Nigeria: Flood - Danger Looms in Lagos

Dr. Akintola Omigbodun is an expert in flood management. In this interview, he says the floods ravaging many states in Nigeria are avoidable. Omigbodun, who fielded questions from Vanguard editors during a visit to the media house, last week, also deplores the Ministry of Water Resources' handling of the crisis and warns that there are grave dangers ahead for Lagos and Ogun states should the water in Oyan Dam not be properly managed.

You are an expert on environmental issues, particularly flooding. What got the flooding story in Nigeria started and was it avoidable?

There is a dam across the River Benue in Cameroon called Lagdo Dam. This dam is about 40meters high. Its storage capacity is about half of what is found in Kainji Lake Dam. And at full flow, if equipment was installed in it, it could possibly generate 700 megawatts of electricity. But the equipment is limited and is only generating about 20 megawatts.

They are also supposed to have an irrigation scheme in that dam. The result is that the dam is storing a huge amount of water and is not being used for any purpose. In the event of so much rainfall like what we have now, the people around the dam would become terrified that it might be overtopped. So the authorities release additional water from the dam.

What we get now is a lot more than what we would get. If there was no dam, the water will continue to flow day in day out. But when you put a dam, you are controlling the flow of water; when you now suddenly release the water because you are afraid your dam will overtop, then it will result to releasing much water. The Lagdo Dam has been flooding every year, just that this year is exceptional. Communities in Cameroon are also flooded. There is a town called Garua; every year, that place is flooded. But in order to save Nigeria, the Cameroonian government should lower their operational level, otherwise, every year, most Nigerian communities will continue to be flooded.

Can we know more about this operational level that you want the Cameroonian authorities to lower?

What really happened was that they opened the gate of their dam. The actual water released from that dam from 1992 to 2002 showed that they opened a number of gates at higher percentages. Floods are associated with rainfall, water courses, streams, rivers, dams and reservoirs where water behind dams are stored. Rainfall is natural while dams and their reservoirs are hand made and are therefore subject to human control. Dam owners and operators are expected to exercise control over the water behind their dams such that in years of heavy rainfall and for singular rainfall events, water passing through the dams does not damage infrastructure or create floods. Earthquakes are natural events and, when they occur in certain regions, there is considerable damage to buildings and other social infrastructure. However, in some areas such as Tokyo in Japan, Los Angeles and San Francisco in the United States, buildings are designed to withstand earthquakes. Damage from natural occurrences can be limited through appropriate human action. For example, the Netherlands has over two-thirds of its economy and half its population below sea level. The Netherlands has about 350km of coastline on the North Sea and major rivers, the Rhine, the Meuse and the Scheldt passing through on their way to the North Sea. The Netherlands has an active coastal and river flood management programme to keep the country flood-proof and maintain its prosperity.

Our experience in Nigeria suggests that dam operators should prepare for heavy rainfall within the next 20 years and for singular rainfall events leading to exceptional floods within the next 35years.

Is there a nexus between the Dam in Cameroon, and the River Benue and the flooding of the Oyan Dam?

There is no physical connection. What we have is operational connection. They (Cameroon) are storing a lot of water in the lake and they are not doing much with it. And when the water is much, they release it and the released water causes flooding.

If they release it in small quantity, it would not have effect, but when they release the water in large quantity, it results to flooding. The Osun River is not in any way connected to the Ogun River or the Niger. That tells you that there is no physical connection. I am hoping that government will live up to expectations. I have personally involved the Ministry of Environment and I must say that I am disappointed with their level of involvement in the crisis. They are just being arrogant.

The Minister of Water Resources has not lived up to expectation and I have met with the Director of Water Resources and I could not get him to do anything. I have also written to the Attorney General of the Federation on the Oyan Dam, so that they can do something about it. We must understand that the dams are designed to have spillways and the spillways guide the release of water. The people are suffering as a result of the flooding and government has to rise to the challenges posed by the flood.

We have River Ogun which starts in Oyo North. And there is a dam in Iseyin. That dam is about 47meters high. There is also a tributary of the Ogun River which also has a dam.

At the moment, the Okere Dam is not gated. There is no gate and water flows over. The dam is supposed to provide irrigation and also generate power. What is important is that the dam is supposed to provide water for Iseyin and environs. Following the non-utilisation of the dam for various purposes, there is huge storage of water. All the things that caused the flooding in Lagos and Ogun are under the control of Ogun River Basin Authority. They should manage the dams in such a way that we do not have flood in the areas of their mandate. We are about to be flooded again like what happened in 2010 and 2011.

I have had experience of the floods along the River Ogun in Ogun State and Lagos State in 2007, 2010 and 2011. The flood path is over 27km long and is up to 4km wide in places. The flood level in 2010 was 0.5m higher than the level of 2007. The River Ogun system has two major dams, the Okere Gorge Dam on the River Ogun at Okere Village 28km north east of Iseyin in Oyo State and the Oyan Dam located about 20km northwest of Abeokuta on the River Oyan, a tributary of the River Ogun.

The Okere Gorge Dam is ungated while the Oyan Dam is gated. The Federal Ministry of Water Resources has been asked to direct that the freeboard in the reservoir behind Oyan Dam should be increased by 4meters as an interim measure pending appropriate studies and a construction programme along the River Ogun from Oyan Dam to Lagos flood plains. Put simply, the floods now taking place yearly at Isheri North, the Lagos wetlands communities and parts of Ogun State and the River Oyan Dam were not built on the River Oyan respectively, floods will occur in the Lagos flood plains within the intervals of 10years and 25years.

With the construction of both dams, floods should no longer occur in the Lagos flood plains if both dams are being operated in accordance with their designs. In the exceptional situation, floods may occur once in 50 years.

For the months of August, September, October for years 1992 to 2002, it was only in August 1993 that there was water release. Presently, exceptional release of water takes place yearly in August, September and October. This was observed in 2007, 20010 and 2011. A greater part of the area covered by flood water in 2007 qualified to be included in the disaster area as opposed to the flood plains of the River Ogun. For example, a newspaper published on Friday, November 4, 2011 that the Itowolo Community Primary School Ikorodu started experiencing flood in 2007. The report indicated that the community was founded over 200 years ago and the community never experienced flood until 2007. Further, when the school was established 30years previously, there was no sign that the school would be affected by water.

Why does flood incidence wreaks so much havoc in the face of the existence of River Basin Authorities? Does it mean that the River Basins are no longer working?

The law establishing River Basin Development Authorities all over Nigeria, which is the River Basins Development Authorities, RBDAs, Act Chapter R9 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, required RBDAs to control floods in their areas of operations. Under section 4(1) of this Act, part of the functions of the RBDAs is to undertake comprehensive development of both surface and underground water resources for multi-purpose use with particular emphasis on the provision of irrigation infrastructure and the control of floods and erosion and for watershed management. The river basin is also established to construct, operate and maintain dams, dykes, wells, boreholes, irrigation and drainage systems, and other works necessary for the achievement of the authority's functions and handover to be cultivated under irrigation scheme to the farmers.

However, they have not been performing their functions well. Even though the Ogun River Basin Authority is responsible for what we are experiencing here in Lagos, we are not taking them to court because of my not pleasant experiences in Nigeria's judicial system. The truth is that the flood in Lagos and some parts of Ogun State is entirely avoidable.

It is regrettable that the river basins are not working. For example, when I met the General Manager of Sokoto River Basin Authority, he told me that he only had three qualified staff to work with. Why should the government continue to award new contracts to build new dams, when they have not properly managed the ones they have?

