 | Tip of the iceberg
Wilson Cano directs harsh accusations at the government
and alerts the population to what is yet to come TATIANA FÁVARO  tip of an iceberg. This is the image that comes to mind of professor Wilson Cano, from the Institute of Economics (IE) at Unicamp, when the subject of the energy crisis. The lack of an investment policy, submission to the rules imposed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the disorderly opening to foreign capital are, according to the economist, glaring reasons for not believing in the emergence, in the short or medium term, of any thread of light at the end of the tunnel.
 Cano states that the dismantling of the energy planning structure – as in other vital sectors – has left Brazil facing the demand for an immediate reduction in consumption, a rationing plan made at the drop of a hat, without concrete explanations about the measures adopted, with inevitable passing on of losses to the consumer and an expectation of longevity of the crisis.
“This bad phase is not temporary, for two reasons: firstly, the problem of energy generation itself; then, because without energy, no one invests. We are failing to receive the necessary investments to increase production levels starting next year. And this will trigger a second crisis: that of the country's production capacity, which affects the entire economy and ends in social collapse, with more unemployment, more poverty, more violence”, he predicts. The professor mocks the official version that blames the crisis on the drought. Although he admits that the lack of rain prevented an improvement in reservoir levels, he remembers that these levels have been falling since 1997. “It took a lot of faith in São Pedro and very little in the meteorologists, in addition to enough peroba oil to wax my face and to come and claim that the drought caused the energy crisis”, he criticizes. Cano emphasizes that immediate solutions will not be enough to get the country out of the dark. For him, the consumption reduction plan, in concrete terms, will solve very little. In September, if water levels have not returned  normal, the population will suffer from an effective rationing process. And, waiting until then for divine grace would be clear proof that, not even in the face of the installed crisis, the government seeks to plan the infrastructure sector. The less than encouraging prospects make Wilson Cano warn of the unacceptable: that medium-term alternatives, mainly the installation of power transmission lines, be discarded under the pretext of financial difficulties. He thinks this discussion has not received enough attention. “Within six months, or less than a year, the necessary transmission lines should not be built. The gas turbines of some thermoelectric plants are already experiencing delays in their scheduled delivery of six months. These thermoelectric plants have high costs per kWh, due to the price of gas. Therefore, all possible solutions are moving from the medium to the long-term criteria”, observes the economist. Submission
– According to economists and political scientists from across the country, the impositions of the agreement signed between Brazil and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – in which investments also mean expenses – have often served as a support for the lack of political will. Submission to these international standards has been the preferred motto for criticism by these experts, who illustrate the severity of the energy crisis with the contrast of investments in the sector during the 70s and the bitter aridity in the 90s. Cano recalls that investments in the 70s were, at least, consistent with the demand of the energy sector. “In the 80s, little investment was made compared to what was consumed. In the 90s, the government reduced this spending even further, due to cuts in credit and public investment resulting from monetary policy and privatizations, which resolved nothing and filled the pockets of Spanish and 'smart' Brazilian businessmen with money. the expectation of investments in the electricity sector is now seven to ten years”, he states --------------------------------------------- Consumers will have to pay three times more for energy For Professor Wilson Cano, the reflection of the lack of planning and investment in the energy sector will not only mean passing on losses to the consumer in the short term. “In fact, the Brazilian population will receive another blow in two years, because the cost per kWh will be almost three times higher”, he projects. According to the economist, it is necessary to resume investment capacity as quickly as possible, in order to try to get the electricity sector back on track within a decade.
“Where will the financial resources for this come from? The way the federal government and state governments are operating today, in which debts play a preponderant role in public spending, with interest and amortizations, there are no resources to invest. This needs to be re-discussed, given the need to make a real choice: either we pay the bankers or we build electricity plants”, he warns. More than facing this dark phase of searching for investments, it is essential to bring to light the crucial differences between the problem of distribution and generation of electrical energy in Brazil. Cano states that private investors have always preferred to invest their capital in energy distribution. “Generation is an investment whose return takes a long time and has modest profitability. In a hydroelectric system, the investment is heavy, with heavy fixed operating costs; It is naive or bad manners to say that capital is interested in this. For thermoelectric plants, the need for resources is lower, execution is faster and fixed costs are much lower. Investing in distribution is like selling ice cream at school doors: the return is exquisite and immediate”, he observes. Political solution – The economist remembers that the solution is not just technical. It is, above all, politics. “Any serious political analyst today sees it as extremely difficult for this government to make a political comeback and win the 2002 election. And the situation will only change with a new government, originating from another political base, distinct from this conservative union between the PSDB , PMDB and PFL. It doesn't matter if it will be the PT or the wing of the PMDB not committed to Jáder Barbalho and Fernando Henrique. Whoever is there will have to solve the problem,” he says. Once again ironic, the professor anticipates that there will be no point in the future president assuming office and promising, for example, to lower interest rates from a supposed 21% to 18%. “There is no activity, except cocaine trafficking, that offers a profit rate of 18%. No investor will risk their money where interest rates are so high and there is no electricity. This anti-development model needs to be extinguished. And the people must know what to do with their vote in 2002”, he says.
A necessary outburst, preaching a necessary change, in Wilson Cano's opinion. Because the budget structure is committed to interest and amortization, with an economic policy completely bowed to the designs of the IMF and the World Bank. Because the tip of the iceberg could be enough to sink the ship.
|  |
