Tag Archives: MRC

Transboundary EIA in Lower Mekong basin almost impossible, experts warn

Posted on by
Reply

Supalak Ganjanakhundee for The Nation

Experts warned yesterday that it was really an uphill task to conduct a transboundary Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) in the Lower Mekong basin to address the consequences of a project in one country that might affect another.

Most development projects in the Lower Mekong basin countries – Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam – have transboundary implications and a significant impact on the environment. Hydropower projects might generate more energy for one country, but they could have a negative impact such as a massive reduction in fish stocks or a deterioration in the environment in another country, Mekong River Commission (MRC)’s environmental governance specialist Nguyen Van Duyen said.

MRC members have their own environment impact assessment laws, but these regulations do not require that transboundary impacts also be addressed, he explained.

Besides, transboundary environmental impact assessments could ignite conflicts among members. For instance, Laos is currently caught in a dispute with Cambodia and Vietnam over the Xayaburi dam, which will be constructed in mainstream Mekong. The two downstream countries want the hydropower project to be halted. Though the MRC facilitated a process to establish a framework for conducting transboundary EIA in 2004, little progress has been made on the issue since then, Duyen told an international conference on transboundary river management in Phuket yesterday.

According to the framework, projects requiring transboundary EIA include hydropower, irrigation, port and river works, industrial and mining projects, aquaculture, navigation and water supply projects, Duyen said.

He added that transboundary EIA should focus on public participation and be accessible to those who might be potentially affected. If a transboundary EIA for Lower Mekong basin is conducted, then it could supplement MRC procedures for notification, prior consultation and agreement, he said. However, he said, little progress had been made in establishing a framework because each country’s laws and regulations on EIA are different, he said.

Some members have proposed that the transboundary EIA framework for the Lower Mekong basin should be a non-binding technical guideline for development projects in member countries. Timo Koivurova, research professor of the Northern Institute for Environment and Minority Law at University of Lapland, suggested that countries in the Mekong basin sign the 1991 Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, which is widely known as Espoo.

Though the Espoo is a regional convention meant mostly for Europe, it has contributed to the development of transboundary EIA practice globally, he said. More than 30 countries have signed in the Espoo convention since it was implemented in 1997. The International Court of Justice cited that the transboundary EIA is part of the general international law, to which all members of the UN are obliged to commit, he said.

Koivurova used the Baltic Sea Gas Pipeline project as an example for transboundary EIA procedure to be applied to the affected states. More than 300 executives, officials and experts from Mekong countries and other 14 river basins from across the world gathered in Phuket to discuss transboundary river management. One of the topics on the agenda was achieving a balance in development in order to maintain water, food and energy security. The conference, ending with an MRC ministerial meeting today, aims to take a message to the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro next month.

Source

Visit The Nation

As Mekong Leaders Gather, Public Awaits Answers on Xayaburi Dam

Posted on by
Reply

Save The Mekong 1 May 2012

Phuket, Thailand –As the Mekong River Commission (MRC) member countries gather today for the MRC’s Mekong 2 Rio International Conference on Transboundary River Basin Management, the Save the Mekong coalition has called upon regional governments to immediately address the ambiguities that have been left unanswered with respect to the future of the Xayaburi Dam and other mainstream dams.

On April 20th, the Save the Mekong coalition sent letters to the MRC’s respective Council members and CEO Mr. Hans Guttman asking for clarification on whether the prior consultation process for the Xayaburi Dam remains open and whether approval has been granted to build the Xayaburi Dam. These concerns follow the April 17th announcement by Xayaburi Dam developer Ch. Karnchang that it had signed a $711 million construction contract with the Xayaburi Power Company, and that construction on the dam commenced on March 15, 2012.

“Ch. Karnchang has no right to build this project because no regional agreement has been made,” said Niwat Roykaew, Chair of the Chiang Khong Conservation Group in Thailand. “In December, the four governments agreed to postpone the decision on the dam, in order to carry out a transboundary impact assessment of the Mekong mainstream dams. Thailand and Laos must act decisively and demand a stop to all construction activities.”

The Save the Mekong coalition also expressed concern over reports that the Thai government had signed the Xayaburi Dam’s power purchase agreement and granted permission for state-owned Krung Thai Bank to fund this dam, which appears to be in direct violation with the 1995 Mekong Agreement. The coalition urged Thailand to immediately withdraw all involvement in the dam.

“The MRC’s prior consultation process is not finished, and yet construction is starting. Thailand and Laos are endangering the entire future of the Mekong River Basin,” said Pianporn Deetes, Thailand Campaign Coordinator for International Rivers. “Before regional cooperation becomes jeopardized, it’s time the four countries renew their commitment to work together to protect the Mekong.”

“The Xayaburi Dam is not on the agenda of the Mekong2Rio conference, but will be the elephant in the room,” said Youra Sun, Executive Director of My Village in Cambodia. “Now is the time to spotlight the urgent need for the Mekong governments to chart a clear political path forward on the Xayaburi Dam.”

Tu Dao Trong, a representative of Vietnam Rivers Network said, “If the Mekong governments really want to discuss the future of transboundary cooperation around the Mekong River, they first need to agree on an immediate halt to the Xayaburi Dam while further studies are underway. We hope this conference becomes an opportunity for real dialogue.”

The Save the Mekong coalition’s April 20th letter stated that “scientific evidence to date overwhelmingly supports our position that these dams will cause significant and irreparable damage to the Mekong River and the people who depend on it.” The coalition has called upon regional governments to work together to protect the Mekong River as the river is central to the lives, ecology, and cultures of the region.

The Save the Mekong coalition fully supports the actions of Thai villagers from the Mekong region, who have traveled to Phuket and will be presenting a petition to the MRC member governments this morning to raise awareness about the Xayaburi Dam and call for its cancellation.

Mekong 2 Rio is considered a key regional event in the run-up to the United Nations’ Rio+20 Summit on Sustainable Development that world leaders will attend in Brazil in June. The Xayaburi Dam has become one of the most controversial sustainable development issues in Southeast Asia.

