A new ‘death road’ is set to cut in two the land of several uncontacted tribes in the heartland of the ‘Amazon Uncontacted Frontier‘, a wide crescent of rainforest along the border between Peru and Acre, Brazil.

The road was rejected by Peru’s Congress in 2012. Despite this, work continued illegally for many years, and now the project has been proposed again by Congressman Carlos Tubino.

The road, which would run through 270 km of the Amazon’s most biodiverse and sensitive protected areas, is expected to be approved by Peru’s Congress soon. There are estimated to be around 15 uncontacted peoples in Peru, many of them in the region where the road will be built.

Survival International has lodged a complaint with the United Nations, citing the catastrophic impact on the uncontacted Indians and urging the Peruvian government to veto the plan. Of the 3-4,000 people in the area, around 80% are indigenous. Most of them are opposed to the road.

Emilio Montes, president of the indigenous organization FECONAPU, which is based in Puerto Esperanza said: “We flatly reject this road. We indigenous people won’t benefit from it, only the loggers, miners, oil companies and narcotraffickers. It threatens the lives of our isolated relatives, like the Mashco Piro. It will destroy our animals and plants.

“They should, instead, respect our ancestral territories. We’ve always lived here, and our children must carry on doing so. We need another type of development which looks after our resources sustainably: so that we can live properly, and secure our future.”

Linking precious area to Brazil to Brazil-Peru highway

The road will connect Puerto Esperanza to the Inter-Oceanic Highway, which runs through Peru and Brazil. The area is part of the Amazon Uncontacted Frontier, the region along the Peru-Brazil border with the highest concentration of uncontacted tribes in the world.

Uncontacted peoples who could be wiped out if the road is built include the Mashco Piro, Chitonahua, Mastanahua and Sapanawa, who have all lived nomadically in the region for generations. Outsiders such as missionaries and loggers have forced several groups to make contact in recent years.

Elsewhere in the Amazon, road ‘development’ projects have allowed an influx of colonists to access remote areas and threaten the lives and lands of uncontacted peoples. Six indigenous organizations in Peru have made a statement of mutual solidaity and defence.

In it they state their determination to “reject all types of threats that threaten the rights of the indigenous people of the Yurua basin and the Territorial Corridor of Isolated Peoples, including transport project, roads and others, the presence of illegal wood cutters, drug traffickers, etc.”

Survival’s Director Stephen Corry said: “If this road goes ahead, it will destroy the uncontacted tribes, and their “development” will be terminated for ever. Survival has fought roads in this part of Amazonia for decades. Who are they supposed to help? If Peru has any respect for fundamental human rights and the rule of law, it must stop these plans now.”

The right to remain uncontacted is the right to survive

The project has been supported for years by a notorious Italian Catholic priest, Father Miguel Piovesan, who has described the local tribal peoples as “prehistoric”, and slammed international NGOs for raising concerns about the plan.

Fr. Piovesan has repeatedly denied the existence of uncontacted peoples. His parish newsletter stated that: “Isolation is not a natural wish. We can’t prove that isolated people exist. They are dreamt up by those who barely know indigenous people, or base their investigations on unproven theories.”

However uncontacted Indians have clearly expressed their desire to remain uncontacted, adds Corry. The project cannot be carried out with their consent and will violate their right to determine their own futures:

“We know very little about uncontacted tribes. But we do know there are more than a hundred around the world. And we know whole populations are being wiped out by genocidal violence from outsiders who steal their land and resources, and by diseases like flu and measles to which they have no resistance.

“Uncontacted tribes are not backward and primitive relics of a remote past. They are our contemporaries and a vitally important part of humankind’s diversity. Where their rights are respected, they continue to thrive.

“All uncontacted tribal peoples face catastrophe unless their land is protected. We at Survival International are doing everything we can to secure their land for them, and to give them the chance to determine their own futures.”

Oliver Tickell is contributing editor at The Ecologist.

Albanian campaign groups are urgently calling for support to protect a pristine area of the country under threat from three hydroelectric power projects.

The Valbona Valley in northern Albania faces destruction from the planned works, despite being within the protected area of the Valbona National Park.

Catherine Bohne, campaigner from Albanian NGO TOKA, and owner of the website Journey to Valbona, says the developments began without any public consultation, and she has sent out an urgent appeal to help save this presently unspoilt part of the country. Campaigners say the work is illegal and they are now launching a legal challenge against the developments.

