therefore follow a next to run-of-river pattern. The inflow estimate to the AFHP reservoir in the dry months 18 is uncertain. It is clear, however, that the low season inflow will not be sufficient for continuous full capacity generation. That means additional generation from other sources will be required in the dry season from a certain year as the demand is growing, possibly already from the year of commissioning of AFHP. The last available review of the hydrology and production potential 19 presented in 2011, deems the factor 0.3 used for transposing average monthly flows at Kaieteur falls to inflow to AFHP reservoir as reasonable, but highlights all sources of uncertainty connected to this assumption. On the same basis the IE Due Diligence Report of 2013 opines that the inflow to AFHP may be grossly underestimated, by more than 20% in average and more than 30% in the dry season. If the IE Engineer is right, the need for back-up capacity for the dry season may be reduced during the first years of operation. Until a new evaluation based on later years flow measurements, comprising simultaneous measurement at the AFHP site and at Kaieteur Falls, may conclude that the dry season inflow to AFHP has been ... HFO after the commissioning of ... HP. ... of "some" 1 ... 0% emission-free/renewable energy use ... 2025 therefore ... fulfilled, especially ... the increase in ... will follow the ... in the Generation System ... of June 20 ... technically and logistically ... biomass fuel. ... thermal plant fuelled ... 100 ... hydropower project by ... time with a ... reservoir large enough for maintaining most of the production capacity during ... periods. We are not ... reservoir. Development of smaller ... small compared to the mean water flow in Kuribr ... a rivers at the project ... A drawback is the topographic profile at the dam site, which requires a very long dam for creating even a quite modestly sized live reservoir. The seasonal regulation capacity of the reservoir is therefore insignificant. The height of the dam adds only about 5% to the gross head of the plant, while the dam cost represents about 29% of the total EPC Contract Price 27 for the Power Plant. The regular operational pattern of AFHP will be close to a run-of-river scheme with spill of water over the dam crest much of the time, while the plant at the same time may run at full capacity. In periods of inflow less than required for continuous operation at full capacity, the reservoir storage volume is sufficient for any rational mode of peaking operation of the plant. Another natural drawback is the longitudinal topographic profile of the tunnel routing with an

Amaila Falls Hydropower Project is not very ... since continuous series ... site do not exist. Flow records from the gauge station at ... eteur Falls in ... neighbouring Potaro River provided the basis for the Fe ... Study in 2001, as well as for later stages of project planning. For simulation of energy production at AFHP average monthly flows at Kaieteur Falls for the period 1950-90 have been used with a fixed transposition factor of 0.3. Simultaneous flow measurements were carried out in Kuribrong River at Amaila Falls project site and at Kaieteur Falls in June-July 1975 (pre-feasibility study phase) and in June-August 2001. These measurements were used for selecting the transposing factor of 0.3. The records during these brief periods of measurement showed great variation in the ratio between the simultaneous flows in Kuribrong River at Amaila Falls and in Potaro River at Kaieteur Falls. The measurements in June – August 2001 showed a variation in the different 10% percentiles (10% through 90%) of the monthly average flows in the range 0.276 – 0.439, with a median factor estimated at 0.383. The Halcrow Group's Hydrology Review Report of June 2011 indicates the selected factor 0.3 to be somewhat conservative (on the safe side) as regards the production potential. The same view, even stronger, especially in periods of low flow, is opined in the IE's Due Diligence Report of 2013. A conservative transposing factor (0.3) and the moderate installed capacity compared to the medium inflow to the reservoir means that the risk for not achieving the foreseen production potential is low. Therefore the hydrological uncertainty of having scarce series of direct flow measurements cannot be concluded to be a threat to the soundness of the project. For reducing the present hydrological uncertainty, which is especially desirable in the low flow season, longer periods of direct measurements in Kuribrong River at the project site are required. The main benefits would be verification of the believed underestimate of the water flow in the dry season and thereby more reliable estimates of the low season energy production and improved basis for planning the required low season back up capacity. Supported by IDB, SG started a program for continuous simultaneous measurements in 2011 at Amaila Falls and Kaieteur Falls. This program was discontinued in 2013 after SG withdrew as sponsor. A planned review of the hydrology based on the additional data acquired so far, is suspended. We recommend that the programme for continuous water flow measurement is resumed as soon as possible and before a new main sponsor would be ready to take the front seat. 2-3 additional years of continuous flow data would provide a more reliable basis for an updated energy production simulation and thereby reduce the risks for both parties related to the PPA. Based on the same improved flow data the design flood capacities of the dam spillway and flood levels of the reservoir should be reviewed as well. In addition to flow records we recommend a continuous sediment sampling program of at least one year's duration to get a picture of the seasonal variation. As per today only a limited number of spot measurements of sediment transport exist and the project design does not include any facilities for future sediment handling. Probably, siltation of the reservoir may not create any problem during the first 20 years of plant operation. Sedimentation may therefore not be a concern for the private investor in the BOOT perspective. GPL, as operator beyond the BOOT period, should pay closer attention to this issue. Direct flow records in the period until commissioning of the project would provide a valuable data base for planning the plant operation during the first years of operation and as a reliable basis for deciding on the total installed capacity in a possible later second stage development.