Eleven proposed hydroelectric projects on the Mekong River in Southeast Asia threaten migratory fish stocks, regional food security, and the livelihoods of millions of people, warns a new campaign launched by environmental groups.
The Save the Mekong coalition says the dams would "block major fish migrations and disrupt this vitally important river, placing at risk millions of people who depend upon the Mekong for their food security and income." Several threatened species — including the critically endangered Irrawaddy dolphin and the giant catfish — would be at risk, as would important tourist sites, including Khone Falls, Asia's largest waterfall. More than 2,100 square kilometers of land — including agricultural areas, wetlands and tropical forests — would be flooded.
Fisherman on the Mekong in Laos' Siphandone area near the proposed Don Sahong dam. Photo by: Rhett A. Butler.
Most of the projects are planned in Laos, a poor, but resource-rich country that shares the Mekong as a border with Cambodia and Thailand. The dams would generate more than 20 megawatts of power, most of which would go to cities in Thailand and Vietnam.
"Big dams don't develop Laos; they destroy invaluable rivers and resources upon which Lao people depend for daily survival," said Shannon Lawrence, Lao Program Director for International Rivers — a coalition member — and editor of Power Surge, a report outlining the dams proposed in the country.
Khone Falls. Photo by: Rhett A. Butler.
"Mekong mainstream dams - like Don Sahong - would be a tragic and costly mistake," said Dr. Carl Middleton, International Rivers' Mekong Program Coordinator. "For only 360 megawatts of electricity, Don Sahong would devastate fisheries that are central to people’s food security and the wider economy and undermine the region’s growing tourism potential. In a region where wild-capture fisheries are valued at US$2 billion per year and are of critical importance to riparian communities, these dams simply don't add up."
Laos, the battery of asian country, it sounds good but we have to invest, we can't get nothing from nothing, for me, the dams construction is a good thing : we shall have plenty of fish in this huge basin, we shall have enough water for the next decades as the mekong's level is dropping from year to year, for the wood, if the lao government manage it well, it can get money from it too. and for the reptiles and other wild animals we could create a special place for them and in anyway, human must come first, if there is someone who think that animals are more precious and more important than people... then I have not anything to talk with. Have fine day !
I think, now Laos is peaceful country therefore the dams is good for lao people and it's country. Lao people have the rights to development their own country by their potential what they we have in order to get out of LDCs, western countires had destroyed the nature in 18 and 19 century for develop their countries before us , they have avery thing today thank to the nature but now do not want our country develop and wanted Laos belong and depens on them in term of money, technology, rice , housing..., Lao people had been suffered from france and American for more then 80 years and they didnot do any thing for us, just only droped the Cluster munitions and divided our society and destroyed what we had . I support the said project, take care oursefl it better to be begger.
You said al that I just wanted to say, yes , you are right, now westerner countries want to oblige south asian and south american countries to keep intact the rain forests to save the world from the heatwave but do not intend to lose a cent, it cannot be done and it is not fair sir ! Regards.
Did you really read? "they destroy invaluable rivers and resources upon which Lao people depend for daily survival,""
Who will suffer from bad consequencies of inapropriate dam projects? lao people first.
There is just a balance to be found : of course lao need to develop and have the right to do it... but on the other hand, experience of already developed countries is percious and should be considered: we know now that sometimes (often), development project have more "hidden drawbacks" than real benefits, and so the environmental impact of any development project have to be seriously studied and considered, just to avoid local people to suffer from all the bad consequences of the project.
As an example, it's certainly a good thing to drive project such as Nam Theung II, but only if everything is made to compensate the population who will suffrer from this project... On the contrary, building dams directly over mekong river is certainly not a good thing, because in such case, the drawbacks are tremendous and cannot be compensated in any way.... or maybe only at higher cost that the benefits of the projects.