Damology~ Mega-dams and Their Impact on the Environment

Dams are implemented along rivers and tributaries frequently without much controversy and backlash. However, when a government chooses to execute a large dam across a culturally and naturally important waterway without taking into account the repercussions, these projects become extremely controversial.
Two examples of mega-dams that are currently being resurrected are the Belo Monte dam located along the Xingu River in Brazil, and the Ilisu dam located along the Euphrates River in Turkey.

Following are four scenarios created for the future of energy and local/indigenous people affected by the proposed mega-dam projects.

The first scenario, a holistically pessimistic possibility: Both of the mega-dam projects continue development with complete disregard for the cultural sites, indigenous populations and native animals that call these environments home. If the governments believe they can successfully complete projects without first consulting those who the project affects or without aptly looking for a compromising solution, we could see a snowball effect. This realization could lead to other policies being put into action, endangering countless other lives—both human and non-human. Several other dams are required for the Belo Monte dam Ilisu dams to be fully effective, further damaging the environment and displacing peoples and animals. 

Scenario two proposes more of a compromise: The dams are generally being built in order to harvest a large amount of hydroelectric energy. If the government were to implement smaller dams across lesser waterways and tributaries, there would still be measurable increase in hydroelectric energy, without the grossly damaging effects seen with a mega-dam. Indigenous peoples could avoid being evacuated from their communities and could continue to go about their daily lives without devastating impact from the dams.

The third scenario caters to the wishes of the indigenous people: The indigenous/local peoples are incredibly vocal about their opposition to the building of the dams and with support from various outside members including lawyers, environmentalists, and the general public the governments agree to stop the dams. This is a great achievement for the local peoples and encourages them to stand up and fight for other issues that negatively affect their culture and ways of life. This scenario also encourages the government to look for other, cleaner energy sources in an effort to lessen the use of natural resources and harmful sources of energy. This in turn could promote other countries and communities to do the same—a snowball effect toward a healthier global environment.

The fourth scenario is a no win for both sides, a curveball: After endless protest from local/indigenous peoples and their supporters, the governments proceed with the projects as planned. Over the years the environment becomes increasingly damaged, with some areas flooded while others are in desperate need of water. As a result native species begin to die off and locals are forced to evacuate. The dam is generally holding up well, however faulty engineering—in effort to build the dam in a timely fashion—is taking its toll. Suddenly the dam bursts, and there goes hundreds of thousands of pounds of water wreaking havoc on an already fragile ecosystem, and the government is out millions of dollars and hundreds of man-hours in the process.

It is import to look at all sides of a controversial issues before taking either side. I hope that these scenarios give you some insight into looking at the bigger picture of an issue.