Catherine said: “The country is poor, the people are very isolated, and have been striving hard to make an environmentally friendly tourist attraction of the beautiful and so far unspoilt Valbona Valley – a biodiverse haven for plants and animals.

“It is now under threat from three large hydroelectric projects. The price of energy is falling, and solar will kick in soon, with the result that even the profit expected will not be earned.”

The Albanian Government, under former Prime Minister Sali Berisha, granted three concession contracts for the construction of six hydropower plants along the Valbona river.

The campaign against the hydroelectric projects started in January 2016 – when Catherine says plans were seen for the Dragobia Energy plants entirely by accident.

An Environmental Impact Assessment was carried out, but campaigners say it was of extremely poor quality and claim that developers failed to properly assess a number of issues such as:

• Biodiversity: The EIA offers no detailed analysis of species and habitats in the area; moreover, species regularly seen in the NP are not even mentioned. EIA doesn’t refer to the area’s “protected” status, and doesn’t mention the conformity with Bern or Espoo Conventions nor with EU Habitats and Bird Directives.

• Development: Campaigners say this did not meet legal deadlines. The EIA was based on the outdated legal requirement from 2003 instead on the new Law No. 10440 that has already been in effect. Furthermore, the project missed the two-year deadline to start construction works, so the environmental license should automatically be invalidated and the process of the new EIA started.

 

• Public consultation: This has been called inadequate and ineffective. A page with 20 signatures from one small village was submitted as evidence of the EIA public consultation (the Valbona Valley is home to over 1.000 people). Campaigners say that affected people were not adequately consulted and that a petition among locals against the hydropower development gathered 94 signatures.

 

• No consultation with the neighbouring countries: The EIA makes reference to the “creation of roads through virgin territories” to Montenegro, which is not part of licensing documents. The intent to construct a major road route to Montenegro, delivering increased auto traffic to Prokletije National Park, implies transboundary impact, and requires consultation with Montenegro under the Espoo Convention.

 

• Poor project design and planning: Campaigners say the project design is based on a river discharge of 12.66 m3/s, but elsewhere the developer reports that the river maximum flow is only 7 m3/s and around 3 m3/s during dry months. Hydrology data is out of date and although power lines and roads are drawn in licensing maps, no description of their construction parameters or impacts is made.

 

In a letter to Julian Beqiraj, Director of the National Environment Agency of Albania, Professor Emeritus and Member of the Science Academies of Denmark and Poland, Arne Strid writes: “Scenery, geology, wildlife and flora combine to make the Valbona Valley and the surrounding mountains one of the finest natural habitats in the Balkans and indeed in the whole of Europe. Botanically it is characterized by a unique combination of Mediterranean and arctic-alpine elements, and a high degree of endemism.

“I have worked on the Balkan flora (especially in Greece) for 50 years and written many books and articles on the subject. A couple of years ago I spent a few days in the Valbona area and found it one of the most interesting habitats I have encountered in my many ears of travelling in the Balkans.

“It would seem wise and farsighted to preserve this unique natural habitat for future generations. I thus respectfully ask you to postpone any decision on development projects in the area until the environmental impact has been thoroughly studied and suggestions for sustainable development have been considered.“

Since work commenced on September 28, access roads have been constructed, which were not included in the project plans or in the Environmental Impact Assessment.

The campaign against the developments has gained momentum since a jazz concert against the hydropower plants was held last month, and campaigners are now rallying for more supporters against the developments.

More information at http://www.journeytovalbona.com/good/river-initiatives and to sign the petition visit https://actions.sumofus.org/a/stop-hydroelectric-power-plants-on-albania-s-wild-rivers

Laura Briggs is the Ecolgist’s UK-based news reporter

Follow her @WordsbyBriggs

 

 

 

 

 

A new ‘death road’ is set to cut in two the land of several uncontacted tribes in the heartland of the ‘Amazon Uncontacted Frontier‘, a wide crescent of rainforest along the border between Peru and Acre, Brazil.

The road was rejected by Peru’s Congress in 2012. Despite this, work continued illegally for many years, and now the project has been proposed again by Congressman Carlos Tubino.

