Dongola Hydropower… Legitimate Ques
Face of Truth: Dongola Hydropower… Legitimate Ques
Ibrahim Shiglawi
The announcement by the Northern State government regarding the signing of a contract with “Toki for Multiple Activities” to establish a hydropower station in Dongola, in collaboration with a specialized German company, raises several questions about the feasibility of the project, its institutional framework, and whether it meets transparency requirements and necessary technical studies.
With talks of supplying 5,000 megawatts of electricity to the state and producing 300 megawatts in the first phase within six months, a fundamental question arises: Has this project undergone thorough technical and economic studies, or is it merely a premature step lacking scientific foundations?
Many have taken note of the statement made by the state’s Minister of Infrastructure and Urban Development, Engineer Mohamed Sayed Ahmed Faqiri, in a recorded video, where he appeared cautious in addressing what he called the “controversy” surrounding the contract signed with the German company. This cautious tone raises several inquiries:
Where is the project located, and is the site free from obstacles that may lead to compensation for affected communities? When was the project’s tender announced, and how was the implementing company selected? What is the total contract value, what are the project’s components, who owns it, and who is funding it? Is there a project consultant? What is the timeline for the implementation phases? Do the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank of Sudan play a role?
Additionally, critical questions need answers: What is the role of the Sudanese Electricity Holding Company in this project, given that it has a specialized department for alternative and renewable energy? Were feasibility studies conducted to select the power station’s location, and were previous studies considered, or were they disregarded? Has the project taken into account national expertise in the field, past studies, and construction contracts?
A notable point in the minister’s remarks was his assurance that the project has no relation to the Dal and Kajbar dams. However, this assurance appears weak, as it fails to acknowledge Sudanese government strategies, which had completed studies for these projects at an earlier stage. These studies were reviewed with Sudanese government funding to avoid the displacement of local populations in those areas. It is worth noting that the Dams Implementation Unit had completed comprehensive studies in 2017 on electricity generation from the Dal and Kajbar projects, incorporating technical updates to mitigate environmental and social impacts, such as submerging agricultural lands or flooding residential villages.
So why were these studies not utilized? Does the new project conflict with or complement those plans?
Furthermore, according to Sudan News Agency, the project aligns with the state’s strategy to develop the renewable energy sector, enhancing electricity self-sufficiency and supporting Sudan’s comprehensive development plans. This is positive, but it is well known that the country’s energy strategy falls under federal jurisdiction, specifically the Ministry of Electricity, which oversees the national electricity grid based on development requirements.
Additionally, the ministry owns electricity transmission lines, transformers, and operation and maintenance departments, among other essential infrastructure. Moreover, any projects involving the Nile River fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources. According to the minister, the project’s designed capacity is 5,000 megawatts, which means it would generate nearly four times the power of the Merowe Dam—the largest energy-generating project in Sudan, producing 1,250 megawatts.
This project emerges at a time when the global energy sector is undergoing significant transformations, with growing interest in green hydrogen as a future source of clean energy. While hydropower remains a strategic option, new projects face challenges regarding feasibility, particularly given the scarcity of long-term funding and investments.
In contrast, hydrogen extraction through electrolysis represents a promising pathway, yet it remains in the study and development phases, facing obstacles related to cost and storage. Therefore, adopting any energy-related project must be backed by a comprehensive vision involving relevant authorities.
The concern over dealing with unqualified companies remains valid in such rushed projects. Historically, many countries have fallen into the trap of contracting with unqualified firms, and Sudan is no exception. This has led to stalled projects or unfavorable contracts that fail to achieve the intended goals. So, was the German company’s competence verified through the “Global Energy Club”? Are there concrete guarantees for executing the project according to required standards?
Sudan’s reconstruction efforts, especially in infrastructure, must be based on clear institutional foundations, grounded in transparency, scientific studies, and local expertise. Sudan is one of the regional nations with extensive and well-established engineering and technical expertise. It should not rush into seemingly attractive projects that lack technical and economic depth.
From the Face of Truth perspective, it would be more prudent to complete the Port Sudan and Garri power stations, with a combined capacity of 920 megawatts, which are nearing completion, rather than embarking on new projects that require further studies and coordinated efforts. The priority should not be merely signing contracts but rather building a strategic vision that aligns with Sudan’s national energy plan and global energy shifts, ensuring project sustainability without resorting to hasty and random decisions.
Wishing you well and in good health.
Wednesday, March 26, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com