To hell with heffalumps

One question (and there are many) is why in this day of global concern over climate chaos can such a mine and plant even be considered. Even the company itself has admitted that lignite releases noxious gases. When confronted by Greenpeace last year, Thailand’s The Nation reported:

A senior BLCP staff member denied the accusation,(that BLCP was importing green house gas producing coal from Rio Tinto Australia) saying the plant had implemented all measures demanded by its environmental impact assessment.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source claimed the plant used high-grade bituminous coal -not low-grade lignite that would emit a high volume of sulphur dioxide and carbon dioxide to the atmosphere (September 2006).

Banpus other major lignite mine and power generation plant in Mae Moh near Lampang in Northern Thailand, attracted sustained criticism and activism prompting investigations by Thais Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment. They monitored the air and found excessive levels of sulphur dioxide. As a result, a complex set of engineering and technical controls including meteorological warnings governs the running of the plant. Electrostatic precipitators and forced oxidation flues to remove excessive sulphur were installed. Occasionally the plant has to switch to low sulphur diesel run operations.

The major difference between this plant in Thailand and the one proposed in Hongsa in Lao is that the public was allowed to show its displeasure. In Lao, any public demonstrations would be dispersed and the instigators arrested and possibly “re-educated” at one of the euphemistically named “seminars” rumoured to be still in existence.

In Mae Moh, in Thailand, technical assistance is available and regular air and soil monitoring possible. It is doubtful whether similar systems and expertise are available in Lao. Maintenance, and sensitivity to meteorological fluctuations is possible in Thailand but maybe not yet reliable in Lao, where the technical elite who fled the Pathet Lao victory, have yet to be replaced by the new generation of experienced professionals.

Despite the government initiated engineering controls, a Greenpeace study in 2002, showed how the Mae Moh Power Plant produces 4,380,000 tons of fly ash along with 39 tons of the neurotoxin mercury annually. The samples of fly ash tested contained three times more arsenic and 14 more times more mercury than you would find in normal soil.

This bodes badly for Hongsa where people and animals are dependent on soil and water. It is likely that adjacent river Kene will suffer contamination from pollutants. Fish provide a major source of dietary protein, and fish are known to take up mercury where it bio-accumulates. The substance is extremely toxic. Inorganic mercury, as present in the fly ash, can be converted by bugs found in soil and fresh water into the very poisonous methylmercury. Elephants are already heavy enough.

It is no wonder that a nearby resident in Lampang complained that the plant represented the capitalists running over the small people. Mae Moh power station, he complained, has a nine hole golf course.

Lao has bragged that it will be the “Battery of Asia”. That has another connotation of sitting immobile in your own mess, while everyone else gets the fruits of one’s productivity.

Over the past 12 months Lao has initiated many hydro and power projects. They are building like (dare I say) dam busters. A Lao friend joked that the only way to earn money in Lao is to teach swimming, as most of the nation will be under water soon.

But several things give cause for concern. First, most of the power projects, like the Hongsa project, are private investments in partnership with the Lao Government, meaning there is no serious oversight of environmental or social concerns. Anyone thinking the Lao regulations have protective teeth, need only to look at the Nam Theun 1 dam which will spell devastation for fish breeding and biodiversity in the Nam Kading river and Protected Area. The investor, Malaysia’s engineering giant Gamuda, is riding roughshod over local and conservation concerns and proceeded with work before the final go ahead was issued by the Government. The Government rather than canceling the project or inflicting other sanctions, sees this merely as an additional source of revenue through “fines”.

The previous government of Taksin Shinawatra put a slow down on many of the energy projects planned for Lao after taking a backwards glance at the debt caused by the economic boom and subsequent bust. The Thai economy, while showing all signs of rapid heating, may be at risk of over-inflating. The Economist magazine recently warned that Thailand’s economic system is not resilient enough to stand too much pressure and inflation has been a persistent problem. Both political and economic stability are necessary to ensure that Lao is not left with a heap of environmental and social mud pies to clean up if the investments fail.