The road, which would run through 270 km of the Amazon’s most biodiverse and sensitive protected areas, is expected to be approved by Peru’s Congress soon. There are estimated to be around 15 uncontacted peoples in Peru, many of them in the region where the road will be built.

Survival International has lodged a complaint with the United Nations, citing the catastrophic impact on the uncontacted Indians and urging the Peruvian government to veto the plan. Of the 3-4,000 people in the area, around 80% are indigenous. Most of them are opposed to the road.

Emilio Montes, president of the indigenous organization FECONAPU, which is based in Puerto Esperanza said: “We flatly reject this road. We indigenous people won’t benefit from it, only the loggers, miners, oil companies and narcotraffickers. It threatens the lives of our isolated relatives, like the Mashco Piro. It will destroy our animals and plants.

“They should, instead, respect our ancestral territories. We’ve always lived here, and our children must carry on doing so. We need another type of development which looks after our resources sustainably: so that we can live properly, and secure our future.”

Linking precious area to Brazil to Brazil-Peru highway

The road will connect Puerto Esperanza to the Inter-Oceanic Highway, which runs through Peru and Brazil. The area is part of the Amazon Uncontacted Frontier, the region along the Peru-Brazil border with the highest concentration of uncontacted tribes in the world.

Uncontacted peoples who could be wiped out if the road is built include the Mashco Piro, Chitonahua, Mastanahua and Sapanawa, who have all lived nomadically in the region for generations. Outsiders such as missionaries and loggers have forced several groups to make contact in recent years.

Elsewhere in the Amazon, road ‘development’ projects have allowed an influx of colonists to access remote areas and threaten the lives and lands of uncontacted peoples. Six indigenous organizations in Peru have made a statement of mutual solidaity and defence.

In it they state their determination to “reject all types of threats that threaten the rights of the indigenous people of the Yurua basin and the Territorial Corridor of Isolated Peoples, including transport project, roads and others, the presence of illegal wood cutters, drug traffickers, etc.”

Survival’s Director Stephen Corry said: “If this road goes ahead, it will destroy the uncontacted tribes, and their “development” will be terminated for ever. Survival has fought roads in this part of Amazonia for decades. Who are they supposed to help? If Peru has any respect for fundamental human rights and the rule of law, it must stop these plans now.”

The right to remain uncontacted is the right to survive

The project has been supported for years by a notorious Italian Catholic priest, Father Miguel Piovesan, who has described the local tribal peoples as “prehistoric”, and slammed international NGOs for raising concerns about the plan.

Fr. Piovesan has repeatedly denied the existence of uncontacted peoples. His parish newsletter stated that: “Isolation is not a natural wish. We can’t prove that isolated people exist. They are dreamt up by those who barely know indigenous people, or base their investigations on unproven theories.”

However uncontacted Indians have clearly expressed their desire to remain uncontacted, adds Corry. The project cannot be carried out with their consent and will violate their right to determine their own futures:

“We know very little about uncontacted tribes. But we do know there are more than a hundred around the world. And we know whole populations are being wiped out by genocidal violence from outsiders who steal their land and resources, and by diseases like flu and measles to which they have no resistance.

“Uncontacted tribes are not backward and primitive relics of a remote past. They are our contemporaries and a vitally important part of humankind’s diversity. Where their rights are respected, they continue to thrive.

“All uncontacted tribal peoples face catastrophe unless their land is protected. We at Survival International are doing everything we can to secure their land for them, and to give them the chance to determine their own futures.”

Oliver Tickell is contributing editor at The Ecologist.

A new ‘death road’ is set to cut in two the land of several uncontacted tribes in the heartland of the ‘Amazon Uncontacted Frontier‘, a wide crescent of rainforest along the border between Peru and Acre, Brazil.

The road was rejected by Peru’s Congress in 2012. Despite this, work continued illegally for many years, and now the project has been proposed again by Congressman Carlos Tubino.

The road, which would run through 270 km of the Amazon’s most biodiverse and sensitive protected areas, is expected to be approved by Peru’s Congress soon. There are estimated to be around 15 uncontacted peoples in Peru, many of them in the region where the road will be built.

Survival International has lodged a complaint with the United Nations, citing the catastrophic impact on the uncontacted Indians and urging the Peruvian government to veto the plan. Of the 3-4,000 people in the area, around 80% are indigenous. Most of them are opposed to the road.

