David Granger saved Guyana from a calamity

Dec 23, 2023 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – If you are building a house, you would first seek to ensure that you can obtain both at the start of your undertaking or during construction, cement, sand, aggregate and wood, depending on what type of building you are putting up. In other words, without the ability to source the essential items needed for the construction of the house, you would not undertake the project.

Similarly, if a government is developing a hydroelectric facility, it should at the minimum ensure that the most basic resource needed for the operation of the falls is adequate. And what is that basic? It is water. Unless there is an adequate supply of water for the project, it will flop.

In the case of the Amaila Falls Hydroelectric Project, the brainchild of former President Bharrat Jagdeo, it was necessary to ensure that the hydrology data was credible and that there was sufficient water to justify the massive investment in the project.

In order to maximize efficiency and reduce the marginal cost of generating electricity you must ensure there is adequate water for the operations of the hydroelectric plant. This maximization cannot occur if the plant operates an optimal capacity during the wet season and a far lower capacity during the dry season.  This is why great emphasis was placed on the hydrology of the project.

The APNU and the AFC have always raised concerns about this project, including its hydrology.  In 2013, Kaieteur News published a series of articles concerning this aspect of the project.

In response, the government had backed the hydrology of the project based on a 70-page report by Halcrow, a UK-based engineering consultancy. The government accepted that during the dry months, water flow will be limited but it contended that the reservoir will be used to store water and allow for the station to have a continued supply of water. This was wishful thinking at best. Recent photographs have shown that the river is now bone-dry in sections and therefore had the project gone ahead, the reservoir would not been able to supply a continuous flow of water to the project.

The 2016 NORCONSULT evaluation of the project maintained that the live storage volume of the reservoir 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.

NORCONSULT also had similar reservations, as the APNU+AFC relative to the hydrology of the project. NORCOBSULT found data inadequacies in relation to the flow of water to the site.

This is what the report said, “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.”

The Norwegian consultants suggested that to mitigate the current hydrological uncertainty, particularly crucial during the low flow season, it is necessary to extend the duration of direct measurements in the Kuribrong River at the project site. This extended monitoring period would bring about significant advantages, including confirming the presumed underestimation of water flow during the dry season.

This monitoring would lead to more reliable estimates of energy production during the low season, providing an improved foundation for planning the necessary backup capacity for the same period. There is a clear hint that back-up sources of energy would be needed, especially during low-flow periods.

NORCONSULT recommended that the programme for continuous water flow measurement be resumed as soon as possible and before a new main sponsor of the project is found. It called for 2-3 additional years of continuous flow data would provide a more reliable basis for an updated energy production simulation.

Someone needs to ask Jagdeo whether the 2-3 years of data has since been collected. This is hardly likely since upon returning to Office, the PPPC said that the project would be restarted in 2022.

Predictably, the PPPC has run into serious bottlenecks with the project. It is not finding a sponsor and is now suggesting returning to bids for a BOOT arrangement. By now it should realize that this project is overpriced and, given the hydrology concerns, too risky an investment.

The APNU+AFC did this nation a great favour when it forced the developer to walk after not giving its approval for the project when it held a one-seat majority as the Opposition in the 2011 parliament.  David Granger saved Guyana from a calamity when he canned the project citing high costs, hydrology concerns and financing concerns.

Jagdeo, however, is persistent and wants to redeem his pet project. But time and history are not on his side. No one will touch this project unless they obtain it as a sweetheart deal.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of this newspaper and its affiliates.)

---

• Construction, David Granger, Guyana, Peeping Tom, President Bharrat Jagdeo

---