Contacts:
Dr. Tu Dao Trong, Representative of Vietnam Rivers Network. T: +84 913 236 542, E: [email protected]
Ms. Pianporn Deetes, Thailand Campaign Coordinator, International Rivers. T: +66 81 422 0111, E: [email protected]
Mr. Niwat Roykaew, Chair of the Chiang Khong Conservation Group in Thailand. T: +66 89 955 7890, E: [email protected]
Mr. Sun Youra, Executive Director, My Village, Cambodia, T: +855 16 590 111, E: [email protected]

Portland State University researchers expose environmental costs of building Mekong River dams

Posted on by
Reply

Scott Learn for The Oregonian

When Robert Costanza and colleagues traveled to Laos earlier this year, the decision to build the lower Mekong River’s first mainstream dam seemed close to done.

Then the researchers, most from the Northwest, pointed out the poor history of predicting environmental and social damage from big hydropower dams. Their study (check out interesting comments here-MouthtoSource) also put new dollar signs on the potential cost to the environment and traditional fisheries — figuring the net economic impact of a string of electricity-producing dams could range from a gain of $33 billion to a loss of $274 billion.

“There’s a pretty high probability that things are not going to go the way they had planned, given the history of dam projects worldwide and in the Pacific Northwest,” says Costanza, the study’s lead author and a sustainability professor at Portland State University. “All the evidence pointed toward their assumptions being highly optimistic.”

Last week, the Mekong River Commission recommended Laos postpone dam building, citing the need for further study of the “sustainable development and management of the Mekong River.”

Costanza’s study highlights the biological importance of the Mekong, painfully familiar to Americans during the Vietnam War. It also shows how PSU is brokering its sustainability reputation worldwide, with contributions from Costanza and other researchers at its Institute for Sustainable Solutions.

Costanza, 61, got the shoulder tap for the study late last year from U.S. Agency for International Development. After years of discussion, the foreign aid agency wanted a new look at costs and benefits of Mekong dams, which would affect Laos, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam.

Costanza, who arrived at PSU last fall, was a logical choice. In 1997, he helped advance the notion of valuing the world’s environmental capital when he co-authored a study published in the journal Nature that pegged the value of global “ecosystem services” at $33 trillion a year, more than the world’s gross domestic product at the time.

In general, Costanza says, economists have downplayed the importance of maintaining the environment — say a wetland that helps with flood control, or a free-flowing river that supports indigenous fisheries and delivers nutrient-laden sediment to rice fields.
`
“If you’re not making the environmental costs explicit, you could make the wrong decisions,” he says. “You don’t understand what you’re trading off.”

The Xayaburi dam, the first of up to 11 proposed for the lower Mekong, would be built in Laos, with power going primarily to Thailand.

The researchers traveled to Thailand and to Vientiane, Laos, last February, returning to Thailand in March and June. In Vientiane, they saw fishermen casting nets, people picking rice in fields fed by side channels, children crossing the river, low at the time, to get to sandbars for pickup soccer games. Fish make up about 70 percent of the protein intake in the region.

“It was pretty amazing,” says Ida Kubiszewski, an assistant professor at Portland State. “From young to old, life revolves around the river.”

Hydropower dams would provide badly needed revenue to Laos. The initial dam would have about the same electric-generating capacity as Bonneville Dam, the first of 14 federal dams in the Columbia and Snake river system.

China has built dams on the upper Mekong, and leaders in Laos consider dam building “an opportunity to become a power generation hub,” says Shpresa Halimi,a member of the study team and an assistant professor at PSU. “They’re also looking at it as a way to combat chronic poverty.”

Even with more realistic estimates of environmental and social costs, Laos would still come out ahead, the study concluded. But Thailand, Vietnam and Cambodia could all lose, with foregone fisheries and altered wetlands a big part of the tab.

Proponents say passage facilities at the dams to help migratory fish — including the endangered giant catfish — can minimize damage, and aquaculture can compensate for lost fisheries.

That had a familiar ring to Peter Paquet, wildlife and resident fish manager for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. Paquet, who was among the study group, has seen hundreds of millions devoted to correct problems with fish passage at Columbia dams. Performance of the Columbia’s aquaculture system, otherwise known as hatcheries, has also fallen short of predictions.

“You can’t go into a place like that and say, ‘Don’t do this,’ because they can turn around and rightly say, ‘Look what you’ve done,’” Paquet says. “We were trying to say, don’t make the mistakes that we’ve made, because fixing these things after the fact is hugely expensive.”

The Mekong hosts some 1,200 fish species, far more than the Columbia, Paquet says. Many are migratory, and none can jump up fish ladders at dams the way salmon and steelhead can.

Laos could still build the dam — the river commission’s opinions are just advisory. Costanza said he hopes the country’s leaders agree to delay the decision and study other carbon-free power, such as wind and solar.

Dam developers could be required to post bonds to cover a worst-case scenario, an incentive to keep environmental effects low. Or other countries in the region and international groups could pay Laos for foregoing the benefits of dam construction.

Costanza says the poor, particularly in fishing villages, could bear the brunt of unexpected damage.

“There’s always uncertainty,” he says. “The real question is who bears the burden. The way it’s setting up now, it’s the public that will pay.”

Source

Visit OregonLive

Food security key issue in mekong dam debate

Posted on by
Reply

Not only is the waterway home to millions of people, but the freshwater fish it supplies is a major food source for the people of four different countries

Op-Ed for the Bangkok Post

The ministerial meeting to decide the fate of the controversial Xayaburi hydropower dam in Laos ended last week without a clear decision on whether member states of the Mekong River Commission (MRC) would oppose the project.

This could open the way for the Lao government and the Thai construction company Ch Karnchang to continue work on the dam without facing the criticism that it has breached the 1995 Mekong Agreement which requires consensus from its member states: Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos.

The ministers, after a three-day meeting in Siem Reap, Cambodia, concluded that further study on sustainable development for the Mekong and the likely impact of dam development was needed. They said they would approach Japan to help with the task.