Some have attributed this flooding disaster to climate change. Do you in anyway see climate change as a factor?

We should not be talking of climate change and sea level rise as the cause of the flooding because they are measurable. What the New York City panel on climate change said was that the figures of rainfall analysis from 1970 to 2000 indicated that rainfall and snow will only be ten percent different from 1970 to 2000. The rainfall in 1991 for Abeokuta and Iseyin in 1990 was higher than what we have today. People who are doing research on climate change have come up that there are variations in the rate of rainfall in West Africa. That implies that there are years of low rainfall and years of high rainfall change have variables that are measurable. What is needed to be done in the case of Oyan Dam is to lower the operational level by 4 meters.

What can be done proactively to forestall further damages by flood?

The best thing is for the government to perform its functions. I don't think the government is deaf to newspaper publications, even if they are deaf to letters, because I have written in the past and present on how to avoid the present damages that the flood is unleashing all over the country. What we are saying is that they should take correct measures so that we don't experience this kind of disaster again, because the chances of occurring again are real. The water we are seeing in the Niger Delta is River Niger and Benue water, because there is exceptional rainfall in Kainji and Lagdo Dams.

They were forced to release water. In River Benue, for instance, they wait for the water to be so much high before they release it. Government should realise that they are losing economically to the flooding. It affects our GDP and well-being.

My message is that the losses we are encountering as a result of the flood is avoidable. Definitely the flood would unleash food crisis on the nation, because farmers would lose their crops to the flood. We experienced a similar thing in Sokoto in 2010 when the Goronyo Dam wreaked havoc. The same thing will happen as a result of this year's disaster, especially for those that planted by the river side.

BY CHARLES KUMOLU@allafrica.com

Wrong Climate for Damming Rivers

Hundreds of large dams are proposed in areas where climate change could bring great hydrological uncertainty, including the Amazon, the Mekong, Africa, China, and the Himalayas. While there is uncertainty in hydrological forecasts, one thing is clear: it's the wrong climate for damming rivers. First, big dams are at huge risk from climate change's impacts on river flows. Equally important, healthy rivers are also key to successful climate adaptation, especially for the world's poorest, who are also at greatest risk of climate change. Finally, large reservoirs can be significant sources of greenhouse gases. International Rivers is working to raise capacity on this critical issue globally and in dam-building regions, and promoting an energy revolution that allows us to dramatically cut our use of fossil fuels, while also preserving life-giving water resources.

Explore the following resources to learn more:

• Watch the Google Earth video below (available in English, Portuguese, German, French, Italian, Hindi, Chinese, Turkish, Spanish)
• Read our Fact Sheet "Wrong Climate for Big Dams" (available in English, Portuguese, Spanish, Chinese, German, Hindi and Bangla)
• Explore our Educator's Toolkit on Climate Change, Rivers and Dams (available in English, Spanish and Portuguese)
  

Raising Awareness with a global information campaign

International Rivers is working to create awareness about these issues, through a Google Earth 3D tour and video that  narrated by Nigerian activist Nnimmo Bassey, winner of the prestigious Right Livelihood Award and chair of Friends of the Earth International. The production was launched at the COP 17 climate meeting in Durban, South Africa in November 2011. The video and tour allow viewers to explore why dams are the wrong answer to climate change, by learning about topics such as reservoir emissions, dam safety, and adaptation while visiting real case studies in Africa, the Himalayas and the Amazon.

internationalrivers.org

A Costly Bill Putting Our Economy and Rivers at Risk

Hydropower can be a source for clean, renewable energy. In the US, hydropower accounts for over 7% of total electric generation. If done right it is an important part of our nation’s energy mix. But the key lies in getting it right. When it’s done wrong, hydropower is far from clean. 

But Representative Hastings' bill is one of the most anti-environmental pieces of legislation introduced this Congress. It would jeopardize jobs, public safety, and the outdoor recreation industry that is so critical to communities all across the nation. 

This “Dangerous Dams Protection Act” would:

• Harm rivers and wildlife and threaten public safety by prohibiting federal funds to be used to remove or study the removal of any hydropower dam – even unsafe dams that the dam owner and the local community want to remove.
• 
  
• 
  
• Slow job growth and hurt businesses by bringing river restoration to a screeching halt and stopping growth in commercial and recreational fishing.
• Create an expensive new subsidy that would not only allow private groups to build new dams, whether or not they are in the public interest, but taxpayers would have to reimburse the full cost.

Take Action Today

Tell Congress to oppose this extreme bill that would halt river restoration in communities nationwide, harm rivers and wildlife, and hurt local economies.

Please sign the petition

Mekong Dams Could Rob Millions of Their Primary Protein Source

Hydropower dams planned for the lower mainstem of the Mekong River could decimate fish populations and with them the primary source of protein for 60 million people. The impact of the dams would extend far beyond the river, as people turn to agriculture to replace lost calories, protein and micronutrients, according to a new study by WWF and the Australian National University.

There are 11 planned dam projects on the Mekong mainstem, and another 77 dams planned in the basin by 2030. The study, “Dams on the Mekong River: Lost fish protein and the implications for land and water resources”, looked at two scenarios: replacement of lost fish protein directly attributable to the proposed 11 mainstem dams, and replacement of the net loss in fish protein due to the impact of all 88 proposed dam developments.

If all 11 planned mainstem dams were built, the fish supply would be cut by 16 per cent, with an estimated financial loss of US$476 million a year, according to the study. If all 88 projects were completed, the fish supply could fall 37.8 per cent. 

Study co-author Stuart Orr, freshwater manager at WWF International, says policymakers often fail to recognize the crucial role of inland fisheries in meeting food security. “The Mekong countries are striving for economic growth, and they see hydropower as a driver of that growth. But they must first fully understand and take into account the true economic and social value of a free-flowing Mekong,” says Orr. 

The lower Mekong, flowing through Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Viet Nam, is renowned for its biological diversity, with more than 850 freshwater fish species. These fish are fundamental to diets and economies in the region, with 80 per cent of the 60 million inhabitants relying directly on the river for their food and livelihoods. 

The report also looks at the effects on land and water as people are forced to shift to cows, pigs, poultry and other sources to meet their protein requirements. On top of 1,350km2 of land lost to dam reservoirs, the countries would need a minimum of 4,863km2 of new pasture land to replace fish protein with livestock. The high end of the estimate if all dams were built is 24,188km2 – a 63 per cent increase in land dedicated to livestock. 

Water requirements would jump on average between 6 and 17 per cent. But these averages mask the considerably higher figures for Cambodia and Laos. Under scenario one, with 11 dams on the mainstem, Cambodia would need to dedicate an additional 29-64 per cent more water to agriculture and livestock; Laos’ water footprint would increase by 12-24 per cent. Under the second scenario, with all 88 dams, these numbers shift dramatically, with an increase of 42-150 per cent for Cambodia and 18-56 per cent for Laos. 

“Policymakers in the region need to ask themselves where they are going to find this additional land and water,” says Orr. “The Mekong demonstrates the links between water, food and energy. If governments put the emphasis on energy, there are very real consequences for food and water – and therefore people.”

The report, published in the journal Global Environmental Change and presented during World Water Week in Stockholm, comes at a critical time in the debate over hydropower development in the region. Construction work appears to be moving ahead on the controversial Xayaburi dam in Laos, despite a decision by the intergovernmental Mekong River Commission to halt the project pending further studies. It would be the first of the planned dams to span the lower Mekong mainstem. 

