文章 Articles

节能减排成为中国水电开发的借口

七年前,迫于公众压力,中国政府暂停了怒江上的大坝建设。但在发展清洁能源目标的带动下,水电项目再次受到一些高级官员的青睐。孟斯报道。

Article image

经过7年沉默,中国发改委官员近日首次就怒江水电开发表态,认为“一定会开发”。“十二五”规划对节能减排任务的进一步压力,和政府、国有企业愈发频密的水电开发动作,使外界猜测,水电将有一个“大跃进”。

128日,国家能源局新能源与可再生能源司副司长史立山就怒江开发表态:“我个人认为怒江一定会开发,因为怒江的上游、下游都已经在建设,过去有人提出,要留一条生态江,我认为其理论、实践都不那么现实,所以我们希望能在深入论证的基础上,在广泛征求各方意见的基础上,能尽快启动怒江的有关电站建设。”

长期报道水电问题的资深记者刘鉴强认为,过去水电开发因给生态和移民造成的不良影响,受到很大争议。现在利益集团正以节能减排为借口,试图掀起新一轮水电开发的热潮。

2004年,在环保组织和媒体压力下,温家宝总理在发改委上报国务院的《怒江中下游水电规划报告》上亲笔批示:“对这类引起社会高度关注、且有环保方面不同意见的大型水电工程,应慎重研究,科学决策。”

随后几年中,怒江水电开发方极为低调,即便有前期的勘探与移民,也极力避免引起公众注意。此次主管官员如此高调,令中国
NGO觉得事态严重。 怒江为中国西南地区大河,发源于青藏高原,流入印度洋,水力资源丰富,是现在中国唯一一条没有被大规模开发的大河。

据报道,按照最初的设想和水电开发的设计方案,怒江的
13级电站年发电量可达1029.6亿千瓦时。经测算,电站建成后,发电产值将达360亿元,每年可上交国家利税80亿元,地方的财政收入将增加27亿元。同时,电站建设的工程投资约需1000亿元,电站的建设将带动怒江相关产业的发展。
 
“水电开发确实能带来经济发展,但未必能惠及当地民众。”公众与环境研究中心主任马军说。他认为目前不够公开透明的决策机制,令水电开发将官员、开发商和少数学者的利益最大化,却可能破坏生态、影响居民生计、引发地质灾害。

当年怒江建坝争论正酣之时,《中国经济时报》记者曾在
2003年第10期《水能技术经济动态》(中国水电学会水能专委会主管,全国水能技术经济信息网主办)上读到了关于《怒江中下游水电规划报告》评审会上的言论:“怒江水电开发势在必行,在国家批准之后应尽早开展下阶段的前期工作……”

今日的“一定会开发”犹有当年“势在必行”的决然。但当年中央高层最终回应并认可了民间呼声,今天的中国政府可能更着急“清洁”能源水电如何帮助政府实现低碳承诺。

中国政府承诺
2020年非化石能源消费比重占一次能源消费量的15%2020年碳排放量将比2005年下降40%-45%。然而十一五期间为完成节能减排目标,一些地区出现拉闸限电,2010年上半年甚至出现单位GDP能耗反弹,都表明实现上述目标压力之巨。  

2010年底,中国水力发电工程学会副秘书长张博庭接受媒体采访时说,“十二五”规划中有关电力开发的思路,提出了要优先开发水电。由于各种原因导致的“十一五”规划中未能完成的三分之二的水电开发项目,将在“十二五”期间得到释放。

20111月, 环保部第二次为水电开发提出缩小长江上游国家级自然保护区,威胁多种珍稀特有鱼类生存。民间环保组织“自然之友”于2010年末向环保部提出听证会请求,但未获批准。

此前,曾因环保组织阻挠和舆论压力停建的鲁地拉水电站、金安桥水电站、龙开口水电站等已陆续解禁。

马军说:“环境组织并非反坝组织,我们认可适度开发。但中国现在的速度是过度开发。”他说,
2004年,中国已经超过美国,成为全球水电装机容量第一大国。而以当时的目标,即到2020年达到3亿千瓦,相当于在16年里翻3倍。这样再过15年,中国的水电储量将被完全开发。“到时,无法挽回的破坏将造成历史性的遗憾。”

