A Mega-Dam Dilemma in the Amazon
A huge dam on Peru's Inambari River will bring much-needed development to the region. But at what cost?
- By Clay Risen
- Photographs by Ivan Kashinsky
- Smithsonian magazine, March 2011, Subscribe
(Page 3 of 5)
Under Brack, the ministry has rewritten sections of the Peruvian penal code to make it easier to prosecute polluters, and it has won significant budget increases. Brack has placed more than 200,000 square miles of rain forest under protection, and he has set a goal of zero deforestation by 2021. Thanks in part to him, Peru is the only Latin American country to sign the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, an effort led by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair to make the mining industry more accountable to public and government scrutiny.
Brack has also taken over enforcement of artisanal-mining laws from the Ministry of Energy and Mining. “There are now 20 people in jail” for breaking Peru’s environmental laws, he said. A few days before our meeting, police had raided a series of mines in Madre de Dios and made 21 arrests. He told me he wants to deploy the army to protect the country’s nature preserves.
But Brack acknowledged that it is difficult to enforce laws created in Lima, by coastal politicians, in a remote part of the country suffering from gold fever. Last April thousands of members of the National Federation of Independent Miners blocked the Pan-American Highway to protest a plan to tighten regulations on artisanal miners; the demonstration turned violent and five people were killed. Brack said several police officers involved in anti-mining raids had received death threats, and the Independent Miners has demanded that he be sacked. “I have a lot of enemies in Madre de Dios,” he said.
Unlike the leftist governments of Ecuador and Venezuela, Peru and Brazil have been led, of late, by pragmatic centrists who see good fiscal management and rapid internal development as the key to long-term prosperity. By aggressively exploiting its resources, Brazil has created a relatively stable society anchored by a strong and growing middle class. Dilma Rousseff, Lula’s handpicked successor as president, says she will continue her mentor’s policies.
Lula reduced Brazil’s poverty rate from 26.7 percent in 2002, when he entered office, to 15.3 percent in 2009—accounting for some 20 million people. Peru has done almost as well: it has reduced its poverty rate from 50 percent to 35 percent, a difference of about four million people. But farming and resource extraction require lots of land and energy, which is why Brazil is expected to need 50 percent more electricity in the next decade, and Peru at least 40 percent more. In the short term, both countries will have to keep pushing deeper into the Amazon to generate electricity.
Meanwhile, they are under pressure from trading partners and finance organizations such as the World Bank to manage their growth with less environmental damage. Brazil has a bad reputation for its decades of rain forest destruction; it has little interest in becoming known as a polluter, too. With the world’s focus on limiting fossil-fuel consumption, hydropower has become the easy answer.
Until recently, Brazil had focused its hydropower construction within its own borders. But a hydropower facility works best near a drop in elevation; gravity pushes water through its turbines more quickly, generating more electricity—and Brazil is almost completely flat. Which is why, over the past decade, Brazil has underwritten mega-dams in Bolivia, Paraguay and Peru.
In 2006, Brazil and Peru began negotiating an agreement to construct at least five dams throughout Peru, most of which would sell power to Brazil to feed the growth in its southwestern states. Those negotiations produced the deal that García and Lula signed last summer.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (11)
As you can see, this project needs a place to develop the dam. And it´s going to manage this project by 30 years. So, do you think they are going to create a crisis situation by three decades? It is just impossible. What is going to happen is this project needs to get an agreement with all villages around and fulfill all these commitments (anyway, people isn´t going to move). They don´t have any alternative. According to Peruvian legislation, population is not going to be fired from their houses, but relocated to new places in better living conditions. And obviously, the more than 50 year experience of Brazilian companies is a guarantee for managing environmental issues in the best way (In 21st Century, they must be learned, don´t they?). I see they have to carry on all their duties.
Posted by Ricardo on May 30,2011 | 10:34 PM
I think what the article says is just only a one part of the true, because as everything, it has a lot of positive things like people will get more jobs, will be economic tourism, etc. And about the nature, it will take the 7% of the nature in those few meters. And with the money that the project get, the reforestaton will come back. And I'm a native
Posted by alejandro on April 7,2011 | 12:14 AM
"What I find strange is that the government of Peru didn't finance the project themselves. The Return on investment of a dam like this is quite high and to take financing from the Brazilians means they are probably selling themselves short." Well said! But Garcia, the present President of Peru (known to have amassed a fortune while serving...as they all do) who cut this deal with the Brazilian president, knows what he is doing: don't doubt that he will be getting paid for "cutting Peru short."
