Small Decentralized Hydropower Program National ... - Cd3wd.com

a) El equip0 fuk objeto de crbditos de1 proveedor o
sea se vendia a alg& plazo de pago, que estaba
de ecuerdo a la pr&Aica de1 fabricante, plazas de
ha& 8 ties se registran en las numerosas cen-
trales hidroektricas vendidas.
b) La obra civil estaba financiada por la misma en-
tidad duefia de la obra (Municipio, cant&~, etc) y
@sta se la incltia en forma prioritaria dentro de1
presupuesto anual de la misma, sin embargo en
ocasiones se di6 el case de que la comptiia con-
tratista de1 proyecto financi6 parcialmente la
obra civil y recaud6 el monto financiado con el
product0 dc la venta de energia; o sea la comer-
cializaciSn de la misma estuvo en dichas opor-
tunidades controlada por la compaiiia con-
tratista, con el objet0 de1 pagarse la inversi6n y
estz forma de pago se la introducia dentro de1
contrato de construcci6n.
Es precise anotar que esto era posible por el
relativamente bajo costo de la obra civil, que en ese
tiempo podtia haber e&ado en el orden de1 35% de1
costo total de la obra correspondiendo al 65% el
cost0 de1 equipo.
En la d6cada de 1960-70 con el advenimiento de
INECEL, las CompaZas constructoras dejaron de
hater contratos “Llave en mano,” INECEL y las
Empresas Ekctricas que se contituyerc.. en esa
dkada, se convirtieron en las promotoras y ejecu-
toras de las obras, quedando las comptiias aquellas,
coma simples vendedores de1 equip0 de las centrales;
el problema de financiaci6n poco a poco fuk absorbido
por INECEL, en vista de haberse constitido en ac-
cionistb de dichas Empresas, con mayor capacidad de
soportar cargas financieras y obtener crkditos para
las obras. INECEL obtenia creditos para la finan-
ciaci6n de1 equipo, sea de 10s mismos proveedores y
en ocasiones de Gobiernos y contribtia con la contra-
parte en moneda local para la obra civil; las centrales
luego eran operadas por las Empresas Electricas.
Miremos ahora, en base de esta experiencia, cuales
serian las posibilidades actuales de financiar un pro-
grama de micro o pequeiias centrales hidroekctricas.
La p&tics demuestra que mientras en un gran es-
quema hidroel&trko, 10s Bancos de Desarrollo, in-
stituciones de foment0 de1 credit0 a las exporta-
ciones, 10s mismos proveedores, tratan de financiar y
obtener las mejores condiciones de financiamiento,
para estas pequefias centrales no hay tal devoci6n;
las razones de esto pueden ser; (i) 10s montos a finan-
ciarse considerados indikidualmente pueden no ser
atractivos; (ii) siendo la importancia de estas cen-
277
a) The equipment was obtained through sup-
plier credits, i.e., the supplier sold on in-
stallments according to the manufacturer’s
practices. Terms of up to 8 years were ap-
plied to the numerous hydroelectric plants
sold.
b) Civil works were financed by the owner of
the project (municipality, county, etc.) and
were included on a priority basis in the year-
ly budget. Nevertheless, there were
sometimes cases in which the project con-
tractor partially financed the civil works and
collected the amount financed from the
monies obtained from the sale of electricity.
Sales were then controlled by the contrac-
ting company, with a view to recuperating
its investment and this form of payment was
introduced as a part of the construction con-
tract. It should be pointed out that this was
made possible by the relatively low cost of
the civil works which at the time may have
accounted for 35 per cent of the total cost
of the works, with 65 par cent corresponding
to the purchase of the equipment.
In the 1960-70 decade, with the creation of IN-
ECEL, the costructing companies stopped
subscribing “turn-key” contracts. INECEL and the
electric power companies established at the time
became the promoters and axecutors of the
works and the constructing comp;5Aes became
mere sellers of powerplant equipment. The pro-
blem of financing was gradually absorbed by IN-
ECEL since it had become a shareholder of the
power companies with a greater capacity to ab-
sorb financial burdens and obtain credits for the
works. INECEL obtained credits for financing the
equipment, either from the suppliers themselves
or, upon occasion, from other governments, and
contributed the counterpart funds in local curren-
cy for the civil works. The powerplants were then
operated by the electric power companies.
Based on this experience, let us examine the
current possibilities for financing a program of
small or micro-hydropowerplants.
Experience shows that, while development
banks, export credit firms, and the suppliers
themselves try to finance and obtain the best
financing conditions for large nydroelectric pro-
jects, there is no such interest for small
hydroelectric plants. The reasons for this lack of
interest may be that 1) the amounts to be financ-
ed, individually considered, may not be attractive;