The Grand Inga Dam Project: Feasibility and Controversies

Filippo Verre - January 30, 2022

* L’immagine di copertina di questo paper è stata presa dal sito di Wikipedia, alla sezione Wikimedia consultabile al seguente link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inga003.jpg.

In the African continent, and especially in sub-Saharan Africa, despite an abundant supply of raw materials, there are still many problems related to the production of electricity. The latter, above all, is often lacking in many developing countries, which are still unable to provide their citizens with a service that nowadays appears increasingly fundamental. This situation is inevitably destined to change in the near future, since many African nations have invested heavily in the construction of infrastructures and plants capable of generating electricity for both domestic and industrial use. One of the most used methods is the exploitation of rivers to produce hydroelectric energy. There are numerous cases that can be cited in this respect. Above all, think of the large dam that the Ethiopian government has been building since 2011 on the Blue Nile. The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), with an estimated cost of approximately 4.8 billion dollars and an installed capacity of 6.45 Gigawatts, once completed will be the largest hydroelectric plant in Africa, as well as the seventh in the world. This great work will allow many millions of Ethiopians to have continuous access to electricity; furthermore, the government of Addis Ababa will be able to export and sell the energy surplus produced by the dam to several countries located in East Africa.

The GERD is not the only mega hydroelectric project present on the continent. Another significant development project aimed at producing electricity through the exploitation of watercourses concerns the Inga Falls of the Congo River. The latter is a truly enormous river, second in length only to the Nile[1] but with a decidedly more massive average water flow (41,800 m³/s compared to the 2,830 m³/s of the Nile). Inga Falls, in particular, are among the largest waterfalls in the world by average flow rate, with more than 42,000 m³/s.

Fig. 1: Una porzione delle cascate Inga

Fig. 2: Cascate Inga viste dal basso

There are currently two large dams on this impressive “waterfall,” inaugurated in 1972 and 1982 respectively. However, due to a lack of maintenance and modernization, they operate at a very reduced rate, or about 40% of their actual capacity (700 Megawatts produced in total annually). The government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has repeatedly addressed the problem of rehabilitating the two existing dams without finding a definitive solution that would produce reliable results.

One way to remedy this situation would be to upgrade the existing dams and add other infrastructure in order to significantly increase the energy produced. This is the Grand Inga Dam Project, a colossal project estimated to cost $80 billion that would involve the construction of six more dams on the Inga Falls to add to the two already existing ones. According to various estimates, once actually completed, the dams would be able to generate between 40 and 50 Gigawatts of hydroelectric energy. To understand exactly the enormous amount of energy that is aimed at being produced, let’s keep in mind the numbers. The Itaipú Dam, which is located on the border between Paraguay and Brazil and is the largest hydroelectric infrastructure in the world, has an energy capacity of 14 Gigawatts. The Three Gorges Dam, located on the Yangtze River in the province of Hubei in China, is the second largest hydroelectric infrastructure on a global scale but has a greater energy capacity than the Itaipú Dam, equal to about 22.5 Gigawatts. Well, according to the development plans for the Grand Inga Dam Project, the complex of dams to be built on the Congo River would have the capacity to generate more energy than the two most important hydroelectric infrastructures currently operating together.

Fig. 3: Diga di Itaipú

Fig. 4: Diga delle Tre Gole

The Estimated Benefits of the Grand Inga Dam Project

Once completed, this gigantic water development project would benefit not only the DRC, which has always had significant problems with electricity production, but also all of southern Africa. According to various studies, adequate exploitation of the Inga Falls could guarantee the satisfaction of approximately 35/40% of the entire energy needs of sub-Saharan Africa[2]. It would therefore be an infrastructure that is nothing short of strategic for the entire continent, much more so than the strategically important Ethiopian GERD. In fact, while the dam planned on the Blue Nile would have a beneficial impact especially in the Horn of Africa[3], the Grand Inga Dam Project would have a completely different type of resonance. In this regard, it is important to point out that some African nations have shown great interest in the construction of dams on the Congolese falls. Nigeria and South Africa have already declared that they want to secure part of the energy produced in exchange for a financial compensation to the Democratic Republic of Congo.

According to a feasibility study conducted by the Canadian company AECUM and Électricité de France (EDF) between 2011 and 2013, the project should be built in six different stages. It does not foresee the closure of the Congo River or the creation of underground tunnels that would permanently alter the ecosystem of the river and its drainage basin. On the contrary, according to French and Canadian analysts, it would be sufficient to create a massive artificial basin parallel to the course of the Congo from which to draw water for the so-called "Inga 3", the first of the six large dams to be built. Inga 3 alone would generate about 4,800 megawatts of energy, equal to about two-thirds of the Ethiopian GERD. In the further development phases, it is also planned to flood the Bundi Valley; this will create a huge artificial reserve that will serve as a water storage for the numerous hydroelectric plants that will be built throughout the complex.

