The New York Times has joined the Aysén region project controversy in Chilean Patagonia which was recently approved but has triggered massive protests from environmentalists and an overwhelming rejection from the majority of the population according to public opinion polls.
The government of conservative president Sebastian Piñera argues that the several dams project, expected to flood pristine land and to develop a 2.200 kilometres corridor of power lines to the north, is essential for Chile’s current and future energy needs.
The editorial piece under the title “Keep Chilean Patagonia Wild” follows:
An environmental review commission in the Aysén region of southern Chile has made a potentially disastrous decision, voting to approve the construction of five hydroelectric dams, two on the Baker River and three on the Pascua. The damage these dams would do to the environment is tremendous, and their construction — in a largely unspoiled natural haven — would open the way for further development, including more dams.
The Baker and Pascua Rivers flow into the wild fiords that thread their way along the southern Chilean coast. The dams would partially flood a national park as well as portions of a landscape that Chile had been hoping to have named a Unesco World Heritage Site.
The vote follows an environmental review that looked only at the immediate consequences of construction and not the long-term effects on the ecology of these watersheds or the downstream risks of damming short, violent, glacial rivers that are subject to abrupt outburst floods from the lakes above them. To deliver the power they would generate — some 2.75 gigawatts — Chile would have to build a 1,400-mile corridor of power lines to the north, creating the longest clear-cut on the planet.
There is no disputing Chile’s energy needs or the fact that it pays much more for electricity than any of its neighbours. But major studies have made it clear that Chile has extraordinary renewable energy sources, including solar, geothermal and wind power that could be developed with far less impact on the environment.
This is an early skirmish in a lengthy, hard-fought battle. A separate environmental review must be completed and approved for the transmission corridor. We hope it takes a more comprehensive look at the damage this project would cause. Perhaps then the Chilean government, which supports the dam project, will come to understand what many Chileans already know: that sacrificing Patagonia for power would be an irreparable mistake.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!
Carlos Slim's New York Times says.................May 25th, 2011 - 08:48 am 0
Why the TNYT don´t take care of their own enegy supplies in USA....nuclear, thermal, hydro power plants are working there and they say nothing at all, but when we decide what we think it´s the best for us then they speak out loud against it...Please, keep your nose under your own ass and leave us live our life as we want...Why don´t talk about the bigger hydro power plants under plan in Brazil´s Amazonas or Argentina's Patagonia for the next years?? Those are wild sites too to take care, aren´t they??? Why we must pay bigger electricity bills just because some gringos wants to keep this little area of the Chilean Patagonia for them ??? We need energy to develope our country on the next decade so this is a very important project to us and nobody have the right to decide for us, even if is a foreing journalist (what a proffesional) that have never been on the Patagonia or near to Chile, probably...So, please TNYT, keep your efforts to give the illegal Latam´s a way to legalize them because the USA without the espaldas calientes (hot backs) will have a very big problem to do the dirty works that they do...or why don´t try to help the USA to get back to a growing economy (the Chinnese are over your head right now, yankees...and the Brazilians, Indians, etc)..May 27th, 2011 - 03:44 am 0
So, get worried about your own problems and let us live as we wants...wet boys.