‘Release Wales gas project contracts now’ – Jordan says too many unanswered questions

Apr 14, 2026 News

---

(Kaieteur News) – Is Guyana now required to pay for the gas in the Stabroek Block? How can this impact the feasibility of the Wales Gas-to-Energy (GTE) project? Will government still be able to cut electricity cost by 50%? What is the final cost of the pipeline and who owns the structure? Is using gas cheaper than continuing the use of heavy fuel oil (HFO) to generate electricity?

These are just a few of the questions former Finance Minister Winston Jordan said must be answered by the government following the revelation that Guyana has signed an agreement with ExxonMobil to purchase its own gas from the Stabroek Block.

In an interview with Kaieteur News on Monday, the former minister raised concerns over the contradictory statements shared by several government members and Exxon.  Guyanese were previously told that the gas will be supplied free to the Wales site, however sources have since disclosed that a Gas Sales Agreement (GSA) have been signed between the GoG and Exxon which ties Guyana to take-or-pay arrangement. This means that whether the country uses the full amount of gas brought to shore or not, it must pay the contractor a standard fee.

The pipe dream/ nightmare

Citizens were also assured that the pipeline cost will be amortized over a 20-year period at US$55M annually, but information suggests that Exxon is already recouping this expense through cost recovery, or by taking Guyana’s oil.

To this end, Jordan reasoned, “Because we have seen none of the agreements, we have had no access to the negotiations, we don’t know! That is why we can have five and six different stories coming out from the Prime Minister, Ali, Jagdeo, Routledge, every one of them has a different story. The only thing we know for sure is the pipeline is not free but we know nothing else about the pipeline.”

He pointed out that Guyana has not seen an agreement with the company to construct the pipeline which leaves question marks at the end of the project. Jordan was keen to note that although the structure was completed since the end of 2024, the company is yet to disclose the final cost of the pipeline.

“How could you have asked Exxon to build a pipeline and you don’t know what is the cost, because when (Exxon’s Country Manager, Alistair) Routledge was asked by the media, he said that they were still ascertaining the cost. This means that we signed a contract not knowing what the cost of the pipeline is, which is unheard of, and now they are telling you, well we are still adding up the cost. So that is the first thing, heaven help us if they signed a contract saying build a pipeline and then tell us later what is the cost,” the former Minister said.

Further, Jordan recalled that when government was asked in Parliament about the cost, the nation was informed that the deals were still under negotiation although the pipeline was already under construction.

Given that the pipeline expense has been reportedly added to the cost bank, he said it was likely that the project is already completely repaid. To this end, he questioned whether Guyana owns the pipeline, since both Exxon and government formerly stated that although projects are funded through cost oil, assets belong to Exxon.

He said, “Let us assume that the government owns this pipeline, where does the pipeline show up and where in the country’s assets does the pipeline show up and what are the accounting arrangements on the various books? Whether it’s the Balance of Payments, the fiscal account, if the government owns something then two transactions have to be in place- one is an asset that they acquired and the other is a liability what they paid out to claim this asset.”

Still on the pipeline, he noted that there is additional cost being incurred to maintain the pipeline while the government struggles to complete the gas plants at Wales.

No free gas

Jordan said that while he has not seen the secret contract between the GoG and Exxon, he firmly believes that Guyana should not have to pay for its own gas. “Jagdeo had said the gas would be free and all we will be paying for is the pipeline,” he recalled.

In fact, Jordan pointed out that this notion was used to push the project as feasible, which therefore raises serious questions about the economics of GTE. Given this new development, the former minister urged that a study should be conducted to determine whether continuing with the project would be cheaper than continuing the use of HFOs with improved efficiency.

“When this project started it was under a US$1B, but when it now reaches US$3B and maybe going beyond, because if now you have to buy the gas, the question is whether it wouldn’t have paid you to improve efficiency of the plant and the transmission than to incur this massive expenditure,” he noted.

Furthermore, in determining the final cost of the project, Jordan stated that litigation, arbitration, cost overruns and gas purchase must be considered. “This will put the GTE way over the initial budget and not to mention way over the time which they said it would have been made available to the country, another cost to citizens for the rental of powerships,” he pointed out.

Come clean!

“The government of Guyana now has to come clean. They have to tell us clearly whether there is a contract between the GoG and Exxon to purchase gas that originally Jagdeo said will be made available for free. That is what was made the project economically feasible. If you now have to pay for gas at the commercial price, what are the implications for the GTE in terms of the tariffs? Will they still be able to cut tariffs by 50% and if they go ahead with that, how much will the government be subsidizing electricity and whether that subsidy would be bigger than the actual subsidy they are giving right now to the consumers,” the former minister questioned.

He said it would be interesting to know what circumstances led to the change in position regarding the free gas.

Moreover, Jordan argued that if the information published was incorrect, it is the responsibility of the government to not only reject, but respond with concrete evidence.

“We have not seen a single document in relation to this project and so we keep speculating and they can end all the speculation by putting the document in the public domain or come out and refute with evidence what we have said. You have to show the evidence that this is not so and they can withhold whatever proprietary information from the contracts,” he said.

---

• contracts, ExxonMobil, Stabroek Block, unanswered questions, Wales gas project, Winston Jordan

---