1) How does the environment and economy connect in this case?
2) Who is going to win? Who should win?
3) Anywhere else in the world where this is going on? What were the effects there?
4) How do the people who live along the river feel about this?
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21692885-governments-should-stop-building-dams-mother-rivers-damned-if-you-do
Mark this one please:
ReplyDeleteThe Mekong river is the heart of south-east Asia’s food supply and is well known for its vast species diversity. Countries such as Cambodia, China, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam are all heavily dependent on the Mekong, where south-east Asia’s so-called ‘rice basket’ produces more than 100 million tons of rice a year, making up 15% of the world’s total in supply. Due to the plans to build a large river dam in the Mekong, major implications will be permanently set on wildlife, safety, and the well-being of hundreds of thousands of people. Due to the dam, fish farmers will lose almost 600,000 tons of fish yearly, a 60% loss in capture that feeds millions of people in Laos alone.
Its economic and livelihood risks are alarming, where more than 2,100 people will be forcibly resettled from their homes, and where 202,198 farmers that feed their countries will be directly impacted by the Mekong dam. Not to mention the outstanding amounts of rice that will be literally drowned under the mass waters of the dam, creating less rice in the world’s supply and causing the price of rice and fish to rise.
The Mekong has a beautiful array of species diversity. There are over 20,000 types of plants and over 2,500 types of animal groups that will be immediately affected due to the severe change in habitat, where the lifecycle and migration of many different fish will be disrupted, such as the Mekong cat fish and 40 other species with a high risk of extinction due to the dam.
Finally, the main reason for the dam – the electricity – will not be anywhere near enough to outweigh the cons of building the massive dam. First of all, the dam will take eight years to build and will cost an alarming 3.5 billion US dollars. And in spite of this, only 1260 megawatts are projected to be created, meeting only 8% of the lower Mekong’s power needs. In a country where so much poverty already exists, the dam promises nothing more than to strip the jobs and the comfort from hundreds of thousands of people by effecting their economy and livelihood on a large scale, and to only benefit the few people behind the construction of this dam.
With solar panels, wind turbines, geothermal energy, and biomass, US$3.5 billion could go a very long way with very minimal destruction to produce safe and renewable energy.
http://www.internationalrivers.org/files/attached-files/the_xayaburi_dam_eng.pdf
http://www.economist.com/news/essays/21689225-can-one-world-s-great-waterways-survive-its-development
I agree with your opinion on this situation. I think that the dam would be a disaster to the environment and the economy. As you had said, the money should be used in other ways to generate clean power, such as solar panels, wind turbines, or geothermal energy. The clear importance of the river to the environment and society should be a big enough statement to the developers that this is not the place to build a dam. After some research I discovered that the Mekong is home to numerous endangered species, such as the Bagarius yarrelli, which is a large catfish. With the fabrication of the dam, it is likely that these endangered species will become extinct. Excitation is a serious issue because it - in term - affects us in the food chain. Extinctions will always cause more extinctions, which is scary to me. Also knowing that an estimated 50 million rely on this river for food, makes me very hesitant about the dam. I think that this dam poses more negative effects than positive, and would therefore be a waste of supplies, space, and money.
DeleteCitations:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/special-features/2014/07/140711-mekong-river-laos-thailand-dams-environment/
I agree that it would be quite disastrous for the food supply along the Mekong, and would mean that these already starving nations would have to rely more on foreign handouts. I do disagree with your last 2 paragraphs. The dam would provide thousands of jobs in construction which would help the impoverished area and when it is done would provide massive amounts of electricity. You also state “[the dam] will cost an alarming 3.5 billion US dollars. And in spite of this, only 1260 megawatts are projected to be created, meeting only 8% of the lower Mekong’s power needs.” Generating 1260 megawatts of reliable and renewable energy is something that can only be dreamed of in most nations and also 3.5 billion is not nearly as much money as it sounds like to you and me.
DeleteI also agree with Mahshad in this situation. I think that these dams would be a big threat to the rivers ecology and it also disrupts the lifestyles of millions not being able to get food, income, transportation and a multitude of other needs. Also by researching I found that China's dam construction on the Upper Mekong has already caused negative impacts, so continuing would only cause more.
DeleteAlthough the prospects for China’s and Laos’ economy seem sound, I believe that our environment is too important to sacrifice. The effects that such dams would pose on ecosystems are so grand that they outweigh any benificial outcomes on the economy. Not to mention, the benefits of a growing economy would not be felt by the populations of Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam. Meanwhile, those areas will experience the majority of the dams' nuisances.
DeleteGreat summary of the what the river provides and providing an alternative is great too.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMark this one please:
ReplyDeleteWhile reading this article I noticed the environment and the economy are joined with the planning or forming of the dams on the Mekong River. China has 14 dams planned or under construction on its stretch of the Mekong, joining the six that are already built. Laos also has nine dams planned or under way; Cambodia has two. Dozens more dams for tributaries are on the drawing board. These places are using these dams for hydroelectricity and to bring in much needed money. According to the article, Laos is aiming to become the dynamo of South-East Asia by selling its energy to Thailand and others; it dreams of hydro power becoming its biggest earner in just a decade. There is also a concern for the ecosystems within the Mekong river. Building dams will threaten migratory fish which is a staple food for many South-Asian people. It is believed that farmland will become less productie, and that building the dams will just be a high environmental cost and it may also increase regional tensions.
https://www.internationalrivers.org/campaigns/mekong-mainstream-dams
Great recap of the article but where is your opinion on the matter?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMark this one please
ReplyDeleteThe Mekong River is a very advantageous river to the people from China to Cambodia. It supplies people with food and many jobs (agriculture). This river supplies people with a guaranteed food source which is a very powerful thing while being surrounded by some poverty areas. This river on its own supports the economy that surrounds it from selling what comes out of it and supporting the farms that lie on it.
To me placing one single dam on this river could be advantageous to the countries, but still support the local people without a great deal of damage. 25 will make a huge impact. Although these dams could improve the economy for these countries and supply them with an abundance of money, it would damage the eco-system beyond repair. It would also have a huge negative impact on the people who once relied solely on this river. This dam would reduce the amount of wildlife in and around this river. The potential of extinction could become a very risky amount.
These dams could be extremely profitable for the countries. There are benefits to the outcome of these dams. But to put them up is expensive and also damaging to the environment. Although these dams are made to help the environment they also do the opposite. According to the estimates of the INPE researchers, dams are the largest single anthropogenic source of methane, being responsible for 23% of all methane emissions due to human activities. This means that the dam methane emissions are responsible for at least 4% of the total warming impact of human activities. They still have a substantial way of effecting our environment.
Furthermore, if the countries are relying too heavily on the money created from the dams they could be in trouble. There have been many dams known to have droughts that end up taking a toll on the country and eco system. A famous dam known as the Hoover dam was created in 1931 killing and extending several different species. They are now saying there is a 'bathtub ring' that shows the devastating effects of a drought.
Overall I think that the creation of 25 dams will make a negative impact on everyone and everything.
• https://www.internationalrivers.org/resources/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-dams-faq-4064
• http://energyinformative.org/hydroelectric-energy-pros-and-cons/
• http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3150830/Bathtub-ring-Hoover-Dam-shows-level-Lake-Mead-dropping-amid-continuing-drought-America-s-west.html
I agree with Bronwyn on the fact that building 25 dams on one river, no matter how big, will largely affect it surroundings. 1 dam, however, will not make as much difference and all of the surrounding countries may be able to profit from a single dam. I think that the surrounding countries need to negotiate and find a solution that won't harm the environment and that will make each country at least a little bit satisfied.
DeleteGood work on this one.
DeleteMark this one
ReplyDeleteAround 80% of the 60 million people living in the lower Mekong Basin rely directly on the river system for their food, and livelihood. The Mekong does not only contribute to these peoples lives, it contributes heavily to the countries that it runs through and the world. The Mekong River supports the largest inland fishery in the world, with total production in 2008 of 3.9 million tons, valued at between US$3.9-7 billion.
It is not only people that rely on the Mekong. The Mekong is home to no fewer than 20,000 species of plants, 1,200 bird species, 800 species of reptiles and amphibians and 430 mammal species—including Asian elephants and as many as 350 tigers.
The largest threat to this river system comes from the series of dams and other hydropower projects planned for the river’s mainstream and tributaries. Such impacts on river ecosystems would have flow-on effects to dependent communities and economies. These impacts are expected to include a growing inequality in the lower Mekong Basin countries and an increase in poverty in the short and medium term, especially among the poor in rural and urban riparian areas. Food security is also likely to be affected by reductions in fisheries production.
I think that instead of jumping right to the conclusion that dams need to be put in the Mekong River, some thought should be given to other forms of energy production that could be more beneficial for the environment and maybe even the economy.
http://www.greatriverspartnership.org/en-us/asiapacific/mekong/pages/default.aspx
I agree with Keith's comment. There is no reason to put in a dam if it's going to have a negative effect on the ecosystems in and around the river.they should look for other ways to produce energy with less of an ecological effect.
DeleteGood response
Deletehttp://e360.yale.edu/feature/life_on_mekong_faces_threats_as_major_dams_begin_to_rise/2741/
ReplyDeleteThe environmental and economical concept connect in this issue throughout the survival of the people and animals in the affected areas. The environment will not survive if the economy aspect continues to try and profit off of people needs by building dams. The economical point of this issue is winning when it should be the environmental. The environmental aspect is a major factor in the happiness and welfare of the countries involved where as the economical part only benefits the government and high society. This is occurring in four countries and Laos has the most problems surrounding the dams. People living and surging off of the Mekong river are obviously upset over the fact that their food and homes are being destroyed over the governments greed. The government is the only party benefiting from this plan.
Ellen
great answer
Deletehttp://e360.yale.edu/feature/life_on_mekong_faces_threats_as_major_dams_begin_to_rise/2741/
ReplyDeleteThe environmental and economical concept connect in this issue throughout the survival of the people and animals in the affected areas. The environment will not survive if the economy aspect continues to try and profit off of people needs by building dams. The economical point of this issue is winning when it should be the environmental. The environmental aspect is a major factor in the happiness and welfare of the countries involved where as the economical part only benefits the government and high society. This is occurring in four countries and Laos has the most problems surrounding the dams. People living and surging off of the Mekong river are obviously upset over the fact that their food and homes are being destroyed over the governments greed. The government is the only party benefiting from this plan.
Ellen
Please say mark this one: before your post so i know this is the one to mark. Thanks,
Delete