Three Gorges Dam, Current Issues with Historical Context
November 15th, 2007
Submitted By: Rob Belloni
Three Gorges Drama: Why Chinese Dam Is Forcing Yet Another Mass Exodus. This article by Shai Oster of the WSJ focuses on current issues regarding the Three Gorges dam. The article frames larger issues with the dam in the context of a man named Fan Zhongcheng, whose mother and father were killed as they demolished their own home to move out of the path of rising lake waters.
Mr. Zhongcheng is just one of 1.4 million people displaced by the dam, and the displacement of human beings is just one issue among many that have resulted from the dam’s construction. As I read this article and contemplated the negative aspects of the dam I wondered two things. First I wondered who made the ultimate decision to build this dam? Second, I wondered what positives will come from this dam - or is everything about it bad?
Why the Three Gorges Dam was Built
According to Wikipedia, the dam was conceived by Sun Yat-sen in 1914. Sun Yat-sen was Provisional President of the Republic of China for a short period of time around 1912. This article on worldpress.org claims the dam was conceived in 1919. Whatever the case may be, the idea of building a dam in this region of China had been around for considerable time. The issue was revisited many times in the years leading up to the start of construction, but it was only in modern times that the Chinese government was able to secure sufficient funds to begin building.
The man behind the dam if you will, is Li Peng a Hydroelectric Engineer who rose to become the Premier of China from 1987 to 1998. Li Peng considered the Three Gorges Dam to be his life’s work, and pushed the issue through the National People’s Congress despite uncharacteristic dissent and absenteeism during the vote. What struck me here was how one person was able to initiate such a massive undertaking. Some would say this is the beauty of the communist system. Many would say that things like this reflect the horrifying nature of communism - that one person can have so much power.
What also struck me as I read about the history of the dam is how its building was viewed as an inevitable outcome. The train of logic was something like; Sun Yat-sen said we should do it, Mao said we should do it, Li Peng said we should do it - so we did it - and our only regret was that it could not have been done sooner. I have no doubt that if the capability and financing had been available any time between 1912 and 1992, the dam would have been built then.
In America there exists a system of checks and balances to rein in individuals who seek to use political power to advance their personal projects. Environmental agencies like the EPA mandate EIR’s and other checks to ensure that one person’s “good idea” is not a catastrophe waiting to happen. The system here is not perfect, and without a doubt we can find a litany of bad projects in the U.S. that resulted from lack of oversight, group-think, and other political failings - but I cannot imagine a project like the Three Gorges dam ever coming to fruition in the 1990’s in America.
The Three Gorges Dam was built because a historical context existed, because one man (Li Peng) achieved a position powerful enough to make it happen, because China reached a point of financial capability, and because a political system existed that did not have the necessary checks built in to prevent it.
Looking for Good in the Three Gorges Dam
A Google search for articles on the Three Gorges Dam will find you a long list of articles deriding the dam and pointing out its failings. The standard article format (like the one focused on here) starts with a litany of negatives about the dam, makes passing reference to the positive aspects of the dam, and follows that with comments about what “critics” say about those positive comments.
When you do find a positive article about the dam, it almost always originates from a Chinese media outlet and focuses on three things: flood control, energy production, and navigation of the Yangtze River. Ironically, if you research the Hoover dam in the U.S., you find articles touting the exact same things. Compare this article on sunsetcities.com about the Hoover Dam with this article on chinadaily.com and ask yourself why you didn’t mind what you read in the sunsetcities.com article, but felt like the chinadaily.com article was just a propaganda tool.
Why are we, as American’s, so willing to gloss over the negative aspects of our Dam projects while criticizing the Chinese with such thinly veiled vehemence? You will be hard pressed to find information and articles criticizing major American dams like the Hoover Dam. But the Hoover dam is responsible for flooding 20% of the Grand Canyon, killing off three of eight native fishes in the Colorado River, and the death of 104 workers during its construction. Granted this does not equate with the level of damage and destruction resulting from the construction of the Three Gorges Dam, but it is hard to look at these two dams without bias.
The Three Gorges Dam will generate substantial amounts of hydroelectric power, obviating the need to burn coal. The Dam will result in economic benefits for that region in China, and for China as a whole. People living below the dam will benefit from improved flood control. Boats will be able to navigate the 400+ mile long lake with ease. There will be costs associated with these benefits, but you cannot deny them. Perhaps the lesson here is that we should not be so quick to call the kettle black when we are occasionally the pot.
Entry Filed under: Pre-Departure, Beijing, China
12 Comments Add your own
1. Chris Carr | November 15th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Good post. Thoughtful. Well done. And a nice job doing external/other research to further explore the issue you raise, and working that into your post.
One thing that has struck me about projects like this in China, and that also ties into the historical context, is that in recent past China has had a lot of engineers who rose to the top of the political ranks, and said folks, with their training and view of the world, in turn dictated China’s domestic and foreign policy priorities. Thus, to what extent was a engineer type “group think” phenomenon behind such projects in China?