马军介绍,如果怒江水电解禁,当地政府提的“矿电经济”,有可能掀起新一轮高耗能产业进驻西南。马军曾在云南做过调查,当地河流水量季节性差异很大,因此兴建大坝的同时,常需要新建同等规模的火电厂,用于调节电力供应波动,这将与节能减排的低碳目标背离。他认为这种情况很可能在怒江继续上演


中国两会将在3月召开,“十二五”规划对节能减排和水电开发的规划将成为瞩目焦点。与此同时,自然之友已号召本土环境组织,向全国人大代表和全国政协委员致信,继续反映长江上游国家级自然保护区调整的问题。


孟斯,中外对话北京办公室副主编。

本文最初刊登于《卫报》绿色博客节。

图片来自SunnyBada

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default thumb avatar
hotdogluke

问题的根源

节能减排是名义。当地经济的落后和生活的贫穷是根源。名义可以有千千万万个,根源只有一个。不从根源去考虑,不想解决根源问题,观点就不能深入。

The Root of the Problem

The energy-efficiency and emissions-reduction target is just a name. The root is the backwardness of the local economy and the poverty of life. There can be tens of thousands of name while there is only one root. If you don't think of root, don't want to solve the radical problem, you point is not profound.

Default thumb avatar
eduard

应当改善怒江沿岸居民的生活

史立山认为在陡坡上砍伐森林和耕作已经破坏了怒江沿岸地表以上1500米所有的自然植被,这种腐蚀不仅威胁河流更影响了农民的生活。“种庄稼就是培育灾难。”幸运的是,很少有人住在哪里。那些想要保持一个原始不被破坏的河流的人和水电开发者至少在这点上可能达成共识:应该给予在13个潜在的水库建设地的50000名居民拥有未来更好更安全生活的机会,并且他们现在的农田(或者是在山腰的新农田)不会挪作此用。

Life along the Nujiang should change

Shi Lishan put forward the argument that deforestation and farming on steep slopes have already destroyed all natural vegetation along the Nujiang below 1500 meters and that erosion is seriously threatening both the river and farmers' livelihood. "Cultivating grain is cultivating disaster". Fortunately, few people live there. Those who want to maintain a pristine river and hydropower developers might agree at least on this: the 50,000 people living in the 13 potential reservoir sites should be given the opportunity to have better and safer lives in the future, and their present farms (or new farms higher up the mountain) do not offer that prospect.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
yingyingz

回复“问题的根源”

我不认为怒江的水电开发能够改善当地经济落后和居民生活贫穷的现状,太多的案例告诉我们,很多地方以牺牲当地居民的环境和健康为代价进行经济开发,但是大多数普通居民并没有得到实际的好处。如果从根源考虑,解决当地的经济落后问题仍然可以依靠合理的政策,在不破坏生态环境的前提下,进行合理的利益分配。我们可以想象怒江进行水利开发,唯一的受益者就是促成这件事的幕后利益所得者,和当地居民基本上毫不相干,但是他们却不得不承受水电开发带来的恶果。

Respond to the “root of the problem”

I don’t think developing hydropower from the Nu River will improve the local backward economy or the circumstances of the poor residents. As so many examples have told us, many places have sought economic development at the expense of the local environment and the health of residents, with the majority of common people not reaping any real benefits. If we look at the central issue, solving local economic backwardness still must rely on well-reasoned policies that, under the premise of protecting the ecological environment, can be put into action to reasonably share benefits. We can imagine that the lone beneficiaries of the hydropower development along the Nu River would be those behind the scenes who are pushing the project, and that the local population will basically be out of the equation but will surely have to suffer the ill effects that hydropower development will bring.

