## Learning from Megaproject Failures to Strengthen the ASEAN Power Grid
As Southeast Asia focuses on building the ASEAN Power Grid,ther will be a higher chance of success if interconnections are designed to be modular and embedded within a broader regional integration agenda.
There is growing regional momentum towards the realisation of the ASEAN Power Grid (APG). The grid, which is a major initiative to link up Southeast Asia’s electricity networks, has at least six subsea and overland interconnection projects at various levels of implementation or negotiation (Table 1). Due to high levels of optimism, conversations about the APG have focused on the need to glean lessons from best practices from more advanced regional grids in Europe or South Africa. This is a logical approach – doing things right requires learning from good examples. yet, what has been missing from the discussion is the need to consider worst practices – how to avoid mistakes.In this context, the ever-expanding graveyard of energy megaprojects holds two key lessons for the APG: first, implement scalability and modularity – break up a big project into smaller parts that can operate independently. Second,embed interconnection projects within a broader vision of socio-economic integration – instead of focusing narrowly on energy trade,the narrative can be expanded to include regional development,including broader impacts on domestic economies.
Megaprojects like large hydropower dams, cross-border grids and solar farms have three definitive features: they are technically complex, cost huge sums of money and have enormous socio-economic impacts. Bent Flyvbjerg, Emeritus Professor at the University of Oxford has argued that megaprojects fail to be implemented not due to complexity, but because historically they have been designed as one-off projects that must be 100 per cent completed before operation. One example is Gobitec, a project proposed in 2009 to develop a 1 gigawatt (GW) solar farm in the Gobi Desert and 4,000 km of transmission lines from Mongolia, thru China to South Korea and Japan. From the very start, Gobitec was encumbered by challenges – the costs of the cables and converter stations alone were estimated at a mammoth US$12.7 billion, while interconnecting four national grids increased the risk of cascading blackouts. As an inevitable result, the project was never implemented.
If energy projects are presented as part of a broader regional agenda towards development and connectivity, they are likely to have higher chances of success.
Flyvbjerg suggests that megaprojects like Gobitec fail not as they are huge but because they were not broken down into smaller parts, operationalised, improved upon and then replicated. He recommends the approach adopted by Tesla’s
The Success of Energy Megaprojects Hinges on Regional Integration
Energy megaprojects, like pipelines and electricity corridors, are frequently enough envisioned as crucial for economic development and energy security. However, history demonstrates that thier success isn’t solely persistent by technical feasibility or economic viability, but critically by their integration into a broader regional development agenda. Projects conceived merely as conduits for energy trade, divorced from wider regional cooperation, are prone to failure.
A prime example is the proposed Myanmar-Bangladesh-India Pipeline (MBI), initially suggested in 1997 to transport 5 billion cubic meters of gas from Myanmar’s Swe field to India via Bangladesh. While India viewed the project as a straightforward gas import initiative, Bangladesh sought to leverage it as a catalyst for broader regional integration, including Indian support for electricity infrastructure development with Bhutan and Nepal, and improved land connectivity. This disconnect in vision led to stalled negotiations and the eventual shelving of the MBI in 2005. Consequently, China secured a notable portion of the gas from the Swe field, highlighting the strategic implications of failed regional cooperation. According to reports, China began importing gas from Myanmar in 2013 via a separate pipeline.
In contrast, projects framed as components of a larger regional development strategy demonstrate a higher likelihood of success. The Trans-Balkan Electricity Corridor, for instance, aims to connect the power grids of Serbia, Montenegro, and Bosnia and Herzegovina with those of Croatia, Hungary, Romania, and Italy. This initiative is intrinsically linked to the broader economic goal of integrating the Balkan countries into the European Union, providing a strong incentive for all participating nations. More recently, the Memoranda of Understanding signed between Singapore and Indonesia in June 2024 on a Enduring Industrial Zone, alongside agreements on cross-border energy trade and carbon capture and storage, illustrate how embedding energy trade within a comprehensive framework of development can align with the national interests of exporting countries. These agreements signal a commitment to collaborative growth beyond simply energy exchange.
The lessons from past failures are clear: modular, scalable projects integrated within a broader regional agenda are more likely to thrive. As Southeast Asian policymakers move forward with the ASEAN Power Grid (APG), these principles should be paramount. A successful APG will require a holistic approach, recognizing that energy cooperation is most effective when it contributes to, and is supported by, wider regional economic and political integration.
Sources:
* Myanmar-Bangladesh-India Pipeline Failure
* Energy Cooperation in South Asia
* India Lost Gas Pipeline to China
* Trans-Balkan Electricity Corridor
Keep reading