Grassroots triumph blocks Las Cruces hydropower project
A study by the NGO SuMar-Voces por la Naturaleza concludes that the Las Cruces hydroelectric powerplant project is not strategically or financially viable. Click to enlarge.
TEPIC
Faced with fierce opposition from San Pedro Mezquital River Basin communities and grassroots organizations—heavily armed with legal, technical and human rights resources—, the Las Cruces Dam megaproject gave up the ghost in February 2019.
In front of more than 20 media outlets in Tepic, Nayarit, representatives from communities along the river and the NGO SuMar-Voces por la Naturaleza announced that the Energy Ministry (Sener) had withdrawn the proposal for construction of the hydroelectric plant from the National Electric System Development Program (Prodesen 2016-2030), leaving it without a budget; instead, each annual 15-year program update since then calls for diversification of the electrical matrix with alternative renewable energy technology.
At least for now, the last wild river in northwestern Mexico -- and the seventh largest river in the country -- is safe. The cancellation prevented relocation of indigenous Nayeri (Cora) villages,. Furthermore, it protects the river and the nutrients it contributes to downstream the productivity of agricultural valleys and coastal lagoons in the Marismas Nacionales Biosphere Reserve, a Ramsar site.
The free-flowing river has a big impact on farming, ranching, fishing and tourist activities, directly benefitting almost 10,000 producers.
Grassroots organizations, which for the past seven years supported the Nayeri people and fishermen in the fight against the slated environmental destruction, called on the new federal government to adopt a process of open dialogue and inclusion of the communities to discuss alternatives that generate true sustainable development in the region.
Their arguments were based on a study carried out by the NGO SuMar-Voces por la Naturaleza, which concluded that the Las Cruces hydroelectric project is strategically and financially infeasible.
The study points out that Las Cruces is not necessary now, nor in the future, to satisfy the requirements of the national power grid given the current state of the energy sector.
"Investing in small-scale renewable technologies close to the place of consumption is more attractive to investors, more strategic for the national power grid and more efficient for distribution networks," said SuMar.
The opening of the electric energy sector to private investment and international trends in energy generation from renewable sources have changed Sener's projections regarding the Las Cruces hydroelectric project. Added to this was a more than 80 percent increase in project costs, due both to the price of construction materials and the variation in the exchange rate with respect to the dollar, resulting in a budget increase of more than 13 billion pesos.
According Ministry of Energy documents, the electrical system in Mexico experiences an energy transmission and distribution loss of approximately 13 percent, which represents a loss of more than $42.246 billion pesos annually. These losses were not taken into account for the Las Cruces project, which would have produced energy in Nayarit to send to Jalisco, Guanajuato, Michoacán and San Luis Potosí; these states were demanding 73 percent of the energy produced.
What's more, the Las Cruces hydroelectric project was assessed from a financial standpoint and didn’t consider the environmental, social and economic costs to communities downstream and the mitigation that would be required. The costs of operation, maintenance and closure of the facilities during and after their useful life also were not included.
Another factor not evaluated was the health costs due to the increase in dam-related diseases during its construction and operation. According to the study, the primary risk of a hydroelectric project "begins with the arrival of large numbers of workers in a remote area, which spread infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, measles, influenza, syphilis and AIDS."
During dam construction, "illnesses such as diarrhea increase about 60 percent,” and women are the most vulnerable, i points out. In addition, at least 12 towns were identified that would have had to be relocated solely because they were within the zone considered at risk for contracting mosquito-borne diseases.
A hydroelectric plant is not necessarily a clean energy provider: In a tropical climate, it emits four times more greenhouse gases during its first 10 years of production than a fossil fueled power station, according to the NGO study, which concludes that the Federal Electricity Commission’s greenhouse gas emissions calculation for Las Cruces was incorrect.