Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Translation: Agustina Cendán
This documentary is not aligned with any political party
Dedicated to all who, like me, changed their minds after listening to both sides of the story.
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. Native American Proverb
This video presents information and research mainly conducted by Movus Uruguay and Observatorio Minero del Uruguay
It also uses public information published by the government of
Uruguay, newspaper El Pais and Zamin Ferrous, among others. Created by: Erich Buhler, Uruguayan Entrepreneur 2002
I actively support Movus Uruguay
Uruguay,
population 3.5 million,
the smallest democratic country in Latin America, historically
an agricultural exporting country, known for its organic meat and the quality of
its pastures.
27th June, 2012
The president of Uruguay
supported by most of the parties of the opposition
issued a decree for the country’s general restructuring
through mega-projects that will base part of the economy on non-renewable
resources
therefore consolidating
polluting extractivist initiatives in the country,
disregarding international standards and G8 suggestions on the
preservation of the environment and forcing the population to abandon their traditional
ways of living.
The complex plan pursues the swift beginning of open-pit mega-mining
activities in agricultural areas,
the installation of a deep-water multi-purpose port
in a protected and tourist area, 200 km away from the capital city and
the construction of a mine pipeline along 230 km to the new port,
among others.
Transgenic crops
soybean, pulp, oil exploitations,
are but some of the projects to be developed. The country wants to position itself
as a strategic centre for trans-oceanic vessels
and to increase its businesses and become an iron world provider.
The government and most of the opposition sustain that
this enterprise is strategically relevant for Uruguay, as it will
relocate the population, and re-activate Communications,
production,
tourism
and the country’s domestic development.
They assure that Uruguay
will be more independent
as it will increase its production and exporting capacity, avoid port intermediations
and have direct access to products’ destinations.
This is particularly important when Argentina, one of the main
destinations of the goods,
sets trade barriers to exports.
Footage of Alianza Pachamama Uruguay (c).
Among 8 other projects the following will
be implemented
1. A deepwater port in a biosphere world reserve
2. A timber port in a tourism area
3. Open-pit mining in several areas of the country
4. A 230 km mine pipeline that will cut through native flora and fauna
reserves
5. The use of hydraulic fracture or "fracking" to obtain gas
6. A new pulp-mill in the centre
of the country
7. A new regasification plant next to Montevideo on Río de la Plata river
8. and several
oil rigs.
On the 3rd of July, the president of Uruguay met with the authorities
Of investing company Zamin Ferrous,
owner of Aratirí mining company, one of of the main shareholders of the project,
with offices in tax havens such as Jersey (England) and Switzerland
"What would the future of the mining project be if the port project is rejected?
"If the port project is rejected, the other projects make no sense, all components must be approved."
After the meeting, the Website of the presidency
of the Republic of Uruguay announced
that the government
and the mining group will unite efforts to develop the first deepwater
port in the Southern Cone.
Exports of iron ore could become the platform
for the construction of the project. They assured that
all biodiversity and environmental international quality standards
would be met. But reality
is quite different.
A few days after the announcement the government started expropriating land
from cattle-raisers and families,
as well as 480 hectares from Rocha’s natural coastal
reserve, a resort located 200 km away from the capital.
This caused the eviction of residents and started outlining the country’s
new profile
for coming years.
Is Uruguay capable of maintaining high biodiversity
standards?
In spite of the beauty of its shoreline Uruguay got one of the lowest qualifications
among countries in the region in an international ranking
that measures the quality of maritime ecosystems.
On a 1 to 100 ranking scale
it was ranked 47 and, among 171 countries,
it was awarded the 136th position.
Historically, it did not prove to be competent either.
In 1979, for example, the country modified a water channel called
Andreoni, located in the tourist area of La Coronilla, to the east of the country.
It was said that the works would not affect tourism or biodiversity.
However, consequences were disastrous...
mega-polluted beaches,
ruined hotels and a disproportionate increase of unemployment.
Along this coastal strip, the ocean never regained its crystalline quality.
Finally, at the beginning of 2000, Uruguay decided to install a pulp mill
on the coast of the River Uruguay, on the border with Argentina, which resulted in
a lawsuit grounded on the likelihood of polluting the neighbouring country.
The conflict was filed before the International Court of The Hague,
and resulted in the establishment of joint river monitoring measures.
