Connect with us

Features

Are we to buy our solar energy with dollars?

Published

on

By Eng. Parakrama Jayasinghe

Email : parajayasinghe@gmail.com

A Presidential Press release, dated 13th June 2021; clearly defines the policy on our Energy Sector. The direction indicated is congruent with the presidential policy declaration “Vision for Prosperity and Splendour”. This is not a moment to vacillate and get embroiled in personal or political agendas. The situation in the country is much too precarious with the Covid-19 raging and the spectre of the impact of Climate Change haunting us. The foreign reserves are falling, impacting the rupee and the cost of living. The agitation and indiscipline on the streets, in the midst of a Pandemic are signs of the social and economic instability creeping in. Sri Lanka can overcome the crisis but it needs sound leadership to mobilise and motivate the people to utilise its own resources in a prudent and fair manner.

A country, endowed with talented and educated human resources, abundant sun, wind, fertile soil and water. All these are valuable assets when it comes to opting to renewable energy. Renewable energy will not bring millions to individual businessmen but will give them sound incomes. However, a very large number of people will be become prosumers, that is those actively contributing to producing energy and at the same time using the generated energy themselves. The excess will be sold to the national grid as already practiced by the Solar Roof Top systems.

In this way, the country will save a large amount of foreign exchange, the environment will benefit as no fossil will be used and the consumers will benefit as they will be also producers and earning money as a result. There will also be a change in the economic scenario as power generation will be decentralised. The character of the Ceylon Electricity Board will be totally changed, from being a loss-making “Colossus” to becoming a sophisticated research and development unit servicing the entire country with training and back0-up facilities. Singapore has very successfully graduated to this system.

The President, in a recent progress review meeting, left no room for the interpretation of his Policy Target of reaching 70% of Renewable Energy for Electricity Generation by 2030 (unfortunately diluted down from the original 80% RE) that his vision is for Renewable Energy and there should be no attempts to misinterpret this by calls for so called “Clean Energy”. There is no such clean energy outside the realm of renewable energy and no fossil fuel can be given that distinction.

This national target has to be formalized now by a Cabinet decision and gazetted; otherwise, the President’s policy could very well be surreptitiously overturned.

Pursuing this goal, the contributions of various forms of indigenous sources of renewable energy have to be harnessed. Of these, Solar Energy holds pride of place with the progress made in recent years, particularly by Roof Top Solar PV systems , aided by the most visionary provision of the Surya Bala Sangraamaya which has to date reached a level of over 350 MW installed and many more in stages of implementation. The most challenging target set by the President however, would call for development of other larger installations both ground mounted and floating in the coming years.

The Ministry, as well as the CEB, have been working on several such projects with a 100 MW Solar Park in Siyambaladuwa for which the required land has already been earmarked and a proposed 150 MW Solar park in Pooneryn to follow shortly.

It is under these circumstances that I am compelled to raise alarm bells as noted in the title of this Paper. Are we to buy our Solar Energy in Dollars?

 

My article A Fresh Look at Solar Energy -Devoid of preconceptions and bias for and against.(https://island.lk/devoid-of-preconceptions-and-bias-for-and-against/) highlighted the many aspects of this most valuable resource, that mother nature has endowed on us in Sri Lanka and the need for most careful plans and programmes to gain the best advantage to Sri Lanka ,

The objective should be broader than the mere addition of energy to the grid. This would contribute to the national economy much more than what is given by the amount of electricity generated, by way of highlevel employment, development of local entrepreneurs and possibility of upstream and downstream integration not to mention the savings in foreign exchange.

With the current moves to implement the 100 MW Solar Park in Siyambaladuwa, it is most important that the other relevant issues are given due consideration.

 

Looking at the larger picture

The President’s goal of 80 RE as expressed in the “0Vision for Prosperity and Splendour” is based on a number of far reaching concepts. The reduction of Sri Lanka’s dependence on imported fossil fuels and thereby ensuring the future energy security, is the most apparent and noteworthy goal. But along with it should come the additional spin off benefits which would accrue, whether specifically stated or not. Only by ensuring these spin-off benefits, while reaching the primary goal, that the “Splendour” of the vision would be achieved.

