Dams of destruction threaten Mekong

Click on the link to get more news and video from original source:  http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/269392/dams-of-destruction-threaten-mekong

• Published: 6/12/2011 at 12:00 AM
• Newspaper section: News

This week a decision will be made in Siem Reap, Cambodia, that could shape the future of the mighty Mekong River and fundamentally alter the lives of 60 million people.

The Mekong River at the site of the planned Xayaburi hydropower project in Laos. Experts say the dam will wreak havoc on the ecology of the entire Lower Mekong region.

The governments of Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam will meet tomorrow and Thursday near the ancient temple of Angkor Wat, to discuss the controversial Xayaburi Dam in Laos, which threatens to become the first dam on the Lower Mekong River. Under a 1995 treaty, the four governments must reach a consensus before any project can be built on the Lower Mekong.

If Xayaburi is approved, it could open the floodgates for 10 more dams to be built on the river. If all the projects are built, an estimated 55% of the Lower Mekong would be turned into a stagnant reservoir. The world’s largest inland fishery would be decimated by giant walls that prevent millions of fish from migrating to their breeding grounds. Farmers would lose access to the nutrients that the river carries down from its upper reaches, and millions of people would lose access to the fish that are an essential source of protein in their diets.

Politicians are scrambling to make sense of this dilemma. All major geopolitical decisions have complicated tradeoffs. But with the Xayaburi Dam, there is simply not enough information about what the region’s governments could be trading away.

Evidence so far points to the dam being a bad idea of historic proportions. Because the impact would be irreversible, numerous scientists have urged the governments to conduct more studies before making a decision.

In the past year, two authoritative scientific investigations urged caution and recommended further studies, but were quickly swept aside by politicians.

In 2010, a strategic environmental assessment was completed for the Mekong River Commission (MRC), the inter-governmental organisation that manages the shared river. The report concluded that the 11 proposed dams on the Mekong River would likely cause “serious and irreversible environmental damage” in all four countries, and recommended a 10-year deferment while further scientific studies were conducted.

The MRC, however, pushed this study aside. Instead of endorsing the report, its website explained that the assessment is “not an official MRC approved document”.

Economists are also questioning whether the Mekong dams will really bring about the growth that proponents claim.

In a 2011 study funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Portland State University questioned the assumptions that regional policymakers used to calculate the costs and benefits of the Mekong dams. The study concludes that the costs could significantly outweigh the benefits (with a net negative cost of US$274 billion in one scenario).

Many proponents of the Mekong dams, it seems, did not consider the massive economic benefits generated by the river’s fisheries and ecosystems.

Meanwhile, Laos has distributed a quasi-scientific study to woo the other governments into agreement. In May, Laos hired Swiss company Poyry Energy to determine whether the Xayaburi Dam complies with the governments’ agreed criteria for Mekong dams.

The Poyry report recommends that the dam should be built, despite identifying over 40 major scientific and technical studies that still need to be completed.

The report falsely claims that any negative impact from the dam can be fixed after construction begins _ an approach that is out of step with all respected international practice.

This puts politicians in an awkward position. The legitimate concerns of the strategic environmental assessment and the USAID-funded study have been buried.

Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam (along with donor governments) instead find themselves forced to spend time reviewing the Poyry report that has already been widely dismissed as greenwash.

Vietnam and Cambodia have raised concerns about the Xayaburi Dam’s trans-boundary impact. While Thailand has also expressed concern with the project, it is negotiating a deal to purchase 95% of the electricity generated. No consensus has been reached.

Laos has capitalised on all of this indecisiveness, constructing roads and work camps in the remote area where it wants to build the Xayaburi Dam, and announcing plans to begin blocking the river by the end of the year.

The official Xayaburi website boldly claims that Laos has a right to move forward with the project, and that the project would not have any negative environmental impact.

The Siem Reap meeting this week is not only a test for the Xayaburi Dam, but a test for regional cooperation around the shared Mekong River.

The right thing for governments to do is to take a precautionary approach and cancel the dam _ or at least commit to a 10-year postponement on construction of dams along the Lower Mekong region, so that further scientific studies can be conducted.

In either case, Laos will need to stop construction on the Xayaburi Dam and cooperate in good faith.

Thailand will need to cancel plans to purchase electricity from the dam.

Donors, such as the United States, European and Australian governments, could offer to fund the necessary scientific studies, support a revision of the regional decision-making process, and urge Laos to explore more reasonable development alternatives to Mekong dams.

This will take some uncomfortable conversations with Laos and Thailand. The next few days will see some awkward diplomatic moments, but the time has come for governments to take a bold stance against the reckless damming of the Mekong River.

---

About the author

Writer: Kirk Herbertson

Kirk Herbertson works with International Rivers, a US-based non-profit organisation that protects rivers and the rights of people who depend on them.

Guilty as the Getaway Driver? Thailand and the Xayaburi Dam

 

Click on the link to get more news and video from original source:  http://www.internationalrivers.org/en/blog/kirk-herbertson/2011-12-5/guilty-getaway-driver-thailand%E2%80%99s-role-xayaburi-dam

 

Mon, 12/05/2011 – 12:40am

By:

Kirk Herbertson

On December 7-8th, the governments of Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam will meet and are likely to decide if the controversial Xayaburi Dam will go forward. The dam would be located in Laos, but would cause significant harm in Cambodia and Vietnam – so who takes the blame? The dam would drastically reduce the number of fish that are able to migrate upstream to their breeding grounds, depriving people in the region of an essential source of food and jobs. It would also prevent nutrients from traveling downstream to farmers who grow rice and other crops in Cambodia and the Mekong River Delta.

