World Bank approves $350 million grant for Malawi hydropower project
The World Bank logo is seen at the 2023 Spring Meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund in Washington, U.S., April 13, 2023. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz/File Photo
BLANTYRE - The World Bank's board of directors has approved a $350 million grant to support a large hydropower storage project in Malawi that will significantly increase the Southern African country's generation capacity.
The World Bank said in a statement late on Thursday that the Mpatamanga Hydropower Storage Project would help supply electricity to over 1 million new households and create thousands of jobs.
The public-private partnership with an expected overall cost of over $1.5 billion will represent the largest foreign direct investment in Malawi's history.
In September 2022 the Malawian government selected a consortium consisting of Electricité de France and SN Malawi BV owned by British International Investment, Norfund and TotalEnergies to lead the project's development and implementation.
The project will have a total generation capacity of 358 megawatts, doubling Malawi's installed hydropower capacity by building two dams along the Shire River between two existing hydropower facilities, according to its website. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
DBS tops US$100 billion market value in Singapore Exchange first
South-east Asia's top lender closed 0.8 per cent higher at $45.49 in Singapore trading on June 9, giving it a market capitalisation of $129.36 billion. ST PHOTO: LIM YAOHUI SINGAPORE – DBS Group Holdings became the first listed company in Singapore to top US$100 billion (S$128.6 billion) in market value, helped by a weaker US dollar that amplified gains on the local stock market. South-east Asia's top lender closed 0.8 per cent higher at $45.49 in Singapore trading on June 9, giving it a market capitalisation of $129.36 billion (US$100.6 billion), extending its gains this year to more than 4 per cent. The advance in DBS's share price in US-dollar terms was driven by the weaker greenback. So far this year, the Singapore dollar has appreciated about 6 per cent against the US dollar. In local currency terms, DBS has eased slightly from its record closing high of $46.67 on Feb 26. At the current market value, DBS ranks about 22nd among global banks, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That's ahead of Tokyo-based Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, but half that of HSBC Holdings. Some of Asia's biggest banks like Commonwealth Bank of Australia and India's HDFC Bank have bigger market capitalisations. The milestone comes after Singapore banks pledged in recent months to hand over billions of dollars in surplus capital to investors, encouraged by record-high earnings in 2024. DBS in particular, has benefited from increases in lending and wealth fees. Other than DBS, Singapore-based Sea that is listed in New York reached this valuation before. DBS chief executive officer Tan Su Shan took charge of the bank in March from Piyush Gupta after his 15-year leadership. Ms Tan said at her first earnings call in May that the bank seeks to benefit from supply-chain changes undertaken by its clients and increased demand for hedging foreign exchange exposure amid US President Donald Trump's tariff moves. 'A lot of DBS's out-performance has been due to the larger growth of its wealth management, which is really starting to challenge top players in Asia,' said Michael Makdad, a senior analyst at Morningstar, adding he sees the business continuing to grow. 'Despite Trump's tariffs, the environment remains relatively benign for Singapore banks which are increasing share dividends and buybacks more than we would've expected a year ago.' DBS is the third-largest wealth manager in Asia, excluding mainland China, according to data compiled by industry publication Asian Private Banker. Net new money for its business catering to the rich came in at $21 billion last year, demonstrating the strong inflows that have exceeded $20 billion for the past three years through 2024. BLOOMBERG Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
The White House wants 90 trade deals in 90 days, may have 1 so far
US President Donald Trump has so far announced only one deal: a pack with Britain, which is not one of America's biggest trading partners. PHOTO: REUTERS The White House wants 90 trade deals in 90 days, may have 1 so far WASHINGTON - President Donald Trump has announced wave after wave of tariffs since taking office in January, part of a sweeping effort that he has argued would secure better trade terms with other countries. 'It's called negotiation,' he recently said. In April, administration officials vowed to sign trade deals with as many as 90 countries in 90 days. The ambitious target came after Mr Trump announced, and then rolled back a portion of, steep tariffs that in some cases meant import taxes cost more than the wholesale price of a good itself. The 90-day goal, however, is one-tenth of the time it usually takes to reach a trade deal, according to a New York Times analysis of major agreements with the United States currently in effect, raising questions about how realistic the administration's target may be. It typically takes 917 days, or roughly two and a half years, for a trade deal to go from initial talks to the president's desk for signature, the analysis shows. Roughly 60 days into the current process, Mr Trump has so far announced only one deal: a pact with Britain, which is not one of America's biggest trading partners. He has also suggested that negotiations with China have been rocky. 