The Electricity Company of Ghana (ECG) has disbursed over GHS 1.3 billion to players across the energy value chain for May 2025 under the Cash Waterfall Mechanism (CWM), according to figures validated by the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission (PURC). The funds covered payments to Independent Power Producers (IPPs), fuel suppliers, statutory agencies, and other key sector institutions as part of the government’s monthly allocation programme designed to bring transparency and consistency to electricity sector cash flows.
Originally introduced to address chronic disbursement imbalances, the CWM was meant to eliminate selective payments and ensure all parties, from generators to gas suppliers, receive fair and predictable compensation. Over time, it has come to symbolise a broader effort to reduce the sector’s indebtedness, improve financial discipline, and restore stakeholder trust, especially among IPPs who generate the bulk of Ghana’s electricity.
Yet, despite PURC’s validation of the May cycle as compliant, the distribution of funds is triggering quiet unease, not over legality, but over transparency, consistency, and logic.
Disbursement Rankings Trigger Questions
The Cash Waterfall Mechanism remains the primary tool for distributing ECG’s revenue from power sales. Under the May 2025 cycle, ECG transferred over GHS 518 million as “Level A” payments, priority disbursements earmarked for power producers, fuel suppliers, and the West African Gas Pipeline Company (WAPCo), before meeting other downstream obligations.
In total, nine entities received Level A payments. However, a closer look at the rankings is raising questions about how payments are determined, especially in relation to installed capacity, actual generation, and current operational status.
Among the surprises: Cenpower, with a smaller installed capacity than Sunon Asogli, received the largest individual disbursement, USD 10 million (GHS 105 million). In contrast, Sunon Asogli, the country’s largest IPP by capacity, received USD 7 million (GHS 73.5 million), equal to what was paid to Karpower, AKSA, and Early Power. While Cenpower’s role in maintaining grid stability is acknowledged, the payment discrepancy remains unexplained.
A more puzzling case is Amandi Energy, which, according to multiple confirmations, had suspended operations since April 2025 due to technical and financial challenges. Yet, it still received USD 3 million (GHS 31.5 million) in May, raising questions about whether the mechanism reflects current output or includes legacy obligations.
Transparency Gains, But Accountability Gaps
There’s no doubt the CWM has brought order to what was once an opaque and erratic disbursement process. Monthly publication of payment data, now validated by PURC, is widely seen as a step forward for financial governance in the energy sector.
Still, persistent questions linger, not about whether the funds were paid, but why they were allocated as they were. For some industry observers, the figures don’t add up.
It is possible the allocations reflect complex, pre-agreed contractual arrangements, including minimum capacity charges, legacy debt servicing, or technical services like voltage support, spinning reserves, and grid stability inputs, all essential to a functioning power system. But such technical justifications remain mostly hidden from public view.
And in an environment where energy sector arrears weigh on the national budget, and where tariff increases face public resistance, perception matters.
Ghana’s power sector continues to wrestle with major financial strains, from fuel import delays to forex-driven cost hikes and rising IPP arrears. In such a landscape, the credibility of reforms like the CWM rests not just on compliance but also on public trust.
