[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
dam-l Epupa Verdict Delayed/LS
>>From owner-irn-safrica@igc.org Fri Jul 10 19:54:48 1998
>Return-Path: <owner-irn-safrica@igc.org>
>Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 14:45:59 +0100
>From: lori@irn.org (Lori Pottinger)
>Sender: owner-irn-safrica@igc.org
>Subject: Epupa Verdict Delayed/LS
>To: irn-safrica@igc.apc.org
>X-Sender: lori@pop.igc.apc.org
>
>>From The Namibian, July 10. 1998:
>
>
> Epupa verdict delayed
>
> Commission says report 'deficient'
>
> CHRISTOF MALETSKY
>
> THE official decision on the construction of the controversial Epupa
> hydropower project has been postponed for one month after a two-day
> meeting of the Namibia-Angola Permanent Joint Technical Commission
> (PJTC) found the draft feasibility study incomplete.
>
> A statement issued by the joint chairmen of the PJTC, Siseho Simasiku
> (Namibia) and Armindo Gomes Da Silva (Angola), Thursday said the
> meeting found that the study contained some deficiencies that must be
> amended before the report is finalised to meet all the requirements of
> the terms of reference.
>
> "The major shortcomings relate to the incomplete consideration of
> mitigation measures, the lack of a complete proposal for an
> environmental management and post-construction monitoring plan,
> inconclusive work performed on the bilateral agreement and the
> non-inclusion of the terms of reference for the phase three work," the
> statement said.
>
> The study contained comments on the project by Supervision Committee
> for the Feasibility Study (SCFS), and other organisations such as the
> World Conservation Union (IUCN) and the Norwegian Water and
> Energy Administration Directorate (NVE) which were specifically
> requested by the PJTC to review the draft report.
>
> Phase three of the three-year study was the controversial inclusion of
> the Epupa site - seen as "prestige project" - after the Namang
> consortium comprising Namibian, Angolan, Swedish and Norwegian
> consultants recommended Site E in the Baynes mountains as the only
> option to be investigated further.
>
> The decision cost taxpayers of both countries an additional N$3 million
> which was split between the two governments.
>
> The Baynes site was seen by Government as too small, despite its
> environmental and social advantages over the other sites considered. It
> is some 40 kilometres downstream from the Epupa falls and is
> considered to have less negative social and environmental impacts than
> the other sites initially considered.
>
> In sharp contrast, the Epupa site is seven kilometres downstream from
> the falls and is likely to displace some 700 Himba people. The area
> flooded at the Baynes site would be 94sq kilometres while Epupa would
> cover over 250 sq kilometres.
>
> The Baynes site is likely to be more dependent on the repair and
> regulation of Gove dam inside Angola which was damaged during the
> civil war and has not been regulated since 1975. The consultants
> pinpointed Baynes as the best option in October 1996.
>
> Environmentalists have expressed fears that the decision to include the
> Epupa site indicated that the feasibility study was just a procedural
> exercise while the political decision to build the dam at Epupa
>itself had
> already been taken regardless of the consultants' conclusions.
>
> Thursday the PJTC said it had been agreed that a subcommittee be
> formed to discuss details with Namang to revise and finalise the report.
> The subcommittee will be made up of seven officials from the two
> countries and will start its work with immediate effect. The final
report
> accommodating all concerns is expected to be ready by the end of next
> month.
>
> In addition to the shortcomings, the PJTC had recognised there was a
> need for the verification of some facts before the project could finally
> be concluded.
>
> "With due consideration of the problems indicated above, the PJTC was
> not in a position to discuss the matter of the selection of the
>single site
> (Epupa or Baynes) for implementation as envisaged. Instead, this topic
> has been postponed for discussion and formulation of the final
> recommendation to the two governments at the next PJTC meeting in
> Luanda on August 24-25 1998," it said.
>
> The statement said it also reviewed progress made by several projects
> including the Calueque dam, Gove dam, technical assistance to the PJTC
> by Coba-Internel, and bilateral agreements on the Kunene River Basin.
>
> July 10, 1998
>
> CLICK to return to story index
>
>
> [Front Page] [Namibian News] [Opinions] [Columns] [Economic
>News ] [Sports]
>
> [Arts] [Oshiwambo] [About The Newspaper] [Email Us ] [Subscribe]
>[Archive] [Web Links]
>
>
>::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> Lori Pottinger, Director, Southern Africa Program,
> and Editor, World Rivers Review
> International Rivers Network
> 1847 Berkeley Way, Berkeley, California 94703, USA
> Tel. (510) 848 1155 Fax (510) 848 1008
> http://www.irn.org
>::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
>
>
>
><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>¸.
·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>
Dianne Murray,
Coordinator, Dam-Reservoir Working Group
Webmistress, Dam-Reservoir Impact and Information Archive
http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/dams
vox: 1-613-520-2757 fax:1-613-520-3898 e: dianne@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca
Home of Project Pisces: fish need flow!
><((((º>`·.¸·´¯`·¸><((((º>¸.·´¯`·.¸.><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`¸><((((º>