Saturday, 1 December 2012

The Belo Monte Dam - Part 2


In my last entry I discussed the social impacts and tension the construction of the Belo Monte Dam through the Amazon Rainforest would have on the indigenous people of the Amazon Basin. This, however, is not the whole story and there are so many more matters to consider when looking at opposition to the dam.

Firstly, this is being touted as the ‘green answer’ to Brazil’s energy problems. Fearnside (1995) strongly argues against this, as if all planned reservoirs (of which there are many more needed to even make the Belo Monte Dam a feasible energy source during the dry months) then the total flooded land needed for water storage would result in an annual emission rate of nearly 5.2 million tonnes of methane (a greenhouse gas 25x more potent than CO2), most of this coming from the open water and the underwater decay of forest biomass. On top of this, the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere at the time of construction ‘greatly exceed the avoided emissions from fossil-fuel combustion’.

Although Fearnside admits these figures (particularly that of methane emissions) are difficult to calculate, even with a huge margin of error the emissions are vast. This then begs the question – if this is not a green answer to Brazil’s energy problems, is it truly necessary to displace so many people and destroy so much precious land when there surely must be so many other, equally as non-green alternatives? Or maybe, as WWF Brazil estimates, 40% of Brazil’s energy usage could be reduced by introducing energy efficient measures.

What astounds me more than this is the glaring omissions left out of the Environmental Impact Assessment. Amazon Watch details the fact that information regarding water quality, socioeconomic indicators, fish populations, and the impacts on riverine families were left out of the EIA – yet the environmental approval was still granted on a ‘wait and see’ basis – allowing the dam to continue with the environmental impacts only worked out as it is allowed to be operational for 6 years.

While writing this blog thus far, I had always considered the main problems the indigenous people face were as a result of the little guys destroying their land via logging, mining and clearing space for agricultural land, with the government looking rather powerless to stop it. However, after researching this topic I have come to realise that indigenous tribes are indeed facing a much bigger battle. Amazon Watch highlights a complete lack of communication between the proposed works and the indigenous people and it would appear that they were perhaps more focussed on getting onside the mining companies and other businesses – as 30% of the power generated will be used for these projects. As a result of this the indigenous people took matters into their own hands.

For 35 days the indigenous people affected by the construction of the dam staged protests with an additional 11 days of occupation of the dam site. This is clearly a cry for them to be heard and just demonstrates the lack of a voice they have had through the years of planning of this dam. After numerous promises to listen to the concerns of the indigenous people, construction began again in early November 2012. Their concerns were not met, and to this day protests continue.

Indigenous people protest the Belo Monte Dam

I will never claim to be an expert on this subject, but on my research into this monster dam I have seen very few glimmers of hope on the matter. A lot of it has just made me angry. It may well be the only necessary way forward in a way I am just not seeing, but as the focus of the blog is the plight of the indigenous people, I find it hard to swallow hearing about how their views and concerns have been so quickly tossed aside. This does not seem like the right way to conduct such a massive, life changing project.

For more information on the Belo Monte Dam, Amazon Watch have numerous articles and causes you can get involved in. For a far more in depth study of the dam than I can provide, I suggest de Sousa JĂșnior and Reid (2010) – even if you only glance at the conclusion.


Philip M. Fearnside (1995). Hydroelectric Dams in the Brazilian Amazon as Sources of ‘Greenhouse’ Gases.  Environmental Conservation, 22, pp 7­19 

No comments:

Post a Comment