This article showcases the efforts made by Ikal Angelei, a
31 year old from northern Kenya, in protesting the construction of a dam on the
Omo River in Ethiopia that would have damaging impacts on Lake Turkana which
serves a vital purpose for local indigenous communities of northern Kenya that
depend on its waters for sustenance. Lake Turkana is also the world’s largest
permanent desert lake and is regarded by many anthropologists as the cradle of
humankind because of the life it provides to the intensely hot and arid region.
The Omo River is a crucial lifeline to Lake Turkana. The proposed dam on the
river would be the largest hydroelectric plant in Africa, set to provide large
amounts of electrical power to Kenya and Ethiopia that is in dire need of
cheaper energy supplies. But for people of local communities and Ikal Angelei
the dam proposes great threats. The region surrounding Lake Turkana is more
desperate for food than electricity, and the dam would have a significant
effect on water levels and local fisheries, which would result in increased
tension among the local communities who are already fighting for limited
resources.
In one sense this
situation reflects the issue of food vs. fuel, but on a more localized level.
There is a delicate balance between the need for food and fuel. Who decides
where the resources are best allocated? Perhaps there is an argument that the
increased supply of cheap electrical power will be able to spur the surrounding
economies and thus provide more jobs and hopefully more disposable income which
would then lead to more purchasing power for food. However, who is receiving
the benefit? In this case it seems that the local indigenous communities, far
down river, would be left with fewer water supplies and no increase in their
electrical power supply.
Angelei’s, and others’, efforts succeeded in halting the
plans for construction based on the resulting independent environmental reviews
that were spurred by protest efforts. However, there are still deep pocket investors
hungry for the opportunity to construct the dam. How should this issue be
viewed in light of the food vs. fuel debate?
Would it be possible in this situation to pull a best of both worlds type of situation? Would it be possible for some kind of fishing sustainability project to arise out of the dam? After all, after a dam is created, a lake is created with it. This could be stocked with regional, hardy food fish that could be used in a healthy manner after a couple of years of growth and breeding. A lake dam might also concentrate water, eventually making irrigation easier. Having ready access to electrical power would be useful for spurring economic development in the region, but that development would be useless without the food to sustain the people who live in that region. I think that with a little creativity, this dam might turn out to be useful in both sides of the fuel vs. food argument.
ReplyDelete