[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
dam-l Alternatives to Epupa Dam/Namibia
>'Cost-saving' alternatives
>to Epupa, Okavango proposed
>
>CHRISTOF MALETSKY
>
>ENVIRONMENTALISTS are proposing alternative sources of power and water to
>the Epupa hydro electric scheme and Okavango pipeline, both of which have
>drawn fire from environmental groups the world over.
>
>According to Earthlife Africa's Namibia branch, the alternatives would
>effectively cut the cost of the existing schemes by around N$966 million.
>
>Earthlife Namibia's suggestion comes more than a week after the feasibility
>study on Epupa dam scheme was completed.
>
>The study's recommendations are currently being studied, and an official
>announcement on whether or not the scheme will go ahead is due towards the
>end of this month.
>
>The Earthlife Namibia proposal focuses on gas power and desalination, which
>the organisation argues would be cheaper and more sensitive to the
>environment.
>
>In a letter to Government, Earthlife Namibia said their proposed
>"integrated plan" would make the development of the N$2 760 million Epupa
>scheme and the N$1 150 million Okavango project "unnecessary".
>
>The organisation said the Government would need N$2670 million for the
>Epupa development, N$1150 for the Okavango pipeline, and N$322 million to
>build a water desalination plant in Walvis Bay and at the Khan dam in the
>Swakop River. This would total N$4 232 million.
>
>On the other hand, Earthlife's "integrated" development consisted of a
>12-inch gas pipeline from Oranjemund to Walvis Bay for N$1 150 million, a
>250 MW gas power station plus desalination plant for N$966 million and a
>water pipeline between Walvis Bay and Swakopmund, which the organisation
>says should cost N$1 150 million. This totals N$3 266 million, which could
>save the country N$966 million.
>
>"In addition to financial advantages, the integrated development plan would
>boost industrial development and create many job opportunities at Luderitz
>and Walvis Bay where gas could be made available," the group said.
>
>Earthlife said industries would also be decentralised to locations where
>prerequisites for economic development were available such as access to
>international trade links.
>
>The group described Epupa and the Okavango projects as "unwanted" with
>"destructive consequences".
>
>They also reiterated their stance that the planned 750 MW Kudu gas power
>station in the vicinity of Oranjemund would make the Epupa project
>superfluous, as it would provide abundant and much cheaper power.
>
>Kudu is a joint development by NamPower and South Africa's Eskom and Shell
>Exploration and Production BV and will cost an estimated N$2 200 million.
>
>It will supply volumes of gas which will be more than sufficient to supply
>a power station with an output of approximately 750 MW over 20 years.
>
>Earlier Shell said the Kudu gas power plant would make Namibia
>self-sufficient in power during the foreseeable future while also allowing
>some export of electricity.
>
>A detailed feasibility study to examine the overall aspects of establishing
>the gas-powered plant, including technical, financial, economic and
>environmental aspects, will be undertaken.
>
>"Beyond social and environmental disruptions, Epupa would waste a precious
>water resource for good. Also, being located in a very hot and dry region,
>roughly 900 million cubic metres of water would be lost by evaporation from
>the large dam surface. This is 45 times the envisaged abstraction from the
>Okavango river," Earthlife said.
>
>The Okavango, they said, would disrupt the ecology of the Okavango Delta as
>it would serve as precedent for future increased water abstraction by the
>countries having access to the delta.
>
>October 7 1997
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*
Lori Pottinger, Director, Southern Africa Program,
International Rivers Network
1847 Berkeley Way, Berkeley, California 94703, USA
Tel. (510) 848 1155 Fax (510) 848 1008
http://www.irn.org
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*