This summer period was characterized by many controversies around the construction of big dams in many developing countries. Just to cite some examples, the debates evolved around the Laos dam on the Mekong River, the Inambari dam in Peru and the Belo Monte dam in Brazil. Whether the Peruvian dam construction project has been cancelled and the Laos one is currently again being delayed due to population mass protests and neighboring countries concerns (ENS, 2011, Hay, 2011), the Belo Monte dam in Brazil construction instead has finally received its definitive approval, after 30 years of discussions, this June 2011 (Hoffman, 2011).
These debates mainly concern the never ending opposition between environment against development.
Brazil aim is to get million of people out of poverty and desperately needs better infrastructure to feed its growing economy (Pyne and German, 2011). Certainly more energy is needed to do that and many argue that big hydro projects are the greenest way to produce large amount of energy. The Brazilian government also argues that the dam is crucial for the country’s development as it will create jobs and provide electricity to millions of home (Guardia, 2011).
On the other hand, ecologists, green activists, environmental groups (whatever name you wish to call them) along with local communities directly affected by this big project argue that the dam will cost enormous amount of money, threaten the survival of indigenous groups, make thousands of people homeless, damage Amazonian ecosystems as vast areas of rainforest will be flooded (Hoffman, 2011, Pyne and German, 2011 ).
Amazon Watch (2011) study claim that hidden interests lie behind the construction of the soon to be third biggest dam in the world. Their study asses that the dam will be highly inefficient and produce in one year only 39% of its nominal capacity and that building Belo Monte is economically unviable unless more dams are built upstream ( Amazon Watch, 2011). They make heavy accusation: they denounce the government from putting pressure to build the dam, its links with the mining sector that wishes to expand its operations in the Amazon and profit from the cheap and subsidized electricity that Belo Monte would procure and the dubious legal standing as the Environmental Impact Assessment barely covers even the minimum amount of information required by Brazilian legislation.
In the light of these arguments the questions that arises are then: are dams good or bad? Are they effectively the only way possible to create emission-free power? Are the environmental, economic and social costs worth the building of such project?
The one thing that remains clear is that the need for energy and water will not go away.
Some discuss that Brazil has the potential to be a global leader in energy efficiency and renewables such as wind and solar power which could be more than enough to supply the country’s energy needs instead of building other dams (Amazon Watch, 2011, Sommer, 2010, ENS, 2011).
However figures on the consequences on building a dam depend on the source and the interests that publish them. All dams are not alike, many variables come in when assessing if a dam is good or bad: the site, the amount of people that will be displaced, the potential economic efficiency of the plant, the length of the river left dry, the amount of biomass flooded , fish species diversity etc…( Ledec and Quintero, 2003). It is clear that if the process behind the planning and construction of a dam is not transparent and is corrupted, the potential benefits the dam can provide can be seriously questioned.
The era of big dams which started in the 1950’s is therefore not over and the debates that characterize them neither. The need to supply energy still persists, consequently, it is about time that effective and transparent decisions, free from other political or economic interests, decide upon the real necessity of building such big scale project in order to find a right equilibrium between development and environment. It is the least we can do if we are about to affect the faith of the forest that hosts the richest biodiversity ecosystem on hearth and many native populations - don't you think?
References:
ENS, 2011, Peru Revokes Permit for Giant Dam on Amazon Tributary. Available from: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2011/2011-06-16-01.html
Guardian, 2011, Brazil approves Belo Monte hydroelectric dam. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jun/01/brazil-belo-monte-dam
Hay, 2011, Controversial Laos dam project delayed. Available from: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2011/09/201194101833825475.html.
Hoffman K., 2001 , Belo Monte dam marks a troubling new era in Brazil's attitude to its rainforest. Available from: http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/1016666/belo_monte_dam_marks_a_troubling_new_era_in_brazils_attitude_to_its_rainforest.html
Pyne S and German E., Belo Monte dam: Brazil's energy gamble. Available from: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/brazil/110203/drought-belo-monte-dam
Sommer R. 2010, Shame on Brazil: Stop the Amazon Mega-Dam Project Belo Monte. Available from: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/columns/100311-sommer-columnsbrazil.html
Amazon Watch, 2011, Stop the Belo Monster Dam. Available from: http://amazonwatch.org/work/belo-monte-dam
Ledec G. and Quintero J.D, 2003, Good Dams and Bad Dams: Environmental Criteria for Site Selection of Hydroelectric Projects. Available from: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/LACEXT/Resources/258553-1123250606139/Good_and_Bad_Dams_WP16.pdf