Brazilian Judge suspends Amazon dam project

[Derechos]

mongabay.com
April 15, 2010

A Brazilian judge on Wednesday suspended the preliminary license for the Belo Monte hydroelectric dam, a controversial project in the heart of the Amazon rainforest, citing "danger of irreparable harm," reports the Amazon Watch, an NGO that has been campaigning on the issue. The move comes just days after a high-profile visit by James Cameron, director of the box office hit Avatar, and Sigourney Weaver, one of the stars of Avatar, to indigenous communities potentially affected by the dam.

Judge Antonio Carlos de Almeida Campelo also cancelled the construction auction for the project scheduled for April 20 and ruled that IBAMA, Brazil's environmental agency, refrain from issuing a new license for the project.

"It remains proven, unequivocally, that Belo Monte's plant will exploit the hydroelectric potential of areas occupied by Indigenous people who would be directly affected by the construction and development of the project," wrote the judge in the decision.


http://news.mongabay.com/2010/0415-belo_monte_suspension.html

[protocol rv]

1. I like Mongabay, but....

The question is, what's the amount of CO2 emissions saved by building this plant, and what is the benefit for the planet if those CO2 emissions are indeed cut? What can be done to compensate the people whose land is taken? I believe countries should set up benefit/harm systems so they can weigh properly these factors, and then compensate those who are harmed - if the benefits outweigh the costs.

By the way, a while back I posted an article from mongabay discussing the way illegal mining has been allowed by the Venezuelan government, and this has led to the destruction of rain forest which in turn has reduced the ability of the Caroni watershed to hold water during the dry season. Which in turn has led to the energy crisis which in turn led the government to purchase generators which, according to the government, will consume 100 thousand barrels of diesel per day. Thus, by not protecting the forst by allowing these illegal miners to destroy it, the government has allowed not only environmental destruction, but also indirectly helped worsen the electricity crisis which in turn led to so much economic malaise (today the steel and aluminum smelting industries near the Guri dam are not functioning as they should, which of course causes unemployment and losses for the state). And this has a carry over effect as we now prepare to burn the 100 thousand barrels per day of diesel which we could export, and in turn increase CO2 emissions (the alternative for us of course would be to use hydropower and if we have to use thermal plants they should burn natural gas, not diesel).

My conclusion, as I said while I really like Mongabay, the "bad" impact of hydropower has to be weighed. And sometimes the existence of a large hydro power plant will lead society to protect the surrounding forest with zeal - because the electricity from the plant will depend so much on having a pristine forest surrounding it, so the dry season can be overcome by the water caught by the soil and the plants. And these type of analysis is seldom done. Here in Venezuela we failed to protect the forest (the problem is a common one), and we are now paying the price. But the hydro plant itself was a very good idea, even if it caused some people to be displaced.

[protocol rv]

2. Weird

This comment split up.