I am repeating here these important principles which should not be lost sight of at this critical juncture, and the opportunity be lost forever. These principles to ensure that Sri Lanka truly achieves future energy security and the additional advantages are

 

* The energy industry must at least now strive to become a National Industry. The competency of our entrepreneurs and technologists this is already well proven.

*The entrepreneurship in the energy sector should be viewed as a major potential contributor to the growth of the GDP, not a mere service in ensuring the energy supply for other sectors in the economy to grow.

*The development of Renewable Energy resources and services is a significant avenue of developing employment opportunities.

*The reduction of the drain on foreign exchange by eliminating the continued use of imported fossil fuels.

*In case of bioenergy the added advantage of multiple spin off benefits to the rural economy, with the added advantage of being a source of firm power, with no drain of foreign exchange

 

The challenge now is to ensure that the adherence to these principles is held as sacrosanct in the efforts to develop the larger solar and wind projects in the pipe line.

 

The Pitfalls to be avoided.

I am addressing these remarks on the Siyambaladuwa 100 MW solar project in particular, but similar consideration must be given for any other such solar and wind projects too.

The desire for the CEB to have large power plants in one location is acceptable from their point of view. However, both Wind and Solar Projects have the advantage that any size of project conceived however large, consists of a large number of solar panels currently reaching over 500 watts per panel and a discrete number of wind generators, which too have now reached capacities of 5 MW each. Therefore, the packaging of the number of individual units for a particular project is made purely on economic considerations.

What is important to realize is that such considerations must take into account, the principles outlined above to gain the greatest advantage to the country, which unfortunately seems to be glossed over by the planners, for various reasons. A holistic view in a national perspective would highlight the immense direct financial value and other economic and social benefits and energy security on one hand and the potential dangers in overlooking these on the other hand.

Let us look at the Siyanbaladuwa project as the example before any unwise decisions are made.

 

The project capacity – 100 MW installed

Targeted Grid Substation – Moneragala

Land Acquisition – Already made

 

Sri Lankan entrepreneurs and engineers have already proven their capacity of developing projects up to 10 MW. Therefore the logical policy should be to plan this project to be awarded to ten local entrepreneurs, to handle packages of 10 MW, properly structured and managed by the CEB, by National Competitive Bidding, so that the tariff would be in Sri Lanka rupee terms considering that we don’t have to pay for our sunshine. And there would be no drain on foreign exchange except for the initial one-time expenditure on import of the necessary equipment and a limited amount for any minimal spares imports only. The local entrepreneurs and the lending institutions and even the smaller investors in the stock exchange have shown their eagerness to contribute to this form of national venture. So, there is no validity in any argument on the availability of funds or the technical capabilities.

The alternative would be to invite foreign participation, usually couched in arguments of lack of adequate expertise, which as shown above are not tenable in the present situation, and the lure of so called ” Foreign Direct Investment ” and inward flow of Dollars at this critical juncture. But the question must be asked is, in how many such projects approved by the BOI, how much funds were sourced from the local banks limiting the credit available for the local entrepreneurs. The most blatant example is the Korean Investor in the Thulhiriya Textile Mill, who vanished leaving a multibillion loan unsettled for a local bank.

In the present situation the conditions are even worse. Let us assume that the investor would bring in the total capital required. Which may be assumed as US $ 100 Million for the 100 MW by one or more foreign investors. It is clear that they would have the advantage of the currently depleted cost of funds in the global market, which is not available for the local competitors in an open international tender. However, it is certain that the foreign investor in exchange would demand a Dollar Linked Tariff. Using an estimated final tariff of US $ 0.07/kWh, the following interesting numbers emerge.

(See image 1)

 

So against a dubious inflow of $ 100 Million we would be sending out 260 % , all of which other than the initial capital could have been retained in Sri Lanka. Moreover, with the ever depreciating rupee, this amount of dollar would be costing us much more in rupee terms. Let us be generous to assume that the a mere 3% depreciation of the rupee annually. Therefore this drain would amount to a colossal Rupees 75.8 Billions over the 20 year project life including cost of spares. .

Against this, for an initial foreign exchange cost of US $ 80,000,000 for a group of local companies the entire expenditure over the project period would be Initial capital on US$ . 80,000,000 plus the Import component of spares during project period @ 1.5 % of capital per year. If this is also adjusted @ 3% Depreciation per year the total foreign exchange drain is Rs 23.06 Billion only, against the Rs 75.8 Billion mentioned above.