Things have changed, though. Many of the new and upcoming political leaders from China have often lived, worked or were educated abroad, and studied other disciplines outside engineering. See, for example, this very important and relevant Wall Street Journal article, China’s Party Congress Is Likely To Elevate Younger Professionals.
I anticipate this will take China in new directions, some of which will be good and others bad, as with any new development. Let’s keep an eye on how this pans out the next 50 years.
I wish I could take you all to see the Three Gorges Dam. But, it’s too far into Central China for us to make that trek.
2. Brandi Eng-Rohrbach | November 15th, 2007 at 6:42 pm
I think you might have missed some other reasons to build a huge dam other than flood control and the minimal electricity that can be obtained. The other reason is the same as starting a space program or hosting the Olympics. It is to impress those around the world and in your country.
Another project similar to all this stuff currently being undertaken is the construction of a highway to base camp of Mount Everest. This is being done in order to attempt to run the Olympic torch to the top of Everest. Literally to take it the greatest height which humanity has ever accomplished. See Chinese plan road up Everest for torch or China widens road to Everest for Olympic torch bearers. This project similarly contains a variety of large environmental implications and is opposed by the local population in addition to the international population but is being pushed by the central government.
In response to why there was not as great of uprise in America over American dams. First, I believe this is largely due to the fact that the areas that were flooded in America were largely unpopulated and did not contain villages that had been established there for hundreds of years. These villages in China contained cultural and historical landmarks. Thus the dams in America only resulted in environmental destruction and not the displacement of millions and destruction of historical landmarks. Second, it is easier to criticize things externally than internally. It is much easier to criticize the actions of other nations than of our own. Lastly, it was a different time period when big dams were built in America and their negative effects were not as widely known.
Another reason that the Chinese also want to build a dam is to get water for irrigation and watering the arid northern part of their country. Water is quickly becoming a limiting factor to growth in the northern part of their country similar as it is in the American west. In the future I expected them to dam more of the Yellow and Yangzi rivers and divert the water to the north. Similar to in the United States in the future we will probably divert the Great Lakes to California and Arizona. If you think this is a joke, see Great Lakes water target of dry states’ lust or Great Lakes compact at the center of great debate.
3. Deanna Haskell | November 17th, 2007 at 11:26 pm
This is a really interesting analysis of the Three Gorges Project. I like that you pointed out the problems with U.S. dams. Another big problem with dams in CA is that our dams have casued a polluted water supply for Mexico. Many dams were built as WPA projects and I think that it would be interesting to compare the phase that China’s economy was in when they built the dam to the phase that the U.S.’s economy was in when they built many of their dams.
Dam building seems like a necessary evil to produce cheap , clean electrcity and to irrigate farmland.
It could be interesting to look at the future costs that will be associated with the Three Gorges Dam. There are the obvious costs such as the loss of historical items, and the displacement of families. So what effect will that have on the economy? Will the displaced families move to the cities and join a workforce related to a big industry or will they move to a different part of the countryside. If they move to the cities , then what cost will be associated with that move. Will the government have to commission more housing projects to accommodate those people. In addition, what will happen if they have to decommission the dam due to poor engineering? Three Gorges is another example of nationalism.
4. jimmy | November 18th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
[Comment deleted. Irrelevant. Nonsensical. Appears to be a personal attack. So poorly written it looked like spam. 'jimmy', whoever you are, you will need to do much better than that if you want to be a part of the discussion in this forum. Stick to the issues, please.]
5. Rob Belloni | November 18th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Brandi - I enjoyed your feedback and agree with your points. It was hard for me to cover all of the aspects of the dam in a post that would be short enough to get people to read it so I focused on some key points, but you are right about yours as well.
Dr. Carr - I read the WSJ article about up and coming leaders in China. Some interesting ramifications there in relation to your Dec. 17th post.
If foreign educated leaders rise to power in China perhaps we will see real change in policy. The WSJ article did not seem to think so, but I don’t see how someone could live abroad, then come back to China and not see the negative aspects of communism with a different eye. Education can be a powerful change agent.
6. Chris Carr | November 18th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
Here is today’s NY Times article touching on the subject of this post …. Chinese Dam Projects Criticized for Their Human Costs.
Rob — I am optimistic this new generation of leaders in China will be an improvement over the previous lots. They have their hands full. I would not want their job, even if I had all the power that went along with it. Time will tell.
Given your age and that of your classmates, you are all much more likely to see the answer to this question and how the story unfolds than me. You can tell your kids, “I went there and saw how the early part of this story developed from the ground up. Now let me tell you about the way it really was ….”
7. Tai Massion | November 19th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
And there are more dams to come. Constriction on three of the twelve proposed dams (of this magnitude) have begun. Will builders continually try to outdo each other by building bigger? Can water pressure on the earth from the Three Gorges Dam actually cause an earthquake as stated in the last posted article? An earthquake is hard for me to believe, but if it’s true that’s huge. Also hard to imagine are the number of people who will be displaced from dam construction by 2020 ~10 Million. The standard of living for those displaced certainly goes down.