“We hope this study can help fill some of the knowledge gaps about the effects of the proposed dams,” says co-author Dr Jamie Pittock from the Crawford School of Public Policy in the Australia National University. 

WWF urges the lower Mekong countries to defer a decision on the mainstem Mekong dams for 10 years to ensure critical data can be gathered and a decision can be reached using sound science and analysis. WWF further advises lower Mekong countries considering hydropower projects to prioritize dams on some Mekong tributaries that are easier to assess and are considered to have a much lower impact and risk.


wwf.panda.org

Cambodian Villagers Protest Controversial Laos Dam

Cambodian villagers demonstrated on Friday against a controversial Lao hydropower dam that activists say is being built in defiance of an agreement to assess its potentially damaging impact on millions of people first.

About 200 villagers whose livelihoods depend on the Mekong River urged a halt to the Thai-led construction of the $3.5 billion Xayaburi dam, which has angered Cambodia's government and triggered a rare rebuke by Laos's biggest ally, Vietnam.

"This dam won't just affect the people in our country but will also affect many parts of Laos," said Buddhist monk So Pra, organiser of the protest in Kompong Cham province, 124 km (77 miles) from the Cambodian capital, Phnom Penh.

The Xayaburi dam is one of dozens planned as part of Laos's aggressive push to boost its tiny $7.5 billion economy and become the "battery of Southeast Asia" by exporting the vast majority of its power.

Foreign governments are concerned Laos is prioritising its growth ambitions over ecological and environmental protection.

Under pressure from neighbours that felt its environmental impact study was inadequate, Laos agreed in December to suspend the project pending an assessment by foreign experts. Four countries share the lower stretches of the 4,900 km (3,044 mile) Mekong -- Laos, Thailand, Vietnam and Cambodia.

Environmental group International Rivers released a report this week saying it had witnessed Ch Karnchang Pcl, Thailand's second-biggest construction firm, resettling villagers, beefing up labour, building a large retaining wall and undertaking dredging to deepen and widen the riverbed.

"So far, Ch Karnchang claims that they are only going forward with 'preliminary construction' on the project," said Kirk Herbertson, Mekong Campaigner for International Rivers.

"Ripping up the riverbed and resettling entire villages cannot be considered a preliminary activity."

Te Navuth, secretary general of the Cambodia National Mekong River Commission, said Laos had violated a 1995 agreement requiring prior consultation before starting any development on the Mekong.

"Laos always said that it's just preparatory work," he said, adding Cambodia and Vietnam would jointly demand a halt.

Thailand could also be affected but, although small protests have taken place there, the government has been reluctant to oppose the project.

Ch Karnchang has a 57 percent share in the Xayaburi, which Thai banks are helping to finance. State-run Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) will buy electricity generated by the plant. 

AlterNet 

12 large-scale dams are planned to be built in the Lower Mekong River. One of these, currently the most advanced, is the Xayabury dam. The issues surrounding this dam are getting increasingly controversial and complicated, due in part to potential cross border impacts.

In the Lower Mekong River, local communities have experienced impacts from Mekong dam construction in China for years. In Thailand, civil society calls for action against Xayaburi dam.

Laotian Paradox: Living Next to a hydroelectric Power Plant, Without Electricity or Drinking Water

It's the mega-Nam Theun 2 plant, the largest in the country with over a thousand megawatts of power. Costing 1.25 billion dollars it has displaced over 6 thousand people. But in the new villages built near the dam, there is no electricity and homes are subject to flooding.

Vientiane (AsiaNews / Agencies) - The paradox of living next to a hydroelectric plant, which you helped build, and having no energy and drinking water. This is the reality for some of the thousands who have realized the Nam Theun 2 plant that produces 1070 megawatts of power, built along a tributary of the Mekong River in the province of Khammouane, operational since March 2010. To build the dam - the largest in Laos - residents have also had to abandon their villages of origin and build new homes outside the construction sites. And now, two years later, they are forced to live in the dark without electricity.

Over 90% of the plant was sold to neighboring Thailand and the energy that remains in the country is simply not enough even to supply inhabitants of areas surrounding the mega-facility. A man, who from the district of Nakai Plateau moved to Nhommalat, told Radio Free Asia (RFA) that the new village in Ban Sang has no "electricity and drinking water." "We live next to the dam - he adds, calling for the guarantee of anonymity - but we do not have electricity or water."

Local sources add that, from time to time, homes are flooded because "they never announce the opening" of the dam, to drain the water when the level exceeds the threshold.

The testimonies recount the drama of one of the 6,300 farmers, according to government figures, who had moved since 2005 to make way for the dam. It channels the water from the river Nam Theun to Xe Bang Fai River, costing 1.25 billion dollars, funded in part by the World Bank and Asian Development Bank. Over time it was supposed to generate a source of income for Laotians and reduce dependence on foreign aid.

However, environmental groups and environmental movements - including International Rivers - complain that the facility could seriously affect not only the hundreds of residents forced to flee their homes, but a total of at least 100 thousand people, who live by fishing in the lower watershed of the Xe Bang Fai River. Currently in Laos, there are 14 operating hydroelectric plants, another 10 under construction and 56 planned in the design stage or on paper. Among them is the controversial Xayaburi dam, which will have a huge environmental impact on lower Mekong according to experts 

AsiaNews.it 

Carbon Offsets Misused by Hydropower Industry

Brazilian Megadams Make Mockery of Clean Development Mechanism

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is meant to catalyze climate-friendly and sustainable projects in low-income countries by providing financial support to projects that could not go forward without the extra help. Instead, it's been used to subsidize destructive large dams that fail to meet the CDM’s two main criteria: promoting sustainable development, and supporting clean energy projects that are only able to go ahead if they get funding from carbon credits (this is called being “additional” in CDM jargon).

Because of their well-known extensive environmental and social impacts, and because dams in tropical regions can be major emitters of greenhouse gases, many large dams don’t belong in a fund devoted to “sustainable development.” Yet hydropower projects dominate the CDM pipeline: 27% of all carbon offsets projects registered under the CDM are hydropower projects. Over 1,000 hydropower projects are already registered under the CDM and another 700 are applying for registration, more than any other project type. Through deception and abuse of the system, at least two-thirds of all CDM projects are likely not additional, and more are slipping in each year.

In particular, dam developers in Brazil, India and China are rushing to get their projects registered before stricter rules take effect next year. After 2012, the European Union’s Emissions Trading System (ETS) – the largest cap-and-trade scheme – will only accept credits for projects from least-developed countries.

Brazil seeks rewards for damming Amazon

The increase in projects applying for carbon credits has led to a higher percentage of controversial megadam projects in the CDM pipeline. Three recent examples in Brazil are the 3,150 MW Santo Antônio Dam and the 3,750 MW Jirau Dam (both part of the Madeira Complex) on the Madeira River, and the 1,820 MW Teles Pires Dam in the Tapajós Basin in the Brazilian Amazon. Some key issues raised by Brazilian civil society include the following:

• These projects are not carbon neutral. The latest research in reservoir emissions confirms that hydroelectric plants in the tropics are intrinsically large emitters of CO2 and CH4 (methane).  In addition to large emissions produced by decomposing vegetation submerged in the reservoirs (particularly in the first 10 years of plant operation), a large amount of methane is also released at the turbines, spillways, and downstream. Moreover, these projects will lead to greater deforestation of the Amazon rainforest – a key climate regulator and carbon sink – through an increase in migration, land speculation, and through their connection with large-scale soybean agribusinesses, which results in the clearing of large expanses of rainforest.