It sounds like a wise decision, and was praised by several experts at the Mekong Forum, which was being held in Phnom Penh at the same time. Nearly 200 experts had gathered to come up with recommendations on how best to balance development and conservation to ensure sustainable development for the region.

But the MRC’s decision raises questions about how seriously Mekong River countries are taking steps to ensure that development will be in harmony with the millions of people who earn their livelihoods – mainly from fishing.

For years, experts have studied the health of the Mekong ecosystem and discovered that it has played a significant role in the richness of biodiversity of river species. However, unlike the Amazon, which is the world’s most biologically diverse river, the areas around the Mekong are densely populated.

Dr Eric Baran is a senior scientist of the WorldFish Centre, which helped conduct the project’s environmental impact assessment and developed the MRC’s environmental assessment for hydropower development on the Mekong. He says that food security is the most critical issue.

”The combination of a high proportion of migratory fish and high dependency of people on river fish is unique, making the Mekong a place where dam development is most critical to regional food security,” he said. ”So it is not just about environmental conservation and displaced villages. The issue is much bigger than that. The trade-off between hydropower development and regional food security in the Mekong is probably unique in the world.”

Dr Baran, along with other scientists from the centre, has been studying fish in the Mekong for years. They have discovered that the Mekong has 781 fish species, second after the Amazon, which has 1,217. Dr Baran believes that the Mekong has more species, as 28 new one have been discovered, on average, each year during the past decade. Mekong fishermen catch about 2.1 million tonnes of fish each year, around one sixth of the world’s freshwater catch.

Communities in Lao’s mountainous areas, Thailand’s Northeast, Vietnam’s south and all of Cambodia depend the most on fishing for their livelihoods.

In Cambodia, studies have found that freshwater fish account for 90% of the country’s total fish supply, and 81% of its protein supply.

According to Dr Baran’s studies, more than one third of the 2.1 million tonnes harvested each year are migratory fish that need to travel to feed and breed. Dams will block that migration.

One scenario in the MRC’s environmental assessment shows that if all 88 dams are built, by 2030 up to 81% of the Mekong Basin will not be accessible to migratory fish. But scientists also agree that the dam projects can possibly coexist with other activities essential to people’s livelihoods.

To lessen the impact, one of their suggestions is to build the dams on the river’s tributaries instead. Also as the river tends to be more biologically diverse downstream, it would be preferable to build the dams upstream.

Dam planners also need to be more adaptable.

While dam developers tend to build dams for optimum use, Dr Baran says they need to strike a compromise in their designs to ensure that the river’s other possible uses are not impeded.

The height of dams should not exceed 30m to allow the construction of effective fish passes. According to his team’s study, the Xayaburi dam would block migration of at least 70 fish species.

He also suggested constructing dams on man-made canals rather than natural waterways to lessen the impact of these projects, a practice which has become common in Europe, especially France.

Dr Baran said that dams should be planned as multi-purpose structures and prior to them being built, a thorough assessment should be made of the trade-offs between power generation and environmental and social costs.

Due to the potential losses of food security and millions of people’s livelihoods, the Mekong countries made a wise decision last week to take a further look at sustainable development in the region.

It would also be wise for the dam developers and the Lao government to take a stand by stopping construction and conducting further studies of their own to ensure the project is in harmony with people’s lives.

Source

Visit the Bangkok Post

Mekong dam reprieve

Posted on by
Reply

Milton Osbourne for The Lowy Interpreter

At a meeting of the Council of the Mekong River Commission (MRC) in Siem Reap, Cambodia, yesterday the issue of whether or not Laos should be able to go ahead with its plan to build a major dam on the Mekong at Xayaburi was fudged, with the council members concluding that ‘there is a need for further study on the sustainable development and management of the Mekong River including impact from mainstream hydropower development projects’.

In effect, this means construction of the Xayaburi dam has been postponed for the moment.

The anodyne official statement glosses over the sharp divisions that have emerged and continue among the four member states of the MRC (Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam) on the proposed Xayaburi dam.

It is the first of many dams proposed for the Mekong after it flows out of China. With much preliminary work already completed, it is poised for construction work to begin across the river.

As planned, Xayaburi is no minor, ‘run-of-the-river’ dam. If built it would stretch 830m across the Mekong and rise to a height of 40m. Its reservoir would stretch back 60km (see my earlier post on the dam and the more detailed Lowy Paper, The Mekong: River Under Threat).

According to environmentalists, civil society groups and, most importantly, the governments of Cambodia and Vietnam, the Xayaburi dam is a ‘game changer’. Thailand has taken a hands-off position, not opposing the dam but saying it would hold Laos responsible if the dam caused problems in the future.

The concern has been, and will remain, that if Laos does ahead with Xayaburi it will only be a matter of time before other dams are built on the Mekong in Laos and Cambodia. The attraction of building dams that would generate hydroelectricity that could be sold for foreign exchange would be hard to resist. And if one is built, why not others?

There is almost universal agreement that if the Xayaburi dam is built it would serious negative effects on fish stocks, by blocking fish migration and by distorting the flow of water and sediment down the river, to the detriment of Cambodia and Vietnam. Yet Laos has seemed prepared to ignore the concerns of the critics, including its MRC partners. Most surprisingly of all, Laos seemed ready to incur the wrath of Vietnam, its long-term ally.

Whether this reflects the role China now plays as a supporter and donor is at the very least an open question. Just how long this Perils of Pauline-type saga will continue is impossible to predict, but what is clear is that, when it comes to dams on the Mekong, it is hard to make any judgments that do not take into account national self-interest.

Source

Visit The Lowy Interpreter

A Thai Perspective On Proposed Mainstream Mekong Dams

Posted on by
1

Teerapong Pomun, Director at Living River Siam via Stimson

The Mekong River is very important for millions of local communities along the mainstream and its tributaries who depend heavily on the river’s natural ecosystem functions. The health of the river is the health of the communities. Changes in the river basin mean a lot to those marginalized people who too often have no voice and have limited alternatives for sustaining their livelihoods.

