PHOTOCAPTION: Adair (on projection screen) responds to a question from the floor during the interactive session.
POWER PANEL: The panel of speakers (from left) Sjotveit, Adair, Kanchasa, Tronstad, Semper and Appleyard.
Benefits in dam construction must be visible, affected communities must not be sidelined
KUCHING: The social impact of hydropower dams (HEPs) on local communities matters just as much in modern hydropower planning as other more traditional considerations such as technical, financial, operational and economic factors.
This was among major points and general consensus expressed by a panel of top hydropower industry executives during a lively interactive plenary session entitled ‘CEO Roundtable: What is modern hydropower’ on the second day of the International Hydropower Association (IHA) World Congress here yesterday.
Given the various constraints and challenges faced by hydropower development and construction, focus should be given on developing hydropower projects where the positives were easy for all to see, said Katai E Kanchasa, the founding CEO of Lunsemfwa Hydro Power Company Ltd, the first independent power producer in Zambia.
“When we discuss these issues, we must remember that there are people involved…. some of the things we take for granted. Almost everyone is talking about what sauce they should eat with their steak but for most people, there is no steak to be eaten. So we must put things we discuss into context.
“If we are able to design our projects more inclusively, there will be no long-term social costs to be borne because (affected) communities should not be allowed to remain stationary in their social conditions, unless they choose to. But no one chooses poverty if there are other or alternative means.”
He was replying to earlier questions from the floor by local social activist, Elli Luhat, on who should bear the social and commercial costs of HEPs – the government, project owner or the end-users.
Sarawak Energy Berhad CEO Torstein Sjotveit noted that each HEP had its own standards and challenges and things were different now from what they were 20 years ago.
“If you look at Murum, the social cost is close to 10 per cent of the total investment, so it is a huge investment. All hydropower projects are creating a lot of value for the overall society, in terms of taxes and all sorts of activity at state and federal levels. This is an argument that could support the notion that the costs should be carried by the larger society,” he said.
He also drew attention to the nature of HEP contracts which differed from country to country. He compared Norway where wholly government owned HEP companies were given 200-year concessions with the situation in Sarawak where companies were only given 30-year concessions after which the projects would be returned to the government without compensation.
Executive vice president of SN Power and IHA board member Elsbeth Tronstad agreed that HEP developers and companies faced greater challenges and constraints. She said that hydropower as a renewable source of energy had the potential to create a lot of good and provide much needed momentum for economic growth. She also said that due to these factors, HEP companies needed to take care of water resources and use the scarce resource in a very prudent way.
While she agreed that standards such as that set out under the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol was good, she did not agree that IHA members should be forced to adopt the standards.
However, she said those who did not adhere to international standards would reflect poorly on those who tried to follow those standards closely, and thus, they had a responsibility to follow for the sake of the whole industry.
Other panelists participating in yesterday’s session were Hydro Tasmania CEO and IHA board member Roy Adair and Hydro Equipment Association chairman Wolfgang Semper. The moderator was David Appleyard, chief editor of Hydro Review Worldwide.