Gabon’s agreement with Karpowership, a division of the Turkish Karadeniz Holding conglomerate specializing in floating power plants, has become the focal point of a significant financial and operational dispute. Official figures indicate that Libreville pays 1.8 billion CFA francs monthly for a theoretical capacity of 150 megawatts. However, the actual power delivered to the national grid is currently estimated to be between 80 and 90 megawatts. This substantial discrepancy raises questions, particularly as Gabon’s transitional government seeks to streamline public expenditures, which have long faced criticism for their lack of transparency.
An emergency agreement becomes a long-term fixture
The initial contract signed with the Turkish operator was intended as a short-term measure. Facing a persistent electricity generation shortfall, exacerbated by aging thermal infrastructure and inconsistent hydropower output during dry seasons, the Gabonese government previously turned to the rapid deployment of powerships. These floating power stations, anchored off the coast of Owendo, can supply tens of megawatts to the national grid within weeks. While this method, successfully implemented in nations like Ghana, Sierra Leone, and Sénégal, offers an immediate resolution to energy crises, it typically comes at a higher per-kilowatt-hour cost compared to traditional land-based power plants.
What was conceived as a temporary stopgap has, however, evolved into a lasting arrangement. Despite the development of local generation projects, including new dams and gas-fired power plants, these initiatives have not yet progressed sufficiently to eliminate the need for the Turkish contract. Consequently, the Société d’énergie et d’eau du Gabon (SEEG) remains reliant on an external provider to meet its electricity demands, especially during peak consumption periods. Over a year, the total expenditure exceeds 21 billion CFA francs, a considerable sum for a nation whose fiscal stability remains under close observation.
Economic challenges under increasing scrutiny
The primary point of contention revolves around the disparity between the invoiced capacity and the actual power supplied. Effectively, paying a fixed rate for 150 megawatts while receiving only a portion of that output inherently inflates the true cost per delivered megawatt. Numerous individuals within both governmental administration and technical circles argue that the current contractual terms offer excessive protection to the Turkish operator against fluctuations in demand and potential technical issues. Since assuming power in August 2023, Gabon’s transitional authorities have initiated a comprehensive audit of all major public contracts inherited from the previous administration.
Karpowership operates extensively across the African continent, deploying dozens of its floating power plants in approximately fifteen countries, with a particularly strong presence in Sub-Saharan Africa. The company’s strength lies in its rapid deployment capability for units ranging from 30 to 470 megawatts. However, from the perspective of client states, a significant drawback is the dependency it creates: once a powership is connected, disengaging from the service necessitates having reliable alternative power sources readily available, otherwise the risk of returning to widespread power outages becomes a serious concern.
Considering renegotiation or an orderly exit
The issue extends beyond mere financial implications; it also presents a significant operational challenge. Terminating the current contract without simultaneously activating equivalent power generation capacities would expose SEEG to a severe supply shock. Major anticipated projects, such as the Kinguélé Aval dam developed in partnership with Meridiam, or forthcoming national gas-fired power plants, are not expected to be fully operational for another two to three years. This leaves little immediate room for maneuver.
Several strategic options are currently under consideration. The first involves renegotiating the financial terms, aiming to more precisely link billing to the actual power injected into the grid. A second approach favors a phased withdrawal, carefully coordinated with the gradual commissioning of new energy infrastructure. A third, more assertive option, proposes an outright termination of the contract, potentially involving alternative suppliers, even if it risks international legal disputes. The ultimate decision will have long-term consequences for the credibility of Gabon’s energy policy and, more broadly, for the industrial sovereignty doctrine championed by its transitional authorities.
Key decisions regarding these options are anticipated in the coming weeks, as the nation’s energy roadmap becomes more clearly defined.
