A Struggle for Power
Electricity blackouts in Lebanon have become a prevalent way of life; a daily nuisance bore by the Lebanese population. Social phenomena have developed in response to the inconsistent provision of electricity. An app named “Beirut Electricity” was created to track electricity rotations throughout the capital. For most people abroad, they ask, how do they cope?
The inconsistent provision of electricity in Lebanon is at best described as a struggle for power. It is, literally, a struggle for powering homes as well as a medium for extending political influence. The pun on power is important to emphasize as it greatly illuminates the core of the electrical problem. The electricity crisis in Lebanon is deeply synchronized with the sectarian divides entrenched within its political system. The electricity sector is also a victim of market inefficiency.
Electricity provision, is controlled by the state-owned Electricite du Liban (EDL). The proposal of privatizing the electricity sector has become a prominent debate throughout the country. Aggravated with the state’s inability to execute consistent electricity provisions, citizens are beginning to put more faith into the principles of free markets and supply-demand mechanisms. Although this proposal has been circulating for some time now, there is no visible move towards privatization. The most recent development was the temporary employment of Turkish ships to supply electrical power along the coast. EDL lacks the proper infrastructure to meet the demand of the entire Lebanese population. According to The Economist, the daily gap between supply and demand is 1.1 Gigawatts (GW), which is roughly equal to 40% of total demand. EDL’s machinery is outdated and obsolete. Limited re-investment and poor maintenance have resulted in diminishing returns for the government. EDL losses contribute to roughly 20% of national debt.
The dishevelled conditions of the electricity sector have prompted private services of electric generators. Beirut has become the home of an orchestra of buzzing generators. Fumes produced by the generators also have negative effects on health and air pollution. Furthermore, generators are mainly enjoyed by those that have the financial means to purchase them. The electricity crisis has created inequitable living conditions for the Lebanese people; yet, we do not see any fierce protests or parliamentary changes. Moves towards changing or privatizing the electricity sector are highly sensitive to sectarian strife and fear of upsetting the public sector’s balance of power. There is a recurring theme in Lebanese politics to ensure that Muslim Sunni, Muslim Shiite and Christian sects receive equitable shares and rations from public policies. For example, last year, parliament failed to agree on making worker contracts in EDL permanent due to the Christian belief that the beneficiaries would mainly be Muslim. The Lebanese government almost always questions the political identity of the individuals concerned before implementing a solution. This sectarian divide is a huge barrier to successful policy making in the electricity sector. Policies should be implemented regardless of the political or regional identity of the stakeholders involved. So long as the benefits are accrued by Lebanese citizens, then those policies should be accurately evaluated and thusly implemented.
Clearly, the electricity crisis has a complicated political dimension. Allegiances to sects and poor infrastructure are main barriers to consistent electricity provision. Politicians have engaged in a ‘blame-game’ in order to avoid addressing the crisis. Lebanese individuals should not endorse this sectarian competitiveness and should, instead, realize their rights. One of these rights is access to electricity twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Improving the electricity sector is not a game of balance of power, but rather a platform to start building a better and improved nation. The politics behind the crisis is not the only aspect that needs adjustment. Re-investment is necessary in order to build power plants with enough capacity to meet shortages. Re-investment is a binding precondition for maintaining the state-owned monopoly over electricity. If the state is unable to do so, perhaps privatization or another economic solution is the answer. The solution to the electricity crisis has many dimensions. But first, let us clarify what we are struggling for: A Struggle for Power or a Struggle for (the Balance of) Power?
N.C
The inconsistent provision of electricity in Lebanon is at best described as a struggle for power. It is, literally, a struggle for powering homes as well as a medium for extending political influence. The pun on power is important to emphasize as it greatly illuminates the core of the electrical problem. The electricity crisis in Lebanon is deeply synchronized with the sectarian divides entrenched within its political system. The electricity sector is also a victim of market inefficiency.
Electricity provision, is controlled by the state-owned Electricite du Liban (EDL). The proposal of privatizing the electricity sector has become a prominent debate throughout the country. Aggravated with the state’s inability to execute consistent electricity provisions, citizens are beginning to put more faith into the principles of free markets and supply-demand mechanisms. Although this proposal has been circulating for some time now, there is no visible move towards privatization. The most recent development was the temporary employment of Turkish ships to supply electrical power along the coast. EDL lacks the proper infrastructure to meet the demand of the entire Lebanese population. According to The Economist, the daily gap between supply and demand is 1.1 Gigawatts (GW), which is roughly equal to 40% of total demand. EDL’s machinery is outdated and obsolete. Limited re-investment and poor maintenance have resulted in diminishing returns for the government. EDL losses contribute to roughly 20% of national debt.
The dishevelled conditions of the electricity sector have prompted private services of electric generators. Beirut has become the home of an orchestra of buzzing generators. Fumes produced by the generators also have negative effects on health and air pollution. Furthermore, generators are mainly enjoyed by those that have the financial means to purchase them. The electricity crisis has created inequitable living conditions for the Lebanese people; yet, we do not see any fierce protests or parliamentary changes. Moves towards changing or privatizing the electricity sector are highly sensitive to sectarian strife and fear of upsetting the public sector’s balance of power. There is a recurring theme in Lebanese politics to ensure that Muslim Sunni, Muslim Shiite and Christian sects receive equitable shares and rations from public policies. For example, last year, parliament failed to agree on making worker contracts in EDL permanent due to the Christian belief that the beneficiaries would mainly be Muslim. The Lebanese government almost always questions the political identity of the individuals concerned before implementing a solution. This sectarian divide is a huge barrier to successful policy making in the electricity sector. Policies should be implemented regardless of the political or regional identity of the stakeholders involved. So long as the benefits are accrued by Lebanese citizens, then those policies should be accurately evaluated and thusly implemented.
Clearly, the electricity crisis has a complicated political dimension. Allegiances to sects and poor infrastructure are main barriers to consistent electricity provision. Politicians have engaged in a ‘blame-game’ in order to avoid addressing the crisis. Lebanese individuals should not endorse this sectarian competitiveness and should, instead, realize their rights. One of these rights is access to electricity twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Improving the electricity sector is not a game of balance of power, but rather a platform to start building a better and improved nation. The politics behind the crisis is not the only aspect that needs adjustment. Re-investment is necessary in order to build power plants with enough capacity to meet shortages. Re-investment is a binding precondition for maintaining the state-owned monopoly over electricity. If the state is unable to do so, perhaps privatization or another economic solution is the answer. The solution to the electricity crisis has many dimensions. But first, let us clarify what we are struggling for: A Struggle for Power or a Struggle for (the Balance of) Power?
N.C