Belo Monte Dam in Brazil - WITH UPDATES

[Tìtstewan]

I know. It was a symbolic question.

[Tìtstewan]

I got a PM from a member, and he told me, that this pictures are from 2008.
Here is a link to the article (portuguese):
Índios entram em confronto com PM no Amazonas

[Tsmuktengan]

Thank you for helping in spotting manipulation by photos picked out of context. 

[Teylar Ta Palulukankelku]

Saw those pictures on Facebook, ma Tsanten. Completely f**ked up  ! Irayo for sharing.

I got a PM from a member, and he told me, that this pictures are from 2008.
Here is a link to the article (portuguese):
Índios entram em confronto com PM no Amazonas

One may argue that it's bad to use pictures out of context like this, but keep in mind that the events depicted in these pictures are as real as the current crisis facing the Xingu communities.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Saw those pictures on Facebook, ma Tsanten. Completely f**ked up  ! Irayo for sharing.

I got a PM from a member, and he told me, that this pictures are from 2008.
Here is a link to the article (portuguese):
Índios entram em confronto com PM no Amazonas

One may argue that it's bad to use pictures out of context like this, but keep in mind that the events depicted in these pictures are as real as the current crisis facing the Xingu communities.

As real, but perhaps not as shocking?

[Tsanten Eywa 'eveng]

As I see the article was dated in the year 2008, it was before James Cameron were even there. He were going to the Brazilian rainforest in 2010, meeting with the Kayapo tribe. So that was after the tragical event where the Brazilian military invaded their homes, and took them away. That is a very brutal act. I am really glad JC where going there, to warn about this dam

[Toruk Makto]

http://news.mongabay.com/2013/0408-gen-brazil-dams-military.html

Indigenous group: Brazil using military to force Amazon dams
Jonathan Watts, The Guardian
April 08, 2013

An Amazonian community has threatened to "go to war" with the Brazilian government after what they say is a military incursion into their land by dam builders.

The Munduruku indigenous group in Para state say they have been betrayed by the authorities, who are pushing ahead with plans to build a cascade of hydropower plants on the Tapajós river without their permission.

Public prosecutors, human rights groups, environmental organizations and Christian missionaries have condemned what they call the government's strong-arm tactics.

According to witnesses in the area, helicopters, soldiers and armed police have been involved in Operation Tapajós, which aims to conduct an environmental impact assessment needed for the proposed construction of the 6,133MW São Luiz do Tapajós dam.

The facility, to be built by the Norte Energia consortium, is the biggest of two planned dams on the Tapajós, the fifth-largest river in the Amazon basin. The government's 10-year plan includes the construction of four larger hydroelectric plants on its tributary, the Jamanxim.

Under Brazilian law, major infrastructure projects require prior consultation with indigenous communities. Federal prosecutors say this has not happened and urge the courts to block the scheme which, they fear, could lead to bloodshed.

"The Munduruku have already stated on several occasions that they do not support studies for hydroelectric plants on their land unless there is full prior consultation," the prosecutors noted in a statement.

However, a court ruling last week gave the go-ahead for the survey. Government officials say that neither researchers nor logistical and support teams will enter indigenous villages. The closest they will get is about 30 miles from the nearest village, Sawré Maybu.


River in the Brazilian Amazon. Photo by: Rhett A. Butler.

The ministry of mines and energy noted on its website that 80 researchers, including biologists and foresters, would undertake a study of flora and fauna. The army escort was made possible by President Dilma Rousseff, who decreed this year that military personnel could be used for survey operations. Officials say the security is for the safety of the scientists and the local population.

Missionaries said the presence of armed troops near Sawré Maybu village, Itaituba, was intimidating, degrading and an unacceptable violation of the rights of the residents.

"In this operation, the federal government has been threatening the lives of the people," the Indigenous Missionary Council said. "It is unacceptable and illegitimate for the government to impose dialogue at the tip of a bayonet."

The group added that Munduruku leaders ended a phone call with representatives of the president with a declaration of war. They have also issued open letters calling for an end to the military operation. "We are not bandits. We feel betrayed, humiliated and disrespected by all this," a letter states.

One of the community's leaders, Valdenir Munduruku, has warned that locals will take action if the government does not withdraw its taskforce by 10 April, when the two sides are set to talk. He has called for support from other indigenous groups, such as the Xingu, facing similar threats from hydroelectric dams.

