In a major twist, the World Bank is supporting mega dams

World Bank and Democratic Republic of Congo officials have also been negotiating terms of a deal that includes financing Inga 3, the third of eight dams proposed in the massive project known as Grand Inga. The jaw-dropping scale of Grand Inga is a $100 billion corporation.^⁠ Venture that will be the world’s largest dam scheme, nearly doubling its size^⁠ The power output from China’s Three Gorges, currently the world’s largest hydroelectric dam, could potentially power a significant portion of the African continent. It would also reshape the hydrology of the Congo River, the world’s second-largest river, in ways that opponents consider environmentally harmful.

Also in April, the bank “agreed in principle” to lead a consortium of international and regional banks to finance the $1.1 billion dam.^⁠It is one of the largest in Nepal on the Arun River. The dam, called Upper Arun, is backed by an Indian company and its power will be exported to India. However, Nepal is already satisfied with its hydroelectric power generation. My Republicakathmandu newspaper, reported In October, huge amounts of generated electricity have been wasted for years due to inadequacies in transmission lines. The Upper Arun Dam is also being built in an area that is highly vulnerable to earthquakes and flooding from ice dam bursts on glacial lakes.

The bank’s role in this project marks a radical change in its approach to hydroelectric dams. “Rogun and Inga are the largest dams in the world on a scale not seen in decades,” said Josh Klemm.^⁠He is co-director of International Rivers, a river conservation NGO based in Oakland, California. From 2014 to this year, the bank supported only one new major hydropower project, Nachtigal in Cameroon. But between this week and mid-2025, the bank’s board is likely to approve financing for five major dams, including Rogun and Inga 3.

“We are seeing a huge movement [by the World Bank] “It would be wise to consider funding a variety of large-scale projects that are expected to have a significant impact on the river basin or that have already generated great historical controversy.” said Eugene Simonov, coordinator of the International Coalition for Rivers Without Boundaries and a researcher at the University of New South Wales. , Canberra, during interview. “The World Bank is reviewing projects it once halted because of obvious problems and risks, but those risks have not gone away.”

In response to questions, a World Bank official said in a statement: “There has been no policy change on financing hydropower.” “Nonetheless, it is becoming increasingly clear that hydropower is an important factor driving clean energy investments,” the statement said, citing the potential of hydropower to supplement solar and wind energy.

The World Bank’s support for large-scale hydroelectric power generation began in the 1990s, when the social and environmental controversy sparked by dam construction efforts led to the convening of an investigative body of 12 independent experts (the World Dam Commission) to make the following recommendations: It has been done intermittently since the second half of the year. Proper planning, design and construction procedures for large dams. But the bank decided the committee’s recommendations, issued in 2000, were too restrictive and dismissed them. Instead, it policy It contains the meaning of “High Risk/High Reward,” a sincere acceptance of Big Hydro. But the bank backed down when the dam once again caused controversy. In 2013, the bank tried again to support large-scale hydropower development, but then backed off until 2018 when it relaxed social and environmental standards for such projects.

“We believe the bank’s rediscovery of its love for large-scale hydropower reflects the desire of the bank’s president, Ajay Banga, to begin his tenure from June 2023, even if it means overlooking environmental and social issues that would have previously ruled out the project,” it said. Klemm said.

But bank officials appear to be downplaying the new importance of hydropower in their plans, experts say, noting that they may not want to draw attention to the high costs of dam construction at a time when President-elect Donald Trump may be considering it.^⁠ End U.S. support for banks. Project 2025 is an outline of a controversial nationalist policy designed by close Trump advisers. says The new government should “withdraw from both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and cease financial contributions to both institutions,” he said. The United States is the bank’s largest contributor.

Experts believe that no matter how many of these projects are completed, the bank’s involvement will not change the status quo of the global dam construction industry. It is on a downward trajectory for increasingly obvious reasons. These include the dam’s enormous upfront cost and a waiting time of more than a decade before electricity revenue begins flowing. destruction of fisheries and riverine ecosystems; Their displacements are conservatively estimated. 80 million^⁠ people It has affected the livelihoods of more than 500 million people worldwide. Some reservoirs release significant amounts of methane. Droughts, which are becoming increasingly common due to climate change, are causing dramatic declines in energy production, currently occurring in southern Africa and other regions. And seemingly coup graceAs wind and solar installations become increasingly cheaper, they are becoming less competitive.

