The major policy and governance guideline for this Government is anything with a PPP footprint must be rejected. It is the only plau­sible reason I could think of why the APNU+AFC gov­ernment is determined to end the Amaila Hydro-elec­tricity Project. But choosing to terminate a project that is transformative and that would push Guyana further up on the development tra­jectory simply because it is a project conceptualized and brought to implemen­tation stage by the PPP/C is foolhardy, a terrible blunder and injurious to the overall welfare of Guyana and the Guyanese people. 

Indeed, the decision to terminate the Amaila Proj­ect, if confirmed, is injurious to even APNU+AFC. This project has the potential to vastly enhance APNU+AFC in the governance and man­agement of Guyana on an upward development trajec­tory, more than any other initiatives presently under consideration. 

 Availability and access to adequate, reli­able and affordable electricity is an im­perative for Guyana’s development. While I do not want to rank which pre-requisites are the most important for sustainable development in our country, one thing is certain – without affordable, reliable and sustainable access to electricity Guyana’s hope of moving up to a high middle in­come country by 2025 is hopeless. Indeed, without access to cheap, reliable and ad­equate energy, Guyana will have a diffi­cult time to sustain its status as a middle income country, much less getting up to a upper middle income country. 

Availability and access to adequate, reliable and af­fordable electricity is an im­perative for Guyana’s devel­opment. While I do not want to rank which pre-requisites are the most important for sustainable development in our country, one thing is certain – without affordable, reliable and sustainable ac­cess to electricity Guyana’s hope of moving up to a high middle income country by 2025 is hopeless. Indeed, without access to cheap, re­liable and adequate energy, Guyana will have a difficult time to sustain its status as a middle income country, much less getting up to a up­per middle income country. 

Amaila is a large part of the solution. With Amaila all of Guyana’s immediate needs for electricity would be met and with Amaila we can lower our electric­ity cost from about $US0.32 to under $US0.10 per KWH of energy. This would mean not only lower costs for households, allowing them a better standard of living, but also lower costs would make industries more produc­tive, efficient and profitable. Guyana’s industries would lower cost of production and become more competitive with similar industries from other countries. We will be more competitive on the lo­cal and international mar­kets. More industries and more employment would be created. 

These are practical ben­efits of Amaila. But besides all of this, Guyana has al­ready invested major re­sources on Amaila. Inves­tors have been mobilized. The best part of the story is that Guyana does not have to invest a single dollar in the construction and opera­tion of Amaila. 

We simply have to pur­chase the energy generated at an agreed cost starting from about half of what we generate energy at presently and then up to 66% savings. In addition, the annual sub­vention of more than $9B to GPL would end, freeing up these resources for commu­nity development projects and initiatives. Our high­ways and streets could be affordably lighted up every­where in Guyana. 

This is, therefore, a no-brainer decision – we must complete Amaila because it is good for all Guyana. And the credit will go to APNU+AFC because it could be completed under their watch. Terminating the project because the PPP/C initiated it is a stupid move by APNU+AFC. While we know that APNU+AFC is capable of stupid things, we cannot accept recklessness in their continued effort to be vengeful to the PPP/C. The people must matter, not a war with the PPP/C. Those who voted for change did not vote for APNU+AFC to wage war with the PPP/C – they were supported be­cause people wanted them to govern for the country and her people. 

But even with all the above, there are other rea­sons why the move to ter­minate Amaila is foolish. In May 2014, the Caribbean Development Bank held its Annual General Meeting in Guyana. During the confer­ence, the President of the CDB alluded to the need for the Caribbean to frontally reject fossil fuel-based ener­gy and to embrace a new en­ergy paradigm. Dr. Warren Smith insisted that energy cost and reliability represent one of the greatest barriers confronting development in CARICOM. 

I agreed then with Dr. Smith that energy cost is an albatross weighing CARI­COM countries down and stifling our development. This remains an unswerving conviction on my part. More than 90% of CARICOM’s energy is fossil-fuel depen­dent. For two major reasons CARICOM countries must pursue a new dispensation and a new paradigm: one is purely economics for all the above reasons and the other is environmental and climate change. 

The high and volatile price of electricity is suffo­cating economies in CARI­COM and abandoning fossil fuel-based energy in this context is an economic im­perative. Electricity prices in the Caribbean are among the highest in the world, and they fluctuate greatly with the global price of oil. 

The primary cause of the high cost of electricity is that most Caribbean coun­tries use diesel and heavy fuel oil for electricity gen­eration. Trinidad and Suri­name at about 6 US cents per kilowatt hour are among the lowest cost and similar to charges in the USA. But Antigua at 42US cents and other countries that pay more than 30 US cents pay tariffs that are unsustain­able. Guyana’s tariff rates are at about 32US cents per kwh. 

For Guyana and her CARICOM sister nations, except Trinidad and Surina­me, while oil-based energy is important for our present development, its cost is pro­hibitive. Because of its pro­hibitive cost, oil-based en­ergy is “sucking the blood” out of the economy and prosperity of our countries today. 

Outside of this also is the fact that oil-based en­ergy systems contribute to CARICOM’s carbon foot­print. It is true CARICOM’s carbon emission rate is low, but a substantial portion of our carbon footprint is from fuel. Herein lies our second imperative – an environ­mental and climate change imperative. 

At this juncture of CARI­COM’s history and our realities, a new energy par­adigm, forged by technolog­ical advances, resource and environmental constraints and socioeconomic de­mands, has emerged. This paradigm is based, not on a finite stock of fossil fuels, but on a virtually limitless flow of renewable energy - sun, wind, water, wood, the earth’s heat - and on the most abundant element in the universe: hydrogen. The truth is within a short peri­od, CARICOM’s energy in­dustry could be totally revo­lutionized. I predict that by 2030, CARICOM’s energy would be based on alterna­tive forms of energy, with fossil fuel-based energy ac­counting for less than 20% of the Region’s energy. 

In Guyana, for example, hydroelectricity and solar energy can displace more than 90% of fossil fuel-based energy by 2020. The same can be said for coun­tries like Dominica, St. Kitts, Grenada and others, which can develop geo­thermal energy – energy from the heat of the earth’s core. It is in this context that Amaila looms large. Termi­nating the Amaila project now disregards these reali­ties and the pursuit of a new energy paradigm for Guy­ana and CARICOM. 

Guyana embraced the notion of a new energy paradigm within our LCDS model of development, articulated by the PPP/C Government since 2009. The investment to make the Amaila Hydroelectricity Project is a concrete expres­sion of our commitment to a new energy paradigm. More than anything else, Dr. War­ren Smith’s call for a new energy paradigm in CARI­COM in May 2014 was an endorsement of Guyana’s energy strategy. 

It is unfortunate that the APNU+AFC Government is signaling its intention to dent Guyana’s progress to­wards a new energy para­digm. It is sad that Guy­ana’s efforts to contribute to the global response for a more sustainable environ­ment and to stall any further global warming and climate change is being jeopardized by a visionless and irrespon­sible government. 

Nations that an­ticipate and position themselves for the transition away from fossil fuel are likely to reap an array of social, economic and environ­mental benefits. Those who remain mired in the status quo will only prolong the fossil-fuel legacy of ecological instability and politi­cal insecurity, leaving them less prepared to face the challenges of the new millennium. Guyana having taken a bold stance towards attaining a new energy paradigm, will blunder big time should we give reality to a reprehen­sible decision to ter­minate Amaila simply because it was a PPP/C Project. 

I condemn the inten­tion of APNU+AFC. It is an anti-Guyana and anti-Guyanese people action.