Hydropower Propaganda Disguised as Science
Himanshu Thakkar
Clear headed piece from Peter Bosshard: "The new report
was prepared in close cooperation with the hydropower industry. The IEA authors
consulted 34 experts for the publication, 29 of which work for hydropower
companies and other institutions promoting the technology. It is no surprise
that an industry lobby would prepare a biased and unscientific report."
http://www.internationalrivers.org/blogs/227/hydropower-propaganda-disguised-as-science
Hydropower Propaganda Disguised as Science
By Peter Bosshard
International Rivers, November 8, 2012
www.internationalrivers.org/node/7719
The International Energy Agency (IEA) advises industrialized countries on
energy policy and energy security. For decades, the organization has been
beholden to the oil, gas, nuclear and hydropower industries. A Technology
Roadmap on Hydropower published recently by the IEA reads like a propaganda piece
by the dam industry. It calls for increased government subsidies, and
consistently downplays the impacts and risks of hydropower projects.
The IEA published its new hydropower report as part of a series of energy
sector roadmaps. Hydropower is a long established technology, and produces
almost one sixth of the world's electricity. The report asserts that the
technology generates "much more [electricity] than wind, solar, geothermal
and other sources combined," and will remain "the major renewable
electricity generation technology worldwide … for a long time."
With thousands of projects built in past decades, hydropower still generates
much more energy than renewable sources. Yet when it comes to creating new
capacity to mitigate climate change, wind and solar energy have overtaken
hydropower. In 2011, for example, 40 gigawatts of wind and 30 gigawatts of
solar capacity came online, compared to 25 gigawatts for hydropower. The IEA,
which has neglected renewable energy sources for years, is silent about this
trend.
The IEA predicts that hydropower capacity will roughly double to 1,947
gigawatts by 2050. This would require the construction of thousands of new
large dams. The biggest increases are expected to occur in China and other
Asian countries and - at a much lower level - in Africa.
Dams ravage floodplains which are among the richest and most productive
ecosystems on Earth. Freshwater systems such as rivers, wetlands and lakes are
already more seriously affected by species extinction than any other major
ecosystem, and dams are one of the main reasons for this. You would expect that
a roadmap for the global expansion of hydropower would assess how much more
damming freshwater ecosystems can absorb before they collapse. Yet the IEA
skirts this question.
The new report acknowledges that hydropower plants "may significantly
affect natural aquatic and terrestrial habitats." Yet it asserts, without
elaboration, that "all these effects can be mitigated by thorough
flow-management programmes." This contradicts the empirical evidence of
the independent World Commission on Dams, which found that efforts to mitigate
(rather than avoid) the environmental impacts of dams have usually failed.
The most attractive locations for dams have already been used, and doubling
hydropower capacity would likely require the displacement of scores of millions
of people. The report does not address the widespread impoverishment and misery
that dam displacement has caused. Again without elaboration, it claims that
"with careful planning and implementation these issues can be avoided,
minimized, mitigated or compensated."
The IEA report also downplays the amount of greenhouse gases produced by
hydropower projects. Shallow tropical reservoirs can emit more greenhouse gases
- particularly methane - than thermal power projects with an equal output of
electricity. A peer-reviewed research paper estimates that such reservoir
emissions may amount to 4% of all human climate impacts. The IEA report simply
states that "some hydropower plants could contribute to GHG
emissions." It proposes measuring these emissions, but excludes the large
emissions from deforestation caused by dam building in pristine forests.
The more intense droughts brought about by climate change will reduce the
economic viability of hydropower dams, and the escalating floods will affect
their safety. The new publication acknowledges that climate change can have
"substantial" impacts on hydropower projects, but does not assess how
these long-term changes will affect their economics. This puts a fundamental
question mark behind the report’s ambitious expansion targets.
More than 40 countries - including the US, China, India and Brazil - offer
subsidies and other incentives for hydropower projects. The IEA report proposes
to expand such government support. Its recommendations include:
. All countries with hydropower potential should prepare inventories, set
targets for new projects and track their implementation.
. Since neither the public nor private investors are keen on dam building,
governments should "promote public and private acceptance of
hydropower."
. Governments should "develop effective financial models to support the
large number of appropriately sized hydro projects in developing regions."
. Governments should "streamline administrative processes [which include
environmental assessments] to reduce the lead time for hydropower
projects."
. Developers should follow sustainability guidelines and protocols, and
"avoid, minimize, mitigate or compensate negative socio-economic and
environmental impacts." Yet the report does not even mention the
framework of the World Commission on Dams, which provides the strongest
guidelines on dam building.
The International Energy Agency has a long record of boosting conventional
energy sources at the cost of renewables. Based on an analysis of forecasts
about the development of wind power, the Energy Watch Group found in 2008 that
the IEA was "by far the leading issuer of faulty predictions."
The new report was prepared in close cooperation with the hydropower industry.
The IEA authors consulted 34 experts for the publication, 29 of which work for
hydropower companies and other institutions promoting the technology. It is no
surprise that an industry lobby would prepare a biased and unscientific report.
It is less clear why the IEA's member governments would pay for and legitimize
such a piece of propaganda.
--
Himanshu Thakkar
South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People,
c/o 86-D, AD block, Shalimar Bagh,
Delhi 110088, India
himansh...@iitbombay.org, ht.s...@gmail.com
www.sandrp.in