[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
dam-l fwd: Nation editorial on Bakun and NT2
Forwarded from Grainne Ryder at Probe International
Forwarded message:
From grainne@nextcity.com Wed Sep 17 15:34:06 1997
Subject: [Fwd: THE NATION editorial on Bakun and NT2]
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 16:37:02 +1000
From: aviva@irn.org (Aviva Imhof)
Sender: owner-irn-mekong@igc.org
Subject: THE NATION editorial on Bakun and NT2
To: irn-mekong@igc.org
>The Nation (Bangkok)
>Editorial
>Saturday, September 13, 1997
>
>
>Southeast Asia's biggest dams will have to go
>
>When 15 leaders of the 9,500 indigenous communities affected by Malaysia's
>Bakun Dam received their compensation last month, they sent the cheques back
>to the government. One said he received a token Bt3.3, which made the cost
>of issuing the cheque higher than the compensated amount. No wonder
>opposition to Southeast Asia's largest dam project continues despite the
>fact work has already begun.
>
>Last week, the anti-dam advocates got what they wanted.
>
>In a dramatic reversal, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said the dam would
>be "indefinitely delayed". That meant the project was as good as dead, for
>now. Mahathir's backflip came not because of a new-found concern for the
>plight of the indigenous people who will see a pool big enough to sink
>Singapore in their ancestral home, but rather because the ringgit and stock
>market took a severe beating from investors who are wary of his grandiose
>projects.
>
>Also scrapped are the ambitious "floating" airport off the northern coast,
>the three-kilometer-long Linear City which snakes above the Klang River --
>dubbed the world's longest building -- and a highway which cuts through the
>ecologically sensitive mountainous region in the heart of the peninsular.
>All of this is good news for the environment.
>
>It is not good news for the indigenous people though. Their relocation will
>go ahead regardless. In an attempt to put a brave front, the government
>argued that Bakun's woes will not affected future energy supplies. There are
>alternatives. But that begs an important question. Why Bakun if it is not
>necessary? The answer could lend support to the dark suggestion that Bakun
>was a sick excuse to log the rainforests and convert them into palm oil
>plantations.
>
>With Bakun effectively shelved, all eyes are on what is now the biggest dam
>in Southeast Asia -- Nam Theun 2 (NT2) in Laos. Planners hope that NT2 will
>catapult this poor and landlocked nation into the 21st century. But as with
>Bakun, the recent economic hiccup in Southeast Asia has also dealt a serious
>blow to Laos' ambition. Economically hobbled Thailand -- the main importer
>of electricity from NT2 -- is now less able and willing.
>
>That spells trouble for NT2. Even without the economic crisis, NT2 will pose
>problems for Laos. After all, big dams involved big risks. And big debts
>too. NT2 is expected to incur a debt of almost four times that of Laos'
>national budget. And with Thailand on a belt tightening regime, it is
>clearly suicidal for Laos to press ahead with NT2. What's more, this is only
>one of the 20 dams planned for the country.
>
>The future of NT2 now lies with the World Bank. Laos needs the bank to give
>it a "risk guarantee" before it can raise US$1.5 billion from the private
>sector. The guarantee means that while the dam is funded privately, the bank
>will assume the risks of Laos negating its contractual agreements. This
>would be the first time that the World Bank would provide such a guarantee,
>in the hope it would spur private investments in poor economies.
>
>The World Bank has made major blunders with big dams before. Recently, the
>bank was forced to pull out from the Narmada Dam in India and Arun III Dam
>in Nepal. This time, the bank vows to do this right. But if right is what
>the bank wants to do with NT2, surely it is to withdraw support for the
>project.
>
>Over the past few decades, the West has been making a hard sell on two major
>electricity generation technologies to power hungry T hird World countries --
>nuclear and hydro. As harnesses of power, both have evoked great awe and
>admiration as human technological triumph over nature. In addition, such
>billion-dollar projects also promise great wealth to the political elites --
>from lucrative contracts to graft.
>
>While nuclear power has created widespread fear of radiation leaks,
>hydro-power enjoys the reputation of being a cheap, clean and renewable
>energy. That opinion, however, is now being seriously challenged. Big dams,
>like nuclear power plants, have the potential to do great damage to the
>ecosystem, culture and livelihood of the indigenous peoples they displace.
>
>The sooner that the World Bank and the political elites in Third World
>countries realise this, the better.
>