• The EIAs are inadequate and poorly conducted. Experts have criticized the EIAs of all three projects, citing the lack of consideration for transboundary impacts by the Madeira Complex in Peru and Bolivia, underestimation of sedimentation, impact on migratory fish species and subsequent effects on the food security of both indigenous and urban citizens, and underestimation of reservoir size and greenhouse gas emissions.

• The dams are a setback for environmental sustainability. Since the opening of its gates in 2012, Santo Antônio has caused massive damage along the river and displaced hundreds of communities. Teles Pires would destroy one of the most important spiritual heritage sites of the indigenous Munduruku, Kayabi and Apiacá, flood 95 km2 of surrounding land and destroy spawning habitat for more than 200 species of fish.

• The projects violate Brazilian legislation and international agreements around free, prior and informed consultation with affected indigenous communities. All three hydropower plants have had their environmental licenses legally questioned by federal prosecutors because of their enormous environmental and social impacts. In the case of the Teles Pires Dam, a federal judge suspended its license in March due to a lack of free, prior and informed consultation with indigenous communities as required by Brazilian laws.  Brazilian civil society groups have also filed several lawsuits against the Santo Antônio project for violations of Brazilian law.

• Projects are not additional. All CDM projects must show that they would not have been built without CDM financing. The resources for all three of these projects have been guaranteed by private and public investors and public funding through the participation of state companies and the National Bank of Economic and Social Development (BNDES).

Calling for European leadership

Unfortunately, the CDM’s track record of preventing the registration of the worst projects, such as those with human rights violations, is poor. In response, several developing countries have asked the UN for permission to withdraw letters of approval for CDM projects that later evidence a breach of human rights laws or serious environmental impacts.

Where host countries and the executive board have failed to restrict harmful projects from the CDM, the European Union has recognized the importance of improving the sustainability and additionality of offset credits entering the EU Emissions Trading System. To this end, the EU commissioned a study to assess the integrity of the CDM that was released in December 2011. In addition to reviewing the performance of the CDM thus far, the authors of the study also discuss potential policy options for reform, which include the option to ban large hydropower projects and improve the environmental integrity of small- and medium-sized projects.

As the largest buyer of CDM credits, sound decisions taken by the EU can both reduce the likelihood of harmful projects entering the CDM and be the catalyst for reforms of the CDM at the UN level, if it is up to the challenge. As its own study has shown, large hydropower projects often do not support sustainable development. Any international climate financing, whether through climate funds or market mechanisms, must support renewable energy systems that improve climate resilience rather than harm the very resources upon which millions of people depend.

Written by Katy Yan@InternationalRivers.org

A Climate-Safe “Green Economy” Protects Rivers, Rejects Destructive Dams

                                                                               Map of major dams and reservoirs in the U.S.

The twentieth anniversary of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development, or Rio+20, comes at a time when human-caused emissions have pushed our planet to the brink of a climate crisis. The effects of the global industrial economy brought planetary levels of carbon dioxide to a record high of 31.6 gigatonnes (Gt) in 2011, according to a 2012 International Energy Agency (IEA) report – only 1 Gt below the level that the IEA considers necessary to keep global temperatures from rising beyond 2°C. In response, many governments, banks, and corporations are increasingly looking to large hydropower dams to reduce fossil fuel use. Proponents claim that large hydropower dams will help usher in a “green economy.” Rather than achieving greater protection of the planet's ecosystems from the demands of growing energy use, this policy direction will put an increasing burden on Earth's freshwater species and habitats.

Large hydropower dams have resulted in a crash in freshwater species, huge social costs, reductions in river flows for users and ecosystems downstream, and significant greenhouse gas emissions. These impacts make them the wrong choice for governments seeking to protect ecosystem services, eradicate poverty, increase energy access, and resolve food shortages in a time of growing climate uncertainty. Decentralized, off-grid solutions make the most sense for a real “green economy.”

Rio+20’s guiding concept of “green growth” focuses on environmental protections that sustain corporate growth, rather than prioritizing the protection of the earth's critical natural systems – a worrisome shift away from the original intention of the 1992 UN conference. A variety of multi-stakeholder initiatives are being promoted at Rio that aim to advance the goals of the “Green Economy.” Many of them heavily promote large hydropower dams.


One initiative, convened by the private World Water Council, is called the World Water Forum. The sixth World Water Forum met in March of this year in France, where the final declaration called for governments to make commitments in the water sector for Rio+20. One call is for governments to harmonize water, energy and food developments by investing in large multi-purpose hydropower dams. Another is to implement a non-binding auditing tool called the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol (HSAP) that will allow dam builders to assess and rank their projects as “sustainable.” Both initiatives threaten to greenwash business-as-usual approaches while allowing the private sector to capture more of the world's water resources.

Another initiative, convened by the United Nations, is called Sustainable Energy for All. It aims to double the global share in renewables, to double the rate of improvement in energy efficiency, and to universalize energy access by the year 2030. The goals are excellent, but the group’s board is made up of heavy hitters in the global dam industry, including the CEOs of Eletrobras and Siemens, the Chairman of the China Development Bank, the President of the Brazilian National Development Bank, and the World Bank. Sustainable Energy for All has begun gathering government commitments, including one from Norway called Energy+, an offset investment program modeled after the Reducing Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) program. Energy+ seeks to pool opportunities for Norway (a key dam-building nation) and other high-income countries to invest in the energy sectors of low-income countries. Ethiopia and Kenya, two countries highly dependent on hydropower, have already indicated they will participate.

A third initiative, created at the UN’s 2011 climate meeting in Durban, South Africa, is called the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The GCF is supposed to be about raising finance to bring forth transformative changes to the global economy. One proposal from civil society, for example, is to end fossil fuel subsidies, redirecting them wholesale into the solar market to lower the price of the technology and create economies of scale. However, governments and the private sector have already positioned themselves to submit business-as-usual projects such as large hydro to the fund.

A final initiative, proposed by the Group of 20 (G20), is detailed in the group’s High-Level Report on Infrastructure. The report identifies 11 infrastructure projects to advance “green growth” as one possible way out of the global economic recession; four of them are related to the hydropower sector. One such project, the Grand Inga Complex in the Democratic Republic of Congo, would be the largest, most costly hydropower project ever built (it already has an $80 billion dollar price tag). Scientists believe that damming the Congo could alter the river's ability to transport sediment to the Atlantic Ocean, a system which is significant to reducing carbon in the global climate system. The G20 is a closed-door meeting of finance ministers of the world's wealthiest countries, and is not open to the scrutiny of civil society.

Proponents of large dams are ignoring the risks of climate-changed rivers when they tout them as being a panacea to climate change. The world's rivers are experiencing more radical swings in hydrological flow than ever before due to human-caused climate change. The Rio Negro in the Brazilian Amazon – still a free-flowing river – suffered two 100-year droughts in just five years, between 2005 and 2010. These troubling droughts were punctuated by two record-setting floods in 2009 and 2012, during which the river submerged parts of the city of Manaus, affecting 77,000 families. Such wild swings in hydrology have led some, including the Sustainability Unit of the World Bank, to call for an increase in large-storage multipurpose dams in order to hedge against the uncertainties of water availability. There is a fatal flaw in this approach: multi-purpose dams built on rivers already suffering from upstream drought will put multiple users in competition for decreasing water assets. Downstream users often bear the costs, as these dams reduce downstream ecological quality and water quantity, making livelihoods less resilient.

