Adani controversy: Why the cheerleaders are wrong

Samaranayake’s rambling polemic against environmentalists and in favour of Adani sidesteps the most important issue: transparency

The past week has seen a flurry of media activity from apologists for, and supporters of, the proposed Adani wind power project in Mannar. An article by Engineer Gerald L. Samaranayake in the Daily FT of 8 July, for instance, observed: “Environmentalists rallying against a renewable energy project is odd. As they should be against fossil fuel-based projects and push for a quicker energy transition for Sri Lanka to achieve its goal to become carbon neutral by 2050.” (https://www.ft.lk/columns/Will-environmentalists-stall-new-50MW-Mannar-wind-power-project/4-763942).

Samaranayake begins his article by noting, “Recently a group of environmentalists and a religious leader approached the Supreme Court against a renewable energy project to come up in the country’s north.” This is a clear reference to the Bishop Emmanuel Fernando of Mannar, Professors Sarath Kotagama and Nimal Gunatilleke, and myself. In addition, the Wildlife and Nature Protection Society too, has gone to court on this issue. But Samaranayake is mistaken if he thinks we act purely as environmentalists. We act primarily as citizens of Sri Lanka and, indeed, as we think every citizen should act, in defence of the Constitution, the rule of law, and the public interest.

Samaranayake is correct, however, when he observes that “Environmentalists rallying against a renewable energy project is odd.” It is indeed odd, for we all want to see a Sri Lanka that delivers clean energy to the grid at the lowest cost to consumers. Where Samaranayake misses the bus is when he argues in effect that we should do so while bypassing the procurement guidelines of government and violating not just the National Environmental Act but also the Constitution. 

Transparency

Samaranayake’s rambling polemic against environmentalists and in favour of Adani sidesteps the most important issue: transparency. Adani’s bid was unsolicited. If the Government was anxious to facilitate a wind-power project in Mannar, all it had to do was call for international bids. Problem solved. Worse, in the environmental impact assessment submitted by Adani in January, the price per kilowatt hour was declared as 4.6 US cents. By the time the Cabinet came to approve the deal in May, that price had magically jumped to 8.26 US cents, an 80% increase. Would the public-spirited Samaranayake care to explain that? What is more, the lowest responsive bid in the recently closed tender for a 50 MW facility, also in Mannar, was at 4.88 US cents. Adani’s price is 69% higher than that, too.

Wind power prices worldwide have been collapsing, and the people of Sri Lanka too, have a right to benefit from that windfall. In India, for example, Adani itself has been contracting one project after another at around 3 US cents per kilowatt-hour. How does Samaranayake explain the almost three times higher price for Sri Lanka? The usual apologist’s excuse is that there is a risk premium for Sri Lanka, owing to the financial crisis. But the Minister of Power and Energy himself claims that this is a government-to-government transaction. If so, where’s the risk? It would be a sovereign transaction, and Adani’s investment would be secured not just by the Government of Sri Lanka but also by the Government of India. 

Samaranayake goes on to ask, “If anybody else has an appetite for implementing such large-scale renewable energy projects, why aren’t they doing so?” Well, Mr Samaranayake, there’s only one way to find out. Call for tenders and see what the response is, rather than channelling unsolicited bids through the back door. It is the Government that you should address your remarks to, not environmentalists.

Adani hits back

When it comes to trying to deflect from the environmental and regulatory objections to Adani’s Mannar project, Samaranayake is not alone. In an article titled ‘Adani urges SL to consider long-term tariff stability’ published in another local newspaper on 2 July, the Managing Director of Adani Power and Adani Energy Solutions, Anil Sardana, is quoted as saying, “Should we offer a fixed tariff with no changes over the next 20 years, or should we present a seemingly lower figure that could potentially double through additional charges in the future? This dilemma demands clarity from Sri Lanka.” 

The issue with Adani’s proposed wind project is not an imaginary ‘dilemma’ about whether it is contingent on a fixed or variable tariff. The issue is that the entire transaction, from beginning to end, lacks transparency. It is founded on an unsolicited offer foisted on the CEB, bypassing an open and competitive bidding process. No amount of sophistry on the part of Sardana about fixed and variable tariffs will fix that fundamental defect. 

And then, in a flourish of sublime irony, Sardana is quoted as saying that “Transparency is the key.”

Sardana is also quoted as claiming that “The entire Sri Lanka coast is a flyway for birds, and they are oblivious to whether it’s Mannar or elsewhere.” I cannot know which comic book Sardana learned his ornithology from, but I cannot offhand think of a more ignorant statement that even a primary-school student could make. By that assertion alone, he fails Science 101. A simple search on GoogleScholar for the keywords “Mannar” and “Flyway” brings up more than 100 scientific papers (written preponderantly by Indian scientists, to boot), which reference Mannar as the focus of the Central Indian Flyway that culminates in Sri Lanka. What is more, birds possess extraordinary navigation skills, returning to the same locations year after year after north-south migrations of thousands of kilometres. Every schoolchild knows this. It seems Sardana has never heard of the homing pigeon. Even birds are not as ‘oblivious’ as Sardana seems to be.

There is a version of an old Sri Lankan ditty that goes:

If you want to marry me, darling, 

Come the proper way. 

Coming through the window, darling, 

What will people say? 

That would be my response to Sardana too. Come the proper way, Sardana, come through the front door.