But are these problems unique to Grand Inga Dam? Not really, says Professor George Egides, a hydropower expert at Lancaster University in the UK.
He says years of delays and multiple changes of partners are “normal” for a major infrastructure project like the Inga Dam.
He pointed to Britain’s Mersey Tidal Project – which, if successful, would be the world’s largest sea barrier. The idea was first proposed in 1984 and abandoned, then revived in the decades that followed.
“Does this mean we are unstable here in the UK?” asks Mr. Aggidis. He calls the Inga project “viable”.
Similar sentiments are shared by Alexander Schwab, an executive at Andreas, an Austria-based company that signed on to supply equipment for Inga 3.
Mr Schwab says Andreatz has signed an MoU with Congolese authorities but has received no word on the project since 2021.
He appears largely frustrated by the lack of communication, saying one of the three major infrastructure projects “will stall somewhere”.
For Mr Schwab, Grand Inga is “one of the best mega-projects in the world”.
But despite its potential, there are deep concerns about the project’s environmental and social impact.
A common criticism is that the dam will benefit South African consumers and DR Congo mining companies, but not the Congolese people. About 80 percent of the population lacks access to electricity.
“Inga will not bring electricity to the people,” says Emmanuel Mousseau, head of the Congolese Civil Society Alliance Corp. He alleged that the majority of the electricity had already been promised to South Africa and the mines.
In a recent report on Inga 3, DR Congo officials acknowledged that the dam “is not sufficient alone to address the DRC’s energy and development challenges” but called it a “catalyst” for national transformation. can work
The World Bank said it is exploring how it can support the government to “provide the broad benefits of energy access” to Inga.
Environmental and rights groups are also concerned that about 37,000 Residents of Inga area will be displaced without compensation. According to organizations such as International Rivers and the Observatory del Duty en la Globalizacio, thousands of people were forcibly evicted from their homes and never compensated when Inga I and II were built.
They also say that the first two dams damaged the region’s biodiversity and any additional dams are likely to do the same.
“This will have a significant impact on fish and all aquatic animals… When you change the flow of water in rivers, we can see some species of fish disappearing,” says Mr Mousavio.
A 2018 study argued that many large-scale hydropower projects in Europe and the US have been environmentally destructive.
DR Congo officials have acknowledged that people will be displaced by Inga III, but said residents would be resettled in areas with basic services and promised “fair compensation”.
He also acknowledged the threats to the local environment and said a review to mitigate the impact would be completed in the next two years. However, according to a BBC source close to the project, authorities have yet to raise funds for these studies.
If Grand Inga is facing the ups and downs that come with major infrastructure projects, the World Bank may still have reason for hope. is
But a dam is a complex engineering project – one that requires its many stakeholders to work together.
The World Bank’s withdrawal, to the exclusion of only three gorges, suggests that DR Congo is struggling to maintain such unity.
And despite DR Congo’s ambitions, construction cannot begin until funds are secured.
So for now it seems that this project, which has the potential to change the lives of millions of people in Africa, is just that – a grand vision.
