Dam Shame: 60,000 Could Lose Homes For Controversial China Hydropower

[News_Editor]

A fisherman sits on the eastern bank of the Nu River, also known as the Salween River, in southwest China’s Yunnan Province. (Photo: Reuters)

BEIJING — China expects 60,000 people to lose their homes in the remote southwest if a series of four dams along the country’s last free-flowing river gets the go-ahead, a local official said on Thursday in the first government estimate for relocations.

Outgoing Premier Wen Jiabao, a geologist by trade and populist by instinct, vetoed the dams in Yunnan Province on the UNESCO-protected Nu River, known outside China as the Salween, in 2005, after an outcry from environmentalists.

But in late January, the government unexpectedly announced that dam building would resume, with the Nu River high on the list for development.

Qin Guangrong, Yunnan’s Communist Party chief, told reporters on the sidelines of China’s annual meeting of parliament that work had not yet begun.

But Li Siming, head of the prefecture along the Burma border where the dams would be built, said the prefecture had already begun looking at how to relocate people.

“The initial estimate is that 60,000 people will have to be relocated,†Li told Reuters. Most are from the ethnic Lisu minority.

“We’ve not yet got to the stage of working out where they will be relocated to. There are no details yet on whether the projects will even happen,†he added. “There are limited amounts of land.â€

China relocated 1.3 million people during the 17 years it took to complete the massive, $59 billion Three Gorges Dam, built in a much more heavily populated area in central China.

Li, an ethnic Lisu himself, said the environmental impact assessment had not been completed and he did not know when construction might start.

“The whole process, from the central government to the provincial government to the prefectural government, will be open to the public—it’s part of the policy of ‘letting the light shine on the government’,†he said.

Environmentalists have long complained about the lack of transparency about the dam project.

“The problem is that for a matter that has provoked concern from the international community, they have never held a hearing before,†Wang Yongchen, an environmentalist who has long campaigned for the Nu River, told Reuters recently.

Li said that most residents supported the dam project, but added that “a minority†did not.

“If we see that development of hydropower resources on the Nu River will not benefit the local people, then we will not do it,†he said.

Li sounded uncertain, however, when asked if he personally supported the project.

“I grew up along the Nu River. How to protect it, how to develop it, how to use it, I have my own opinions on that,†he said. “I’m a local boy: we’ve always relied on the land, and the water.

“As head of the prefecture, I’m always thinking about how to protect the land but also how to use it. This is always on my mind… It’s not about whether I personally support it or not.â€

Source: Irrawaddy.org

[jamhar]

Pun of the day to the news editor

On a serious note

I dont see whey the Thai and Burmese governments should be apprehensive about their Dam projects on this river, given the Chinese are going to build 4 of them up stream!

[maidu]

Pun of the day to the news editor

On a serious note

I dont see whey the Thai and Burmese governments should be apprehensive about their Dam projects on this river, given the Chinese are going to build 4 of them up stream!

Are you joking - with that sentence above? The Chinese are to environmental husbandry what caged dogs are to the floor of their pound, scatalogically speaking.

[jamhar]

Pun of the day to the news editor

On a serious note

I dont see whey the Thai and Burmese governments should be apprehensive about their Dam projects on this river, given the Chinese are going to build 4 of them up stream!

Are you joking - with that sentence above? The Chinese are to environmental husbandry what caged dogs are to the floor of their pound, scatalogically speaking.

Whats you point?

My point was that I know some Thai's that are opposed to damming up wild rivers (btw, so am I, in general)

What i was saying is that if the tributaries are in China, it will be dammed by the Chinese with no regards to downstream.

[Payboy]

No one could stop Three Gorges, so this is just a fallout from that.

[NeverSure]

Damming rivers isn't all bad. It isn't all good, but it does have its bright sides. It is very effective at flood control. It evens out the flow of water during dry season by storing massive amounts. The levels are lowered during the dry season, to make room for excess water during the rainy season.

Lakes are formed, creating far more shoreline than ever before. Lake Shasta in California, US, behind Shasta Dam, has more than 360 miles of shoreline.

