1. A proposed dam project that activists successfully halt before it's built, only to see it rise again and again – years later – in different forms.
Thanks for reporting on this very important issue. Fortunately, in the US many dams are being taken down or are under consideration for removal. There are numerous challenges with "de-"engineering a dam and trying to restore a sustainable geomorphological state of the river/riparian system. Watching the mega dams proposed, under construction, and recently completed throughout the world knowing that the ecological impacts were known continues to astound me. As the article mentions these beasts are conceived of, funded by, and intended to benefit the rich who live nowhere near their siting. With our current ecological knowledge of the impacts of dams it can be said that dams equal damn greed.
Great report, and thank you, Ms. Bardeen and Mr. Bosshard for demarcating the WE that wins from dam building and the far greater "WE" that loses... if it's informed at all of its newly imposed collective fate.
That gigantic rerouting of a massive river in China is instructive. How many thousands were relocated off their ancestral lands and placed into ugly uniform buildings in order to secure that dam (or should I say damn) project?
These days, with droughts occurring with greater frequencies coupled with massive floods, all bets are off on controlling the flow of water.
Jack Perkins wrote about this very thing in "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man." The idea is that "the suits" show up with tempting deals made to the few persons in power who can seize an immediate financial advantage for themselves. In exchange, their people are indebted into perpetuity as a result of these so-called "developments."
Then, when poor nations can't pay the debt, hedge fund sociopaths purchase it and then use "that paper" to purchase REAL assets like the best waterfront properties, mineral ores, and other lucrative natural resources.
These deals should be illegal. Any decision that calls for people--in large numbers--to be moved from their natural homes should be based on genuine Democratic referendums... not the decision of a corrupt father figure determining the destiny (often in life and death ways) of "the multitudes."
A friend of mine working for DFG (dept of fish and game) reporting on major water damage due to logging over a long period of time, similar to what the below water landscape would look like after the dam was deconstructed , stated that "its nothing that leaving it alone for a couple hundred years wouldn't fix ."
Good post. Most dam studies show that a dam causes more problems than it solves. I live next to an old woman who's family lost their home when their entire TOWN was submerged to build the local lake...that is now a playground for the rich. ( Burton, Ga. now under Lake Burton). She told me that the townspeople and farmers were lied to by the builders, and ended up being paid a pittance for their land.
Bullshit. You obviously know nothing about the work of International Rivers Network or Peter Bosshard.
Not so important in BC, where the site C dam on the Peace River appears to be going ahead in spite of it being extremely unpopular.