'I like President XI of China, always have, and always will, but he is VERY TOUGH, AND EXTREMELY HARD TO MAKE A DEAL WITH!!!' Mr Trump wrote on Truth Social on June 4. China and the United States agreed last month to temporarily slash tariffs on each other's imports in a gesture of goodwill to continue talks. Part of what the president can accomplish boils down to what you can call a deal. The pact with Britain is less of a deal than it is a framework for talking about a deal, said Ms Wendy Cutler, the vice-president of the Asia Society Policy Institute and a former US trade negotiator. What was officially released by the two nations more closely resembled talking points for 'what you were going to negotiate versus the actual commitment', she said. During his first term, Mr Trump secured two major trade agreements, both signed in January 2020. One was the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) which was a reworking of the North American free trade treaty from the 1990s that had helped transform the economies of the three nations. USMCA is an all-encompassing, legally binding agreement that resulted from a lengthy and formal process, according to trade analysts. Such deals are supposed to cover all aspects of trade between the respective nations and are negotiated under specific guidelines for congressional consultation. Closing the deal involves both negotiation and ratification – modifying or making laws in each partner country. The deals are signed by trade negotiators before the president signs the legislation that puts the deals into effect for the United States. Mr Trump's other major agreement in his first term was with China, in an echo of the current trade war. The pact, unlike previous deals, came about after Mr Trump threatened tariffs on certain Chinese imports. This 'tariff first, talk later' approach, said Ms Inu Manak, a trade policy fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, is part of the same playbook the administration is currently using. The result was a nonbinding agreement between the two countries, known as 'Phase One,' that did not require approval from Congress and that could be ended by either party at any time. Still, it took almost one year and nine months to complete. China ultimately fell far short of the commitments it made to purchase American goods under the agreement. A comparison of the two first-term Trump deals shows the drawn-out and sometimes winding path each took to completion. Fragile truces (including ones made for 90 days) were formed, only for talks to break down later, all while rounds of tariffs injected uncertainty into the diplomatic relations between countries. The Times analysis used the date from the start of negotiations to the date when the president signed to determine the length of deal making for each major agreement dating back to 1985 that's currently in effect. The median time it took to get to the president's signature was just over 900 days. A separate analysis published in 2016 by the Peterson Institute for International Economics used the date of signature by country representatives as the completion moment and found that the median deal took more than 570 days. With roughly one month before the administration's self-imposed deadline, Mr Trump's ability to forge deals has been thrust into sudden doubt. Last week, a US trade court ruled he had overstepped his authority in imposing the April tariffs. For now, the tariffs remain in place, following a temporary stay from a federal appeals court. But in arguing its case, the federal government initially said that the ruling could upset negotiations with other nations and undercut the president's leverage. 'I think when the administration first started, they thought they could actually do these binding and enforceable deals within 90 days and then quickly realised that they bit off more than they could chew,' Ms Cutler said. The administration told its negotiating partners to submit offers of trade concessions they were willing to make by June 4, in an effort to strike trade deals in the coming weeks. The deadline was earlier reported by Reuters. The current approach to deal making may be strategic, Ms Manak said. One of the benefits of not doing a comprehensive deal like USMCA is that the administration can declare small 'victories' on a much faster timeline, she said. 'It means that trade agreements simply are just not what they used to be,' she added. 'And you can't really guarantee that whatever the US promises is actually going to be upheld in the long run.' NYTIMES Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
Trump to keep Starlink at White House despite break with Elon Musk
Mr Trump (left) said on June 9 he would not have a problem if Mr Musk (right) called. PHOTO: AFP Trump to keep Starlink at White House despite break with Elon Musk WASHINGTON - US President Donald Trump said on June 9 he has no plans to discontinue Starlink at the White House but might move his Tesla off-site, following his announcement over the weekend that his relationship with Mr Elon Musk, the billionaire CEO of both companies, was over. 'I may move the Tesla around a little bit, but I don't think we'll be doing that with Starlink. It's a good service,' Mr Trump told reporters, referring to the satellite internet company that provides high-speed broadband access. It is a unit of Mr Musk's SpaceX. In March, Mr Trump said he had purchased a red Tesla Model S from Mr Musk, Mr Trump's then-close ally. Last week, a White House official said Mr Trump might get rid of it after a public feud erupted between the two men. The Tesla was seen parked at the White House over the weekend. On June 7, Mr Trump said he had no intention of repairing ties with Mr Musk. On June 9, the president said he would not have a problem if Mr Musk called. 'We had a good relationship, and I just wish him well,' Mr Trump said. Mr Musk responded with a heart emoji to a video on X showing Mr Trump's remarks. Last week, Mr Trump and Mr Musk exchanged a flurry of insults after the world's richest man denounced Mr Trump's tax and spending Bill as a 'disgusting abomination.' Mr Musk's opposition has complicated Republican efforts to pass Mr Trump's 'big, beautiful Bill' in Congress, where the party holds slim majorities in the House of Representatives and Senate. Since the dispute began last on June 5, Mr Musk has deleted some social media posts critical of Mr Trump, including one signalling support for impeaching the president. Sources close to Mr Musk said his anger has started to subside, and they believe he may want to repair his relationship with Mr Trump. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