When several dams are built, the rivers between the dams look basically unchanged. The massive change is the flooding of native areas for the lakes. The dams along the Columbia River between Oregon and Washington are examples of that.

While people are displaced, there is created much more shoreline. The lakes and the river continue to be big draws for fishing.

That's without mentioning that nations do need electricity and water. When the water is released during the dry season to generate electricity and to prepare for next seasons floods, others downstream benefit from that dry season water that went through the turbines. California's agriculture land below that dam for hundreds of miles was provided with irrigation ditches.

Yes, it's controversial and yes, there are good arguments for and against. But all of the good arguments aren't necessarily against.

[Publicus]

The Guardian newspaper provides plenty of reasons to stop the compulsive Chinese hydraulic engrineers at the top of the PRChina government who have run amok in China during the past 15 years, to include damming up rivers at their source, such as the Meekong which flows from mainland China into the Indo-China peninsula.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jan/29/hydro-dams-china-ecosystem

In a radical development, the government of Myanmar/Burma has halted several of Beijing's mega-hydro projects that were plundering their country, using its stance against Beijing's prolific dam projects to break sharply from the CCP-PRC. Myanmar now is reconnecting to its democratic neighbors. Moreover, Pres Barack Obama recognized the historic pivot by visiting Myanmar after last year's November election which resulted in Obama winning his present second term. The Chinese are invenerate plunderers and have a 5000 year old history of dictatorship, so it's very positive to witness the developments in Myanmar during the past two years. Beijing was shocked by Pres Obama's personal visit to Myanmar. The CCP-PRC now is reduced to wishful thinking about Myanmar and its grand designs on the Indo-China peninsula. Here's the link: http://www.mizzima.com/news/inside-burma/8784-myitsone-dam-project-expected-to-resume-in-2015-says-cpi.html

Beijing's shock did strike home in Zhongnanhai quickly and unexpectedly: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/world/obamas-road-to-myanmar-is-paved-with-new-asia-intentions.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

(Zhongnanhai is Beijing's Kremlin.)

And here's a good one from Greenpeace about Zhongnanhai's compulsive drying up the country's rivers, to include especially the Yellow River and the Yangtze: http://www.worldwatch.org/human-activities-contribute-drying-major-river-headwaters And now comes the Salaween River, China's last free-flowing river which the hydraulic CCP engineers in Beijing already are mucking up both in China and downstream, i.e., in Southeast Asia.

Edited March 9, 2013 by Publicus

[MrRed]

Dam control

Power rivers

Money flows

If we let it.

[maidu]

Pun of the day to the news editor

On a serious note

I dont see whey the Thai and Burmese governments should be apprehensive about their Dam projects on this river, given the Chinese are going to build 4 of them up stream!

Are you joking - with that sentence above? The Chinese are to environmental husbandry what caged dogs are to the floor of their pound, scatalogically speaking.

Whats you point? My point was that I know some Thai's that are opposed to damming up wild rivers (btw, so am I, in general)

What i was saying is that if the tributaries are in China, it will be dammed by the Chinese with no regards to downstream.

When you write; 'Thai and Burmese gov't shouldn't be apprehensive about the Dam projects on this river' it sounds like u r saying there's no reason for concern by peons downstream. Anyhow, there should be dire concern.

Even if any Chinese had the mental ability to think outside the box, don't expect any of them (in China) to speak up. They're breaking the law if they do. According to 2012's survey by 'Reporters Without Borders', China ranks 174th (out of 179) in their 'Press Freedom Index'. Commentary on the RWB site mentions; "the Chinese government responded to regional and local protests and to public impatience with scandals and acts of injustice by feverishly reinforcing its system of controlling news and information, carrying out extrajudicial arrests and stepping up Internet censorship."

[473geo]

I lived in an area where there were 5 dams in very close proximity, thing is once full the water flows almost as normal, excepting a more steady flow is released in the 'dry' periods maitaining a constant output, and more water is witheld to refill the dam in the wet periods reducing any high water level damage. Down side is the loss of land and displacement, 60k people is a shame but in the grand scheme not a lot. Plus I have seen local people learn new trades and be set up for life as a result of working on these projects.

[harryfrompattaya]

No one could stop Three Gorges, so this is just a fallout from that.

I think all who against the dam write the Chinese Government maybe they will listen to you fools

[Gary A]

Hydroelectric is much preferred to coal burning power plants. You can't make everyone happy but the fact is that we all need electricity.

[Payboy]

No one could stop Three Gorges, so this is just a fallout from that.I think all who against the dam write the Chinese Government maybe they will listen to you fools

Thanks for the suggestion, o wise one. Perhaps you could also help draft this letter?

[NeverSure]

Many of the above quotes are from ultra left wing sources. It is those same sources including Obama who have tied up resources elsewhere that people truly need.

The mighty Columbia river in the US generates so much power that electricity rates around it are the cheapest in the nation. Yet, I can see no damage done from those dams. Still, instead of building more dams, dams are being torn out in other rivers.

I posted a quote in another thread from the US Government's Office of Budget and Management, stating that the US has more oil underground in just one place than all of the rest of the world's oil reserves combined. Yet the environmentalists have it all shut down and about $700 billion a year goes out of the US to buy oil. Much of that oil money supports people in the Middle East who hate all Westerners.

This is what extremists can do. They are so blinded by their "religion," that they don't see the damage they do by denying the rest of the people the resources they need.

Yes, dams store massive amounts of water and they generate electricity. Yes, that water must be released during the dry season both to generate electricity through the turbines, and to prepare to catch and control the excess water from the next rainy season. They are champs at providing irrigation and at controlling flooding, both when needed at two different times of the year.

If China is withholding water during the dry season and letting rivers dry up, it is typical of their need to be seen as powerful, and their lack of care. They do after all build filthy coal fired electricity plants with no regard for the atmosphere of the whole world.

I don't buy the extremist views of some of the quotes above. I have seen too many beautiful hydroelectric dams and the beautiful lakes behind them, and the fertile soil below them being irrigated after the water went through the turbines.

Lake Mead, Hoover Dam. Providing water for absolute desert. This is the same river that runs through the Grand Canyon.

Shasta Lake, Shasta Dam. Providing 360 miles of shoreline where once was only the Sacramento River. It irrigates much of central California's farmland.

List of dams in the Columbia River watershed.

The Bonneville Dam, Columbia River.

The Dalles Dam, Columbia River. Powering Google's newest server farm, in the middle of a desert.

"Massive datacenters have been built along the Columbia River as well as in central Oregon and central Washington including Amazon near Boardman, Google in The Dallas, as well as Yahoo in Quincy and MSN in Wenatchee (in central Washington)." Link

This is all Columbia River power.

[Scott]

Dams, like a lot of things, have a life expectancy. Eventually, they fill with silt.

[maidu]

not sure where to put this item: There is a worldwide treaty called MARPOL (maritime pollution) which has been signed by nearly every country in the world which has a coastline. The only exceptions are Costa Rica, Taiwan and, ....get this: THAILAND.

Why is Thailand not a signatory to a ww treaty which is dedicated to lessening and, if possible, eliminating dumping and polluting the seas?

[otherstuff1957]

The demand for electricity in China is growing by leaps and bounds. Their choices are coal, nuclear or hydro. If I was the leader of China I would be building more dams too.

Dams have their downsides, but they are the least of several evils.

[maidu]

The demand for electricity in China is growing by leaps and bounds. Their choices are coal, nuclear or hydro. If I was the leader of China I would be building more dams too. Dams have their downsides, but they are the least of several evils.

There comes a time when a country is dammed-out - either by physical restrictions (no more watersheds) or by concerns for the environment. China is indicative of the the human-commandeered world - it wants to configure everything, including forests and valleys to benefit humankind's dominance. There is a line (for some of us) between how much the environment can be scraped and cement-covered - and nature. Some people can stretch that line every direction, rather like a cities and suburbs sprawling unbroken for hundreds of miles over vast tracts of land. Others, like me, prefer to have a planet where people communities dovetail with natural spaces. Re; Dams: There are more than enough now. Renewable alternatives (solar, wind, bio-fuels, thermal, tidal, etc.) which don't flood valleys and watersheds - are the way to go forward.