Finally, large hydropower dams can cancel out any intentions of developers to offset greenhouse gas emissions produced elsewhere. In the case of both traditional large-storage reservoirs and run-of-the-river reservoirs, large hydropower dams interrupt natural floodplain inundation cycles that feed much needed organic nutrients to areas of carbon sequestration, such as soils and oceans. What's more, the construction, implementation, and operation of large hydropower dams emit greenhouse gases – especially in the tropics, where decaying vegetation flooded by reservoirs can produce methane, the most potent greenhouse gas.

There are better options for meeting water and energy needs that do not require damaging rivers and the ecosystems they support. At Rio+20, governments, banks, and corporations, public and private sector alike, must listen to the multitude of voices calling for a return to the original mission of the 1992 UN Conference on Sustainable Development: to protect life on Earth. We can get there together if we change the focus to investing in true climate solutions for the water-energy-food nexus, rather than greenwashing business-as-usual projects such as large hydropower dams. The future of our freshwater systems, and life on Earth, depends on it.

InternationalRivers.org

Glaciers, Dams and Chile's Baker River

Four years ago, the Baker River in Aysén Patagonia suddenly tripled in size, causing a virtual river tsunami. In less than 48 hours, roads, bridges and farms were severely damaged and dozens of livestock drowned. Residents were in disbelief. Jonathan Leidich, an American whose company regularly leads tourists on treks up to nearby glaciers, hiked to the Colonia Glacier at the eastern flank of the Northern Patagonian Ice Field and discovered the source of the mysterious flood: Lake Cachet 2 had vanished. This enormous, two-square-mile glacial lake had emptied its 200 million cubic meters of water in just a matter of hours.

Lake Cachet 2 before the GLOF...

What happened? Glaciologists say it was yet another “glacial lake outburst flood,” or GLOF. An increasing rate of melting at the Colonia Glacier swelled the lake so much so that the resulting water pressure gradually forced the creation of a tunnel beneath the surface of the adjacent ice and drained the lake. Since Cachet 2 emptied in 2008, the lake has “disappeared” ten more times.

....and after. Photos courtesy of Patagonia Adventure Expeditions.

Such GLOFs don’t necessarily arise because of climate change; indeed, some four decades ago a GLOF occurred on the Baker River. But a clear warming trend over the past decade has taken its toll on the world’s glaciers, and it is widely agreed that climate change is dramatically increasing the frequency and intensity of GLOFs.

In December 2010, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) released a report on mountain glaciers at the climate-change talks in Cancún, Mexico, stating that glaciers on Argentine and Chilean Patagonia are “losing mass faster and for longer than glaciers in other parts of the world.”

“Accumulation of science shows us a clear general trend of melting glaciers linked to a warming climate,” UNEP executive director Achim Steine said.

Glaciers on the Chilean side of Patagonia account for more than 90 percent of the Patagonian region’s ice fields. Those fields consist of two non-contiguous sheets: the Northern Patagonian Ice Field, which includes Cachet 2, and the Southern Patagonian Ice Field, the world’s third-largest continental ice sheet after those of Antarctica and Greenland.

Data show that since 1995, the rate of thinning has more than doubled. Studies from NASA show that the Patagonian Ice Fields, which extend some 6,600 square miles altogether, account for about 9 percent of annual global sea level change from mountain glaciers.

Skeptics of global warming point to some Patagonia glaciers that remain stable, or that are even growing, such as Argentina’s Perito Moreno Glacier. But Gino Casassa, director of Glacier and Climate Change Research at the Center for Scientific Studies, said global warming can also lead to more rain, or snow in the case of regions such as Patagonia.

“We have scientific evidence showing a new cycle of activity in GLOFs in Patagonia and not just Lago Cachet,” Casassa said. “Glaciers are melting and lakes growing in size throughout the region — a clear sign of global warming. We will see GLOFs more often.”

Casassa said that in part, Patagonian glaciers are more susceptible to global warming because they are dominated by so-called “calving glaciers,” which release icebergs into lakes or the sea. There are also other climate change effects that intensify melting, such as elevation feedback. 

“As a glacier thins, the (upper edge retreats to lower elevations) — often in Patagonia by about five meters (16 feet) per year,” he said. “As that happens, atmospheric temperatures get warmer because you are at a lower elevation. This can be important in speeding up the melting of a glacier.”

The GLOFs are not just happening at an increasing rate in Patagonia, but worldwide in countries that are home to mountain glaciers. In April 2010, a huge slab of ice the size of several football fields broke off a glacier on Mount Hualcán and plunged into a lake in central Peru, creating a tsunami-like wave at least 76 feet high that flooded four towns, destroyed at least 50 homes and severely damaged a water plant serving a town of 60,000 people.

This accident came on the heels of the warmest summer season on record in the Southern Hemisphere, according to NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Compared with other countries, Peru is unusually well-prepared to cope with sudden lake floods, experts say. The Peruvian Andes mountain chain has witnessed more than 30 glacial floods in the past, killing nearly 6,000 people altogether since 1941. As a result, the Peruvian government has invested millions of dollars in working to drain or dam glacial lakes to lessen the hazardous risks.

Yet despite significant initiatives to safeguard nearby towns, Lake 513 on the slope of Mount Hualcán burst. Peru is experiencing rapid glacial change.

A 2009 World Bank report states that, due to warmer temperatures, Peru’s glaciers have declined 22 percent since 1975 and are likely to disappear in two decades, threatening to provoke more floods and eliminating a major source of water and hydropower for its people. In the Himalayan region of Nepal, China, Bhutan, India and Pakistan, the International Center for Integrated Mountain Development has identified 200 “potentially dangerous” glacial lakes.

Scientists predict that several major rivers fed by the Himalayas, such as the storied Ganges River in India, are set to be affected by massive glacial floods in the years ahead and eventually, as the glaciers retreat, the site of serious water shortages for untold millions of people during dry seasons.

DANGEROUS COMBINATION 

GLOF events at the Baker River in Chilean Patagonia, considered Chile’s largest river in terms of water volume, can sometimes raise the river up to 18 feet in some areas. Historically, GLOFs have been known to increase water flow to as much as 45,000 cubic feet per second.

“The lake is growing in size after every GLOF,” the 38-year-old Leidich said. “Which means the floods are just going to be more devastating in the future.”

Especially worrisome to Leidich and others is the combined effect these GLOFs may have together with a series of controversial large dams planned for the Baker River as part of a US$10 billion HidroAysén project.

The companies pushing the project, Endesa Chile, owned by Italy’s Enel, and Chile’s Colbún, hope to get the first of their Baker River dams readied by 2015. But a possible GLOF-related accident at the dam could wipe out the 512-person Tortel, a small, tranquil village located at the mouth of the Baker River, where the river merges with the Pacific Ocean.

Tortel is already issuing GLOF-evacuation orders for its residents as the high-water mark of the Baker River hits new peaks with the GLOF events. A study by the Physics Department at Santiago’s Metropolitan Technology University found that if a dam on the Baker were to break, Tortel would suffer “catastrophic consequences” within less than an hour.

“This project goes against the development and future of Tortel,” Bernardo Lopez, mayor of Tortel, said.

HidroAysén has said that it has considered in its engineering studies potential GLOFs based on nearly 50 years of past history of GLOFs. But Alejandro Dussaillant, a Chilean expert on hydrology at Greenwich University in England who has studied closely the Lake Cachet GLOF and its effects on the river, said several factors could overwhelm HidroAysén´s projections.