Default thumb avatar
shuibo

这是一篇公开造谣的文章,具体内容我们已经作出了明确的驳斥。请作者注意答复。

这是一篇公开造谣的文章,具体内容我们已经作出了明确的驳斥。请作者注意答复。
驳斥和揭露谣言的全文见:http://www.hydropower.org.cn/info/shownews.asp?newsid=4480

We have refuted the accusation from this frabricated article. We would urge the author ot response accordingly

This is a frabricated article. We have refuted the accusation. We'd look forward to hearing the response from the author. Our defence can be found at http://www.hydropower.org.cn/info/shownews.asp?newsid=4480

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
cold_sun

回复shuibo

中外对话的这篇报道和中国水电学会的那篇反驳文章都看完了,精力所限,就只谈谈驳斥本文的那篇文章吧。

现摘录那篇反驳文章的一段:

“我们水电学会也是中国的一个NGO组织,我们可以毫不夸张地告诉你,中国绝大多数的NGO都希望国家发展、人民幸福,都是赞同国家的发展规划,也必然都是支持怒江开发的。只有少数几个由国外提供经费的极端环保组织例外(其中很多还不乏是非法组织)。

我相信写这段话的作者一定是思想政治觉悟极高的人,在中国讲究戴三个表,此文的作者已经把中国的NGO分为了“绝大多数”和“极少数”,并在短短几十个字中代表了这么多的NGO,我很希望见见这段话的作者,并且充分的相信他(或她)身上戴了很多的表。

另外再说说关于非法组织的问题,对于NGO领域我不懂,就拿与之类似的中国媒体领域来说吧。

这里只陈述一个基本事实:在中国有诸如新华社或人民日报这样具有采访权利的“合法媒体”,也有如“新浪网”、“网易”这样没有采访权利而只能转载的“半合法媒体”,随着微博这些互联网应用的诞生,更是有了很多的个人媒体,我相信这些具有影响力的微博并不具有官方授予的资质,因此也可以当作“非法媒体”去看待。

但是作为读者,我想人民日报或新华社的报道我是一年也看不了一篇,而新浪、网易甚至较有影响力的个人微博是我每天都会阅读的媒体。

最后看了刊登那篇反驳文章的名为“中国水利发电工程学会”的自称为中国NGO的网站,请各位看官注意了,这家网站页面最下方的合作媒体机构名单如下:(注:中外对话这篇报道是对怒江水电开发提出质疑的,看完下面一长串名单之后,我想说的只有,作为一个天朝子民,你懂的)

水利部 能源中国 国家水电可持续发展研究中心 四川水力发电网 西南水电网 中国节能环保网 中国水利水电网 中国长江三峡集团 中华建筑网 中国水电工程顾问集团公司 中国科学技术协会 中国电力企业联合会 中国电力新闻网 四川水力发电网 水力发电学报编 北京峡光经济技 广西桂冠电力股 广西桂能工程咨 水电监理协会 中国国际工程咨 江苏省国信资产 华睿投资集团有 夹江水工机械厂 东方电机股份有 哈尔滨电机厂有 湖北白莲河抽水 辽宁蒲石河抽水 河南国网宝泉抽 山西西龙池抽水 华东桐柏抽水蓄 华东琅琊山抽水 河北张河湾蓄能 山东泰山抽水蓄 中国南方电网调 国电大渡河公司 云南省鲁布革发 大唐岩滩水力发 福建水口发电有 天生桥一级水电 刘家峡水电厂 黄河上游水电开 黄河上游水电开 新安江水力发电 白山发电厂 二滩水电开发有 葛洲坝水力发电 三峡水力发电厂 湖北省能源集团 三门峡水利枢纽 水利部小浪底水 汉江水利水电集 青海省水利水电 黄河上游水电开 湖北清江水电开 五凌电力有限公 广西长洲水电开 金沙江中游水电 福建棉花滩水电

Re: shuibo

I read both Chinadialogue’s report and Chinese Society for Hydropower Engineering’s article
which refutes it, but now I’ll focus only on the latter. Here’s an extract from the article:
“Chinese Society for Hydropower Engineering is also an NGO. We can thus state without any
exaggeration that the overwhelming majority of Chinese NGOs desires China’s development and
citizens’ happiness, approves the national development plan and supports hydropower development
on the Nu river. Only few radical environmental NGOs disagree - those who usually receive funds
from abroad and don’t have a legal status.”

I think that the author of the article has a high level of ideological and political awareness. Adhering
to China’s “Three Represents” theory (also known among Chinese netizens as “Wearing three
wristwatches”), the author divides all Chinese NGOs in only two categories: the “overwhelming
majority” and the “small majority”. I’d really like to meet the author, because I’m sure that he (or
she) actually “wears more than three wristwatches”.