[Potosi]

A lake is a nice thing, for tourism, recreation, water sports, wildlife, vegetation, agriculture. Seems to be a lovely and fertile part of the world according to the pics, and a couple of reservoirs will improve it further. Originally they planed to build a dozend dams, going down to four seems to be a sensible compromise. 60k people displaced isn't a lot, and they're happy if properly compensated. Open pit mining of coal or ore might displace more people than water reservoirs, and these pits are a real mess.

[Publicus]

Many of the above quotes are from ultra left wing sources. It is those same sources including Obama who have tied up resources elsewhere that people truly need.

The mighty Columbia river in the US generates so much power that electricity rates around it are the cheapest in the nation. Yet, I can see no damage done from those dams. Still, instead of building more dams, dams are being torn out in other rivers.

I posted a quote in another thread from the US Government's Office of Budget and Management, stating that the US has more oil underground in just one place than all of the rest of the world's oil reserves combined. Yet the environmentalists have it all shut down and about $700 billion a year goes out of the US to buy oil. Much of that oil money supports people in the Middle East who hate all Westerners.

This is what extremists can do. They are so blinded by their "religion," that they don't see the damage they do by denying the rest of the people the resources they need.

Yes, dams store massive amounts of water and they generate electricity. Yes, that water must be released during the dry season both to generate electricity through the turbines, and to prepare to catch and control the excess water from the next rainy season. They are champs at providing irrigation and at controlling flooding, both when needed at two different times of the year.

If China is withholding water during the dry season and letting rivers dry up, it is typical of their need to be seen as powerful, and their lack of care. They do after all build filthy coal fired electricity plants with no regard for the atmosphere of the whole world.

I don't buy the extremist views of some of the quotes above. I have seen too many beautiful hydroelectric dams and the beautiful lakes behind them, and the fertile soil below them being irrigated after the water went through the turbines.

Lake Mead, Hoover Dam. Providing water for absolute desert. This is the same river that runs through the Grand Canyon.

Shasta Lake, Shasta Dam. Providing 360 miles of shoreline where once was only the Sacramento River. It irrigates much of central California's farmland.

List of dams in the Columbia River watershed.

The Bonneville Dam, Columbia River.

The Dalles Dam, Columbia River. Powering Google's newest server farm, in the middle of a desert.

"Massive datacenters have been built along the Columbia River as well as in central Oregon and central Washington including Amazon near Boardman, Google in The Dallas, as well as Yahoo in Quincy and MSN in Wenatchee (in central Washington)." Link

This is all Columbia River power.

Yes, the Boyz in Beijing can and should learn from other countries about intelligently and wisely damming rivers. The U.S. for example has dammed several rivers in its western regions to irrigate arid land to make deserts highly fertile and arable. The Columbia River in Washington State, with 450 dams, is the most dammed river of the world and is the least complained about. The river is shared without difficulty with Canada. The Boyz in Beijing, however, are invenerate engineers who believe all rivers are to be dammed along with the people along the rivers, the environment, and the countries downstream in India and in mainland SE Asia who rely on the rivers.

Check out this link to read how the CCP in Beijing is establishing a "strategic grip" on international river flows throughout southern Asia to include the Indo-China peninsula, i.e., right here. http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/china-s-threat-to-regional-water-cooperation-by-brahma-chellaney

As we see by reading the article at the link above, the Boyz in Beijing have become "Asia's Dammed Water Hegemon." This really isn't about the pros and cons of building dams. It's about Beijing controlling international river flows that originate in Tibet and in China's westernmost Xinjang Region, flowing into India and mainland Southeast Asia.

[Publicus]

The demand for electricity in China is growing by leaps and bounds. Their choices are coal, nuclear or hydro. If I was the leader of China I would be building more dams too.

Dams have their downsides, but they are the least of several evils.

The Boyz in Beijing are doubling their number of nuclear power plants, with 24 currently under contsruction. I'll bet Beijing isn't missing a single earthquake fault line in the process either.

[maidu]

Dam the rivers and damn the indigenous people and damn the environmentalists and natural habitat.

