The contractual agreement between Gabon and Karpowership, a subsidiary of the Turkish conglomerate Karadeniz Holding specializing in floating power plants, has become central to a significant budgetary and industrial controversy. Figures circulating within specialized media indicate that Libreville disburses 1.8 billion CFA francs monthly for a theoretical capacity of 150 megawatts. However, the actual power injected into the national grid currently hovers between 80 and 90 megawatts. This considerable discrepancy raises critical questions, particularly as the transitional authorities strive to streamline public expenditures, which have long been criticized for their lack of transparency.
An emergency contract becomes a structural fixture
The initial signing of the contract with the Turkish operator was conceived as a short-term solution. Gabon’s executive branch, grappling with a persistent power generation shortfall exacerbated by aging thermal infrastructure and the unreliable nature of hydroelectricity during the dry season, opted for the rapid deployment of powerships. These vessel-mounted power stations, anchored off Owendo, are capable of injecting tens of megawatts into the national grid within a matter of weeks. This method, successfully implemented in countries like Ghana, Sierra Leone, and Senegal, provides an immediate response to energy crises, albeit typically at a higher per-kilowatt-hour cost compared to conventional land-based power plants.
What was intended as a temporary stopgap measure has, over time, become a permanent fixture. The scaling up of local production initiatives, notably through new dams and gas-fired power stations, has not yet rendered the Turkish contract superfluous. 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 hours. Over a twelve-month period, the cumulative cost exceeds 21 billion CFA francs – a substantial sum for a nation whose fiscal trajectory remains under close scrutiny.
A growing challenge to the economic equation
The core point of contention lies in the disparity between the billed capacity and the actual power delivered. Paying a fixed rate indexed to 150 megawatts while receiving only a fraction of that amount inherently inflates the true cost of each megawatt supplied. Numerous voices, both within government administration and technical circles, contend that the current contractual framework excessively shields the Turkish operator from fluctuations in demand and potential technical issues. The transitional authorities, who assumed power in August 2023, have since initiated a comprehensive audit of major public contracts inherited from the previous administration.
Karpowership is not an isolated entity on the African continent. The group operates dozens of powerships across approximately fifteen countries, with a particularly strong presence in Sub-Saharan Africa. Its primary strength lies in its ability to rapidly deploy units ranging from 30 to 470 megawatts. However, from the perspective of client states, its drawback is the dependency it fosters: once a powership is connected, disengaging from the service necessitates reliable alternative energy sources to avoid a return to widespread power outages.
Considering renegotiation or an orderly exit
Therefore, the challenge extends beyond mere financial considerations; it is also profoundly operational. Terminating the contract without simultaneously commissioning equivalent power generation capacities would expose SEEG to a severe supply shock. Furthermore, anticipated major projects, such as the Kinguélé Aval dam being developed with Meridiam or future gas-fired power plants utilizing national production, 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 strictly link billing to the power genuinely injected into the grid. The second favors a phased withdrawal, synchronized with the gradual increase in capacity from new infrastructure. A third, more drastic approach, would entail an outright termination of the contract, potentially involving other suppliers, even at the risk of international litigation. The ultimate decision will have lasting implications for the credibility of Gabon’s energy policy and, more broadly, for the industrial sovereignty doctrine championed by the transitional authorities.