Besides, regarding the problem of illegality, I don’t know if it could be related to the NGO sector.
However, I can take China media sector to give similar examples. Firstly, it’s necessary to stress a
fundamental point: in China, only Xinhua News Agency and People’s Daily are labeled as “legal
media”, while “Sina.com” and “Netease.com” are regarded as “half-legal media”. The emergence of
micro-blogging has led to an increase also in the private media sector, but neither influential micro-
blogs are given official credentials and they are thus considered “illegal media”.

Personally, I never read Xinhua News Agency or People’s Daily articles, I prefer reading daily
Sina.com and Netease.com reports, and the posts on most influential micro-blogs’.

Finally, dear readers, be skeptical when Chinese Society for Hydropower Engineering proclaims
itself as an NGO. Please take a look at the following list of partner organizations which appears
at the bottom of Chinese Society for Hydropower Engineering’s homepage (please notice:
Chinadialogue’s report aims to call into question the Nu river hydropower development project. I
just want to tell you that, after reading the following list, you will surely understand better).

Ministry of Water Resources of the People’s Republic of China, China Energy Net, National
Research Center for Sustainable Hydropower Development, Sichuan Water Power Net, Xinan
Water Power Net, China Three Gorges Corporation, China Construction Net, China Hydropower
Engineering Consulting Group Company, China Association for Science and Technology, China
Electricity Council, China Power News Network, Journal Of Hydroelectric Engineering, Guanxi
Guiguan Electric Power Co. Ltd, Guanxi G-Energy Engineering Consulting Co. Ltd, China
International Engineering Consulting Society, Jiangsu Guoxin Investment Group Limited, Zhejiang
Sino Wisdom Investment Co. Ltd, Synohydro Jiajiang Hydraulic Machinery Company Limited,
Dongfang Electric Machinery Co. Ltd, Harbin Electric Machinery Company Limited, Hubei
Bailianhe Pumped-Storage Power Station, Liaoning Pushihe Pumped-Storage Power Station,
Shanxi Xilong Chi Power Station, Huadong Langyashan Water Energy Power Station, Henan
Zhanghewan Pumped Storage Plant, Shandong Taishan Pumped Storage Power Station, China
Southern Power Grid, Dadu River Hydropower Development Co. Ltd, Yunnan Lubuge Consulting
Co. Ltd, Datang Yantan Hydropower Co Ltd, Fujian Shuikou Power Co Ltd, Tianshengqiao
Hydropower Station, Lujiaxia Hydropower Station, Huanghe Hydropower Development Co Ltd,
Xinanjiang Hydropower and Industrial Development Co Ltd, Baishan Hydropower Plant, Ertan
Hydropower Development Co Ltd, Gezhou Hydro Electric Dam, Three Gorges Hydropower
Plant, Hubei Energy Group Co Ltd, Sanmenxia Water Control Projec, Yellow River Water and
Hydropower Development corporation, Hanjiang Group Limited, Qinghai Hydropower Group,
Hubei Qingjiang Hydropower Development Co. Ltd, Wu Ling Power Corporation, Guangzhou
Hydroelectric Development Co Ltd, Jinsha River Hydropower Co. Ltd, Fujian Mianhuatan

Hydropower Development Co.,Ltd

Default thumb avatar
shuibo

希望作者提供邮件地址,我有重要意见要与之交流。谢谢!

希望作者提供邮件地址,我有重要意见要与之交流。谢谢!
我的电邮是:
[email protected]

Hope author can provide e-mail address

I hope the autor can provide her e-mail address, I have some important comments to share with her. Thank you! My e-mail address is: [email protected]

Default thumb avatar
labfat

看了Shuibo的反驳文章

几个建议给Shuibo:
写反驳文章一定要冷静,《教父》里面说:“千万不要恨你的敌人,这会让你丧失判断力”。
写反驳文章一定要针对对方论据使用己方论据展开反驳,直接扣帽子的做法已经过时了。

comments on shuibo's rebuttal

some suggestions for shuibo:
calm down before you refute it. Here is a quote in God Father :" Never hate your enemies -- it disturbs your judgment."
You need to present evidence to refute your opponent. The method of slapping labels is outdated.