alternate hydro power

National Geographic has rated rafting on the Drangme Chhu – from the Trashigang Bridge to the Royal Manas Park – as one of the 25 Best New Trips for 2010.

But it’s not just the Drangme Chhu. Every one of our major river systems provides some of the world’s best rafting experiences. Dave Allardice of Ultimate Descents says that our rivers are:

A gigantic staircase rising from the Indian border to the high Himalayas of Tibet, the soaring peaks of Bhutan are an untapped treasure house of whitewater. The rivers are powerful and challenging.

And the National Geographic calls them:

A spillway for Himalayan snow and ice that roils into turquoise Class IV and V rapids through sheer granite walls.

So impressed were the editors of National Geographic Traveler magazine that they also included the Drangme Chhu decent as one of the world’s top 50 Tours of a Lifetime.

All this is good news.

But the good news will not last long. In fact, it will barely last two years. By 2012, construction on the 1800 MW Kuri-Gongri hydropower project will begin at the confluence of the Kuri Chhu and the Drangme Chhu. And further upstream, on the Kholong Chuu, construction on a 486 MW project will also commence in 2012.

So if you want to experience what the National Geographic is raving about, head to the Drangme Chhu … before 2012.

Photo credit: Bio Bio Expeditions

But mining? For stone? Now that, I’m sure we can all agree, is something we are good at!

Then why is the government allowing Indian companies – L&T, HCC and Gammon – to operate stone quarries for the Punatsangchu hydropower project?

And how will L&T, HCC and Gammon operate their mines when the Mines and Minerals Management Regulations 2002 clearly defines the eligibility to obtain a mining lease as:

Any Bhutanese individual, licensed firm or a company shall be eligible to obtain a mining lease.

To be doubly sure that only Bhutanese companies operate our mines, the Mines and Minerals Management Regulations goes on to define “company” as:

Any organization registered under the Companies Act of the Kingdom of Bhutan, 2000.

I’ve reported the matter to the Anticorruption Commission.

But before finalizing the policy, the government should hold thorough consultations with all stakeholders, particularly the private sector, to ensure that they understand the policy and, more importantly, that they commit to supporting it.

And once the FDI policy is finalized, it should be made public.

Incidentally, the cabinet approved the Economic Development Policy last year. But it is still not available to the public. Instead, just last month the prime minster informed a potential investor that:

Bhutan was finalizing the Economic Development Policy which would spell out the kind of environment in which they can operate.

Transparency is important. And it is especially important where there’s money to be made.

The draft mineral development policy proposes to allow only “one mining lease to an individual or to a company”. Very good. I’m all for a healthy reduction in the number of mines in our country.

But wait a second, what about the Punatshangchu Hydropower Project Authority? Didn’t they recently apply for “three large quarries”? And what about Penden Cement? Surely they operate more than one mine. And Dungsum Cement? They’ll surely need more than one mine!

Incidentally, it seems that PHPA will not operate the quarries themselves. Instead they may just transfer their mining lease to the big three Indian Contractors – L&T, HCC and Gammon.

Which leads me to an important question: are foreign companies allowed to operate our mines?

Still unsure

More than decade has already passed since the start of Bhutan’s accession process to the WTO. And many of our current ministers have been involved throughout the process. So I find it strange that, after all these years, one of them, the prime minister, is “still unsure” about joining the WTO.

What do you think? Should we join or not? Or are you also “still unsure”?

Take our poll that asks, “Should Bhutan join the WTO?”

Caricature by Bhutan Observer

But I’m alarmed at how the Government changed its decision. Just one meeting with stakeholders and the Prime Minister decides, during that meeting itself, that liberalizing tourist tariffs is not such a good idea. Just a simple show of hands of those present at the meeting, and the PM decides to increase the minimum tourist tariff. Just like that, the most important provision of the PM’s Executive Order is rescinded.

Obviously I’m satisfied with the final outcome of the recent meeting. But I can’t help wondering how our government takes important decisions. Did, for example, the PM fully understand the issues before signing the 13 November Executive Order into “immediate effect”? And, did the PM consider those issues again, carefully and thoroughly, before reversing his decision?