Emilio Montes, president of the indigenous organization FECONAPU, which is based in Puerto Esperanza said: “We flatly reject this road. We indigenous people won’t benefit from it, only the loggers, miners, oil companies and narcotraffickers. It threatens the lives of our isolated relatives, like the Mashco Piro. It will destroy our animals and plants.

“They should, instead, respect our ancestral territories. We’ve always lived here, and our children must carry on doing so. We need another type of development which looks after our resources sustainably: so that we can live properly, and secure our future.”

Linking precious area to Brazil to Brazil-Peru highway

The road will connect Puerto Esperanza to the Inter-Oceanic Highway, which runs through Peru and Brazil. The area is part of the Amazon Uncontacted Frontier, the region along the Peru-Brazil border with the highest concentration of uncontacted tribes in the world.

Uncontacted peoples who could be wiped out if the road is built include the Mashco Piro, Chitonahua, Mastanahua and Sapanawa, who have all lived nomadically in the region for generations. Outsiders such as missionaries and loggers have forced several groups to make contact in recent years.

Elsewhere in the Amazon, road ‘development’ projects have allowed an influx of colonists to access remote areas and threaten the lives and lands of uncontacted peoples. Six indigenous organizations in Peru have made a statement of mutual solidaity and defence.

In it they state their determination to “reject all types of threats that threaten the rights of the indigenous people of the Yurua basin and the Territorial Corridor of Isolated Peoples, including transport project, roads and others, the presence of illegal wood cutters, drug traffickers, etc.”

Survival’s Director Stephen Corry said: “If this road goes ahead, it will destroy the uncontacted tribes, and their “development” will be terminated for ever. Survival has fought roads in this part of Amazonia for decades. Who are they supposed to help? If Peru has any respect for fundamental human rights and the rule of law, it must stop these plans now.”

The right to remain uncontacted is the right to survive

The project has been supported for years by a notorious Italian Catholic priest, Father Miguel Piovesan, who has described the local tribal peoples as “prehistoric”, and slammed international NGOs for raising concerns about the plan.

Fr. Piovesan has repeatedly denied the existence of uncontacted peoples. His parish newsletter stated that: “Isolation is not a natural wish. We can’t prove that isolated people exist. They are dreamt up by those who barely know indigenous people, or base their investigations on unproven theories.”

However uncontacted Indians have clearly expressed their desire to remain uncontacted, adds Corry. The project cannot be carried out with their consent and will violate their right to determine their own futures:

“We know very little about uncontacted tribes. But we do know there are more than a hundred around the world. And we know whole populations are being wiped out by genocidal violence from outsiders who steal their land and resources, and by diseases like flu and measles to which they have no resistance.

“Uncontacted tribes are not backward and primitive relics of a remote past. They are our contemporaries and a vitally important part of humankind’s diversity. Where their rights are respected, they continue to thrive.

“All uncontacted tribal peoples face catastrophe unless their land is protected. We at Survival International are doing everything we can to secure their land for them, and to give them the chance to determine their own futures.”

Oliver Tickell is contributing editor at The Ecologist.

A new ‘death road’ is set to cut in two the land of several uncontacted tribes in the heartland of the ‘Amazon Uncontacted Frontier‘, a wide crescent of rainforest along the border between Peru and Acre, Brazil.

The road was rejected by Peru’s Congress in 2012. Despite this, work continued illegally for many years, and now the project has been proposed again by Congressman Carlos Tubino.

The road, which would run through 270 km of the Amazon’s most biodiverse and sensitive protected areas, is expected to be approved by Peru’s Congress soon. There are estimated to be around 15 uncontacted peoples in Peru, many of them in the region where the road will be built.

Survival International has lodged a complaint with the United Nations, citing the catastrophic impact on the uncontacted Indians and urging the Peruvian government to veto the plan. Of the 3-4,000 people in the area, around 80% are indigenous. Most of them are opposed to the road.

Emilio Montes, president of the indigenous organization FECONAPU, which is based in Puerto Esperanza said: “We flatly reject this road. We indigenous people won’t benefit from it, only the loggers, miners, oil companies and narcotraffickers. It threatens the lives of our isolated relatives, like the Mashco Piro. It will destroy our animals and plants.