The villages along the Mekong mainly depend on fishing and agriculture that require irrigation water from the river. Dam construction in China has already caused impacts to the river ecosystems and subsequently downstream communities. Water-level fluctuation has been the most destructive impact from unannounced releases at upstream dams in China. Most of the Mekong’s fish species are migratory and their migration instincts depend on the natural flow of the river and the health of ecosystems. Some of the fish that are vulnerable to these changes are endangered species such as Mekong Giant Catfish.

Local fishermen depend heavily on migratory fish species. They have learned for generations how to successfully fish each migration for a given season, and how to manage the resulting food and income literally harvested from the river each season. Although the fish population decline already witnessed in parts of the Mekong is the result of many factors, dam construction is the most serious. Already, many restaurants in a province along the Mekong in Thailand are forced to import fish from the Tonle Sap Great Lake of Cambodia.

Riverbank gardens are another important source of food and income generation for locals. In the dry season, when the water level is low and villagers are not growing rice, gardens along the riverbank serve as their main resource. Upstream hydropower operations result in unpredictable water levels, which locals have never experienced before, and result in damage or loss to their crops and investment. Consequently, these conditions cause more negative impacts beyond just food and economic insecurity, including social and cultural problems.

Local Responses and Empowerment

In response to these developments, communities along the Mekong River have established the “Network of Thai People in Eight Mekong Provinces” because of their concern for the impacts they’ve already experienced from dams in China and those anticipated to result from the construction of additional dams in the lower basin. The problems they are already experiencing make locals realize that the dams planned for the river in Lao and Cambodia will be even more devastating.

One of their main strategies has focused on conducting local-level Thai Baan (villager) research to develop scientific evidence for use in their fight with those in support of more dam development. For example, this data could be used to sue the government and related authorities if the proposed Xayaburi dam is allowed to proceed. The research and data will also serve as an important tool for mobilizing, uniting, and empowering local communities in many other ways. Recently the “Network” organized a protest in Bangkok and engaged in other activities to campaign against the planned dams, including the creation and installation of big posters stating their opposition to the planned projects along the Thai-Lao border in all eight provinces.

Of course, another important avenue has been the Thai media who have increasingly covered Mekong hydropower development issues. This coverage reflects the concern of Thai people for protecting their natural resources. Although these concerns are not uniformly widespread throughout the whole country, the people in the eight provinces and those involved in environmental and social movements are intensely aware. In some cases, domestic dam construction is still a controversial issue and can cause conflict among Thais between supporters and those who oppose additional domestic hydropower development. As for the Mekong mainstream dams, it seems no one supports them.

The issue of the dams played a small role in the national elections this past July. People in the eight provinces of Northern and Northeastern Thailand form the core supporters of the Pheu Thai Party. During the election, the “Network” organized a forum aimed at sending a message to the politicians. The new Yingluck Administration has not yet made any statements on the proposed Mekong dams. However, the “Network” plans to send a message to the new government and their representatives stating their concerns and interests. Local people in the eight provinces believe that the new government should want to listen to their concerns because they won the election largely with the help and support of people in these areas.

The first strategy of Living River Siam is to strengthen civil society enough to participate meaningfully in water management. The second strategy is focused on the politics of knowledge. This means using information and knowledge as a tool for the local communities to engage on policy decisions. Living River Siam organizes trips to meet with local communities in the eight provinces to give them information, collect data, and listen to their concern. We work with them to set up the network and support local activities. We also spread their voices by organizing conference, produce publications, organizing a field trip for media and decision makers to visit the local communities, working with the media, cooperating with international organizations, and working with governmental sub-committees on the issue. One of our main activities is working with the communities along the river to collect data and conduct Thai Baan (villager) Research, research done by villagers based on local knowledge. We also use the research model as a tool for building a Mekong civil society network. The first goal is to elevate the voices of locals and ensure that their rights are recognized in water resource management. The second goal is to protect and maintain river ecosystems that are healthy enough to sustain local livelihoods.

Multilateralism and Institutional Improvements

The Mekong River Commission (MRC) should do more to work with civil society partners. This should include producing and providing information and knowledge for civil society organizations which could be used to support their outreach and engagement activities. Conversely, local communities, NGOs, and other civil society organizations can help the MRC conduct necessary research. This sort of relationship would also help to level the current power imbalance that exists among many of the main actors. An important new mechanism that should be established is a Mekong Community Fund. Such a fund will provide a path for communication while also supporting local participation in the various activities of the MRC. Ideally, the MRC office in each member country should establish an appropriate mechanism that allows for people’s participation in research, education, and engagement.

Furthermore, the creation of a People’s Commission of the Mekong River or Mekong Community Network set up by local communities, NGOs, and academics that have been working or directly experiencing these issues would be an important linkage between the MRC and citizens of member countries. It can either be an independent organization or established as a department of the MRC. The first step would be to organize a meeting for representatives of local communities. Past activities of the MRC have not served as a genuine forum for Mekong communities. In 2012, Living River Siam plans to organize an international meeting of Thai Baan Research network in the Mekong Basin. As we know that each Mekong country has different political and social system and are in different stages of development, this research model can provide a strategy for the Commission or Network as it is not necessarily a politic tool aimed at dam supporters or government.

Such an organization would also be a great target for support from the donor countries that traditionally fund the MRC. Their contributions to this new People’s Commission of the Mekong River would support the further development of an active, engaged, and responsible civil society in the Mekong Basin, while also developing new educational tools and providing a clear mechanism for the two-way transfer of knowledge.

Source

Visit Stimson

For More Information on Living River Siam, visit their website in English or Thai

Stimson Backgrounder: Founded in 1989, the Henry L. Stimson Center is a nonprofit, nonpartisan institution devoted to enhancing international peace and security through a unique combination of rigorous analysis and outreach. The Centerʼs approach is pragmatic — geared toward providing policy alternatives, solving problems, and overcoming obstacles to a more peaceful and secure world.