“Up to now we have been lucky because up to now we have not had the worst-case scenario, which is the Baker floods, there is a GLOF from the Colonia glacier and both happen during high tide near Tortel.  As an engineer, we must always consider such extreme scenarios,” Dussaillant said.

“What has been happening up to now does not mean that it will be the same over the next 20 years. There are dynamic changes occurring to the source of the GLOFS, the glaciers and the system of lakes upstream from Lake Cachet 2, that must be studied further,” he added.

In addition to flooding, the GLOFs transport tremendous amounts of sediment, which not only contribute to higher flood levels but reduce the life span of the dam downstream by accumulating sediment in the reservoir and potentially damaging the turbines.

Brian Reid, a limnologist with the Coyhaique-based Centro de Investigación en Ecosistemas de la Patagonia (CIEP), is conducting regular research on the Baker River. Reid said when a GLOF occurs, the river not only increases greatly in size but it contains the maximum amount of sediment the river can hold.

“The idea of building a major dam on one of the most unstable rivers on the planet seems crazy to me,” he said. “For the amount of risk involved in this dam project from these GLOFs, the company’s responses in the environmental evaluation process have been completely irresponsible.”

Despite the widely-shared concerns by scientists over GLOF risks associated with the proposed dams, the Aysén Regional Environmental Commission in November 2010 accepted the company’s views regarding GLOFs, and it was no longer an issue in the evaluation process when the project was approved in May 2011.

Leidich has met with Chilean senators, government ministers and others to seek financing for protection measures for ranchers and others living along the Baker. His efforts led to the creation of an early-warning system called the Sentinel Project in October 2008. High-frequency radios, powered by solar panels and batteries, were distributed to most families in the flood zone so they can receive warnings. But Leidich said the program will not work the way it needs to in the long term until it receives adequate annual funding.

Leidich calls HidroAysén a “blasphemy.” The companies say their dams, with an early warning system in place, can handle a GLOF of up to 23,100 cubic feet per second of water, which is the most their predictions say they will have to deal with in the future. Leidich said he is skeptical.

“What it will mean to the people living in Tortel and all along the river when the dam has to release that amount of water? The answer: Everyone downstream is wiped out.” Leidich said. “This place is a canary in the coal mine for global warming,” he added. “If people want to see whether climate change is for real, here it is.”

Written by Jimmy Langman@The Santiago Times

Kashmiris Fear Hydro Scheme Could Leave City High and Dry

Residents and environmental experts in Muzaffarabad, Pakistani-administrated Kashmir’s main city, fear the diversion of a major river to generate hydroelectric power will deprive local people of water for drinking and waste disposal, and could alter the region’s climate.

The Neelum River gushes down into Muzaffarabad from the Indian-controlled part of the disputed Himalayan territory, running through the middle of the city. It transports away urban sewage discharged into it and provides the inhabitants’ water supply.

But Pakistan’s largest hydropower project of recent decades threatens to lower the river level, leaving too little water to deliver those vital services.

“How we can live here if this river is reduced to a stream with sewage abandoned on its bank?” asks Shoukat Nawaz Mir, who owns a three-storey house on the banks of the Neelum River.

“It has been difficult to be here for a while now due to the stink, as there is no proper system for disposing of sewage and other waste, which is lying around in the open. And it will be a nightmare to live here when there is less water in the river,” says the 38-year-old, pointing to the fast- flowing channel. 

“I have spent most of my life here, but I fear for how my children will live on the bank of an almost dry river. There should be compliance with environmental protection law,” he says wistfully.

Some 32 km of tunnels are being dug out, into which 86 percent of the river’s water will be diverted. When completed in 2016, the water will be used to produce cheaper electricity in a large hydropower scheme with installed capacity of 969 megawatts.

The diverted river water will be discharged into the Jhelum River 28 km south of Muzaffarabad.

ENERGY CRISIS

The work is being carried out on a tight schedule, partly to overcome a severe energy crisis in Pakistan. Extensive power cuts fuelled violent protests in Punjab last month.

A report from the Asian Development Bank, released in April, said power shortages are the main constraint on Pakistan’s economic growth, as domestic resources of hydro, gas and coal have not grown enough to cover energy demand, increasing its reliance on imported fuel oil.

In addition to providing much-needed power and reducing imports of costly and polluting fossil fuels, the new hydro scheme is also regarded as an attempt to secure rights over Kashmir water.

Arch-rival India is also building a dam on the same river in its part of Kashmir, which could curb downstream power generation capacity by 13 percent once finished, due to reduced water flow, according to Muhammad Zubair, head of the Neelum Jhelum Hydro-Power Company.

The long-running dispute between the two countries over the territory of Kashmir extends to water, despite a treaty agreed in 1960 that defines rights to the rivers flowing into Pakistan from India.

The World Bank-mediated Indus Water Treaty (IWT) is intended to resolve disputes over waters originating in the Indus Basin. It allocates the waters of rivers in the eastern basin – the Sutlej, Beas and Ravi – to India, while Pakistan has unrestricted use of the western rivers – the Indus, Jhelum (of which the Neelum is a tributary) and Chenab.

After India began constructing the Kishanganga dam on the Neelum, arguing that the water would ultimately be returned to the river and flow into Pakistan, Pakistan filed a complaint with the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague in 2010. The court issued a stay order on the work last year, saying the project may not comply with the IWT.

But the problems with hydropower projects on Kashmir’s rivers are not just political.

ENVIRONMENTAL FEARS

Concerns have been raised in Pakistani-administered Kashmir’s legislative assembly about the environmental impacts of the Muzaffarabad project, with legislators demanding the publication of the agreement between the local government and the company managing the scheme.

A separate proposed hydropower scheme on the Jhelum River - which would have involved diverting 90 percent of its water – was refused authorisation.

Irshad Qureshi, director-general of the Kashmir Environment Protection Agency (EPA), told AlertNet that government permission was issued for the Neelum project on the condition that its backer, the Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA), complies with national environment quality standards.  

The approved project, now underway, plans to divert an average of 280 cubic metres per second (cumecs) of water from the 322 cumecs that flows in the river’s peak season from April to September, when it is fed by snow and glacier melt. In the winter, between October and February, the water flow falls to just 59.9 cumecs, according to Qureshi.

Diverting the river “will have a serious impact on the environment”, he noted, as there will be less water for drinking supplies and washing away waste. The temperature in the local area could also increase because the cooling effect of the river will be curbed due to less evaporation, he warned.

A dam, 60 m high and 160 m long, is being built to raise the water to the required level during the winter, and a 9-km-long lake is being created to act as a reservoir.

Six sewage treatment plants and an expanded water supply scheme will also be installed to improve the provision of drinking water to urban areas, Qureshi added.

Nonetheless, environmentalist Sahibzada Aftab Alam also believes that diverting the river could affect the Himalayan climate, leading to higher summer temperatures.

“Disturbing the natural flow has a major impact on the climate of the area as it affects aquatic life, the water table and the spring-recharging process, as well as drinking water quality and quantity,” he explained.

Most of Kashmir’s population lives in rural areas, depending largely on forestry, livestock and agriculture for their livelihoods. River water and natural springs are the main source of drinking water and irrigation – and these will be affected by “serious water shortages” caused by the power scheme, Alam argues.

“The project area, 40 km away from the city, has significant conservational importance due to an abundance of forests, aquatic life and many species of wildlife, which have been declared endangered globally,” he said.