These differences are illustrated in the chart below. (See images 1 and two)

 

This is the basis for my question in the title of this article. We will by spending in Dollars for the use of our own sunshine, which we could harness ourselves for a similar or lower cost in rupees and also ensure the much desired energy security and reduction of drain on foreign exchange.

The folly of a similar nature was permitted during the Mahaweli Project downstream development. The project packaging was done in a manner to exclude the local contractors and the awards were made to foreign companies. However, the actual work was done by local contractors on sub contracts very competently. But their experience still remains unaccepted for prequalification of the larger scale of projects. Many decades after, such monumental follies need not be repeated. We must not make the mistake of falling, during daytime, into the pit that we fell into at night, as the local saying goes.



Features

Viktor Orban, Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump: The Terrible Threes of the 21st Century

Published

on

Orban (center) Trump and Netanyahu

In the autumn of 1956, Hungary staged the first uprising against the 20th century Soviet behemoth. Seventy years later, in the spring of 2026 Hungary has delivered the first electoral thrashing against 21st century right wing populism in Europe. The 1956 uprising was crushed after seven days. But the opposition scored a landslide victory in Hungary’s parliamentary election held on Sunday, April 12 and. Viktor Orban, Prime Minister since 2010 and the architect of what he proudly called “the illiberal state”, was resoundingly defeated. Orban who has been a pain in the neck for the European Union was a close ally of US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Trump even dispatched his Vice President JD Vance to Budapest to campaign for Orban. After Orban’s defeat, Trump and his MAGA followers may be having nightmares about the US midterm elections in November. Similarly, Orban’s defeat has reportedly caused “great concern in the halls of power in Jerusalem.” Netanyahu has lost his only ally in the European Union and the opposition victory in Hungary does not augur well for his own electoral prospects in the Israeli elections due in October.

Ceasefire Hopes

Trump and Netanyahu have bigger things to worry about in the Middle East and among their own political bases. Trump is going bonkers, blasphemously imitating Christ and badmouthing the Pope, launching a blockade in the Strait of Hormuz and strong arming more talks in Islamabad. Netanyahu has been forced to sit on his hands, pausing his fight against Iran while pursuing peace talks with Lebanon. The leaders and diplomats from Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey are shuttling around drumming up support for another round of talks in Islamabad and a prolonged extension of the ceasefire.

Further talks in Islamabad and potential extension of the ceasefire received a new boost by Trump’s announcement of a new 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. The background to this development appears to be Iran’s insistence on having this secondary ceasefire, and Trump insisting on ceasefire abidance by Hezbollah in return for his ordering Netanyahu to stop his brutal ‘lawn mowing’ in Lebanon. All of this might seem to augur well for a potential extension of the primary ceasefire between the US and Iran. There are also reports of the narrowing of gap between the two parties – involving a potential moratorium on Iran’s uranium enrichment, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran’s access to its frozen assets estimated to be $100 billion.

Meanwhile the IMF has released its latest World Economic Outlook with a grim forecast. “Once again, says the report, “the global economy is threatened with being thrown off the course – this time by the outbreak of war in the Middle East.” Before the war, the IMF was expected to upgrade its growth forecasts for the global economy. Now it is going to be weaker growth and higher inflation with oil price optimistically stabilizing around $100 a barrel in 2026 and $75 a barrel in 2027. In a worst case scenario, if the oil prices were to hit $110 in 2026 and $125 in 2027, growth everywhere will further weaken and inflation will go further up in countries big and small.

In a joint statement on the Middle East, the Finance Ministers of the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, Spain, Norway, Republic of Ireland, Poland and New Zealand have called on the IMF and World Bank “to provide a coordinated emergency support offer for countries in need, tailored to country circumstances and drawing on the full range and flexibility of their tool kits.” They have also welcomed “advice on domestic responses that are temporary, targeted, and effective, and encourage work to identify steps needed to protect long-term growth.”