No stopping flow of construction at ‘suspended’ dam

Posted on by
Reply

Special Report from The Bangkok Post Sunday

Five months after Mekong countries agreed to reconsider the controversial US$3.8 billion (115.25 billion baht) Xayaburi dam project, construction work around the site has continued despite Laos’ undertaking to suspend the work.

Bangkok Post Sunday revisited the site and found construction of a major road leading to the dam site is 90% finished. Senior engineers, who asked to remain anonymous, said the road construction was nearly done.

The road is planned to run 30km from Ban Nara village, which is about 17km from Tha Dua pier, where access to Xayaburi province can be gained. The first 10km mountain section from Ban Nara village involves road upgrading. Heavy machinery, including backhoes, are working on the second section clearing earth and paving roads to the planned dam site.

Both sections of the road have been widened to four lanes to allow heavy construction vehicles to pass. The earth has been compacted and is waiting to be surfaced. Only one kilometre of road to the dam site needs to be completed, plus a section to Ban Houay Souy village.

But Viraphonh Viravong, the director-general of the Laos Electricity Department, defended the early work, saying that claims construction had begun were ”not totally correct”.

He said when the site was being surveyed, authorities of Xayaburi and Laung Prabang provinces asked the developers if they could link the ”temporary construction” of the road to the site.

”Of course, if the project starts, the road will be used,” said Mr Viraphonh. ”But if not, all the benefits will go to the local authorities, as they will have access roads for a lot of villages.

”As the Lao government has stated at many international conferences and meetings, we will start the project until we reach a happy conclusion with other riparian countries.”

The Mekong River Commission – comprising Laos, Thailand, Vietnam and Cambodia – asked Laos to suspend work on the Xayaburi dam after concerns were raised about potential harm to rice production and fishing communities along the river.

Laos subsequently commissioned a report by Switzerland-based firm Poyry which recommended the dam project – which stands to generate 1,280 megawatts of electricity – could go ahead.

The dam is being jointly constructed by the Laos government and Thai construction firm Ch Karnchang with 95% of the electricity generated to be sold back to the Kingdom through the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand.

Mr Viraphonh said the Lao government is waiting for the final report from Poyry, which will be taken to other MRC members and explained in detail.

”We believe the dam can be constructed,” said Mr Viraphonh. ”I don’t see any reason why it would be rejected any more. At the MRC council meeting, we will also report these findings.”

One engineer at the construction site said preparatory work at the site included construction of worker accommodations and the movement of heavy machinery from the Nam Ngum hydropower project, which Ch Karnchang’s Lao division was involved with.

There are already 1,000 workers on the Xayaburi site, he said.

Dozens of cement silos can also be seen being transported across the river at Tha Dua. The engineer said they would be installed near the dam site near to help with construction.

The engineers have not started on the actual dam construction, but the foundation area is being examined with soil and rock samples collected for lab tests, the engineer said.

”Dam construction is limited by time following the signing of a contract,” he said. ”If we don’t start doing the work, the overall project might be delayed. After the preparation work, once we receive approval to begin construction of the dam, we will immediately begin work on the dam structure construction.

”We have not worked on it that much. We are waiting for the bell to ring. Hopefully we can hear it at the end of this year,” said the engineer, adding that they were employed by Ch Karnchang Lao, which was given permission by Xayaburi Power to start work at the site.

Mekong campaigner Pianporn Deetes of International Rivers said Laos should not allow any construction to go ahead as they had made a commitment in April to discuss the project with MRC members.

Mrs Pianporn said the situation showed regulations and mechanisms under the MRC failed to function effectively when put into practice. The MRC only has a vague undertaking that member states should come to a consensus on projects after consultation but there is nothing legally binding.

”The rules and regulations sound great, but it’s clear that they cannot help in the Xayaburi case,” Ms Pianporn said. ”Leaving matters to the governments to deal with alone under the MRC might not be enough for issues that affect a lot of people.

”It may be the time to think about strengthening the public participation process, which includes inviting the voices of those who would be really affected by a development project”.

A source at the MRC said the Lao government notified the organisation that it was hiring a consultancy firm, but it had not forwarded the final report.

He said the new report could accompany the overall consultation process, but it would be reviewed by the MRC.

Xayaburi Dam billed as passport to prosperity, but details are vague

Villagers who stand to be affected by the Xayaburi dam project on the lower Mekong River have been told little about the project, including where they will live when they are forced to move.

Developer Ch Karnchang Lao hopes to start work by the end of the year on the dam. Roadwork leading to the site has already begun.

But villagers we contacted have been told little more than they knew back in April, when the Mekong River Commission, representing the four Mekong countries of Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam, asked the Lao government to put the work on hold until more research was done.

Even engineers involved in building a road to the dam site cannot tell us where the thousands of homes which would have to be relocated to make way for the dam will be moved.

One senior engineer supervising construction pointed to the mountainous areas surrounding the river. ”They will probably be moved up there, as the water will not be able to reach that high,” he said.

If a resettlement plan has been drawn up, few villagers or engineers know the details.

The Xayaburi dam project is expected to affect directly 1,300 households in Xayaburi and Luang Prabang provinces, and thousands of households downstream when the valley is flooded.

Some villagers have been told about the project by their village heads.

Somboon Phanthaporn, a 57-year-old shop owner and fisherman of Ban Houay Souy, says he knows little.

”I was told only that I would have to move out, away from the river.

”They tell us to leave, so we have to leave,” said Mr Somboon, who owns a two storey wooden house and a grocery shop in the village.

Officers have visited affected villages to survey properties, but their owners have heard nothing more.

At Ban Talan nearby, which will probably be flooded to make way for the dam, Vanthong Chanthavong, a 51-year-old former village head, has no idea when he and the other villagers will have to move out. ”We were told they will build the dam on the Mekong River and that we will be compensated, with new jobs, electricity, new homes, and new roads,” he said.

As a villager living in remote area, he said the offers are tempting.

”The people are just happy to hear things like electricity. We don’t have it. We just don’t know what’s really going on, or what will happen next,” said Mr Vanthong.