Considering the Chinese economy, is the hydroelectricity and the break from coal balanced by the millions displaced? It depends what side of the story you are on. The new emerging class of leaders may view it as valuable, seeing how America is dependent on oil. Maybe hydroelectricity will be their answer too.
8. Kyle Tripp | November 20th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
The Kaixian county seat, with is now destroyed, had existed for 1,800 years. Is it worth demolishing a piece of history for growth? These benefits from the Dam seem to be beneficial for the continued growth of China. That is only if the completion is successful. Recently, however, officials have made candid statements that the country could face a catastrophe if it fails to act quickly to stop riverbank erosion and other problems caused by the dam. This dam is going to kill lives and for what. Do the benefits out way the negatives? Until the full potential of this dam is realized it just seems like a giant mistake. Like posted above, U.S. dams have receive the same type of scrutiny. So I guess we can just be hopeful and hope for success. It is hard to justify that some lives have to end for economic growth, but that seems to be the common trend. I know that this a extreme way to think, but it happens.
9. Witold Sadowski | November 20th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
On Brandi’s point that it is easier to criticize actions of other nations than of our own… just consider this video:
http://www.youtube.com/v/DW-srRx7co4&rel=1
Buying American does not automatically mean that the product will be safer. It can be argued, as seen in the video, that when safety problems like these arise – China at times has the ability to react faster to fix the problem. In the US, the FDA can take considerable time in recalling drugs while in the mean time people continue using them. Even in the case of Avandia, GlaxoSmithKline’s top selling diabetes drug, the drug maker made an effort to hide concerns from the public.
According to the Wall Street Journal, “Over a period of several years, drug maker GlaxoSmithKline PLC was so concerned about a prominent physician’s negative views of its diabetes drug that it engaged in a concerted effort to intimidate him and stifle his opinion, a report by the U.S. Senate Finance Committee found.”
While GlaxoSmithKline has recently agreed to the FDA’s request to conduct a new trial of Avandia, the results won’t be available until 2014.
If China had the same policy as the FDA for leaving products on the market until issues resolved themselves in court or in clinical trails – I believe America would be in an uproar. While here in the US, we give the benefit of the doubt to the good ‘ol drug companies.
10. Jesse Bilsten | November 21st, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Rob this is a great post. I’ve read some great comments on the dam and it’s cultural, economical and ethically related issues so I’ll concentrate on what spurred my interest: the US link.
The question you asked about why our own citizens don’t criticize our own government like we do the Chinese government sums up the main problem we have with our “democracy”. We’re too worried about other countries and what they’re doing and we don’t concentrate on our own. We have more problems internally that need our own attention. We waste energy worrying about what other countries think of us, and if we can help them when our own is falling apart. We’re flooding our own ethics rivers with dam’s of deceit and we ignore them because we’re too focused on pop culture and other people/countries problems.
The US citizens need to stand up and look at our own country and start to question it. We need to get back to what makes the US so great: the constitution. China can be that catalyst as they pass us both economically and militarily. They can spur some enthusiasm by the American public to start caring and looking at our own Hoover dam’s and ask the question, “Why?”
11. Naomi Guy | November 25th, 2007 at 6:42 pm
Great job compiling these articles! I’d like to take a stab at Prof. Carr’s comment about the engineering “groupthink” being a cause of these developments. One element of groupthink is the ability to create an illusion of invulnerability (Thanks OB!). By creating these illusions the engineers felt they could take larger risks and be rewarded for them. In this specific case, they took risks with the environment and the many lives they could damage. It’s quite unfortunate this had to occur, but the closer I look at the situation, the more possible groupthink could have been a cause.
The second thing I would like to take a stab at, is Kyle’s comments about the costs of economic prosperity. As extreme as it seems, I do agree that in order to keep moving forward there are times we need to lose sight of the past. I’m not meaning to say I agree with the methods the government took, but I can not condemn them for trying to push forward. If we were constantly looking at the past and trying to preserve it fully, we simply would not be where we are today. There are always going to be unforeseen costs to any new developments, but it is the responsibility of those in charge to minimize them or arrange an alternative solution in which both parties can benefit.
12. Robyn Bowie | March 21st, 2008 at 9:53 pm
This was interesting to read about because the book I read for this quarter took place back around 1996/1997, when the Three Gorges Dam was just being thought of and announced. Peter Hessler, the author of the book journeyed through many of the areas that are now covered or about to be covered by the Three Gorges Dam project. It was interesting to hear how unconcerned the people who lived in those areas were back during this time. Hessler wrote about how the people didn’t really seem to look forward and worry about the future much.
It was interesting to read this book knowing that now the project has progressed quite a lot. It is sad that they are forcing all of these people to move and it is also sad to know that there are carvings and other aspects of history that are being covered. Unfortunately, the Chinese government seems to be unconcerned about this. I think Naomi may be correct about the groupthink taking over. I also agree with Brandi’s thoughts on China’s desire to impress, which has become more and more apparent as we get closer to the Olympics. Hopefully this project won’t go too wrong and in the end will have some benefits.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed