Some of the comments below bring up the valid point that developing countries need energy production as they grow their economies. These comments are in response to my opposition to hydroelectric dams proposed on the Río Marañón within this video. Here are a few of my perspectives to further the conversation: First off, I agree that developing economies need energy to grow their economies and it is unfair for rich developed countries to dictate how things should be done. I am also not so naive to believe that we as humans do not need energy sources. I also acknowledge that all currently available energy sources have trade-offs, negatives and positives. I drive cars to go kayaking, fly in airplanes to go kayaking, and utilize plenty of materials taken from the earth to go kayaking. However, I think there is still room to fairly criticize certain energy projects in certain places for good reasons, and I don’t think this is a hypocritical stance to take. Second, some of the pro-dam rhetoric is just as unrealistic as hard line anti-dam rhetoric. I have had many conversations face-to-face, and through TH-cam comments, with people who love to state we need dams for energy. Their immediate reaction when they hear opposition to dams, is that all hydroelectric projects should be allowed to moved forward regardless of the consequences in the name of progress. I get the sense that they are being contrarian or playing devil’s advocate, just to do so because they are annoyed by environmentalists. That is to say, every time they hear someone oppose a dam somewhere (or drilling, or whatever) that triggers them take a 100% pro-dam, pro-drilling, everywhere, all the time, no matter the cost. I disagree. While I think there are some good ways to exploit hydro-power (Run-of-the-River for example, heavily used in places like Switzerland), my research into this topic has shown me there are other more viable energy sources out there with fewer negative consequences (Nuclear for example, without entering into a 30 page research paper here). To summarize, yes, we need energy and perhaps some dams are justifiable, BUT that does not make all dams automatically justifiable. Third, this video presents a case for opposing the dams in the locations they are currently proposed on the Marañón, not all dams everywhere. The primary argument is that the locals who live there overwhelmingly oppose them. While other countries, such as the US, may have built dams in the past that displaced local populations, that doesn’t mean it was right then either. Ultimately, this is Peru and their government and systems will make these decisions. Currently, it looks like Peru’s legal system is doing a much better job than the US legal system did of protecting it’s citizens interests surrounding being forcibly relocated from your land. Lastly, in a May 2020, an Analysis of the Legal Status of the Chadin II and Veracruz dams, published by the Sociedad Peruana de Derecho Ambiental (Peruvian Society of Environmental Law) states that, “Peru currently has an oversupply of energy. The Peruvian government has annulled the call for energy supply from large hydroelectric power stations for the National Interconnected Electricity System of Peru (SEIN). • In the case of the Chadin 2 project, the local population strongly rejected the project, and Odebrecht was implicated in cases of corruption, which have led Odebrecht to prioritize the sale of its assets. • In the case of Veracruz, Enel has decided to opt for green, low-carbon growth, and to move away from hydroelectric power plants with large dams due to the social and environmental impacts that these imply. Additionally, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, which participates in Enel, has decided to divest from projects with negative environmental impacts. • Costs associated with the development of non-conventional renewable energy or run-of river hydroelectric plants have reduced in recent years. These are viable alternatives in Peru and have significantly lower environmental and social costs.”
Also, while it is sad and can be unfair that people have to displace Peru has a lot of hydroelectric potential it needs to exploit. It is emissions free and can improve the quality of life of Peruvians greatly. In other developed nations we went over the same process decades ago. Spain, Norway and even the US. In the US now it is basically impossible to build infrastructure due to how hard is to expropriate private property. There has to be. A balance between rights of people and progress.
Just a small correction Orellana’s expedition was part of Gonzalo Pizarro’s expedition. Gonzalo was one of the brothers of Francisco Pizarro, the famous one ;) In any case, Orellana, Gonzalo and many other conquerors came from the same small town of Trujillo, Spain.
we did this trip in 1991 an rafted down to Sarameriza. we had mayor problems with the aguarunas and had to run the river at night to escape from them. very sad that they going to build all this dams.
I can really appeeciate the changes to the communities and environment a dam causes, but what can you expect a country with growing energy needs to do? Coal? oil? Hydro is at least far better for local environments.
Some of the comments below bring up the valid point that developing countries need energy production as they grow their economies. These comments are in response to my opposition to hydroelectric dams proposed on the Río Marañón within this video.