Viraphonh Viravong, the director-general of the Laos Electricity Department which is responsible for the Xayaburi dam, said the project would have to be sustainable, and bring benefits to residents. ”Local benefits are very clear – access to roads, health, education, sanitation, water supplies,” said Mr Viraphonh.

Staff have visited affected villages to conduct a survey. He rejected speculation the villagers would receive as little as US$15 (454 baht) for their homes, saying the government would offer reasonable compensation, including payment for their trees.

”We have many good resettlement laws and regulations which have been applied to previous projects,” he said.

The same standards would be applied here.

Our request to visit the resettlement site was turned down.

Source

Q & A with Viraphonh Viravong, the director-general of the Laos Electricity Department which is responsible for the Xayaburi dam, talks about the controversial project here…

Visit the Bangkok Post

Lessons from China’s dams

Posted on by
Reply

Peter Bosshard for the Phnom Penh Post

China counts half of all the world’s large dams within its borders. During the last 10 years, Chinese companies have also successfully conquered the global market for hydropower projects. With the Kamchay Dam and five other projects under construction, Chinese companies are also the dominant player in Cambodia’s hydropower sector.

Many Chinese dam builders acquired their technology in the giant Three Gorges Project on the Yangtze River. Companies like the Kamchay Dam’s Sinohydro frequently refer to the Yangtze dam as proof of their technical excellence. Like many other foreign leaders, Prime Minister Hun Sen praised the project when he visited the dam site in 2004. In a surprise move, the Chinese government has now acknowledged that the Three Gorges Project has serious social, environmental and geological problems. What are the lessons from this experience?

With a capacity of 18,200 megawatts, the Three Gorges Dam is the world’s biggest hydropower project. In spite of its daunting complexity, the government completed the project ahead of time in 2008.

The Yangtze dam generates 2 percent of China’s electricity and substitutes at least 30 million tons of coal per year. Yet its social, environmental, geological and financial costs are staggering. Here is a brief overview of the main problems:

• Displacement: The Three Gorges Dam has submerged 13 cities, 140 towns and 1,350 villages, and displaced more than 1.2 million people. Many resettlers were cheated out of their compensation payments and did not receive the new jobs or land that the government had promised. While some of the newly built towns have recovered from the initial shock of displacement, others are beset by widespread unemployment and impoverishment.

• Ecological collapse: Damming the Three Gorges caused massive impacts on the ecosystem of the Yangtze, Asia’s longest river. The reservoir has turned the once mighty river into a stagnant garbage dump with frequent toxic algae blooms. Because the barrage stopped fish migration, commercial fisheries have plummeted, the Yangtze river dolphin has been extinct, and other species are facing the same fate.

• Erosion: Government officials were prepared for social and environmental problems, but not for the dam’s massive geological impacts. The strong fluctuation of the water level in the Three Gorges reservoir destabilises the slopes of the Yangtze Valley, and triggers frequent landslides. Erosion affects half the reservoir area, and more than 300,000 additional people will have to be relocated to stabilise the reservoir banks.

• Downstream impacts: The Yangtze River carries more than 500 million tons of silt into the reservoir every year. Most of this is now withheld from the downstream regions and particularly the Yangtze delta. As a consequence, up to four square kilometres of coastal wetlands are eroded every year. The delta is subsiding, and seawater intrudes upriver, affecting agriculture and drinking water. Because of the lack of nutrients, coastal fisheries are also suffering.

• Susceptibility to climate change: The Three Gorges Dam illustrates how the vagaries of climate change create new risks for hydropower projects. The dam operators planned to fill the Three Gorges reservoir for the first time in 2009, but were not able to do so due to insufficient rains. The current year has brought Central China the worst drought in five decades, which has again sharply reduced the power generation of the Three Gorges and other dams. Ever more unreliable rainfalls put a big question mark behind the benefits and the economics of the Three Gorges Dam.

• Financial cost: The official cost of the Yangtze dam is US$27 billion. Critics argue that if all hidden costs are included, the project’s real price tag amounts to $88 billion. It would have been cheaper to generate electricity and replace coal through other means. While the dam was under construction, the energy efficiency of China’s economy decreased. According to the Energy Foundation in the US, it would have been “cheaper, cleaner and more productive for China to have invested in energy efficiency” rather than new power plants.

On May 18 the State Council, China’s highest government body, for the first time acknowledged the dam’s serious problems. “The project is now greatly benefiting the society in the aspects of flood prevention, power generation, river transportation and water resource utilisation”, the government maintained, but it has “caused some urgent problems in terms of environmental protection, the prevention of geological hazards and the welfare of the relocated communities.”

The Three Gorges Dam has served as a model for projects in Cambodia and many other countries. Three Gorges contractors such as Sinohydro and Gezhouba and other Chinese companies are currently building the Da Dai, Kamchay, Kirirom III, Lower Stung Russey, Stung Atay and Stung Tatay dams on Cambodian rivers. Chinese companies have also signed a memorandum of understanding to develop the Sambor Dam on the Mekong, and have proposed several projects on the Stung Cheay Areng and Srepok rivers.

What lesson does the Three Gorges Project hold as Cambodia considers its future hydropower strategy? First and foremost, the Yangtze dam shows that large dams on major rivers are massive interventions into highly complex ecosystems. Their impacts can occur thousands of kilometres away and many years after construction has been completed. It is impossible to predict and mitigate all social and environmental impacts of such projects.

The Three Gorges experience demonstrates that damming the mainstream of major rivers is particularly damaging, in that it will interrupt the migration of fish and the transport of sediments throughout a river’s ecosystems. As the World Commission on Dams recommended in its path-breaking report, Dams and Development, a river’s mainstream should not be dammed as long as there are other options.

A Strategic Environmental Assessment prepared for the Mekong River Commission (MRC) predicts that damming the lower Mekong mainstream would cause the loss of riverine and marine fisheries, reduce the agricultural productivity in the floodplains of the Tonle Sap and the Mekong Delta, and erode the delta’s coastline and river channels. All these impacts have been borne out by the Three Gorges Project.