The measures were
implemented but, at present, there are 14 documents with results of
water tests that are kept as state qualified information.
Deepwater port
Polluting factor: High
Location: Oceanic Coast (El Palenque)
Changes: Coast, wetlands, geography, shoreline.
The deepwater port is one of the projects to be implemented in a
natural reserve 200 km away from Montevideo (capital city)
It shall cover a 6-km extension per 2 km into the ocean.
The president of Uruguay
considers as a priority
the conclusion and operation of
a port in the shortest possible term. Therefore, a few weeks ago, 2,500 hectares
of land on the coast were expropriated,
encompassing 458 plots of native flora and fauna.
Most politicians highlight its positive impact
on the productive, economic, logistic and
transportation structure for foreign trade in the region
and its strategic value to import energy products such as oil or natural gas
as well as ensuring the exit of its agricultural and mining produce,
additionally providing a way out
to countries having no access to the sea.
Due to these characteristics, some choose to refer to the Project as
”South America’s Panama Channel”.
A few days ago, Uruguay’s former President Luis Alberto Lacalle, supported
the instauration of a port and indicated that the use of new vessels
and technologies
would have a favourable impact on the environment,
however,
the opinion of Ariel Grey, a Panamanian University Professor, researcher
and maritime consultant, is contrary to this affirmation.
He points out that some of the factors of port pollution
are ballast water discharges, that is,
the water kept on board to prevent vessels from tipping.
But also
dredging, hydrocarbon leaks, maritime traffic-related emissions
and waste accumulation
in port facilities pollute.
Leaks are generally sporadic and accidental, occurring
during loading and unloading operations on docks or berthing zones that, although located far
from port areas, produce waste that travels
freely, and ends up mostly in natural reserves or affects
traditional fishing areas.
The clearest evidence of hydrocarbon leaks is the visual presence
of stains on the water or rock pigmentation along the
shoreline, such as tar. Many of it is fuel waste
that leaks and travels across the oceans with random destinations.
One of the arguments in favour of the construction
of the deepwater port is that there is a natural depth of
20 metres, making dredging activities unnecessary, lowering the investment
to be made by the government and investors.
Government authorities and private companies have ensured that residents’
quality of life will improve
through the creation
of thousands of jobs, providing stability and agility
to the area.
But, will this actually happen? Based on studies published by the government
the unemployment rate in Rocha is of 4.2%, significantly lower
than the national average of around 6%.
Poverty, on the other hand, reached 9.8%, while in the rest of the country
it is of 13.7%. Apart from the fact that pollution is difficult to refrain and
that it expands like a net, the project would eliminate
part of the traditional fishing areas and change the way of living chosen by
local dwellers. A great concrete wall would be erected,
visible from most seaside resorts, changing the environmental and tourism map.
It would also relax the country’s somewhat weak environmental policies.
"An alternative to ports". In 2008, neighbours of La Paloma
formed a group to create the Nautilo Project, including a sports
Port,
a traditional fishing port,
community-supporting infrastructure and geo-tourism.
The alternative project to the deepwater port would generate a high
number of jobs, stability and compatibility with the way of living
of residents.
However, there was
little political will and all kinds of obstacles were raised at the time of
implementing it.
Mine pipeline Polluting factor: High Location: Four departments Changes: rivers, coastline, wetlands, fields.
This phase of the project implies the construction of a 212 km
mine pipeline, from the mining district to the port.
It is a double pipeline with a diameter of between 60-70 centimetres
that would cross the departments of Durazno, Florida, Treinta y Tres,
Lavalleja and Rocha, thus affecting some 1,100 hectares. The installation
would use 50 metres of each crossed-over plot,
it would cross large rivers (such as Cebollatí) and lesser streams, the eastern wetlands
and Rocha’s native palm groves, bordering Laguna Negra along its final extension
before heading towards the coast.
Apart from the disruptions of the installation of the mine pipeline
across the territory, the greatest environmental risk is the possibility
of duct ruptures, with their consequent leaks. Four fatalities
could cause irreparable damage:
Destruction, for example, by a tornado or nature’s bad mood,
human error,
an electronic error or, finally, a terrorist attack.
