Chile rejects divisive dam project in Patagonia

Most Chileans opposed HidroAysen, an $8 billion plan that would have built five dams on two of the world's wildest rivers, boosting the country's energy output.

Jorge Uzon/AP/File
This Jan. 20, 2008 file photo shows a view of the confluence of the Baker and Chacabuco rivers on the outskirts of Cochrane, in Chile's Aysen region. Chile's government rejected a proposal to dam Patagonian rivers to meet the country's growing energy demands, handing a victory Tuesday, June 10, 2014 to environmentalists who praised the ruling as a landmark moment.

Chile's government rejected an $8 billion proposal to dam Patagonian rivers to meet the country's growing energy demands, handing a victory to environmentalists who praised Tuesday's ruling as a landmark moment.

A ministerial commission rejected the HidroAysen plan, which would have tamed two of the world's wildest rivers and built more than 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) of power lines to supply energy to central Chile.

After a three-hour meeting, Chile's ministers of agriculture, energy, mining, economy, and health voted unanimously to reject the project. The committee "decided to side with complaints presented by the community," Environment Minister Pablo Badenier told reporters. "As of now, the hydroelectric project has been rejected."

The project would have built five dams on the Baker and Pascua rivers in Aysen, a mostly roadless region of southern Patagonia where rainfall is nearly constant and rivers plunge from Andean glaciers to the Pacific Ocean through green valleys and fjords.

Patricio Rodrigo, executive secretary of the Patagonia Defense Council, called the decision "the greatest triumph of the environmental movement in Chile."

It "marks a turning point, where an empowered public demands to be heard and to participate in the decisions that affect their environment and their lives," Rodrigo said.

Chile is strapped for energy, but most Chileans opposed HidroAysen, and protests against it at times turned violent.

With its energy-intensive mining industry demanding more power, experts say Chile must triple its current 16,000-megawatt capacity in just 15 years, despite having no domestic oil or natural gas resources. The dams were planned to generate a total of 2,750 megawatts, almost a third of central Chile's current needs, within 12 years.

Before she was elected last year, President Michelle Bachelet had said the HidroAysen plan was not viable. She announced last month that she instead would tackle Chile's energy crunch by building up alternative energy sources and terminals for liquefied natural gas.

The HidroAysen venture is 51 percent owned by European energy generator Endesa and 49 percent owned by the Chilean company Colbun SA. Endesa is a Spanish subsidiary of the Italian energy company Enel SpA.

The company can appeal the decision before an environmental court, and analysts expect a long legal battle.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.