The aesthetic beauty of the city and its surrounding areas, which attract tourists, could also be damaged, he warned.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Muhammad Shafique Abbasi, an environmentalist working with the EPA, worries about what will happen once the hydropower scheme is up and running.

“They will definitely not care about environmental concerns once they complete the project, and this is about what we are anxious about,” he said.

“What will the situation be when there is only 60 cumecs of water in the river during the lean season in winter, while 280 cumecs will be required for (power) generation?” he questioned.

But Mavish Durrani, another EPA expert, argues that the hydropower project could also have some positive effects - for example, the new dam and reservoir could enhance local rainfall due to evaporation and condensation of the water they contain.

“They will attract migratory birds to the area and improve aquatic life and forest growth, besides the working of water cycle,” he said. 

Zubair of the Neelum Jhelum Hydro-Power Company, a subsidiary of the WAPDA, told AlertNet that enough water will be provided from the dam to guarantee local water supplies.

In winter, when the river flow is at its lowest, the company plans to release around five times the daily amount required to meet Muzaffarabad’s sewage treatment and drinking water needs to maintain the city’s environment, he said.

“The environmental concerns are small when compared with energy generation of more than 5.1 billion electricity units annually - which means income of around 45 billion rupees ($0.5 billion) to the government each year, besides economic development for the people of the area,” Zubair added.

Written by Roshan Din Shad a freelance journalist based in Muzaffarabad@AlertNet

China’s Hydropower Miscalculation

                            Three Gorges Dam, A Symbol of China's Miscalculation on Hydropower

China’s Jinsha River, literally the “Golden Sands” River, could soon live up to its rich name. The approximately 2300-km long upstream section of the Yangtze River is the site of up to 25, planned large-scale (50 MW and above) hydropower projects (Caixun, May 4; Dongfang Zaobao, May 3). China’s state-run hydropower companies, local governments, and energy-hungry cities in the more developed, eastern provinces stand to profit from hydropower construction and electricity generation. Driven by Beijing’s energy and climate goals, this new dam building rush, however, will reduce China’s climate change adaptation capacity and hurt relationships with neighboring countries without providing the emission-free electricity Beijing is seeking.

China’s status as the world’s largest CO2 emitter has put increasing pressure—both domestic and international—on Beijing to curb national emissions (Climate Progress, December 7, 2011). In response, the government has laid out a set of binding targets in the 12th Five Year Plan: an 11.4 percent increase in the use of non-fossil fuel in primary energy consumption; a 16 percent decrease in energy consumption per unit of GDP; and a 17 percent decrease in CO2 emissions per unit of GDP by 2015 [1]. Now, China is looking for sources of clean, emission-free and sustainable electricity to fulfill ever-growing demand and meet renewable energy and emission targets. More large scale hydropower is wrongly thought to be one such source. Consequently, dozens of projects are planned or already under construction on a number of rivers, including 26 on the Lancang, headwater of the Mekong, 13 on the Nu, headwater of the Salween, and 28 on the Yarlung Tsangpo, the headwater of the Brahmaputra (Atlantic Sentinel, March 10; The Hindu, June 10, 2011).

The Misguided Hydropower Narrative

Addressing China’s power sector—a major contributor to national greenhouse gas emissions—is critical to reaching Beijing’s emission targets. A terawatt hour (TWh) of electricity generated in China produces on average 70 percent more CO2 emissions than a TWh generated in the United States, and China’s power sector accounted for almost 50 percent of the country’s CO2 emissions in 2009 (International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2011). Developments in the power sector therefore will have a significant impact on the country’s emission trajectory.

The high carbon-intensity of China’s electricity is due to the sector’s heavy reliance on coal. Coal, a very carbon-intensive fuel, is used to generate around 80 percent of China’s electricity (China Statistical Yearbook 2011). Hydropower accounts for 16 percent of the country’s electricity generation with nuclear, wind and solar making up the remainder. Hydropower advocates argue that shifting the energy mix from carbon-intensive coal to more hydropower would benefit China’s emission targets.

This argument relies on the still widespread “clean, sustainable and emission-free hydropower” narrative. Even the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change tacitly supports this misconception by making reports of greenhouse gas emissions from dam reservoirs voluntary (International Rivers, December 2, 2011). Studies however have shown that hydropower can be a major source of greenhouse gas. Organic material from previously forested, but now flooded land and washed up debris, accumulates and decomposes in the dam reservoirs, thereby releasing large amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. This problem particularly affects hydropower projects in tropical areas, where the vegetation is generally denser and more organic material is accumulated in reservoirs. Some hydropower facilities in tropical areas emit up to twice as much carbon dioxide per unit of electricity as coal fired power plants [2]. As most of China’s planned hydropower projects are located in densely forested, subtropical southern and southwestern provinces, new dam reservoirs are likely to become significant emission sources.

Making Adaptation Harder

The 12th Five Year Plan also addresses climate change adaptation strategies. Beijing wants to strengthen the country’s “capacity to cope with extreme climate incidents,” thereby enhancing China’s climate change adaptation capacity [3]. Yet, the construction of more dams will decrease China’s capacity to cope with extreme climate incidents, which are predicted to include more frequent and more severe record floods and droughts [4].

First, the impacts of large-scale dams on wetlands and human settlement patterns limit China’s adaptation capacity—the ability to moderate potential damages or cope with the consequences of climate change—as they expose millions of people to climate change related risks. To maximize power production, dams store water during the wet season and release it during the dry season. This alteration of natural river flow patterns impacts the health of natural flood storage systems, such as downstream wetlands, lakes and marshes, often leading to their disappearance. Thus, dams reduce the frequency of smaller floods, but also decrease or eliminate wetlands’ natural capacity to absorb water and thus mitigate severe floods.

In addition, dams enable the conversion of wetlands to agricultural farmland and provide downstream cities with electricity and water for irrigation, industrial and household purposes, enabling and encouraging their development and growth. Hydropower development therefore contributes to population growth in downstream areas, which simultaneously increases the number of people at risk of dam failure as changing precipitation patterns could lead to floods that may exceed the storage capacity of dams upstream.

The controversial Three Gorges Dam is a case in point. With a capacity of 22.5 GW, the dam can generate up to 84.7 billion kWh of electricity for cities in central, southern and eastern China, including the downstream metropolis of Shanghai (Xinhua, October 26, 2010). While its reservoir supplied the population in the middle and lower Yangtze with a steady source of water, it also contributed to the drying up of Dongting and Poyang Lake, two of China’s largest freshwater lakes, during the 2011 drought (Shanghai Daily, June, 2, 2011; China Three Gorges Corporation, August 7, 2009). Although the dam withstood its first major flood test in 2010, whether the Three Gorges Dam will be able to contain future, possibly worse, floods is uncertain (Xinhua, July 20, 2010). If it fails, downstream residents will not be able to rely on natural floodplains to mitigate the impact with possibly disastrous consequences for life and property.

Second, the operation of large-scale dams exacerbates droughts in downstream areas. In theory, reservoirs could provide short-term drought relief, by releasing stored water for use downstream. Yet, below a certain water level, the primary objective of hydropower operators—maximizing electricity generation—suffers. The fact that the central government had to order the China Three Gorges Corporation to release water from the reservoir to alleviate the severe drought downstream in 2011 suggests that hydropower operators are likely to put power generation ahead of drought relief (South China Morning Post, May 25, 2011).