Thailand’s fingerprints are all over the dam

Laos is intent on building the dam, the first of nine it envisions for the Mekong River. But Thailand is also a major accomplice in the Xayaburi Dam controversy. Not only does Thailand plan to purchase 95% of the dam’s electricity, but Thai companies are building the dam and four Thai banks will finance the project. Without Thailand’s help, the Xayaburi Dam would not exist.

When a bank robbery is committed, everyone who planned the heist can be held responsible. The judge will not only punish the person who held the gun, but also the getaway driver and anyone else who played a role. This is an important analogy going into this week’s meeting.

Thailand is busy designing the dam, building the dam, paying for it, and deciding how to use its electricity. This is the equivalent of planning the bank robbery, putting together the gang, buying the guns, driving the getaway car, and keeping most of the loot.

Who takes the blame?

As reported in the Bangkok Post on December 1st, however, Thailand’s Minister of Natural Resources and Environment announced that “Laos has the right to construct the dam as it is located inside Lao territory. We will not oppose the project. But if there are any environmental impacts, the Lao government must take responsibility.”

Thailand is deflecting responsibility for the impacts of the dam, even though it will reap many of the benefits. This position is not at all consistent with international law. The Mekong River Basin is a shared resource among the four countries, and the Xayaburi Dam’s harmful impacts will cross borders into Cambodia and Vietnam. Although the dam would be located in Laos, the decision lies well within Thailand’s control. Thailand could still be “guilty” if the Xayaburi Dam proceeds.

Law applies to governments, too

Two recent analyses by U.S. law firm Perkins Coie explain the legal obligations of the Mekong governments under international environmental law and the 1995 Mekong Agreement. All four governments have the following obligations, among others, going into the December 7-8th meeting:

• The 1995 Mekong Agreement commits all four governments to cooperate on use of the river basin in a mutually beneficial way. This also prohibits the countries from using the Mekong River in a way that would harm other countries.
• The International Court of Justice recognizes that under international law, governments have a duty to prevent transboundary harm and to conduct a transboundary environmental impact assessment if the project could significantly impact a shared resource. So far, no transboundary impact assessment has been conducted.
• The Convention on Biological Diversity obligates the governments to protect the biodiversity and endangered species of the Mekong, which would be seriously threatened by the dam. Dozens of migratory fish species are at risk.
• If the dam goes forward, and Cambodia and Vietnam want to seek compensation for harm caused, they have a strong case against both Laos and Thailand.

The stakes are high for the coming week. Ideally, the four governments will think about the future of the Mekong River Basin and will fulfill their obligations under international law. The right decision is to recognize that a healthy Mekong River could benefit all of the region’s citizens for generations to come.

• Kirk Herbertson’s blog

Southeast Asia Set to Square Off Again on Xayaburi

Click on the link to get more news and video from original source:  http://blogs.wsj.com/searealtime/2011/12/05/southeast-asia-set-to-square-off-again-on-xayaburi/?mod=google_news_blog

By James Hookway

Laos’s plans to establish itself as the hydroelectric powerhouse of Southeast Asia will likely face a fierce challenge this week from neighboring  Vietnam and Cambodia which worry that the proposed $3.5 billion Xayaburi dam will devastate fish stocks and disrupt crucial sediment flows to the rice-growing Mekong river delta.

Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos are due to meet in Siem Reap, Cambodia, Thursday to decide whether Laos can proceed with the massive project. If the green light is given at the ministerial-level gathering of the Mekong River Commission, then it could kick-start the development of a series of other dams and, environmentalist groups warn, prioritize industrial power needs over ensuring food supplies and the rights of river-side communities in affected areas.

While no single country can veto another’s plans, Laos is the smallest nation in the Mekong region and may be wary of pushing through with the Xayaburi project if its more powerful neighbors object.

Vietnam in particular is concerned about the impact of dam-building on food security and has urged a 10-year moratorium on the construction of new dams on the river until their consequences are better understood. Already, nutrient-rich sediment flows to the delta are slowing because of the construction of other dams further upstream in China. One consequence is that salt water is now encroaching further up Mekong river than before, threatening to damage large areas of prime rice-growing land.

Cambodia, too, has expressed its concern about how dams could divert migrating fish, and after the four countries met in April – and where Laos agreed to suspend the project temporarily – delegates will meet again to discuss the Xayaburi project’s fate.

Laos’s leaders, though, are holding on to idea of turning itself into the hydropower battery for the region in order to drag the isolated, Communist-run out of poverty.

Laotian officials couldn’t immediately be reached for comment, but have previously insisted that the Xayaburi project wouldn’t have any significant impact further down the Mekong river.

Tellingly, perhaps, Thailand, the sole buyer of the power generated by proposed dam, is keeping out of the debate. Thai firm Ch. Karnchang PCL is the main developer and Thai banks are also providing financing.

Thailand’s energy minister, Preecha Rengsomboonsuk told reporters last week that the dam is Laos’s internal affair and Thailand won’t intervene. Laos, he said, will have to take care of the environmental impact by itself.