Limiting dam development

By Darren Weeks

The Asian Development Bank has released its latest newsletter, Water For All News, in which they ask the question: "Where Are We On The Dams and Development Debate?"

The newsletter features a commentary by Ramaswamy Iyer, who served as Secretary of Water Resources for the Government of India, and led that country to its first national water policy in 1987.

In his commentary, Iyer says,

Big dams are major interventions in nature. They alter geography and local climate, have serious environmental/ecological consequences, and disrupt the lives and livelihoods of large numbers of people. They also involve questions of control, equity and social justice. As the World Commission on Dams (WCD) found out, their benefits (irrigation, hydro-electric power) often come at extremely high costs and go to one set of people, leaving another set to shoulder the social costs. I would therefore like to say "Yes, big dams are bad and should be avoided."

Unfortunately, I can't.

He then proceeds to admit that there are some benefits of dams, but stresses that the benefits should be weighed against the environmental risks and detriments, and all of it within the context of other damaging human development.

We can gather a lot of evidence against dams, but then we can do the same for other features of the modern world that pass for "development" — nuclear power plants, megalopolises, exploding automobile population, conversion of wetlands into urban centers, and so on.

If we say "No" to big dams, we should be prepared to say "No" to those other things as well. But this requires a rethinking of what we see as "development," and at the moment, it is difficult to imagine such a radical exercise taking place.

I've stressed over and over on my radio broadcast and in this web space, that the agenda of sustainable development means the absolute curtailment of human activities. One of those fast-approaching curtailments is in the area of water.

The comments of this water "expert", is published on the website of the Asian Development Bank, which is an arm of the international banking cartel. At the pinnacle of control of the Asian Development Bank is the same international banksters who control the Federal Reserve system — the Bank for International Settlements, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank.

These global banksters have already begun charging the people of various countries for the air they breathe. The system of carbon credit trading is utilized in the Kyoto protocol, which is presently being implemented in the United States through the back door, by various mayors of major cities.

Now, the control of water is heavily under way. Rest assured that these totalitarians won't quit until they control every drop. What does that mean for you? A "profound reorientation" of your lifestyle, just like environmental attorney Daniel Sitarz declared. You will be forced to change your water consumption.

Iyer continues,

Instead of focusing primarily on the supply side of the equation, I believe we should focus on how we can limit the demand for water, increase the benefit from each unit of water, and minimize its wastage. This would lessen, although not rule out, the constant need to augment water available for use.

Having said that, there are three ways in which water available for use can be augmented: rainwater-harvesting, groundwater drilling and large projects (for storage, i.e., dams and reservoirs, or for long-distance water transfers). Each of these would have its impacts and consequences.

The impacts and consequences of large dams are fairly well known by now. In recent years, the reckless exploitation of groundwater and the consequent depletion and/or contamination of aquifers have begun to cause serious concern. Rainwater-harvesting has barely begun to be promoted, but some critics are already cautioning against extensive recourse to this. Obviously, if we say `No' to each of these three possibilities because of the negative aspects, we will face an impossible situation. It follows that a wise and prudent combination of all three would need to be adopted.

My own recommendation would be to treat local, community-led augmentation as the first choice, with big dams and long-distance water transfers as projects of the last resort. There should also be stringent regulation of groundwater extraction.

Already, we are seeing the metering of private water wells in various areas. Shortages of water can be created through artificial weather manipulation (cloud seeding).

Curtailing dam development is one major component of the implementation Agenda 21. For more on limiting dam development, see Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision Making.