Third, dams make it harder for coastal cities to adapt to rising sea levels. As freshwater is held back in reservoirs upstream, natural water outflows at river deltas are reduced, contributing to a fall in coastal groundwater tables. Combined with rising sea levels, this makes coastal delta regions more susceptible to saltwater intrusion, which contaminates coastal freshwater aquifers and makes water unfit for human consumption [5]. More dams could exacerbate future saltwater intrusion challenges for many coastal Chinese cities brought on by rising sea levels. Shanghai, located in the Yangtze River Delta, is already experiencing saltwater intrusion, which research has linked to variations in water discharge from the Three Gorges Dam (Scientific American, October 13, 2009) [6].

Lastly, the expensive and long-lasting nature of hydropower infrastructure makes it difficult or impossible to adapt them to future changes in the environment, agricultural and economic activities and human settlement patterns.

Large-scale dam construction is very costly. The record-setting Three Gorges Dam cost approximately $25 billion. Even smaller projects like the planned Xiaonanhai Dam on the Upper Yangtze cost up to $5.6 billion (China Dialogue, March 9, 2011). China Post Securities analyst Shao Minghui estimates the hydropower sector will need around $136 billion in infrastructure investment by 2020 (Shanghai Daily, January 6, 2011). The sheer size of this kind of investments often prompts path dependency—the preference to continue even if better alternatives are available—as investors look to realize promised returns on investment, and local governments are unwilling to admit that there may have been better development alternatives.

Furthermore, the design of hydropower dams is based on historical and current river flows. While their lifespan ranges from 50 to 100 years, climate change is likely to alter future river flows within decades. Modifications to existing large-scale dams to accommodate these changes, however, are either technically infeasible or very expensive. Dried up rivers or changing river courses could turn dams into stranded assets, because they, unlike solar or wind installations, cannot be moved. A drought in 2011 caused a 28 percent reduction in hydropower output, resulting in 1000 factories and companies in Guizhou suspending operations and showing even temporary reductions in water flows can result in significant power shortages (Xinhua, August 24, 2011).

Damming International Relationships

China’s dam building rush will have negative impacts on relationships with neighboring countries. Furthermore, national hydropower companies’ overseas venture may harm China’s international reputation.

China’s territory encompasses parts of 18 of Asia’s major international river basins. Moreover, China’s position along these river basins is predominantly upstream, and, in the case of the Brahmaputra, the Mekong, and the Salween, at the source. Hydropower development in China therefore has international impact, and affects China’s relationships with its downstream riparian neighbors, including Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam. The construction of cascades of large-scale hydropower dams along rivers in China’s territory affects the water quantity and quality downstream. While the exact extent of these dams’ negative impact on water availability, fish populations and consequently downstream populations may be unknown, the existence of such effects is certain.

Upstream dams also provide some control over the timing and amount of water flow in the rivers affected. People downstream therefore may feel that Beijing rather than nature controls their water and their welfare. Admittedly, upstream China does not control the entire water flow of these rivers as water volumes generally increase along the river. Yet, as river basins are highly complex, and the precise amounts of water inflows at particular sections are hard to measure, citizens of countries downstream may perceive China to be in full control. Indian newspapers, for example, write of China’s “superior upper riparian positions” and “unique position of controlling international rivers,” and suspect the country of secretly diverting water from the Yarlung-TsangpoRiver (Hindustan Times, March 2; India Today, August 19, 2011). In 2010, when severe drought hit the Mekong, farmers and fishermen in countries downstream blamed China and its hydropower stations for the disaster, despite China’s assurance that it collected only “four percent of the river’s water” (China Daily, April 9, 2010; New York Times, April 1, 2010). Regardless of the validity of these suspicions, given China’s geographic position, more hydropower construction will further strain relationships with already apprehensive neighbors and nations downstream.

Furthermore, for about a decade now, Chinese state-run hydropower companies have increasingly looked abroad to market the experience and technology gained in domestic projects. More domestic dam building is likely to make these companies even more internationally competitive as they gain further technical expertise and financial resources. Yet, the nature of many of these overseas ventures may harm China’s international image.

As Europe and North America have turned away from the construction of large dams, Chinese companies armed with newfound skills have sought projects in other Asian, African and South American nations—many of which lack strong legal and political institutions, environmental and regulatory oversight and suffer from corruption and instability. Chinese banks and companies currently are involved in about 300 projects in 66 countries, including Angola, Burma, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Iran, Sierra Leone and Sudan (International Rivers, May 1). Due to these problems, many of the projects are high risk, involve human rights violations by local governments and fail to be built according to international environmental and safety standards. In the long run, this reflects negatively upon Chinese companies and ultimately the country as a whole.

The Myitsone Dam on the Irrawaddy in Burma illustrates this point. Located in Kachin State, home to a strong separatist movement and site of frequent, armed clashes between the Burmese military and the Kachin Independence Army, the project was supposed to be financed and built by the China Power Investment Corporation, before President Thein Sein suspended it in 2011 (The Irrawaddy, September 21, 2011).Myitsone holds a special cultural and religious significance for the Kachin, who revere the area as the birthplace of their culture. Should construction move forward, the result is likely to be viewed as a symbol of China’s lack of cultural sensibilities and disregard for local minority groups (China Dialogue, March 28, 2011).

Conclusion and Recommendations

Beijing’s focus on hydropower to achieve energy and emission targets largely ignores or downplays large-scale dams’ negative impacts on the climate, the country’s adaptation ability and relations with neighbors as well as China’s international reputation. Yet, there are a range of alternatives to large dams.

Greater focus on energy efficiency could provide huge energy savings. For example, China’s cement industry alone could achieve primary energy savings of 23 percent through the implementation of international best practices [7]. In the power sector, the government could accelerate its efforts to replace small, inefficient power plants, with more efficient supercritical and ultra-supercritical power plants, as well as combined heat and electricity cogeneration plants. More efficient appliances and lighting could reduce household electricity consumption, a growing part of China’s total consumption. This could be achieved through programs similar to Energy Star in the United States.

Additionally, all existing alternative energy infrastructure should be connected to the power grid. As of 2011, 30 percent of China’s wind power capacity, for example, was not yet connected to the grid (Xinhua, February 24). At the end of 2008, small hydropower plants numbered 50,000, many of which were built decades ago and are equipped with outdated, inefficient technology (China Daily, January 7, 2009). Prior to building new projects, existing infrastructure should be surveyed, and where necessary retrofitted with new technology to be more productive.

While less impressive in scale than highly visible mega-dams, these alternatives could alleviate expected energy shortages, and help Beijing achieve its targets without the negative consequences and future risks associated with large scale dams.

China’s status as the world’s largest CO2 emitter has put increasing pressure—both domestic and international—on Beijing to curb national emissions (Climate Progress, December 7, 2011). In response, the government has laid out a set of binding targets in the 12th Five Year Plan: an 11.4 percent increase in the use of non-fossil fuel in primary energy consumption; a 16 percent decrease in energy consumption per unit of GDP; and a 17 percent decrease in CO2 emissions per unit of GDP by 2015 [1]. Now, China is looking for sources of clean, emission-free and sustainable electricity to fulfill ever-growing demand and meet renewable energy and emission targets. More large scale hydropower is wrongly thought to be one such source. Consequently, dozens of projects are planned or already under construction on a number of rivers, including 26 on the Lancang, headwater of the Mekong, 13 on the Nu, headwater of the Salween, and 28 on the Yarlung Tsangpo, the headwater of the Brahmaputra (Atlantic Sentinel, March 10; The Hindu, June 10, 2011). 

Free Republic