Environmental groups have expressed concern. The 1,200-mile waterway is home to more than 300 fish species and provides sustenance to some of the most biodiverse forest habitats on Earth. Ten indigenous groups inhabit the basin, along with several tribes in voluntary isolation.

With similar conflicts over other proposed dams in the Amazon, such as those at Belo Monte, Teles Pires, Santo Antônio and Jirau, some compare the use of force to the last great expansion of hydropower during the military dictatorship.

"The Brazilian government is making political decisions about the dams before the environmental impact assessment is done," said Brent Millikan of the International Rivers environmental group.

"The recent military operations illustrate that the federal government is willing to disregard existing legal instruments intended to foster dialogue between government and civil society."

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

I think a large reason why nothing is moving forward is all these overreactions from the indigenous people. Surveying is very far from "impose dialogue at the tip of a bayonet". I do agree that the military should move far away if the talks start tho. Even if eventually the dam is built, there should be a mutual agreement and the military, and any potential indigenous militants, should move far, far away. Nothing is going to go correct if you bring violent force into the mix.

[Toruk Makto]

I think a large reason why nothing is moving forward is all these overreactions from the indigenous people. Surveying is very far from "impose dialogue at the tip of a bayonet". I do agree that the military should move far away if the talks start tho. Even if eventually the dam is built, there should be a mutual agreement and the military, and any potential indigenous militants, should move far, far away. Nothing is going to go correct if you bring violent force into the mix.

These people are being forced off their land at gunpoint. It's kind of hard to overreact to that.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

I think a large reason why nothing is moving forward is all these overreactions from the indigenous people. Surveying is very far from "impose dialogue at the tip of a bayonet". I do agree that the military should move far away if the talks start tho. Even if eventually the dam is built, there should be a mutual agreement and the military, and any potential indigenous militants, should move far, far away. Nothing is going to go correct if you bring violent force into the mix.

These people are being forced off their land at gunpoint. It's kind of hard to overreact to that.

Hmm. The summary you posted did not seem to imply that it is happening right now, only that the natives fear it will happen if the troops stay.

[Toruk Makto]

It is happening now.

[Raiden]

http://news.mongabay.com/2013/0417-hance-tapajos-dam.html

It won't last long.

I wish Dilma would drop dead.

She would make a good meal for the maggots.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

It seems Beazil is hell-bent on generating an enormous amount of electric power for what??-- Centrifuges to enrich uranium?     With this kind of disregard for everyone and everything, they are starting to sound like North Korea, as well as the RDA.

6,133 MW? And they want to build several of these? To put this in perspective, Hoover Dam here in the US, one of our largest dams,only generates 2,080 MW of power. Another way to look at it that 6,133 MW is about the same as four large nuclear plants.

When Brazil gets done with these dams, they will have lots of cheap power. But will this be worth the permanent destruction to one of the world's great ecosystems that this will cause? Has it ever occurred to them that altering the nature of this much area could result in a climate change in the area that will reduce rainfall in the region, and limit what the dams can produce?

[Tìtstewan]

Unfortunately, the Brazilians want the energy for their industry. They also want to be an economic power, like China and India. To achieve their goals, the nature and the Indians must go. As the motto, business is a religion that has priority. Sad only.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

It seems Beazil is hell-bent on generating an enormous amount of electric power for what??-- Centrifuges to enrich uranium?     With this kind of disregard for everyone and everything, they are starting to sound like North Korea, as well as the RDA.

6,133 MW? And they want to build several of these? To put this in perspective, Hoover Dam here in the US, one of our largest dams,only generates 2,080 MW of power. Another way to look at it that 6,133 MW is about the same as four large nuclear plants.

When Brazil gets done with these dams, they will have lots of cheap power. But will this be worth the permanent destruction to one of the world's great ecosystems that this will cause? Has it ever occurred to them that altering the nature of this much area could result in a climate change in the area that will reduce rainfall in the region, and limit what the dams can produce?

Which brings me to the point. Why not build nuclear power plants? As paranoid people are over them, they are the most cost-effective in terms of environmental costs versus energy production. And they can be placed far, far away from the Amazon. Hell, even if they put them next to a native settlement, it's not like it'll dump out toxic chemicals or mess up a river. Hydroelectric sounds so nice but it severely damages ecosystems, which are particularly sensitive to damage in an environment like the Amazon.

And 6,133 MW can be generated simply by building lots of nuclear plants, preferably around cities to minimize damage to the environment in the building process.

[Tìtstewan]

Which brings me to the point. Why not build nuclear power plants? As paranoid people are over them, they are the most cost-effective in terms of environmental costs versus energy production. And they can be placed far, far away from the Amazon. Hell, even if they put them next to a native settlement, it's not like it'll dump out toxic chemicals or mess up a river. Hydroelectric sounds so nice but it severely damages ecosystems, which are particularly sensitive to damage in an environment like the Amazon.

And 6,133 MW can be generated simply by building lots of nuclear plants, preferably around cities to minimize damage to the environment in the building process.

I see you are pro nuclear power.
Where we put the highly radioactive materials? Chernobyl, Fukushima, Mayak, Sella Field, Three Mile Island etc. was not enough? The uranium reserves will only about 60-70 years. The point is that when a reactor explode, tell the indians that they must not eat fruits and catch fish more...

But I will not start a discusion about nuclear power here.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Which brings me to the point. Why not build nuclear power plants? As paranoid people are over them, they are the most cost-effective in terms of environmental costs versus energy production. And they can be placed far, far away from the Amazon. Hell, even if they put them next to a native settlement, it's not like it'll dump out toxic chemicals or mess up a river. Hydroelectric sounds so nice but it severely damages ecosystems, which are particularly sensitive to damage in an environment like the Amazon.

And 6,133 MW can be generated simply by building lots of nuclear plants, preferably around cities to minimize damage to the environment in the building process.

I see you are pro nuclear power.
Where we put the highly radioactive materials? Chernobyl, Fukushima, Mayak, Sella Field, Three Mile Island etc. was not enough? The uranium reserves will only about 60-70 years. The point is that when a reactor explode, tell the indians that they must not eat fruits and catch fish more...

But I will not start a discusion about nuclear power here.

Only Chernobyl and Fukushima are really disasters, and the latter was not nearly as deadly as people think. Also, way more people die from dam bursts and oil refinery explosions than reactor explosions, even ignoring the extreme rarity of reactor "explosions" (actually, meltdowns) compared to the former. A broken dam easily kills thousands of people. Fukushima, about the worst meltdowns in modern reactors can get, killed tens of people, though the decontamination wasted a ridiculous amount of money.

Three Mile Island was a joke. Absolutely nobody was harmed in the accident, and nobody would have been harmed if the people were not evacuated.

Uranium reserves will last 60-70 years, about enough time for fusion reactors to be developed which will use hydrogen which is of course everywhere. Fusion reactors have even less safety issues than nuclear power plants, and even the most anti-nuclear "environmentalists" agree that they can't meltdown or leak radiation. Deuterium resources will last thousands of years.

Also, on the limited uranium reserves, it's an easily solvable problem. Just use light water reactors, plus all our useless nuclear weapons as fuel.

Also, you are talking of "when a reactor explode" as if that's the only way reactors can end. No. The vast vast majority of reactors end their lives by getting replaced, not by "exploding". Even then, the damage to the environment would be much less than, say, an oil refinery explosion or a dam burst. Note that the area around Chernobyl is currently a wildlife haven since, of course, all the people are gone

[Tìtstewan]

Only Chernobyl and Fukushima are really disasters, and the latter was not nearly as deadly as people think. Also, way more people die from dam bursts and oil refinery explosions than reactor explosions, even ignoring the extreme rarity of reactor "explosions" (actually, meltdowns) compared to the former. A broken dam easily kills thousands of people. Fukushima, about the worst meltdowns in modern reactors can get, killed tens of people, though the decontamination wasted a ridiculous amount of money.

Three Mile Island was a joke. Absolutely nobody was harmed in the accident, and nobody would have been harmed if the people were not evacuated.

And what about Majak, Russia? Did you have knew that on this place drives trucks with 5cm lead-amor and the drivers has only 15 minutes to drive away from the contaminated lakes today? That accident in Majak happend in 1957. The Soviets have this accident, of course, kept secret for a long time. There are contaminated lakes with 2,2 · 10¹⁴ Bq up to 4 · 10¹⁸ Bq (4 EBq / 4 Quintillion Bq). That like Chernobyl.

Also, on the limited uranium reserves, it's an easily solvable problem. Just use light water reactors, plus all our useless nuclear weapons as fuel.

Just tell this to China, India, Pakistan, Israel, Russia, Kim Jong Un...

Also, you are talking of "when a reactor explode" as if that's the only way reactors can end. No. The vast vast majority of reactors end their lives by getting replaced, not by "exploding". Even then, the damage to the environment would be much less than, say, an oil refinery explosion or a dam burst. Note that the area around Chernobyl is currently a wildlife haven since, of course, all the people are gone

The contamination of nature is not necessary and the risk for this we need not increase.

[Tsmuktengan]

There are countries who are specilized in the recycling and storage of nuclear wastes.

The thing is that brazil seems to have had one or more small bad experiences with nuclear stuff : there is actualy one unique nuclear power plant in Brazil, the Angra power plant. It is known for havig a catastrophic record, with very regular malfunctions and stops, and for releasing in 2001 150 litres of radioactive water leaked from a reservoir straight into the atlantic ocean.

But this is not the only issue Brazil had with nuclear substances : Brazillians have lived one of the worst nuclear disasters and radiological accidents of all time... but it did not involve a nuclear power plant. It is the Goiânia accident, a radioactive contamination accident that occurred on September 13, 1987, after an old radiotherapy source was stolen from an abandoned hospital site in the city. It was subsequently handled by many people, resulting in four deaths. About 112,000 people were examined for radioactive contamination and 249 were found to have significant levels of radioactive material in or on their body. Read the article to understand this disaster.

We live in a radioactive world, and use radioactivity not only to produce power, but also for essential uses especially in the medical sector; All these uses are extremely dangerous if it is not controlled strictly and if issues aren't anticipated. But they lend immense services that help a lot.

There have been these very bad experiences, and I would even speculate more or less blindly on the patern they seem to apparently reproduce : the incapacity of brazilians authorities to take pedantic measures to ensure risky activities stafe safe at all time. Even for the airline sector, even though the brazilian airlines and pilots are well trained and well behaving, the authorities were not able to guarantee safe air trafic control, nor really satisfying airport safety, resulting in deadly accidents that could have been prevented. Also, many buildings in Brazilian cities weren't built using good materials and good principles of architecture and safety, meaning that 40 years after their construction, numerous buildings like big shopping centers in Rio and Sao Paulo can collapse anytime on thousands of people, in the absence of public inititative to ensure constructions are safe or properly maintained.

... and I am not even sure the existing dams are properly maintained to ensure they won't break, generating yet another deadly disaster. There are actually much more dam failures than serious nuclear incidents. It also takes time before nature can repair from this.

Any consequent human activity to produce energy has risks. Everything depends on :

• The direct impact one technique can have on the environment (and we are part of it)
• It's possible indirect impact, later in time or due to an uncontrolled incident
• The ability and competence of one or more authorities to ensure as much as possible the safety of everyone and of the environment

Everything's relative here. but Brazil public sector looks like it has a fame for being incapable of preventing issues from happening, and maintaining stuff properly, starting by their power grid, which appears to be utterly ineffective, once again. And so there isn't just one answer that should be applied to try to solve all these problems that take their source into the lack of serious of the brazilian authorities and politics. 

To conclude all this, even though nuclear power can be such a great thing (I am also a generally pro-nuclear for a number of reasons), I am thankful they did not continue their nuclear project considering their lack of serious and experience would certainly cause more issues, even with Westinghouse behind like it is currently the case for the unique plant. I am however not thankful of the brazilian public management of energy. The Belo Monte issue would perhaps not exist if they had better resource and energy maintenance and policies.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Well, I think this is a Brazilian issue then. It does no good to just yell at the government for Belo Monte. Sure, if you campaign hard enough perhaps the dam would not be built. That simply means that Brazil builds tons or more oil or coal plants, or build the dam elsewhere that might harm other tribes. They get angry and eventually the dam gets moved to non-native settlement area. And the other Brazilians get angry, ad infinitum. Tsmuktengan was quite correct that energy mismanagement causes all these problems.