Subversion from the Right

The two men, Trump and Netanyahu, who started the war and precipitated the current crisis are not being held accountable by anyone and they are still free to do what they want and as they please. The third man, Victor Orban, who did not have anything to do with the war but extended wholehearted ideological and political support as a faithful apprentice to the two older sorcerers, has been democratically defeated. Together, they formed the terrible threes of the 21st century, spearheading a subversion from the right of the emerging liberal status quo of the post Cold War world. Orban’s defeat is a significant setback to the illiberal right, but it is not the end of it.

The three emerged in the specific historical contexts of their own polities that are both vastly different and yet share powerful ingredients that have proved to be politically potent. The broader context has been the end of the Cold War and the removal of the perceived external threat which opened up the domestic political space in the US, for locking horns over primarily cultural standpoints and climate politics. This era began with the Clinton presidency in 1992 and the election of Barack Obama 16 years later, in 2008, created the illusion of a post-racial America.

In reality, the right was able to push back – first with the younger Bush presidency (2000-2008) pursuing compassionate conservatism, and later with the foray of Trump (2016-2020) threatening to end what he called the “American Carnage.” Of the 32 years since the election of Bill Clinton, Democrats have controlled the White House for 20 years over five presidential terms (Clinton – two, Obama – two, and Biden -one), while the Republicans won three terms (Bush – two, Trump – one) spanning 12 years.

Trump has since won a second term for another four years, but already in his five+ years in office he has issued executive orders to roll back almost all of the liberal advancements in the realms of civil rights, equality, diversity and inclusion. All that the celebrated acronym DEI (Diversity, Equality and Inclusion) stands for has been executively ordered to be banished from the state, its agencies and its programs.

In Europe, the European Union became the champion and bulwark of liberalism and subsidiarity, which in turn provoked the rise of right wing populism in every member country. Brexit was the loudest manifestation against what was considered to be EU’s overreach, but after Britain’s bitter Brexit experience the populists in the European countries gave up on demanding their own exit and limited themselves to fighting the EU from their national bases.

Viktor Orban became the face and voice of anti-EU nationalists. But he and his political party, the Christian Nationalist Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Alliance, are not the only one. Nigel Farage’s Reform UK in Britain and Marine Le Pen’s National Rally Party in France are becoming real electoral contenders, while right wing presidents have been elected in Argentina and Chile.

The rise and fall of Viktor Orban

Of the three terribles, Orban is the youngest but with the longest involvement in politics. Born in 1963, Viktor Orban became a political activist as a 15-year old high schooler, becoming secretary of a Young Communist League local. He continued his activism while studying law in Budapest, visiting Poland and writing his thesis on the Polish Solidarity movement, giving lectures in West Germany and the US as a potential future Hungarian leader, and undertaking research on European civil society at Pembroke College, Oxford.

At the age of 26, Orban gained national prominence with a speech he delivered on June 16, 1989 in Budapest’s Heroes’ Square to mark the reburial of Imre Nagy and other Hungarians killed in the 1956 uprising. Imre Nagy was the leader of the 1956 Hungarian uprising against the puppet Soviet Union outpost in Budapest.

To digress and make a local connection – the pages of Sri Lanka’s parliamentary Hansard of 1956, contain an impressive record of the political debate in Sri Lanka over the events in Hungary. The LSSP’s Colvin R de Silva eloquently led the Trotskyite prosecution of the Soviet invasion of Hungary and the suppression of its freedoms. Pieter Keuneman of the Communist Party used his wit and debating skills to defend the indefensible. GG Ponnambalam, the unrepentant anti-communist, used the opportunity to take swipes on both sides. Finally, for the government, Prime Minister SWRD Bandaranaike deployed his own oratorical skills to empathize with the uprising without condemning the USSR. The four men were Sri Lanka’s foremost verbal gladiators and they used the occasion to put on quite a display of their talents.

Back to Hungary, where Orban began his political vocation identifying himself with Imre Nagy and demanding the withdrawal of the Soviet army from Hungary and calling for free elections in that country to elect a new government. That same year in 1989, Fidesz was recognized as a political party; Orban became its leader four years later in 1993 and led the party and its allies to their first victory and formed a new government in 1998. At age 35 Orban became the second youngest Prime Minister in Hungary’s history.

