Dear Editor,
Solar power has taken center stage, compliments of GEA head, Dr. Mahender Sharma. Dr. Sharma has articulated some basics and numbers about solar power, plans, and projects. There are many positives in his presentations, to which I urge listening by citizens and government. I can speak a little about solar energy, since I am a consumer. I have it, seen cost savings – not as expected, but something; and I see how I am automatically feeding unused energy to GPL, Inc. On the latter, I could use some small change, any tiny rebate, still waiting. The downside of private ownership is that it is expensive; it was for me. Thus, it could be out of reach for many Guyanese homeowners.
Because of the numbers involved – cost per kilowatt hour, and such – I invite government leaders to listen more closely and receptively, as they move swiftly along with gas-to-shore visions and plans. In terms of the cleanest, solar can’t be beaten. Relative to cost, I encourage a side-by-side comparison for a decision on what is cheapest, and could offer the best possible answer to the energy requirements and dilemmas of Guyanese citizens, businesses, and the state itself, both for today and in the future. By cheapest, I mean not just comparative costs (gas versus solar) on a per KWH basis, which looks like an irrefutable ‘no brainer’ all by itself, but the relative outlays for one matched against the other. Which one, a bigger thrust towards solar or the highest priority for the gas-to-shore project, is the more costly to end using citizens, and the taxpayers re borrowings and accompanying debt burdens?
Editor, as I see it, from my distant perch and very limited insight, solar trumps gas-to-shore in every, if not all, respects. First, there is some reduction of a wider dependency on Exxon. Second, there is lesser opportunity for Exxon to exploit this country still more, and with us not knowing until it is too late, and when likely not legally favorable. Third, there is a narrower window of time for Guyanese to experience the effects of one over the other. I am, therefore, reasonably certain that there may be more that speaks favorably to solar energy being made a higher than the present priority for the government.
The drawback is that a government leader seems hellbent on barreling ahead with gas-to-shore arrangements and execution. My concern is not that gas-to-shore is in and of itself inherently dark and dangerous for Guyanese. Rather, it is that the whole undertaking, as presented and persevered smacks of the characteristically sinister. The way that the whole gas-to-shore discussion was delivered, from the inception to now, has only intensified suspicions and increased speculations that there is a less than the noble on something that could be. If gas-to-shore is that good, then give Guyanese the goods on it.
Sincerely,
GHK Lall