Significant benefits would also be seen from an employment point of view. At the moment it is impossible to quantify the exact number of people who would be employed in the construction of this great work; however, it is thought that the workers hired in various sectors could be between 80,000 and 100,000 units. In short, there are plans to enlist a real "army" made up of workers, technicians, engineers and analysts who will have a positive impact on the entire region. This will help bring well-being and stability to Congo and sub-Saharan Africa. The presence of stable and paid work for tens of thousands of people, with the consequent positive flywheel relating to commercial, hospitality and hotel activities, will guarantee a significant economic return even for African entrepreneurs not directly connected with the Grand Inga Dam Project.

The critical issues of the Grand Inga Dam Project

In light of the undoubted benefits that a project of such an impact would bring to all of sub-Saharan Africa, there are also significant critical issues that raise more than a few doubts about its actual feasibility. First of all, the massive financial outlay. Eighty billion dollars is an extremely significant figure, especially in a context like Africa where transparency and proper management of budgets often leaves much to be desired. It is no coincidence, in fact, that several important institutions, after initially supporting the project, have withdrawn. This is the case, for example, of the World Bank, which withdrew in 2016 as a financier of the project due to an alleged lack of transparency and alleged interference by high-level authorities in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Even some of the companies involved in the construction of the works have taken unexpected steps backwards. In this case, it was the Spanish group Actividades de Construcción y Servicios (ACS). The Iberian company had been selected together with another group of Chinese companies to build Inga 3, the first infrastructure of the complex, which was initially supposed to cost 11 billion dollars. According to a feasibility study presented in 2020, the costs for the dam had risen by about 3 billion, up to 14. Following this, ACS took a step back, effectively withdrawing from the group of companies involved.

Secondly, still in relation to the economic aspect, serious doubts arise regarding hypotheses of indebtedness by the DRC. In the 1970s and 1980s, to build Inga 1 and 2 and pursue grandiose development plans, the government of the then President Mobutu had become heavily indebted to the International Community. The Democratic Republic of Congo (then called Zaire) entered a serious debt crisis that led to structural adjustments for a long time, including cuts in public spending and a lack of investment in social development. Furthermore, as mentioned above, all this was done in vain, since in recent years the energy performance of the two dams has left much to be desired. This is due to the fact that the construction of large water infrastructures is only the first step. There is a constant need for maintenance and modernization to make the dams work at their best, given the operational and engineering complexity that distinguishes them. Therefore, an initial financial outlay often seasoned with propagandistic attitudes by the leadership in power is not enough. Given the already experienced difficulty by Congo in managing strategic infrastructures, there is a strong risk that the country could enthusiastically launch into a new adventure without having the necessary management guarantees.

Third, the threat of a possible reduction in national sovereignty that could occur for the Congolese authorities should not be underestimated. Among the countries most involved in the construction of the Grand Inga Dam Project is China, a major international player that has already had its eye on Congo and the important natural reserves that distinguish it for some years. We refer in particular to Beijing's interest in rare earths and coltan, the so-called "grey gold" of which the DRC is well supplied. Following the green revolution inaugurated by Xi Jinping, since 2012 there has been an exponential increase in electric vehicles throughout China. The batteries of these low-polluting means of transport are largely made of coltan. Hence the great interest of the Chinese in Congo, an important exporter of this mineral. Following the withdrawal of both the World Bank and the Spanish company ACS from the hydraulic project in question, China has acquired a preponderant role compared to other "contenders". Consider in fact that a consortium of six Chinese companies[4] has a 75% stake in the project. The remaining 25% is held by another Spanish company, AEE Power Holdings. Given this situation and Beijing's persistent presence not only in the country but throughout the African continent, it is not wrong to ask questions about the danger of excessive Chinese interference in Kinshasa's internal affairs.

