User:AlyssaP1017/HidroAysén

Summary
HidroAysén is a controversial hydroelectric dam project that was originally proposed in Chile in 2005. The project was intended to build five dams, two on the river Baker and three on the river Pascua. The project was designed to flood roughly 5,900 hectares of natural reserves and land of the Patagonia region of Chile with a cost of 3.2 billion US dollars. HidroAysén was expected to generate 2,700 megawatts of electricity per year and the entire plant would have taken 12 years to build. In order to transport the energy to distant cities and region in Chile, the proposal also included plans for a 1,200 mile transmission line that would have crossed many untouched natural resources. This transmission line would also have needed a 100 year wide service lane running underneath the line, which would have cut through various protected areas, private properties, and national parks. Additionally, the project would have also needed coastal parts, a small sixth dam, many new roads, and a sanitation plant. The entire project was cancelled in 2017 due to the constant controversy that surrounded the HidroAysén project.

Environmental Impact
The HidroAysén project planned to build five dams, two on the river Baker and three on the river Pascua. Both of the rivers lead to the Pacific Ocean. The project was to be constructed in the Patagonia region of Chile, an area known for its natural resources. This area is one of Chile’s largest untouched areas of land and contains glaciers, ice-fields, mountains, fjords, lakes, and rivers that attract many eco-tourists every year. The dam project would have flooded around 5,900 hectares of natural reserves. The entire project would have impacted 6 national parks, 11 natural reserves, 26 conservation priority sites, 16 wetland areas, and 32 privately owned protected areas. A portion of the Baker dam would have been constructed in the Laguna San Rafael National Park and would have caused irreversible damage to the environment.

This project plan included a 1,200 mile transmission line, which would have been one of the longest transmission lines in the world. The first phase would have been built from the nearby town near Patagonia, Cochrane, to the city of Puerto Montt. The length of the first phase would have been 410 miles long. This line would have crossed seven of the fifteen regions in Chile, which includes private protected areas, priority conservation sites, indigenous communities, and national parks. This transmission line would have run around volcanoes and crossed through areas in Chile that are prone to earthquakes. Additionally, a service line that would span roughly 100 yards would have to be cut underneath the transmission line, which would cause negative impacts to the ecosystems and natural habitats of various species. 1,750 acres of forest would have been cut down during construction. The line would have also included about 1,500 to 1,700 towers of 164 feet in height. The plans were to build them behind mountains but this still would have caused damage to the environment and disrupted the lives of the locals. A portion of the line would have also been built underwater so to avoid going through the Chaiten volcano and Pumalin Park where it would eventually meet the main electric grid, the Central Interconnected System (CIS).

There were more potential impacts such as the spread of construction dust and run off, noise pollution, the disturbance of fish spawning areas, as well as wetlands. The project would have endangered the habitat of the Huemul, known as South Andean deer in English, who are an endangered species of the deer family. Countless other species and ecosystems around would have also been endangered by the project. There were also potential longer-term impacts such as the loss of the eco-tourism and a loss of profit for the ranching economy, as well as the displacement of residents. Another possible impact was the risk of seismic activity of the region and the uncertainty of the consequences of climate change and the impact of this on the future of Patagonia. Changes in snow and rain patterns could be enough to cause damage to the dams themselves.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Chile’s two largest energy companies, Endesa Chile and Colbún, first submitted the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the HidroAysén project in August 2008. All EIAs are evaluated by the Regional Environmental Commission. The document was over 10,000 pages long and was hugely criticized with thousands of criticisms and replies to the EIA reporting missing information or wrong data. Many organizations have complained and reported that the Environmental Impact Assessment done for HidroAysen left out many possible impacts associated with the construction of the dams. HidroAysén’s EIA documents received over 2,600 critical comments from government agencies and over 10,000 public comments, most of which were never addressed. The documents received many calls for outright rejection. The Commission asked the companies to return with additional information. In the autumn of 2009, the two companies filed their revised EIA, which they called an addendum. This document was once again met with thousands of criticisms citing lack of essential information and relevant data. Once again, the Commission asked for more information. The companies in charge of the project decided to suspend environmental processing in order to respond to criticisms and concerns. The project's Environmental Qualification Resolution (RCA) was overturned in 2014 by the Committee of Ministers due in part to concerns about the EIA.

Chile is a member of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which requires additional studies to be completed before a project can be approved and begin construction. The EIA that was submitted to the Commission did not include any alternative plans or the “no option” plan which is standard for other EIA plans in other countries. One of these alternatives includes proposing an option where other alternatives are used. A 2008 study found that Chile could use non-renewable energy along with efficient technology to produce the same amount of output that the dams would produce if they were constructed. The study found that these two alternatives would meet over 70% of the country’s electricity needs without the same environmental impacts.