Despite all this, hydro advocates insist on the technology’s capacity to generate massive amounts of renewable energy in a country where most people have no electricity at all. Dam industry officials once touted their projects as important to the economic development of a country or region, but now they talk about the potential of hydropower to complement solar and wind power.

River conservation NGOs such as International Rivers argue that the bank’s approval gives the industry an unfair gloss and encourages other local and international banks to support more dam projects. “We are writing to express our collective alarm at the notable recent surge in World Bank support proposed for widespread hydropower development,” the letter began on page 9, dated October 23. letter To the bank’s leaders, signed by more than 100 environmental NGOs from around the world. The letter urged the bank to stop investing in virtually all hydropower projects. The bank responded promptly but superficially, reaffirming its ‘partnership’ with the NGO, but did not address the main points of the letter.

Rogun and Grand Inga have been the subject of debate for decades. Tajikistan is the center of Central Asia’s competition, with Western, Arab, Russian and Chinese interests all vying for political and economic influence.^⁠; One way Europe and the United States can influence Tajikistan’s leaders is by helping them build the world’s tallest dam there. Supporting Rogun could be a particularly strong tactic because the project is very popular in Tajikistan and, according to Simonov, the country’s leaders are “obsessed” with the dam. One of Rogun’s liabilities is that between 50,000 and 60,000 people will be displaced, according to the World Bank. document. Simonov said engineering firms have proposed alternative plans that would build the dam at least 115 feet lower and displace up to 30,000 fewer people. According to Simonov, officials rejected the plan because they were primarily concerned with the prestige they could gain by building the world’s tallest dam.

Between 2033, when Rogun is scheduled to be completed, and 2039, when the reservoir is scheduled to be full, the dam will start generating electricity and “deliver significant power generation both domestically and regionally,” according to an assessment prepared for the bank’s board. “It will provide welfare benefits, contribute to the decarbonization of the Central Asian region’s power grid and potentially transform the Tajik economy.” Of more immediate concern to Tajiks is that the dam’s output will eliminate power outages that hinder heating during the country’s cold winters. The problem is that the water that will run the Rogun power plant’s turbines in the winter is trapped in the Vakhsh River during the summer. This means water will no longer reach farmers and others downstream in Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. , according to Simonov. Rogun would also seriously threaten Tajikistan’s Tigrovaya Balka nature reserve, a UNESCO World Heritage site, conservationists say. And other renewable electricity options are expected until the dam is completed, according to an Oct. 23 letter from the NGO to the World Bank.^⁠ To become much cheaper.

The World Bank assessment of Rogun classified the project’s overall risk as “high.” Among the risks listed was the limited experience of Tajik officials.^⁠This led to design and construction delays and “technical and dam safety issues.” the impact of the project on national debt; The poor performance of Tajikistan’s electricity sector may limit revenues from electricity sales; Project location in an active seismic area.

Like Rogun, Grand Inga in the Democratic Republic of Congo has a complex history. Long after Inga 1 and Inga 2 were built in 1972 and 1982 respectively, the poorly maintained dams provide electricity to only one in five Congolese. The condition is that the Inga 3 proposal, which would cost more than $14 billion, will remain unchanged. . The expected output of Inga 3 is up to 11,000.^⁠ 5,000 megawatts will be exported to South Africa (an additional $4 billion will be spent to build transmission lines). 3,000 will be sent to a mining company 1,700 miles away in Katanga province, Democratic Republic of Congo. The remainder is used to improve electrical reliability.^⁠ In Kinshasa, the country’s capital. Rural residents will continue to do without.

no way study Compare green energy alternatives with Inga 3 environmental studies letters 2018 suggests the dam is not financially sound. It concluded that in most scenarios, “a mix of wind, solar, and some natural gas is more cost-effective than Inga 3.” Since the study came out, the cost of solar and wind has decreased.