Alliance for Change (AFC) member and Shadow Minister of Oil and Gas, David Patterson, is calling on the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) government to have further independent studies executed on the Wales gas-to-shore project. He stressed that an urgent review is needed since project costs have jumped by almost 150 percent.
Speaking during the party’s press conference today, Patterson, who is also the former Minister of Public Infrastructure noted that last year, the parliamentary opposition requested further studies to be conducted on the gas-to-shore project. However, that request was rejected by the government. Further, he recalled that at the launching of this project in April 2021, the government had provided its justification for the urgent need for such a project, specifically pointing to the economic and technical benefits for the country.
Patterson stated that the initial project cost provided was US$910M, however, as of last month their initial projection used to justify the project has increased by to US$2.2B, which is “way off mark”.
According to the former minister, “The initial project cost was listed as US$910M as of April 2021, inclusive of a gas pipeline, gas power plant and associated construction cost. This project now stands at over US$2.2 billion and increasing. No justification has been provided as to why in less than 2 years the cost has been risen by almost 150 percent.”
He further chided that in a normal functioning democracy, such a sharp increase in costs in such a short timeline would be of concern and trigger a full project review. He said however that the government is still reluctant to have a further independent study facilitated.
Patterson has long been in criticism of the Wales gas-to-shore project and has posited on several occasions that there is no basis for the highly boasted benefits since all of the studies were preliminary.
He has also argued that works on the project have already kicked off in the absence of necessary studies and approval from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Despite his concerns, the government has continuously defended itself against such claims noting that there are clear indicators of the benefits for Guyana.