Posted by Aliza on April 2,2011 | 03:08 PM
"...like the other local residents I talked to, she was happy about the hospital and the new houses the government has offered to build them farther uphill. In the meantime, there was the possibility of getting a job on a construction crew. “It will be better for us,” she said. “It will bring work.”"
This is another attempt by the government to empty out the rainforest so that the resources are more accessible to exploit. Just ask the communities in the Lima and Ica provinces, who have witnessed a mass migration of highland indigents into the coastal areas due to the promise of jobs (in the oil industry) and free housing. The jobs never materialized and the free housing consists of decaying mud brick houses with no running water or sanitation services.
Posted by Lynn Wilbur on March 20,2011 | 09:16 PM
I'm a peruvian guy and nothing about this article is true
Posted by Samuel on March 14,2011 | 08:47 PM
Fascinating news. Would love to hear the history of this development. Can you tell me who is Maria? Would love to know who is sending this information and why it got to me.
Does Maria have an e.mail address and information to be able to place her>
Posted by Sylvia A.G;abach on March 5,2011 | 09:10 PM
María: Development for whom? For the people living there, it's not that they will not have electricity after the dam is constructed, they already have electricity, but from petrol. You prefer that? You prefer illegal miners? You prefer the extraction of cashews to the indutrialization of the cashews? or the extraction of trees instead of the construction of finished goods? Nice life is good for you, but not for them? They are OK with what you idealize as an "avatar" existance, but in the practice means lifes of misery? Speak to them and you'll see that what they want is not a leftist utopia, but very concrete things, like Broadband internet, STABLE electricity for transformation of the resources, roads, etc. It's amazing to hear the "natives" shouting in the protest "access to broadband internet" and the "good hearted" leftist activists and the international NGOs hear "we want to live a "natural" and short life" Grow up! Nobody is for the destruction of the amazon jungle, but WE NEED TO GROW. It's not a question of "good" natives vs. development, but just WISE regulations. If you have good ideas about how we can live better lifes, plentiful of opportunities, the same you had when you were growing up,let us know. We as a country, need the money and the electricity. Period.
Posted by Leo on March 4,2011 | 02:46 AM
Is the results of the dam going to be similar to the Anwar dam in Egypt?
Posted by Barbara on March 3,2011 | 05:01 PM
In terms of direct economic benefit a 2000 MW dam like this brings in about 0.75 to 1 billion dollars a year just from the electricity generated. In a country where the Gross National Income is a tad under $2000 per capita, this is the equivalent of providing another 500,000 jobs..
What I find strange is that the government of Peru didn't finance the project themselves. The Return on investment of a dam like this is quite high and to take financing from the Brazilians means they are probably selling themselves short.
Posted by Sparky on March 3,2011 | 03:39 AM
Unbelievable! I actually felt that I was in this story. I have been to Puerto Maldonado for the last two years on medical missions in the native villages along the river. I actually took photographs of many of the scenes and people in this article. There doesn't seem to be any interest or even knowledge of the dam construction project in P.M. The gold-mining along the river goes on seemingly unabated (contrary to the statements in this story). The people are poor but they seem content and unworried by the world's problems. I have a great deal of respect for them and for that native people in the villages along the river. They're building a bridge across the river in P.M. They started it in 1978 and are just now finishing it. With that in mind, I'm not too concerned about this dam being finished in four years - if at all.
Posted by Michael McMorrow on February 28,2011 | 08:40 PM
"Bring much needed development?" Development for whom? The electricity from these dams is being sent to Brazil not used for the people in Peru. The people being displaced by the dam will probably still not have electricity after it is built. Not to mention the environmental toll these dams will take, which affect us all as the carbon is released when the forest is destroyed. Also, what about communities down stream who rely on the water and fish populations? I think this project is a catastrophe on every level.
Posted by Maria on February 25,2011 | 03:36 PM