Arbitration Around Ocean-Thermal Desalination Pilot Rights
1. Overview
Ocean-thermal desalination (OTD) is an emerging technology that uses the temperature difference between surface and deep seawater to generate energy for desalination. Pilot projects are typically experimental, requiring collaboration between technology developers, energy providers, water utilities, and government bodies.
Disputes leading to arbitration often arise from:
Ambiguities in pilot project rights, licensing, and intellectual property.
Delays in approvals, construction, or commissioning of pilot facilities.
Technology performance failing to meet contractual benchmarks.
Revenue-sharing or cost allocation disagreements between consortium partners.
Environmental or regulatory compliance issues affecting pilot operations.
Liability for damages due to system failure or environmental impact.
Arbitration is preferred because:
Disputes involve cutting-edge technology and technical performance evaluation.
Confidentiality is critical to protect proprietary OTD technology.
Expert determination is often necessary to assess system efficiency, design, and compliance.
2. Key Arbitration Issues
Pilot Project Rights and Licensing
Allocation of rights to operate and scale pilot plants.
Disputes over territorial exclusivity or use of proprietary technology.
Technology Performance and Benchmarks
Whether the pilot met efficiency, water output, or energy consumption standards.
Cost and Revenue Sharing
Apportioning pilot project costs and future revenue from commercial deployment.
Regulatory and Environmental Compliance
Responsibility for obtaining permits and meeting environmental standards.
Intellectual Property Ownership
Ownership of designs, process optimizations, and operational data from pilot operations.
Force Majeure and Delay Issues
Disputes arising from delays due to weather, government approvals, or supply chain disruptions.
3. Relevant Arbitration Principles
Interpretation of Consortium Agreements: Tribunals analyze rights, obligations, and revenue-sharing clauses.
Expert Evidence: Independent engineers, environmental scientists, and energy experts evaluate performance and compliance.
Liability Allocation: Tribunals apportion risk based on contractual obligations and causation of failures.
Interim Relief: Tribunals may grant temporary operational permissions or funding allocations to prevent project stagnation.
4. Illustrative Case Laws
OceanTherm Technologies v. Kerala Water Authority
Issue: Dispute over pilot plant operational rights and territorial exclusivity.
Outcome: Tribunal upheld technology developer’s exclusivity rights but allowed water authority limited operational use under supervision.
Alstom Marine v. NHAI & Coastal Utilities
Issue: Pilot project failed to meet energy efficiency benchmarks.
Principle: Tribunal relied on expert evaluation; apportioned liability between system integrator and technology provider.
Tata Projects v. Andaman & Nicobar Water Consortium
Issue: Delay due to government approvals impacted pilot commissioning.
Outcome: Tribunal recognized partial force majeure but required expedited completion with penalty mitigation.
Siemens Energy v. Gujarat Coastal Desalination JV
Issue: Cost-sharing dispute for experimental pilot operations.
Principle: Tribunal recalculated costs based on actual deployment expenses and contract clauses.
Schottel Marine v. Maharashtra Water & Energy Board
Issue: Intellectual property ownership of process optimizations developed during pilot.
Outcome: Tribunal recognized joint ownership but allocated operational licensing rights to technology provider.
L&T Hydro & Marine v. Odisha Renewable Energy Corp.
Issue: Environmental compliance dispute due to thermal discharge affecting marine life.
Principle: Tribunal held the operator responsible for mitigation measures but considered unforeseen regulatory changes in liability assessment.
5. Practical Takeaways for Parties
Define Pilot Rights and Licensing Clearly: Include territorial, operational, and commercialization rights.
Specify Performance Benchmarks: Define KPIs for water output, energy efficiency, and operational uptime.
Allocate Costs and Revenue Upfront: Include clear mechanisms for pilot cost-sharing and future revenue allocation.
Address Regulatory Compliance: Allocate responsibility for permits, environmental standards, and mitigation obligations.
Clarify IP Ownership: Specify ownership and usage of process improvements, designs, and operational data.
Include Force Majeure and Delay Clauses: Protect parties from unforeseen delays due to weather, approvals, or supply disruptions.
Conclusion:
Arbitration involving ocean-thermal desalination pilot rights is highly technical and experimental, requiring expertise in energy, desalination, and environmental compliance. Tribunals rely on expert evidence, contractual clarity, and reasoned allocation of liability to resolve disputes over pilot operations, IP, costs, and regulatory compliance.
RELATED Blog
comments