“They should, instead, respect our ancestral territories. We’ve always lived here, and our children must carry on doing so. We need another type of development which looks after our resources sustainably: so that we can live properly, and secure our future.”

Linking precious area to Brazil to Brazil-Peru highway

The road will connect Puerto Esperanza to the Inter-Oceanic Highway, which runs through Peru and Brazil. The area is part of the Amazon Uncontacted Frontier, the region along the Peru-Brazil border with the highest concentration of uncontacted tribes in the world.

Uncontacted peoples who could be wiped out if the road is built include the Mashco Piro, Chitonahua, Mastanahua and Sapanawa, who have all lived nomadically in the region for generations. Outsiders such as missionaries and loggers have forced several groups to make contact in recent years.

Elsewhere in the Amazon, road ‘development’ projects have allowed an influx of colonists to access remote areas and threaten the lives and lands of uncontacted peoples. Six indigenous organizations in Peru have made a statement of mutual solidaity and defence.

In it they state their determination to “reject all types of threats that threaten the rights of the indigenous people of the Yurua basin and the Territorial Corridor of Isolated Peoples, including transport project, roads and others, the presence of illegal wood cutters, drug traffickers, etc.”

Survival’s Director Stephen Corry said: “If this road goes ahead, it will destroy the uncontacted tribes, and their “development” will be terminated for ever. Survival has fought roads in this part of Amazonia for decades. Who are they supposed to help? If Peru has any respect for fundamental human rights and the rule of law, it must stop these plans now.”

The right to remain uncontacted is the right to survive

The project has been supported for years by a notorious Italian Catholic priest, Father Miguel Piovesan, who has described the local tribal peoples as “prehistoric”, and slammed international NGOs for raising concerns about the plan.

Fr. Piovesan has repeatedly denied the existence of uncontacted peoples. His parish newsletter stated that: “Isolation is not a natural wish. We can’t prove that isolated people exist. They are dreamt up by those who barely know indigenous people, or base their investigations on unproven theories.”

However uncontacted Indians have clearly expressed their desire to remain uncontacted, adds Corry. The project cannot be carried out with their consent and will violate their right to determine their own futures:

“We know very little about uncontacted tribes. But we do know there are more than a hundred around the world. And we know whole populations are being wiped out by genocidal violence from outsiders who steal their land and resources, and by diseases like flu and measles to which they have no resistance.

“Uncontacted tribes are not backward and primitive relics of a remote past. They are our contemporaries and a vitally important part of humankind’s diversity. Where their rights are respected, they continue to thrive.

“All uncontacted tribal peoples face catastrophe unless their land is protected. We at Survival International are doing everything we can to secure their land for them, and to give them the chance to determine their own futures.”

Oliver Tickell is contributing editor at The Ecologist.

The International Energy Agency is calling for substantial new investments in fossil fuels, in particular oil and gas, in its latest flagship World Energy Outlook (WEO) report.

The backing to fossil fuels undermines the agency’s superficailly  positive messages on climate protection and renewable energy, an analysis by the Energy Watch Group shows.

World Energy Outlook 2016, which was presented today in Berlin, calls for increased investment in oil and gas, citing the fact that new oil discoveries are at their lowest level in more than 60 years in this time of low oil prices.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) thereby flies against simple market logic: current production is high compared to demand, thanks to static global oil consumption combined with huge new production of unconventional oil from North American shale and tar sands.

Major new oil fields awaiting development almost entirely lie in areas of very high cost exploration and production only justified by long term oil prices of over $100 per barrel: in the Arctic, for example, or in deep ocean waters. These are completely uneconomic at current prices of under $50.

Moreover investors are scared off these long-payback projects given the sharply reduced fossil fuel production scenarios necessary to deliver the targets set out in the Paris Agreement.

Coincidentally OPEC today announced a reduction of oil production of 1.2 million barrels per day by its member states, led by Saudi Arabia, in an effort to push up prices. Oil futures markets rose on the news, however increased production by non-OPEC members like the the US and Canada, both all operating well below capacity, are likely to subvert the intended result.

IEA assumes that renewable energy development will slow down

Moreover, higher oil prices are looking unsustainable in the medium and long term as continuing price falls in the renewable energy sector, of solar and wind power in particular, challenge the medium- and long-term competitiveness of oil and gas. 