Aratirí, the most likely concessionary, acknowledges
the risks of soil pollution,
pollution of surface and underground waters caused by ruptures in the mine pipeline
and qualifies them as temporary and possibly reversible flaws.
Technicians assert that no accidents will occur.
However, experience proves them wrong.
For example, in Argentina, in September 2004 the mine pipeline of “La Alumbrera”,
controlled by Swiss company Xtrata,
reported a 70m3 leak of gold and copper concentrate
from the mine. In subsequent years new accidents occurred
but many of them were not reported as dwellers were not allowed
access to the area.
The new legislation would then force residents to accept the installation of the
mine pipeline across their land, granting them no right of opposition.
Hydrology of the wetlands would also be affected with
unknown effects on ecosystem dynamics.
Its construction would cause the removal of Uruguay’s native butiá palm trees and could
affect the largest fresh water lake in the country.
This lake and its associated wetland ecosystems hold great wildlife diversity,
containing more than 334 bush and
Tree species, at least 145 bird species, 27 amphibians, 32 reptiles
and 40 mammals.
It is a key site for the region’s biodiversity. In 1971
Uruguay signed in the city of Ramsar, Iran,
the Convention on Wetlands also called Ramsar Convention. 0:14:17.350,0:14:21.730 This intergovernmental treaty sets forth the commitment made by
its member countries to preserve the ecosystems of all
wetlands and plan a rational and sustainable use thereof.
The execution of the projects would cause severe impacts on the environment and
welfare of populations in several areas, including some high priority
preservation areas such as the wetlands of the eastern region
and the coastal strip,
both specified in the 1971 agreement.
It will also set a legal precedent for land expropriation
should the government decide
to implement any new project.
3. Open pit Mining.
Polluting factor: High
Location: several places in the country. Changes: fields, groundwater, lakes, native flora and fauna.
Open pit mining is a mining process
different from the one using traditional underground galleries. It is
carried out on the earth’s surface. In order to extract minerals,
large amounts of land are removed with machinery and
explosives, thus creating enormous craters. In general, they have a
100-hectare surface and usually a depth of 200-800 meters.
Russia, for example, has an open pit for diamonds of
1,200 meters.
Ramps are often constructed in the form of spirals so that they can carry
trucks with ore from the bottom of the mine.
Craters are gradually enlarged until the company ceases to operate
as the site is deemed no longer profitable. Uruguay plans to open
at least five major craters, that will result
in the emission of greenhouse gases due to the use of
218 tons of
explosives every two days throughout the whole
project, as well as traffic of heavy machinery in areas close to
agricultural lands. It will also divert the course of the YI river for two
kilometres and 7 meters.
It will eventually fully destroy 6 kilometres of native woodlands.
While the investor speaks of having discovered iron deposits of 2500
million tonnes to exploit during 20 to 30 years,
the proposal submitted to the National Environmental Agency of
Uruguay (DINAMA) indicates 764
million tons
to be operated for a maximum of 12 years. The Uruguayan deposits contain
an iron ratio
of 28% while
the international market requires 65%, therefore
a pre-industrial process to separate the iron will be used.
Company Aratirí
proposes to extract large volumes of iron and as quickly as possible.
The company has said that the material will be separated
magnetically and without chemicals.
What is not revealed is that the extractive operation
will use 200,000 litres
of diesel per day, resulting in
30 tons per hour
of greenhouse gases. The mining activity will also divert
several streams, pollute surface waters,
groundwater and underground water with the runoff of craters and
deposits, as well as through infiltrations into sterile ponds
and raw water reservoirs.
Aratirí also indicates that there are 327 open mines across the country,
but a quarry for, e.g. limestone
is not the same as
an open pit iron and metal mine. Quarry craters are
five times smaller than the smallest of the five to be dug by
Aratirí. There are four 100-hectare craters and a fifth one of
480 hectares. If we analyse Uruguayan exports, Aratirí states
that the exploitation of iron will be the largest exports sector in the country
amounting to 1.4 billion dollars, however,
Based on information provided by the Ministry of Tourism of Uruguay, the
tourism industry generates income for
more than 2 billion American Dollars
and meat exports are of at least 650 million
dollars. Iron extraction will be consumed in 12 years,
while meat, agriculture and tourism production are
permanent.