It’s important to know that our government does not act arbitrarily. And, that it is not fickle-minded.

water potential

I was happy to read about DHI’s plans to carry out major investments in power generation, power transmission, construction, information technology, aviation, mining, cement production and telecom in the next four years. These investments will add considerable value to the commercial interests of the Royal Government, while also leading and stimulating private sector growth.

Of these investments, which, in total, are estimated to cost DHI about Nu 53 billion, I am most excited about DGPC’s project to start a hydropower construction company.

Our country is blessed with perennial, fast flowing rivers perfectly suited to generate environmentally friendly run-of-the-river hydropower. Our rivers are capable of generating as much as 30,000 MW of hydropower, almost 80% of which has already been identified as technically feasible. And our people have been harnessing hydropower since 1967 when the 360 kW minihydel at Jungshina, Thimphu was constructed.

But virtually all the work, from that first minihydel to the 336 MW Chukha hydropower project (commissioned in 1986) and the 1020 MW Tala hydropower project (commissioned in 2006) were carried out by foreigners, mainly Indians. Similarly, almost all the work on the 1200 MW Punatsangchhu hydropower project is being done by foreigners.

So I welcome the news that the DGPC will soon start a hydropower construction company. That, coupled with the government’s power training institutes and DHI’s investment ambitions, could mean that we may eventually be able to become specialists in run-of-the-river hydropower schemes. And that could mean that we may some day become a recognized authority in planning, designing, constructing, operating, maintaining, financing and marketing clean, sustainable hydropower in Bhutan and beyond.

But the Prime Minister, it appears, has already decided that Tata will be good for us. In fact, he’d gone so far as to tell the Chairman of the Tata Group that: “A country like Bhutan would be happy to be adopted by Tata”.

And to make certain that Ratan Tata did not miss the Government’s invitation for adoption, all our major newspapers – Kuensel and Bhutan Today and Bhutan Observer and Bhutan Times and Business Bhutan – carried the PM’s tempting offer, word for word.

FDI? Maybe.

Adoption? No!

Liberal guests

A recent entry, which was basically a reproduction of the opposition party’s Press Release on the Government’s tourism policies, generated a lot of comments. As of now there are 44 comments, the last of which belongs to “10000eyes” asking:

OL: do you read all the comments made by the blogger…or you just glance on it? just want to know…

Yes, I do read your comments. I read every one of them. And I benefit immensely from your comments, especially those that are critical of and challenge my views.

Obviously what’s more important is that other people – concerned citizens and decision makers – are also reading your comments. And benefiting from them.

But I suspect that what “10000eyes” really wants to know is why I did not post any comments, why I didn’t participate in the discussions. It was intentional. The discussions that “Press release” generated were good, so I preferred to sit back, be quiet and listen. But, be assured, I paid close attention to the discussions. And, I hoped that other readers were following your conversations as well. In fact, that’s why I’ve refrained from posting too many new entries since then.

My views haven’t changed: I still think that liberalizing the tourist tariff is a terrible idea; that requiring hotels catering to tourists to upgrade to at least a 3-star category is insane; and that unilaterally dictating how the entire proceeds of the TDF will be used is illegal.

All said, however, every one of us seems to agree on one thing: that we do not want mass tourism. Okay. But what is mass tourism? How would you define it? Nepal!

Of course, Nepal. And, yes, we do not want to go Nepal’s way, because mass tourism has ruined their country.

But answer this: how many tourists visit Nepal in a year? One million? Two? Three?

Wrong!

In 2008, Nepal had less than 550,000 tourists. And that was an all time record.  And, it included Indian tourists, some 100,000 of them. And, Nepal has about 30 million people.

Now, think about our own country. We have barely 600,000 people. And we seem to be targeting 100,000 tourists per year. And that does not include Indian visitors – they don’t need visas, they don’t pay the daily tourist levy (inappropriately called “royalty”), and they could arrive in much larger numbers.

I don’t know about Nepal. But for Bhutan, liberalizing tourist tariffs and aiming for 100,000 tourists per year amounts to inviting mass tourism. And that must not be acceptable.