During his first term, Orban started well on the economy, reducing inflation and the budget deficit, was welcomed to the White House by President George W. Bush, and led Hungary to join NATO overruling Russian objections. But the slide into authoritarianism and corruption was just as quick, including the attempt to replace the two-thirds parliamentary majority requirement by a simple majority. By the end of the term the ruling coalition disintegrated and Orban lost the 2002 election and became the leader of the opposition over the next two terms till 2010.

Orban returned to power with a two-thirds majority in 2010 and immediately introduced a new constitution that set the stage for ushering in the illiberal state. What had been previously a communist state now became a Christian state where ‘traditional values’ of gender rights, sexuality, and exclusive nationalism were constitutionally enshrined. The electoral system was changed reducing the number parliamentarians from 386 to 199 – with 103 of them directly elected and 93 assigned proportionately. Orban went on to win three more elections over 16 years – in 2014, 2018 and 2022 – each with a two-thirds majority, and used the time and power to transform Hungary into a conservative fortress in Europe.

The new constitution and its frequent amendments were used to centralize legislative and executive power, curb civil liberties, restrict freedom of speech and the media, and to weaken the constitutional court and judiciary. It was his opposition to non-white immigration that made him “the talisman of Europe’s mainstream right”. He described immigration as the West’s answer to its declining population and flatly rejected it as a solution for Hungary. Instead, he told his compatriots, “we need Hungarian children.” His ‘Orbanomics’ policies restricted abortion and encouraged family formation – forgiving student debt for female students having or adopting children, life-long tax holiday for women with four or more children, and sponsoring fixed-rate mortgages for married couples.

Orban wanted to make Hungary an “ideological center for … an international conservative movement”. Orban heaped praise on Jair Bolsonaro for making Brazil the best example of a “modern Christian democracy.” He endorsed Trump in every one of Trump’s three presidential elections, the only European leader to do so. In return, Orban has been described by US MAGA ideologue Steve Bannon as “Trump before Trump.” Orban’s attack on universities for being the citadels of liberalism have found their echoes in Trump’s America and Modi’s India.

For all his efforts in making Hungary a conservative ideological centre, Viktor Orban’s undoing came about because of Hungary’s growing economic crises and the depth of corruption and systemic nepotism that engulfed the government. The economy has tanked over the last three years with rising prices and the national debt reaching 75% of the GDP – the highest among East European countries. Orban’s critics have exposed and the people have experienced systemic corruption that enabled the siphoning of public wealth into private accounts, the creation of a ‘neo-feudal capitalist class’, and the enrichment of family and friends. Orban’s corruption became the central plank of the opposition platform that Peter Magyar and his Tisza Party presented to the voters and caused his ouster after 16 years.

The Prime Minister elect is not a dyed in the wool liberal, but a member of a conservative Budapest family, and a politician cut from the old Orban cloth. Magyar (literally meaning “Hungarian”) was once a “powerful insider” in the Fidesz government – notably active in foreign affairs, while his ex-wife was once the Minister of Justice in Orban’s cabinet. Mr. Magyar may not fully roll back all of Orban’s illiberalism, but he has committed himself to eliminating corruption, increasing social welfare spending, limiting the prime ministerial tenure to two terms, and being more pro-European, EU and NATO.

EU and European leaders have openly welcomed the change in Hungary, and may be looking for the new government to change Orban’s vetoing of a number of EU initiatives, especially those involving assistance to Ukraine. In return, the new government in Hungary will be expecting the unfreezing of as much as $33 billion funds that the EU extraordinarily chose to freeze as punishment for Orban’s illiberal initiatives in Hungary. For Trump and Netanyahu, the defeat of Viktor Orban removes their only ally and supporter in all of Europe.

by Rajan Philips

Continue Reading

Features

ICONS:A Dialogue Across Centuries

Published

on

Sky Gallery of the Fareed Uduman Art Forum is dedicated to bringing audiences, cultures, and time periods together through meaningful and accessible art experiences to create the closest possible encounters with the world’s greatest paintings. Previous exhibitions include, Gustav Klimt, Frida Kahlo, Paul Gauguin, Vincent Van Gogh, Salvador Dali.

ICONS is conceived as “a dialogue across centuries” bringing together over a dozen artistic geniuses whose works span the Renaissance to the modern era. These works at their original scales of creation changes the conversation. You can finally stand in front of a life-size Vermeer or a monumental Monet and feel the dialogue between artists who never met but shaped each other across time. Each exhibit is meticulously presented on canvas, hand-framed, and finished at the exact dimensions of the original masterpieces, preserving the integrity of composition, texture, brushwork, color and scale.

