The PDD did not present alternative options or strategies to supply Brazil's energy needs instead of hydropower. The PDD neglects methane (CH4) emissions to put reservoir as a source of GHG therefore ignoring recent scientific assessments to the impact of huge dams and its reservoirs surface area.
The Santo Antonio project together with another large dam upstream, Jirau, mark the coming back of large dams to the Amazon after the failure cases of the 80's, in particular, the Balbina and Tucurui dams which are known as methane producing factories.
The project is located in the Madeira River in a transnational basin that involves not only Brazil, but also Bolivia and Peru. Nevertheless, the project preparation and the licensing process have never ever considered any study of potential impacts to our neighbor countries, in particular, the ones related to migratory species which are quite relevant for food security of more vulnerable communities living along the rivers' banks ("riberinhos")
Also the indirect projects related to the lack of precautionary measures concerning the huge investment made in a frontier area, such as Rondonia,have been inducing more deforestation in the region. This can be checked by recent deforestation figures of the Brazilian DETER system where Rondonia became the #1 deforestation state in Brazil.
In sum, Santo Antonio shall impact the livelihood of traditional Amazon communities in Brazil, Bolivia and Peru and is already inducing more deforestation in the state of Rondonia.
Does it make sense to give it an incentive for reducing emmissions?!
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: