A conference on building dams – and what more ‘appropriate’ venue than Sarawak, where a dam-building frenzy has gripped policy makers.
These days they have green-washed their image: they are calling it “Water Resources and Renewable Energy Development”.
As part of the conference programme, they are organising site visits to Batang Ai, Bakun and Murum as well as “cultural excursions” and “a full social programme” for delegates. I wonder if these will include visits to the indigenous communities, especially the Penan, many of whom have been and will be displaced by all these dams. (Update: Yes, on day two of the programme, “in the mid-afternoon, the group will have an opportunity to visit the Sungai Asap village, where communities were resettled from the Bakun reservoir area. On arrival the guests will be received with the traditional dance of the ‘Kayan’ tribe. There will be a tour of the village, with a chance to learn about the Kayan culture and customs”. I hope they will be thoroughly briefed about the problems faced by those who were resettled.)
Check out the blurb on the conference here.
Related posts:
Stop your spinning now. Hydro power is renewable and green energy. My “cikgu” also said like that. Many science books also say so. I hope you will make correction in your article.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And how many trees do you have to chop down to build a dam?
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
BIAS !
Chopping trees is another matter. At least hydro power don’t fire gas/coal to generate power. It uses water only and thus it is a renewable and green energy.
p/s: I’m still waiting some honest commentators to support my opinion. Where are you O ???
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
First, hydropower does not in the production of energy necessarily produce greenhouse gases. But it can produce huge amounts of greenhouse gases up-front, from deforestation and flooding of forested areas and from the huge amount of energy used and cement dug out to make the dam itself. This is the same with oil palm biofuel production — upfront carbon dioxide emissions are so huge when you clear forests that the “green” biofuel benefits are just a joke cuz the damage to the atmosphere is already done.
So, Gerakan K, understand both ecology and economics. By pumping up so much carbon dioxide up front, you are raising the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere beyond threshold levels. So no matter HOW MUCH “clean” hydropower energy (or biofuel energy) you produce later, the damage is already done. The climate will go haywire.
Second, there is the immense loss of biodiversity and loss of social welfare for the people living on the lands that are flooded by dam construction.
So, how are you going to address both of this problems, Gerakan K?
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
http://www.hydropower-dams.com/d/d_Asia_2010_FB.pdf
Visits are on pages 8-10. I don’t know why you’re making such a fuss. You see? They’re going to give the locals pens and pencils. Fair’s fair, Anil.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes, thanks for pointing that out. On day two, “in the mid-afternoon, the group will have an opportunity to visit the Sungai Asap village, where communities were resettled from the Bakun reservoir area. On arrival the guests will be received with the traditional dance of the ‘Kayan’ tribe. There will be a tour of the village, with a chance to learn about the Kayan culture and customs”.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Sometimes, these sort of excursions and conferences are used by the government to show that “they have consulted widely with locals and NGOs and other interest groups”, just so that they can say they have “consulted all stakeholders” before going on with the dam development anyway.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m sorry to be over-sensitive to Gerakan K’s comments, but when people state things with confidence, I always feel as though they’re trying to sell me slimming pills or insurance. Hydropower is not green. It’s closer to blue-grey. It usually replaces vast expanses of green, photosynthesising plants (absorbing sun’s energy and absorbing carbon, releasing oxygen) with a large body of water which may do the opposite of those 3.
Worse yet, I’m not convinced it is precisely renewable. Converting rainfall to energy is only renewable as long as the rain continues to fall in the catchment area. I’m not a meteorologist, but I have a sneaking suspicion that changing the response (to solar input / gas composition) of vast tracts of land could have long-term effects on rainfall patterns.
I don’t feel as though it’s unfairly cynical to doubt the benefits we’re being sold. What we really need is a credible expert (preferably one whose opinion is not directly linked to the profit they stand to make from holding it) to explain the issues and alternatives for us.
Some of these changes in the name of ‘development’ really are drawback-free for decades. The problem is that the people who usually stand to benefit most from the development contracts know they’ll be long dead by the time the drawbacks are apparent. I wish young Malaysians would take up some of these causes – it’ll be them that will be paying the price for the mistakes of old people now.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m also not convinced by Gerakan K’s explanation.
Building dams does not make it an environmental and “green” energy. Think about the vast forest that will have to be cleared/destroyed to send in these machinery to build these dams. The pollution released by these gas-guzzling behemoth trucks and like would choke and poison the ecosystem. It would take decades to revive the ecosystem. We will most probably lose (become extinct) another portion of our flora and fauna. Then you have the after-effects that include submerging certain areas under water. That is another hot topic and naturalist have divided views about its benefits.
Point of view: Is green energy about the conservation of planet Earth or the preservation of the human race? If we destroy in order to obtain “green” energy, we have missed the point. Always remember, the forest is the life blood of the planet. Destroy it and you are just making a mess of the whole environment(for the whole world). Just look at the adverse weather patterns all around the world.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You beat me totally. Your level of spinning really exceeded even the president of perkosa. You are the spin champion of the year 2010.
OK you won. And tell everyone about your precious findings. You can be instant multi-millionaire. Just sue the publishers, the teachers, the education ministry, and of course the scientist because they twisted the fact just like attempted to sell you a slimming pill/insurance.
p/s: Kamu sudah sesat
p/s/s: Oh my god! Hello blog owner, please show some sense of nationalism….
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Gerakan K is certainly no fan of those bothersome “blue monkeys” and their sacred trees. Prime example of an ecosystemic virus in human guise.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I expected not everyone will share concern for “their” environment. No amount of “shifting the blame” can or is going to reverse the failures or lack of action of the previous generations. Our (yes, all of us) generation is going to endure a climatic change never seen before. We are experiencing it now. Can you explain the gradual increase in temperature these few years? Or explain the sudden heavy downpours that choke our infrastructures? The Kyoto Protocol was/is a global initiative to address these dramatic climate change. Malaysia is also part of it. Sadly it is not to expectation.
We cannot hide behind excuses of needed national development. Industrialization forced many to move to urban areas leaving the paddy fields behind. Agriculture eventually died. Now that industries are failing (not only here but globally due to cost cutting and downsizing measures), agriculture has become lucrative. But the land was left to rot all these years and socio-economic conditions prevent migration back to the fields. What irony for those who wanted the “good life” and sacrificed a “better life”.
I am not criticizing anyone here. I just hope that reasons are made clear so we can see the light and work towards a better life ahead. I want to live to a ripe old age, don’t we all?
What were you doing during EARTH HOUR? Did you contribute towards preserving our Earth?
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0