2016-06-23nytimes.com

... when the speeches and the celebrations end, one inescapable fact will remain: The expanded canal's future is cloudy at best, its safety, quality of construction and economic viability in doubt, an investigation by The New York Times has found.

In simple terms, to be successful, the new canal needs enough water, durable concrete and locks big enough to safely accommodate the larger ships. On all three counts, it has failed to meet expectations, according to dozens of interviews with contractors, canal workers, maritime experts and diplomats, as well as a review of public and internal records.

The low winning bid, a billion dollars less than the nearest competitor's, made "a technically complex mega-project" precarious from the outset, according to a confidential analysis commissioned by the consortium's insurer. "There is little room in the budget for execution errors or significant inefficiencies," the analysts, from Hill International, wrote in 2010, adding, "This is a high-risk situation."

...

Last summer, water began gushing through concrete that was supposed to last 100 years but could not make it to the first ship. The Hill analysts had warned that the consortium's budget for concrete was 71 percent smaller than that of the next lowest bidder. The budget also allotted roughly 25 percent less for steel to reinforce that concrete.

...

At the same time, the canal's success may be undercut by external forces: chiefly the slowdown in global trade, especially from China.

...

A trouble-free canal would cast a favorable light on a country embarrassed by government scandal and by the Panama Papers, which brought a local law firm international ignominy for setting up secret offshore accounts for wealthy customers from around the world.

Even residents who privately criticize canal management are reluctant to speak up for fear of appearing unpatriotic.

...

The financially weakest consortium was led by a Spanish company, Sacyr Vallehermoso, which American officials called "nearly bankrupt" in one cable and "technically bankrupt" in another...

In March 2009, after 15 months of contentious negotiations, the three consortiums submitted their sealed bids before a packed auditorium, with the president and diplomatic corps as witnesses. To heighten the drama, a motorcade delivered the envelopes to a vault at the National Bank for safekeeping. The one with the best price and design would win. That July, with the nation watching on television, the bids were opened, and the result was a shocker: The underdog Sacyr group had won.

Bechtel and American diplomats were incredulous. Sacyr could not even "pour the concrete" for that amount, a Bechtel representative told the embassy, according to a diplomatic cable.



Comments: Be the first to add a comment

add a comment | go to forum thread