I have some experience with gorges. As someone who currently resides in upstate New York and have taken tours along the Three Gorges before it became more flooded than it is now, I dare say gorges are among the most beautiful things in the world. But this fact (or opinion, rather) alone does not constitute as a legitimate reason to prohibit the construction of a dam that may, in fact, benefit China's infrastructural development. So what does it take for the dam to incur greater costs than benefits, and where do we draw that line?
This discussion recalls the proposed destruction (now relocation) of Queen's Pier in Central, Hong Kong. Hundreds of tree-hugging protesters flocked to defend the Pier in its final days, after having neglected years of government proposals, and insisted that the Hong Kong government was "destroying" a local monument.
But come on, who are you kidding? The government's plan to build an overpass along the harbor where the Pier stood will successfully alleviate traffic during rush hours. Why should thousands of commuters, the workers who drive Hong Kong's economic growth, be tortured every day by rush hour traffic so that a few rich people and hippies can enjoy an un-displaced monument? Maybe the Pier would look better at places where it belongs: in museums.
Yet there exists another extreme. In Chongqing, one of the most congested and polluted cities in China, landslides are a common occurrence. The construction of the Three Gorges Dam there has weakened the river banks, largely due to the destruction of trees as water levels rose. More importantly, shorelines have been depreciating in strength, as killer landslides (4 people were killed in the most recent incident) became a frequent occurrence. Also, sediment such as waste and pollutants have piled up behind the dam as the flow of water reduced significantly.
Unlike the "problems" encountered by Hong Kong activists, which are more about the picturesque harbor than anything, China faces real and serious issues in environmental sustainability in its path to urbanization. Some so-called "environmentalists", the ones seeking a status-quo of old, is letting the rest of us down. For politicians and lawmakers to take this problem seriously, some of us need to grow up and deal with greater environmental issues that aren’t selfish or a deterrent to social wellbeing.
The problem we face today in China shouldn't be which trees to preserve in the wake of economic growth, because mankind would be nothing but animals without development, but rather how to minimize our damage, such that benefits from development will outweigh costs, and how to keep our damage sustainable, by maybe planting those trees we risk our lives protecting, somewhere else.
What do you think?
Comment Preview