“By calling for increased investments in oil, the IEA undermines climate protection efforts and threatens the global energy security”, says President of the Energy Watch Group and former member of the German Parliament Hans-Josef Fell. “Only a rapid development of renewable energies can close the emerging energy supply gap. Oil investments are not able to do so.”

“Even in its most optimistic scenario, the IEA projects the future level of development of renewable energies to be far below today’s rates. In this way, the IEA misleads the public about the real potential of solar and wind energy as well as e-mobility.” Even if oil prices were to rise again, he added, “future oil production will not stay at today’s level, simply because of the limited availability.”

While the IEA makes positive public statements on renewable energy, the Energy Watch analysis reveals that WEO2016 assumes a slower pace of renewable energy development than has already been achieved over the last eight years.

Even the report’s most ambitious ‘450 Scenario’ assumes that the net added capacity of new solar PV and wind power plants will peak in 2030. However the IEA fails to explain why the installation of new solar and wind plants should decrease in the face of their continuously falling prices and growing global energy demand.

“A decrease in net added capacities stands in stark contrast to projections by leading international market observers”, says Christian Breyer, Professor of Solar Economy at the Lappeenranta University of Technology in Finland and Chairman of the Scientific Board at Energy Watch Group.

“Assuming a slow market penetration of wind power and solar PV also contradicts the dynamic of the global energy transition in the last ten years.” Furthermore, he adds, the IEA seems to ignore the new global dynamic created by the Paris Agreement.

‘New Policies Scenario’ stuck in the distant past

The report’s ‘New Policies Scenario’ (NPS) even projects that the costs for solar photovoltaic power plants in India will be $800 per kilowatt of capacity in 2040 – a cost higher than prices actually paid right now in 2016. The Government of India estimates the current costs for solar PV-plants at $710 per kilowatt.

In addition, the IEA severely underestimates the potential of electric vehicles to transform the transport sector. This is illustrated by the IEA’s assumption that 80% of transport will still be dependent on fossil oil in 2040, even as China embarks on a massive expansion in production of cheap electric cars.

The NPS Scenario also suggests a net increase in nuclear capacity of 65 GW, while the 450 Scenario anticipates some 160 GW of new nuclear. The projected construction of 131 new reactors assumed by 2025 suggests that in the coming 8 to 9 years more than double the 60 reactors currently under construction will be built.

This assumption contradicts the experiences of the recent decade, with a globally declining nuclear industry characterised by cost overruns, long delays, financing difficulties an serious techninal difficulties that have yet to be overcome with most current reactor designs.

The IEA assumes that Europe’s gas imports from Russia in 2040 will stay on today’s level, and projects that Russia will increase its gas production by 20% by 2040. This assumption neglects the fact that gas production in Russia, especially by the major producer Gazprom, is sharply decreasing. In 2015, Gazprom recorded a production of 419 billion cubic metres, the same lowest level as in 1985.

Investors following IEA call are onto a certain loser

The IEA also assumes an increase in coal consumption up until 2040 in all except the 450 Scenario, which projects a 50% drop in coal consumption. Yet the 10% drop in coal production in China in 2016, as well as the loss of market value by many western coal companies, suggests a significantly greater reduction of coal consumption.

“It is long overdue that the IEA changes the status of the 450 Scenario into the NPS Scenario, especially in light of the current Chinese coal policies and the internationally binding Paris Agreement”, says Werner Zittel, Senior Energy Expert at the Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik and Chairman of the Scientific Board at Energy Watch Group.

In 2015, a series of studies by Energy Watch and the Lappeenranta University of Technology showed that the IEA continuously published misleading projections on solar and wind energy in its World Energy Outlook series.

As for the potential of renewable electricity to compete directly with fossil oil and gas, the IEA is looking firmly the other way. Solar energy installation contracts in prime locations like Chile and UAE are already just cents for kWh, and falling.

Within a decade or so it will be possible to use that ‘almost free’ power to electrolyse water into hydrogen and oxygen, then convert the hydrogen into gas and liquid fuels like ammonia, methane, ethanol and isobutanol at costs equivalent to $10 – $20 per barrel of oil.

And when that happens, investors in all but the lowest cost oil and gas production will find they are losing money hand over fist, before even counting in any carbon price.

Oliver Tickell is contributing editor at The Ecologist.