15 June 2010
Marc Dourojeanni, specialist in environment and natural resources, voices his opinion on the energy deal between Peru and Brazil and the Inambari hydroelectric dam.
Los Andes. 14.06.2010.
On the verge of the upcoming signing of the Energy Treaty between Peru and Brazil, is it necessary for our country to sign a document of this nature?
At this point in time, Peru does not need this deal, since it very compromising and does not show any benefits for the Peruvian people. There is clear evidence that the deal is harmful to the public interest. If Peru ever came to need any of these dams- which could be possible in a few years- it would build it at that time with ample time to conclude necessary economic, social and environmental studies. In order to do that, the money and the conditions imposed by the Brazilians and gracefully accepted by our government would not be necessary. If Peru commits to selling to Brazil for a period of 30 years the biggest and best part of its hydroelectric energy potential, what would be left for Peru when that same energy is needed? Let’s not forget that dams do not last forever. Probably less than the 30 years that has been put in discussion in the terms of the deal.
What will happen after the treaty is signed?
Peru will be left with useless carcasses and huge environmental and social damages that Brazil has no intention in paying, like it was seen when a fraction of its real cost was offered to account for the future already foreseen damages that are not included in the tariff that will be paid.
The supporting argument for the construction of these infrastructure projects in that it will generate needed energy.
It is obvious that Peru is going to need more and more energy; however, before using the hydroelectric energy from the forest, the country can still take advantage of its potential in the south mountain range. By selling our resources prematurely, we will be sacrificing our future and maybe later have to buy at expensive prices from the Brazilians the energy that they will be producing in Peru, which would be a shame. The Peruvian state points out that the appropriate measures concerning the environment are being included in the Deal, and in order to do that, they are outlining what are the environmental guidelines of each country. Concerning the Brazilian environmental standards, they are better, stricter and more detailed than the Peruvian ones, but in reality, Brazilians do not abide by all of them. At least not much more that we do. This means that this document does not help Peru in holding back the socio-environmental damages that come from the construction of an artificial lake in the large proportions predicted for the Inambari or for the other central hydroelectric dams predicted in the deal. If the deal is signed off, which is not the desirable outcome, the ideal scenario would be for brazil to commit to implementing in Peru the best international standards available, for example, the ones from the World Bank, and that to confirm that those are being put into practice there be an international inspection observing the quality of its implementation and alerting both governments of possible deviations and risks.
Is climate change being factored into the discussion on the construction of this hydroelectric dam?
It is definitely not being considered in terms of the implications for Peru. This question has been raised by both Peruvian and Brazilian specialists, and despite the mystery around the Study on the Environmental Impacts that has not yet been released to the public, it is known that up to this point this subject has not been taken into account. But it is probable that the topic of climate change is being considered by Brazilian authorities since Inambari, more than a generator of energy for Brazil, is also serving as an example for other large Brazilian dams in the Madeira river system.
What has been the environmental impact for Brazil, a country that for years has been building a series of hydroelectric dams?
The impacts of the Brazilian hydroelectric dams have been tremendous, in accordance to the dimension of the country itself. These damages account for the loss in biodiversity, including of rare or endemic species; the destruction of ecosystems even inside protected areas; the drastic alteration of water ways with huge consequences on hydro biologic resources, specially diminishing fishing activities; they have influenced the navigability of the rivers and have caused cases of severe contamination in function of geology and of handling of the dams. The ones that are in the Amazon are causing damages through gas emissions that contribute to global warming, in particular carbon dioxide and methane. Each case is different from the other and some dams are worse than others.
And in relation to social impacts?
The direct social impacts and the ones coming from the environment have been equally serious: displacement of peoples and inahbitants, loss by inundation of the best lands for agriculture and mining, destruction of important cultural hertitage, reduction of economic activities such as fishing, etc. The project requires a lot of labor, but as soon as they are over they create thousands of unemployed people that do not know what else they can make a living with. Small villages appear with no order or law, where there are no services and delinquency and prostitution reign. Several dams are a threat to the people living close by to the river, since they are in constant fear of an accident or a phenomenon that causes their homes to flood. This is situation is aggravated by the fact that in Peru there tends to be violent earthquakes. In Brazil, many people affected by the dams have organized themselves into groups that fight for the rights that construction companies deny or do not fully grant them.
Brazil has a clear geopolitical strategy with the objective of positioning the country as a global power. In this deal, is Peru negotiating under the same circumstances?
Brazil already is a global power and is obviously the stronger country in Latin America. Comparatively, Peru is tiny geographically, demographically, economically, scientific and militarily. Peru is only superior to Brazil in ecologic diversity and in historic and cultural national wealth. Brazil is looking towards Peru and other Andean countries because they have already used up all of their rivers for electric power generation and there are few possibilities left in their own territory. This should serve is Peru’s advantage during negotiations. However, Brazil does not plan on invading Peru; it just plans, as a good negotiator, to extract maximum profit out of the Peruvians, especially if Peruvians “let them”. This is what is going on and the reason for this government’s shameful behavior is unclear. If Peru wants to build for itself one or two hydroelectric dams in the Amazon it can easily do it. It has the technical and economic capacity do to so, and it can also team up with other financial sources such as the World Bank, or private entities that are not the Brazilians. It can negotiate under the same terms, and not below anybody, like is currently the case. Peru is not in a hurry to take advantage of the hydro energy of the Amazon like Brazil is because it still has cheaper alternatives. Peru should save its resources, especially the Inambari, which is the most viable option for itself.