Here are a few of my perspectives to further the conversation:
First off, I agree that developing economies need energy to grow their economies and it is unfair for rich developed countries to dictate how things should be done. I am also not so naive to believe that we as humans do not need energy sources. I also acknowledge that all currently available energy sources have trade-offs, negatives and positives. I drive cars to go kayaking, fly in airplanes to go kayaking, and utilize plenty of materials taken from the earth to go kayaking. However, I think there is still room to fairly criticize certain energy projects in certain places for good reasons, and I don’t think this is a hypocritical stance to take.
Second, some of the pro-dam rhetoric is just as unrealistic as hard line anti-dam rhetoric. I have had many conversations face-to-face, and through TH-cam comments, with people who love to state we need dams for energy. Their immediate reaction when they hear opposition to dams, is that all hydroelectric projects should be allowed to moved forward regardless of the consequences in the name of progress. I get the sense that they are being contrarian or playing devil’s advocate, just to do so because they are annoyed by environmentalists. That is to say, every time they hear someone oppose a dam somewhere (or drilling, or whatever) that triggers them take a 100% pro-dam, pro-drilling, everywhere, all the time, no matter the cost. I disagree. While I think there are some good ways to exploit hydro-power (Run-of-the-River for example, heavily used in places like Switzerland), my research into this topic has shown me there are other more viable energy sources out there with fewer negative consequences (Nuclear for example, without entering into a 30 page research paper here). To summarize, yes, we need energy and perhaps some dams are justifiable, BUT that does not make all dams automatically justifiable.
Third, this video presents a case for opposing the dams in the locations they are currently proposed on the Marañón, not all dams everywhere. The primary argument is that the locals who live there overwhelmingly oppose them. While other countries, such as the US, may have built dams in the past that displaced local populations, that doesn’t mean it was right then either. Ultimately, this is Peru and their government and systems will make these decisions. Currently, it looks like Peru’s legal system is doing a much better job than the US legal system did of protecting it’s citizens interests surrounding being forcibly relocated from your land.
Lastly, in a May 2020, an Analysis of the Legal Status of the Chadin II and Veracruz dams, published by the Sociedad Peruana de Derecho Ambiental (Peruvian Society of Environmental Law) states that,
“Peru currently has an oversupply of energy. The Peruvian government has annulled the call for energy supply from large hydroelectric power stations for the National Interconnected Electricity System of Peru (SEIN).
• In the case of the Chadin 2 project, the local population strongly rejected the project, and Odebrecht was implicated in cases of corruption, which have led Odebrecht to prioritize the sale of its assets.
• In the case of Veracruz, Enel has decided to opt for green, low-carbon growth, and to move away from hydroelectric power plants with large dams due to the social and environmental impacts that these imply. Additionally, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, which participates in Enel, has decided to divest from projects with negative environmental impacts.
• Costs associated with the development of non-conventional renewable energy or run-of river hydroelectric plants have reduced in recent years. These are viable alternatives in Peru and have significantly lower environmental and social costs.”
Also, while it is sad and can be unfair that people have to displace Peru has a lot of hydroelectric potential it needs to exploit. It is emissions free and can improve the quality of life of Peruvians greatly. In other developed nations we went over the same process decades ago. Spain, Norway and even the US. In the US now it is basically impossible to build infrastructure due to how hard is to expropriate private property. There has to be. A balance between rights of people and progress.
Just a small correction Orellana’s expedition was part of Gonzalo Pizarro’s expedition. Gonzalo was one of the brothers of Francisco Pizarro, the famous one ;) In any case, Orellana, Gonzalo and many other conquerors came from the same small town of Trujillo, Spain.
Amigo me gustó mucho el vídeo de kayack en rio atenguillo, ya no vendrás para atenguillo?
Todavía vengo a Jalisco cuando puedo, pero ahora no hay manera de viajar allá . Quiero regresar pronto
we did this trip in 1991 an rafted down to Sarameriza. we had mayor problems with the aguarunas and had to run the river at night to escape from them. very sad that they going to build all this dams.
I can really appeeciate the changes to the communities and environment a dam causes, but what can you expect a country with growing energy needs to do? Coal? oil? Hydro is at least far better for local environments.