As for China and Nuclear: with several dozen to 100 nuke plants, things are bound to go wrong. Japan and Korea and Taiwan are closely downwind, and they won't be happy about radioactive clouds blowing their way.

Chinese are not renown for technical prowess nor can they be trusted to report calamities when they happen.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted. The thread isn't about the US or Russia.

[Potosi]

Dams, like a lot of things, have a life expectancy. Eventually, they fill with silt.

Big problem, also for agriculture downstream that doesn't get free fertilizer anymore. Solved on the Three Gorges Dam though, most of the silt can pass it. Didn't know that until an hour ago when I stumbled across this docu on youtube. Explains with the examples of the big Chinese dam and the previous record holders the technological progress, and how problems like the continuation of shipping on dammed rivers were solved. If you can't choose HD here, go and watch it on youtube in 1080p.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lwca1aka62w

[RickBradford]

Others, like me, prefer to have a planet where people communities dovetail with natural spaces. Re; Dams: There are more than enough now. Renewable alternatives (solar, wind, bio-fuels, thermal, tidal, etc.) which don't flood valleys and watersheds - are the way to go forward.

Oh, come on.

Are you really claiming that windfarms are an example of how "communities dovetail with natural spaces"?

Windfarms are the classic example of how not to create energy in the community; they are noisy, unsightly, disastrous for rare birdlife (and bats), and the electricity they provide is hugely expensive and unreliable. Putting them offshore simply makes them more expensive to build and run, and more prone to breakdown.

The examples of how wind energy is a disastrous feel-good Green folly are too numerous to mention.

The only people who like the windmills are guilt-ridden Greens who don't have to live near them, and landowners who hoover up vast subsidies to plant the things on their land.

"Environmental friendliness" is the selling point of these windmills; all the real-world evidence suggests that they are thoroughly bad for the environment as well as being useless for supplying reliable cost-effective electricity.

[Steely Dan]

Dams, like a lot of things, have a life expectancy. Eventually, they fill with silt.

Big problem, also for agriculture downstream that doesn't get free fertilizer anymore. Solved on the Three Gorges Dam though, most of the silt can pass it. Didn't know that until an hour ago when I stumbled across this docu on youtube. Explains with the examples of the big Chinese dam and the previous record holders the technological progress, and how problems like the continuation of shipping on dammed rivers were solved. If you can't choose HD here, go and watch it on youtube in 1080p.

I've been to Yunnan several times and the sheer scale of the three gorges dam has to be seen to be believed. Let's just hope the Chinese have got this one right, though the portents are not altogether encouraging with the mismanagement of the land under Mao resulting in more deaths than most intentional genocides. There is also the case of a newly built totally deserted city.

Having said all of this I have no ideological objection to dams, but I do hope that the people forcibly moved are adequately compensated.

Edited March 22, 2013 by Scott

[aussiebebe]

great find on that video Potosi - it's incredible that just one of the turbines in the Three Gorges generates the same amount of electricity as a small nuclear power station. Even more incredible that they were made in China. Whether 60,000 will lose their homes for this new dam or not, these projects have to happen - by 2030 it's predicted that China will produce as much trash every year as the entire world did in 1997. I'd just like to know more about how this will affect Thailand - does it mean less flooding and more droughts or more extreme weather?

[maidu]

Others, like me, prefer to have a planet where people communities dovetail with natural spaces. Re; Dams: There are more than enough now. Renewable alternatives (solar, wind, bio-fuels, thermal, tidal, etc.) which don't flood valleys and watersheds - are the way to go forward.

Oh, come on.

Are you really claiming that windfarms are an example of how "communities dovetail with natural spaces"?

Windfarms are the classic example of how not to create energy in the community; they are noisy, unsightly, disastrous for rare birdlife (and bats), and the electricity they provide is hugely expensive and unreliable. Putting them offshore simply makes them more expensive to build and run, and more prone to breakdown.

The examples of how wind energy is a disastrous feel-good Green folly are too numerous to mention.

The only people who like the windmills are guilt-ridden Greens who don't have to live near them, and landowners who hoover up vast subsidies to plant the things on their land.