Finally, even from an environmental point of view, considerable doubts persist regarding the construction of such an imposing infrastructure. Generally, these mega dams have a massive impact on entire regions and ecosystems, since they significantly alter their hydrography and orography. In the case of the Grand Inga Dam Project, these fears are even magnified by the objective gargantuan size that distinguishes it. According to Trusha Reddy, an activist who works for the association WoMin Africa, the project is destined to have very damaging effects for the entire region. The creation of artificial basins by flooding entire valleys, such as the Bundi, for example, would irreversibly alter a large portion of western Congo with unpredictable effects. In addition, tens of thousands of people would be forced to abandon their homes forever. Many of the villages in the affected area had already been displaced at the time of the construction of the first two dams on the Congo River: Inga 1 (in 1972) and Inga 2 (1982). At that time, the displaced received little or nothing to compensate for the homes and land that were taken from them. Communities that lived off agriculture and fishing quickly fell into so-called development-induced poverty.[5] On closer inspection, this condition should be an oxymoron, since economic and infrastructural development has as its backbone the creation of wealth and the diffusion of well-being. However, this does not always happen, especially when dealing with the construction of mega dams that significantly impact territories and communities. Precisely in this regard, according to the analysis of Rudo Sanyanga, director of International Rivers, the complex will modify the course of the Congo River. The latter had already undergone an alteration of about 30% at the time of the construction of the Inga 1 and 2 dams. The new infrastructures could bring this percentage to 70%, with consequent significant effects that can only be verified in retrospect.

Conclusion

Like all large infrastructure projects, the Grand Inga Dam Project has positive aspects and significant critical issues. However, in our opinion, the negative elements that would characterize the construction of a hydroelectric complex of this magnitude cannot be kept in the background since they could far outweigh the positive elements. This does not mean that the production of enormous quantities of hydroelectric energy or the creation of tens if not hundreds of thousands of jobs should be kept quiet, on the contrary. Energy development and the circulation of money through certain salaries and consumption could certainly contribute to significantly improving the economy of entire territories of sub-Saharan Africa. Nonetheless, when dealing with structures of this magnitude that have a major impact on regions and ecosystems, it would seem appropriate to adopt a certain calmness in considering some aspects too positively.

Among the various doubts surrounding the Grand Inga Dam Project is that relating to the teleological aspect. What seems particularly dangerous in this affair concerns the reasons that push the DRC and the numerous companies involved to build six large dams near the waterfalls with the highest water flow in the world. One of the main goals of Kinshasa is to sell part of the energy produced to other African nations. Well, this is precisely the main problem. They plan to build this gigantic complex (also) for commercial and financial purposes. If this aspect were not present, the scope of the Inga Project itself would most likely be reduced. It should be noted that also for what concerns the Ethiopian GERD, the aspect relating to the sale of energy produced by the dam is relevant. Countries such as Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania have already given their consent to the purchase of the surplus energy produced by the large project under construction on the Blue Nile. Therefore, it is not uncommon for agreements to be made between states aimed at sharing energy in exchange for payment of a fee. This is not a negative situation, since the exchange of energy can promote peace and stability in areas of the continent subject to tensions of various kinds. However, it seems appropriate that the sale of energy to more or less neighboring countries that have an actual need for it should take on a role that is not of primary importance, so as not to set up the construction of plants and the implementation of projects with only commercial purposes. As a result, therefore, there would be the concrete possibility of developing enormous structures that serve not only to produce clean energy but also, and above all, to increase the revenue of resources into state coffers.

The fear of such an epilogue is more concrete than ever. Therefore, the question that should be asked is the following: what is the actual purpose of the Grand Inga Dam Project? To generate clean energy that is capable of providing for the infrastructural and social development of Congo? Or to build a gigantic and extremely impactful infrastructural complex in order to increase the financial income of Kinshasa and other companies? These are not small issues, especially when it is planned to divert the course of rivers, flood entire valleys and expropriate tens of thousands of private properties. In essence, "it must be worth it". Not for the leadership in power or for a small circle of multinational companies, but for the community that resides in those places and that would suffer the heaviest consequences following the actual construction of the dam complex.

        ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[1] Il Nilo, dove peraltro si sta costruendo l’altro grande progetto idrico africano, ha una lunghezza di 6.853 chilometri mentre il fiume Congo si attesta sui 4.374 chilometri. Tuttavia, nonostante sia più corto di circa 2.500 chilometri, il Congo ha una portata d’acqua notevolmente maggiore.

[2] https://www.globalconstructionreview.com/democratic-republic-co8n8g8o-seeks-professionals/.

[3] Nonché un impatto molto negativo in Egitto, vista la significativa riduzione del volume idrico che la GERD causerebbe verso nord.

[4] Tra cui anche l’azienda che gestisce la Diga delle tre Gole.

[5]https://www.terraterraonline.org/blog/inga-3-una-mega-diga-sul-fiume-congo-fara-decine-di-migliaia-di-sfollati/.