At the heart of the exhibition is Jan van Eyck’s ‘Arnolfini Portrait’, a work that epitomizes the detail, symbolism, and human intimacy that have inspired generations of artists. Alongside it, visitors will encounter paintings that shaped the renaissance, impressionism, modernism, and the evolution of visual storytelling by Munch, Matisse, Monet, Degas, Da Vinci, Renoir, Vermeer, Rembrandt, Cézanne, Caravaggio, and more. The exhibition invites audiences to experience a rare conversation across centuries of artistic brilliance.

By bringing together works that are geographically and historically dispersed, ICONS creates a compelling space for comparison, reflection, and discovery. Visitors are invited to move beyond passive viewing into a more engaged encounter—tracing artistic influence, identifying stylistic shifts, and uncovering unexpected connections between artists who never shared the same physical space, yet remain deeply interconnected across time.

Designed and curated for both seasoned art enthusiasts and first-time visitors, ICONS offers an experience that is at once educational, immersive, and accessible—removing many of the traditional barriers associated with global museum-going.

Exhibition Details:

Dates: April 24 – May 3
Time: 10:00 AM – 5:00 PM (Monday – Sunday)
Venue: Sky Gallery Colombo 5

Continue Reading

Features

Our Teardrop

Published

on

BOOK REVIEW

Ranoukh Wijesinha (2026)

Published by Jam Fruit Tree Publications.
82 pages. Softcover. ISBN 978-624-6633-81-3

The author is a graduate teacher at St. Thomas’ College, Mount Lavinia; his alma mater. On leaving school he read for a Bachelor of Arts Degree in English Language and English Literature at the University of Nottingham (Malaysia). On graduating, in 2024, he went back to his old school to teach these same disciplines. There seems to be a historic logic to this as his grandfather, a notable Thomian of his day, also started his working career as a teacher at the College before moving on to the world of publishing; as a newspaper journalist and sub-editor.

On his maternal side, Wijesinha’s grandfather was an accomplished journalist, thespian and playwright of his day, and his mother is also a much sought after teacher of English and English Literature and, as acknowledged by him, his first, and foremost, English teacher.

Ranoukh Wijesinha and friends at STC

Though there are some well-written, almost lyrical, pieces of prose in this publication, it is the poetry that dominates. Written with a sensitivity to people and events he has either observed himself, or as described to him by those who did, it also encompasses all genres of poetic verse, from the classical to the modern, including sonnets, acrostics, haiku to free and blank verse, the latter more in vogue today. All in all, it presents as a celebration of English poetry and its ability to, sometimes, express depth of thought and feeling far better than prose.

Dedicated to his mentor at St. Thomas’, his Drama and Singing Master had been a great influence on Wijesinha His sudden, premature, death understandably came as a shock to the still developing student under his tutelage. The poems “The Man who Made Me” and “The Curtain Called” best demonstrate this. In addition, it is apparent that Wijesinha has endured much mental trauma in his young life. Spending much time on his own, the questions these moments have raised are expressed in “When No One is Listening”, “There was a Time”, “Midnight Walks” and the prose “A Ramble through Colombo”.

However, the majority of the poems concern ‘Our Teardrop’, Sri Lanka, for whom the writer has a great love. He explores its history, its natural wonders, its people, its tragedies, its corruption and the hope that things will get better for all its people. “Bala’ and “Dicky” address a time of violence from days gone by when there were few glories, just victims. “Easter Sunday” brings this almost to the present time.

There also is humour. “Ado, Machang, Bro, Dude” celebrates his friends and friendships in a way that will reverberate with all the present and previous generations of those who are, or were once, in their late teens and early twenties.

There is little to criticise in this first of the writer’s forays into published works except, as referred to previously, to re-state that the prose quails in the face of the power of the poetry. It is all well written, filled with passion and compassion, and gives comfort that there still are young Sri Lankan writers who can be this brave, and write so powerfully, and profoundly, in English. It is hoped that this is just the first of many from the pen of this young writer.

L S M Pillai

Continue Reading

Trending