"Environmental friendliness" is the selling point of these windmills; all the real-world evidence suggests that they are thoroughly bad for the environment as well as being useless for supplying reliable cost-effective electricity.

Nothing's perfect, neither is the world. You picked one alternative energy supply source (wind) that you don't like. Have you seen wind farms? I've seen some in the hills of California and they seem to be humming along fine. So even the worst (in your view) type of alternative power generation (from my list) is a far cry better than fossil fuels or nuclear - both of which cause grievous harm - directly and indirectly. Hydro is a renewable, and it's somewhere in between. It's like brownies or coffee - moderate amount of damming is generally ok, but it can readily be overdone. China is on a voracious appetite for damming at every possible place - the Mekong and Salween rivers will be changed - probably to the detriment (to people and habitat and animals and fish) downstream. Those major changes will impact Burma and Thailand in more ways than we can predict right now. Wars have been started for less.

great find on that video Potosi - it's incredible that just one of the turbines in the Three Gorges generates the same amount of electricity as a small nuclear power station. Even more incredible that they were made in China. Whether 60,000 will lose their homes for this new dam or not, these projects have to happen - by 2030 it's predicted that China will produce as much trash every year as the entire world did in 1997. I'd just like to know more about how this will affect Thailand - does it mean less flooding and more droughts or more extreme weather?

The 3 Gorges dam won't affect Thailand, but the multitude of Chinese dams on the 2 big rivers that flow along Thailand's borders (see my note above) will exacerbate floods and/or droughts for the five countries downstream. China is not a signatory to the Mekong River Coalition - because it doesn't want to be bound by any silly initiatives thought up by the little countries downstream. Yet it is the 900 pound panda doing whatever it wants. The other 5 countries are like gerbils - too afraid to speak up.

Incidentally, China uses more cement than all other countries in world combined.

It also contributes the lion's share of plastic trash to the Great Pacific Trash Vortex, but do you think China will do anything to lessen that pollution? ha ha ha. Even if they were aware of that (which they're not) They would laugh you out of the conference room, if you mentioned them lifting a finger to lessen their trash output.

Edited March 22, 2013 by maidu

[RickBradford]

Have you seen wind farms? I've seen some in the hills of California and they seem to be humming along fine.

Come on. The fact that you have seen windmills that are rotating doesn't mean they are a viable or even environmentally friendly energy source.

To be sure, there is no perfect energy source. All the options available to us have pros and cons. Tradeoffs are a normal part of life.

But the obsession with renewables threatens everyone's way of life, not just those people unfortunate enough to live near a dammable river.

Wind power is easily the worst; as for solar, things are so bad that even Chinese solar companies are going bust. (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/21/business/energy-environment/chinese-solar-companys-operating-unit-declares-bankruptcy.html?pagewanted=all). Once the subsidies are removed, the business plan collapses.

Tidal power? Oh, please. You could hardly dream up a less diffuse energy source if you tried (which is why so few plants have been built).

Biofuels? They are so environmentally destructive that even Greenpeace doesn't support them.

Thermal? Do you mean geothermal? Fine, where it's accessible (ie where the Earth's crust is thin, which tends to be in tectonically-challenged volcanic countries such as Iceland, Japan, New Zealand.)

But for cheap, reliable, abundant energy, which keeps the developed world in the affluent state whereby we can afford to subsidise the do-gooding NGOs and other professional worry-warts, you can't beat fossil fuels (assuming everybody continues to run scared of nuclear, which has been powering France for 40 years with few problems).

[Potosi]

Actually, dam failures and overtoppings have probably caused more fatalities than all nuclear accidents, Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. It's serious stuff. A landslide into a reservoir created a 200 metres tall wave in 1963 in Italy, that thing rolling down the valley makes the boxing day tsunami positively fun in comparison. 2,000 victims in this incident. Nuclear has become so expensive that it isn't a viable alternative anymore, though. $10 billion+ for a 1,000MW reactor, that's ridiculous. Germany has been dismantling the old Soviet style reactor on the Baltic shore of former East Germany since 1990, costs so far Euro 5 billion.