The MRC was right to recommend that the lower Mekong should not be dammed in the next 10 years, and the Cambodian government has good reasons to call for caution regarding the proposed Xayaburi Dam in Laos. It should be equally cautious as it considers the Sambor Dam in Kratie Province.

Chinese scientists predicted many of the impacts of the Three Gorges Dam, yet their voices were silenced in what the government claimed was the national interest. In multi-billion dollar projects, the national interest is often taken hostage by political prestige, bureaucratic power struggles, and the generous kickbacks of a bribery-prone industry. These vested interests need to be balanced and held accountable by a transparent and participatory decision-making process.

Finally, China spent tens of billions of dollars on the resettlement program for the Three Gorges Dam. But because the affected people were excluded from decision-making, the programme often ignored their needs and desires, and resulted in wide-spread impoverishment and frustration. The experience of the Yangtze dam demonstrates that affected communities and other stakeholders should be involved in the decision-making regarding large infrastructure projects from the beginning.

Peter Bosshard is the Policy Director of International Rivers. He has monitored the Three Gorges Dam since the 1990s.

Source

Visit VietnamNet

Visit the Phnom Penh Post

US enters dam debate late

Posted on by
Reply

Thanh Nien News

Activists in the ongoing fight against Mekong dams worry that recent US opposition has come too little, too late.

Rising US interest in protecting the Mekong River from deleterious dams has been welcomed by environmentalists and non-governmental organizations.

Some observers, however, worry that the recent US overtures will not suffice to shelve 11 proposed hydropower projects on the river –which feeds approximately 60 million people.

Last Thursday, Senator Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat who heads a Senate subcommittee on East Asia, introduced a resolution calling for the suspension of mainstream dam construction along the Mekong River, which flows through China, Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam.

The legislation urged the US to “assist in identifying sustainable economic, water, and energy alternatives to mainstream hydropower dams on the Mekong River.”

In a statement, Webb also applauded an April delay of the massive, US$3.5-billion Xayaburi dam in Laos as “a positive step forward.”

Conservation groups fear that, if built, the 1,260-megawatt dam will wreak havoc on vital fisheries and small-scale riverside agriculture. Because it is the first dam ever to be built on the lower Mekong, many feel that the project is critical to the river’s future.

“If Xayaburi dam goes ahead, then it removes an important impediment to other projects proceeding and a race to the bottom may well ensue where many, if not most, of the other proposed projects now move forward towards implementation,” said David Blake, a Laos expert at the University of East Anglia in the UK.

Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand have voiced strong opposition to the project and urged Laos to put it on the backburner.

In April, Laos apparently agreed to suspend the project, pending approval from the four countries at a meeting that’s been slated for October or November.

Since then, international observers have remained wary of Laos’ intentions, sowing worries that the US involvement will not prevent the project from going ahead.

“The US is increasingly engaged, but it has not been a major player in the region for some time,” said Philip Hirsch, director of the Australian Mekong Resource Center at the University of Sydney. “There is no reason to expect that its increased interest [will] precipitate a watershed decision.”

‘Considerable uncertainty’

Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand are bound by the 1995 Mekong Agreement to hold inter-government consultations before building dams on the river.

At a recent meeting of the Mekong River Commission (MRC) – an inter-government agency established to coordinate dam projects – the group’s donors voiced concern over the pace at which the Xayaburi project seemed to be proceeding.

“Adequate time should be provided before the conclusion of the [consultation] process for the consideration of all forthcoming analyses, including consultations with public and civil societies,” the donors said in a statement posted on the MRC website.

A spokesperson for the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID), a major donor to the MRC, also acknowledged “considerable uncertainty” about how the MRC was to proceed with the consultation process.

The Lao government and the MRC have appeared to be at odds in this regard.

Daovong Phonekeo, deputy director general of Laos’s Department of Electricity, said the consultation process is already complete, since the other riparian countries had not asked to extend it.

“So the process is deemed as final,” Daovong said.

But Surasak Glahan, a MRC spokesman, said that the consultation process for the Xayaburi project has neither been closed nor extended.

“Due to the lack of mutual conclusion among the four MRC member countries [in April]… the consultation is considered on-going,” Glahan said. “The consultation process is neither a right to veto the use nor unilateral right to use water without taking into account other riparian nation’s rights.”

Moving forward

Last week’s resolution in the US Senate also called on politicians to use their “voice and vote” at multilateral development banks to ensure strict environmental safeguards for Mekong River projects.

Because the Xayaburi project is being funded by four major Thai banks, some observers remain skeptical that increased US pressure will have much influence over their decisions.

“I doubt the US can have significant influence over the Thai banks lending strategies,” said Blake of the University of East Anglia. “But on the other hand, those same banks will need to consider the political risk to their loan portfolios resulting from imprudent lending for projects that do not meet the international lending criteria for sustainable development.”

Laos’s Daovong reiterated that no work will go ahead on the project “unless the Lao government is satisfied with the mitigation measures proposed by the international experts and a good understanding is reached with other riparian states.”

But with Laos maintaining that the consultation process of the project is complete, “the [project] developer could herewith proceed with important preparation works to secure the commitments for the project implementation on schedule,” Daovong said.

Backgrounder: ‘TANGLED WEB’

In May, Viraphonh Viravong, director general of the Laos’s Department of Electricity, told Thanh Nien Weekly via email that the Lao government was procuring a “reputable international independent consultant to review all concerns [expressed] by Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand and recommend suitable mitigation measures, if any.”

Viraphonh’s deputy, Daovong Phonekeo, also said in May that the Xayaburi developer, Ch. Karnchang Pcl (a major Thai construction company), would fund the review.

The “reputable consultant” is the Finland-headquartered Pöyry Group.

In late June, Daovong confirmed in another email that Pöyry was carrying out an assessment of an earlier review done on the project by the Mekong River Commission – an inter-government agency established to coordinate dam projects.

“They would need some time to finalize their report,” he wrote.

On its company website, Pöyry said that it has been involved in the development of the Nam Ngum 2 dam project in Laos since 1994, starting with the project’s feasibility study.