The government estimates that Aratirí will create 10,500 indirect jobs
but based on our international research
on mining, each direct job would create 1.7 to 2.5
indirect jobs.
If, for example, the company hired 1,500 workers, the number of
indirect jobs created would range between 1,700 and 3,750. If we look at previous projects, such as
pulp mill UPM, the area has now the highest unemployment rate
in the country.
But... what will happen when the mine is no longer profitable?
In Spain, for example,
"Corte Atalaya" was the largest open pit mine in Europe;
it is also 1,200 metres long by 900 metres wide and has a 350-metre
depth, similar to the smallest of Aratirí’s projected craters (100 hectares)
in Uruguay.
Corte Atalaya belonged to Rio Tinto, it stopped operating in September 1994 and
Has remained intact ever since. Aratirí states that in some countries
such as China, they build hotels or water supplies but, again,
we must refer to real commitments. Filling the five craters
with water would take 80 years and the investor acknowledges that the quality of that water
would be inappropriate and should not mix with nearby watercourses.
This would leave craters exposed to the rain and wind of five 5 hills around 100 metres high
having a base that is three times larger than the craters.
These hills are mainly constituted by stone and dust which
would dry-up reservoirs and expose the rest of the Uruguayan territory to
polluting agents.
Furthermore, the legal regulatory framework does not guarantee the preservation of
the environment, nor does it force mining companies to execute remediation tasks
So that open pit mining activities have contingency funds
or environmental insurances to recover them
upon the conclusion of extraction activities.
Facts and opinions.
According to the United Nations (UN)
Latin American countries should increase their investment in technology and
training, and in added value industries, and governments should
provide incentives to high productivity investments
and manufacturing industries, rather than rely on
the surge of the prices of commodities. ECLAC indicates that according to
history, developing countries have succeeded in converging with
more advanced countries through the accumulation of
technological capabilities, innovation
and growth not based on profits from natural resource.
We also need to take into account side effects.
Mining and extraction of subsoil fluids generate the phenomenon of
subsidence, which is responsible for cracks and sinking that deteriorate
the soil.
The executive secretary for the Centre of Latin American Social Economies (CEPAL), Eduardo Gudynas
with headquarters in Montevideo,
indicates that on one side there is pressure to advance in development and generate
jobs, but on the other there are enterprises that affect
the environment, generating a contradiction.
The first step is to understand and assume that there is a contradiction.
Usually, when there are environmental alerts what governments do -not just Uruguay’s-
is to observe the other reformist governments in
Latin America and then decide what to do.
For them, environmental alerts prevent the development
and reduction of poverty
and pose a risk because they may imply a national freezing-period.
This approach is incomplete, sometimes infantile and quite dangerous. What they are telling us is
that there is a warning in most of these enterprises and that they have an
environmental cost.
Alongside the environmental costs are hidden economic costs, which are
usually social and paid by society as a whole.
Therefore, what should be done is deep research keeping in mind the
national interest, in order to see the actual profit
from any of these ventures.
Just as there are visible figures for macroeconomics, such as growth and
exports, there are also invisible costs,
ranging from health impairment, and loss of soil fertility
to the loss of hundreds of genetic resources.
No research is currently being carried out in Uruguay.
(Erich Buhler's opinion) With a 6% unemployment rate and an almost constant Growth rate, Uruguay is not in a state of emergency
therefore, plans for open-pit mining and other polluting projects
should not be an option.
Non-renewable resources negatively affect the economies in
the medium term.
If we look around we will see that
Nordic countries or Nigeria, for instance,
have not seen any improvement as the result of this kind of mining projects and
the land has been irreversibly destroyed.
(Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, Alastair Smith, 2011) Rarely profits from natural resources
reflect in the economy of the working class
of a democratic country.
In all cases,
resources are used only and finally to maintain politicians
in power.
(Erich Buhler's opinion) Survey results produced by companies interested in
natural resources or nationalistic campaigns to segregate
the population, are among the strategies to be seen
in the next few months.
Divide to Reign
(Erich Buhler's opinion) Positioning Uruguay as a green, one-of-a-kind country in the region
and creating advanced policies like the ones existing in Europe, could assure us that
with its natural resources and high democratization, Uruguay could actively
create green policies to
ensure compatibility with the majority and
the minorities and would set a highly positive trend and example
for the region.