ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT OF LARGE-SCALE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS AMONG TOPICS DISCUSSED BY ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE

Press Release
ENR/8

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT OF LARGE-SCALE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS AMONG TOPICS DISCUSSED BY ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE

The importance of assessing the environmental and social impact of large- scale hydroelectric projects and the merits of large dams as opposed to small or medium-size ones were among the issues under consideration as the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for Development met this morning to take up two agenda items.

Introducing the Secretary-General's report on the multi-purpose use of hydro resources (document E/C.14/2000/5), Kyaw Kyaw Shane of the Energy and Transport Branch of the Division of Sustainable Development said that expanding the use of hydropower was cost-effective, did not create market distortions and could sharply reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector. However, environmental degradations, effects on fish and reduced water flow must be addressed. For large-scale hydropower development, population displacement could be minimized by careful site selection and project design limiting the maximum reservoir level.

He told the 24-member Committee that concerns about environmental impacts and land requirements for reservoirs had recently constrained multilateral assistance in hydropower development in developing countries. That should be examined in the context of current discussions on carbon emissions and global warming, giving careful consideration to both developmental needs and environmental and social concerns.

Stressing the need to address the environmental and social risks of hydropower generation up front, an expert from Iceland noted that hydropower had been the driving force behind rural electrification in his own country and could be very important for the developing countries, especially those in Africa. They could learn from mistakes that had been made in the developed countries. Environmental impact assessments, therefore, could be a vital tool in mitigating the ill effects of power projects.

An expert from the United States felt that the Secretary-General's report did not sufficiently discuss the environmental and social costs of hydroelectric projects and their incorporation into the overall cost of a project. The World Commission on Large Dams was bringing together experts from around the world to look at the environmental and social costs of large dams.

Natural Resources Committee - 2 - Press Release ENR/8 2nd Meeting (AM) 21 August 2000

Another expert, from Bangladesh, said large dams had become a controversial subject on the Indian sub-continent due to their location on waterfalls and earthquake-prone zones. Small and medium-size dams in the form of cascades could minimize the impact of seismic activity. An expert from Thailand said people's resistance to projects could be reduced by involving the public in decision-making from the beginning.

Committee Chairman Christian Katsande (Zimbabwe), pointing out that the rising cost of fuel over the past year could be passed on to the consumer, said that only State policies to develop hydroelectric generation could bring long-term stability to prices.

An expert from the Russian Federation said hydroelectric power in his country had risen to 30 per cent of total energy production in recent years. The cost of production was 10 times less than that of producing thermal energy. Hydroelectric power projects had a multiple purpose, including water supply, navigation and flood control.

Another relevant factor was the role of private investment, an expert from Costa Rica pointed out. The private sector was less likely to invest in projects with a development cycle of 10 and 15 years. Investing in thermal energy was often preferred because of the short-term benefit and the uncertainties involved in the construction of a hydroelectric plant.

Emphasizing the need for criteria of accountability, an expert from Sweden said there must be a more sophisticated dialogue regarding the environment. It was necessary to take into account both the negative and positive aspects of man's impact on the environment. An expert from China said human activities had always and would always have an impact on the environment.

Earlier, the Committee had considered the outcome of the seventh and eighth sessions of the Commission on Sustainable Development and heard a statement by Manuel Dengo, Chief of the Natural Resources and Minerals Branch.

He said that the General Assembly should help provide the platform for the North-South dialogue on approaches to development. Agenda 21 should not be renegotiated and it was necessary to look at emerging trends relating to all areas of Agenda 21. The 2002 session of the Commission on Sustainable Development should be open-ended to include the delegations of all United Nations Member States, which would review the work done and report to the Commission.

Replying to a question by an expert from Sweden, he said that a paper submitted by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) had been one of the main elements of the Commission's consideration of issues relating to integrated land management, including water and minerals. Delegates had agreed on the need to examine new challenges, trends and opportunities as they emerged.

Also speaking this morning were experts from France, Ukraine, El Salvador, Algeria, Egypt, China, Iran and the Netherlands.

The Committee will meet again on Thursday, 24 August, at 3 p.m.

* *** *