Congo,
D.R: Inga dams mean big business for corporations and no benefit
for local communities
The Inga hydroelectric scheme (Inga 1, Inga 2, Inga 3 and Grand
Inga) is located 140 miles southwest of capital city Kinshasa. It
lies on the largest waterfall by volume in the world, the Inga falls,
where the Congo River drops 96 m (315 ft) over the course of nine
miles with an average flow of 42,476 m³/s.
The project started in 1920 during Belgian colonial rule. Colonial
authorities forced the site’s first inhabitants to leave without
any compensation. Inga’s displaced communities haven’t received
any compensation till today.
The hydroelectric plants Inga 1and Inga 2 were commissioned in 1972
and 1982. Both dams contributed heavily to the country's spiraling
debt crisis and currently operate at only 40% capacity because they
never received maintenance: about half of the 14 turbines don’t
work at all. (1)
Inga 3 would be a tunnel diversion hydropower scheme for electricity
export to South Africa and other neighboring countries, and to attract
energy-intensive industries to DRC, with a total cost up to $8 billion.
(2)
Grand Inga (see WRM Bulletin no. 77) was
proposed in the 1980s and was delayed by political conflict in central
Africa. It started moving again in April last year when seven African
governments and the world's largest banks and construction firms
met to plan the massive hydropower project with an estimated cost
of US$80 billion. Designed as a series of 52 750MW turbine installations,
the Grand Inga mega–project (which includes the related Inga 3),
could produce over twice the power generation of the world’s largest
and most notorious Three Gorges Dam in China.
Grand Inga will allegedly "light up Africa" thus allowing
industrialization as a way of alleviating the continent’s poverty.
Quoting International Rivers’ report: “Inga’s centralized grid system
is likely to do little to "light up" Africa for the 90%
of people now living without electricity, most of whom live in rural
areas outside the reach of power grids. Grid expansion is quite
costly, and trying to reach scattered rural communities would significantly
increase project costs as well as the cost of electricity. … Based
on historical trends, the trickle–down effects in the form of jobs
and taxes will likely be minimal for Africa’s poorest, while also
increasing unsustainable national debt loads.” (3)
Indeed, the mega-project will provide industrial economic growth
for foreign businesses seeking cheap electricity and financial opportunities
for Africa’s elite business and government leaders. They have the
financial support of the World Bank Group, the European Investment
Bank and the African Development Bank as well as the political leverage
of the G8 countries.
Also, according to a The Guardian’s article, “Grand Inga's prospects
of being completed by 2022 are said to have risen significantly
in the last year as countries, banks and private companies have
found they can earn high returns from the emerging global carbon
offset market and UN climate change credits.” (4)
In a time of credit crunch, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM),
a market-based program to subsidize alleged low-carbon projects
in developing countries allowing industrial polluters to continue
“business as usual”, represents another highly needed source of
money for such a millionaire scheme. Grand Inga project is being
sold as “clean and environmentally friendly” energy that can offset
carbon emissions elsewhere “by harnessing run–of–river hydroelectricity
as opposed to damming up a river".
But as International Rivers warns: “While run–of–river projects
can have less damaging consequences than storage dams, they are
often far from environmentally benign. The term ‘run–of–river’ is
undefined, and is often therefore used to ‘greenwash’ projects.
In fact, many run–of–river dams have large dam walls, major social
and environmental impacts, and even reservoirs. The extent of barriers
and diversion canals involved in this colossal project is still
unclear, but the cumulative impacts of Grand Inga’s 52 turbine installations,
as well as Inga 3, on the river’s flow could be considerable. Impacts
to fisheries, riverine forests and river ecology will need careful
study. As more studies of GHG emissions from hydropower are conducted,
scientists are finding increasing evidence that emissions from dams,
especially methane, are a legitimate concern”.
(1) Inga 1 and Inga 2 dams, International Rivers,
http://www.internationalrivers.org/en/node/2877
(2) Inga 3, International Rivers,
http://www.internationalrivers.org/en/africa/grand-inga-dam-dr-congo/inga-3;
(3) Grand Inga, International Rivers,
http://www.internationalrivers.org/en/africa/grand-inga-grand-illusions
(4) “Banks Meet Over £40bn Plan to Harness Power of Congo River
and Double Africa's Electricity”, John Vidal, The Guardian,
http://www.internationalrivers.org/en/node/2744