In 2004, Pöyry was hired as an independent engineer during the project’s implementation, it said.

The main developer of the Nam Ngum 2 dam project is also Ch. Karnchang Pcl.

The Nam Ngum 2 dam project, with an installed capacity of 615 MW, is being built to produce energy for the Thai electricity grid; all output will be sold to the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT), Pöyry said.

Ninety-five percent of the electricity to be produced by the Xayaburi dam is also slated to be purchased by EGAT.

“The selection of Pöyry to conduct this…study… is a complete conflict of interest,” said David Blake, a Laos expert at the University of East Anglia in the UK.

Blake declined to speculate how much influence the Thai developer (Ch. Karnchang Pcl) has over Pöyry in both the Nam Ngum 2 and Xayaburi projects.

“But I think it is fair to say that there would appear to be a tangled web of commercial relationships […] which would not measure up to standards of openness, independence and integrity.”

By An Dien, Thanh Nien News (The story can be found in the July 15th issue of our print edition, Thanh Nien Weekly)

Source

Visit Thanh Nien News

Dams over troubled waters

Posted on by
Reply

VietNamNet Bridge

Much has been said about the impacts of dams on freshwater fish stocks in the Mekong River. However, the effects on marine fishery output also deserve thorough consideration.

The Mekong Delta boasts Vietnam’s biggest marine fishery output although its coastline is only some 736km long, less than a quarter of Vietnam’s.

Figures from the General Statistics Office show that marine fishery output in the Mekong Delta hit 606,500 tons in 2009, almost equal to that of Vietnam’s southeastern region, central and northern central regions and the Red River Delta combined, and nearly eight times that of the Red River Delta (77,900 tons). The Mekong Delta had 25,000 fishing boats in 2008, including 6,000 off-shore vessels, and saw its fishery export jump from US$1.2 billion in 2003 to US$4.2 billion in 2009. In fact, its export destinations number more than 130 countries at present.

The fishing industry also fuels the growth of some other sectors such as processing, transport, commerce and material supply. It is thus no surprise why Kien Giang’s fishing ports are the biggest in Vietnam. The south’s abundant seafood output is ascribable mainly to nutrients supplied by the Mekong River.

The plume

The Mekong River basin extends far beyond its estuary to include a plume, whose seafood output depends on nutrients from the river. On average, the Mekong River discharges some 475 billion cubic meters of water per annum into the sea. The volumes discharged peak in October and hit their trough in May.

Together with climate change, pollution, overfishing and the decline of mangrove forests, hydropower dams have posed a threat to the Mekong Delta’s fishery output. The strategic environmental assessment (SEA) report compiled by the Mekong River Commission (MRC) contends that the primary biological productivity of nearby coastal areas will fall due to a nutrient supply crunch. Consequently, the fishing industry and supporting sectors will suffer.

The report states that the delta’s marine fishery hinges on approximately 16,000 tons of attached nutrients deposited by the Mekong plume in the shallow, near-coastal shelf of the region. The issue is to what extent marine fish stocks will be affected by current and upcoming hydropower dams.

Experience from the world

The detrimental effects of dams on marine fishery have been evident in many countries for a long time. A report by A.A. ALEEM published in Marine Biology and presented at a conference in September 1970 in Tokyo indicated that the construction of Aswan dam in Egypt and disruptions in the flow of the Nile River into the Mediterranean River since 1965 (35 billion cubic meters per annum) were deleterious to coastal areas in the region. Brackish-water fish stocks also dropped.

The nutrient content slid sharply, plankton virtually vanished and sardine catches plunged from 15,000 tons in 1964 to 4,600 tons in 1965 and 554 tons in 1966. As nutrients, organic substances and silt deposits shrank, biodiversity was adversely affected. Coastal erosion also accelerated, inflicting damage on reservoirs and leading to an urgent need for remedies.

Meanwhile, statistics from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) show that Australia’s freshwater and marine fishery outputs in 2005-2007 reached about 140,000 tons per annum on average. According to the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, the country’s marine fishery output dipped below 250,000 tons in 1997-2004.

These figures trail far behind the Mekong Delta’s although Australia has a coastline of 35,000km (only the continent is considered), nearly 50 times as long as that of the delta. In fact, Australia’s marine fishery output is approximately the same as Kien Giang Province’s (239,000 tons in 2000). This is ascribable to Australia’s vast deserts and low rainfall, which cause limited surface runoff and nutrients. As a result, Australian waters are not conducive to marine life.

Once hydropower dams along the Mekong River have all been inaugurated, the Mekong Delta risks facing the same problem, triggering a domino effect that leaves many sectors in tatters. Farmers, in particular, will be hit the hardest.

Research is vital

A growing consensus among scientists is that the dams are among factors that will reduce nutrient supply and fish catches in the Mekong River. The SEA report also forecasts that silt and nutrient supply to nearby coastal areas will fall by some 50-75% by 2030 and exert pernicious impacts on marine fishery output, as well as Vietnam’s fishing industry and related sectors, which have clocked up blistering growth over the past decade.

The report admits that scientists have only a tenuous grasp of the Mekong River’s marine fishery potential even though its seafood catches have surpassed 500,000 tons per annum. It is added that when the impacts have been clearer, estimated losses are likely to be enormous.

Unlike in the case of other important rivers such as the Amazon, the Yangtze or the Mississippi, the plume of the Mekong River has not been the subject of extensive and intensive research. Socio-economic and environmental impacts on the Mekong Delta remain murky, making it hard to assess the transnational effects of hydropower dams on the Mekong River.

It is clear, however, that the Mekong Delta is prone to a growing array of disasters with grave environmental, economic and social implications. The damage that hydropower dams inflict upon the Mekong River’s marine fishery output and productivity will probably be irreparable and permanent. Research on the magnitude of such damage is therefore crucial, as is that on natural processes in coastal areas and at estuaries. This task entails efforts, time and money, and must be implemented as soon as possible.

Source

Visit VietNamNet Bridge