X = Amaila; Y = Alternative. The report clearly says detail studies were done on X, but not the set of Y. If that's the case, the report cannot logically say anything about alternative hydro options. What it can say is that Amaila would likely be an improvement over the present 100% fossil fuel source, it's US$1 bill risk in a US$ 3 bill GDP economy notwithstanding. I think given this report the time has come to start implementing Amaila, knowing that in the history of big projects in Guyana there has always been cost overruns.
Either you are being facetious or you really lack understanding. To determine that a feasibility study should be done on Amelia alone, who made this decision? Jagdeo and the PPP or was this choice made by engineers based on pre feasibility study of other rivers?