But: Patagonia. A battle has landed on the streets of Santiago over the best way to energize the country. The land is long and thin, with every kind of climate from North to South. They have possibilities: wind, nuclear, solar or hydro-electric – and what the politicians have sided with is the hydro-electric, which will impact the beauty of the Patagonian territory.
Endesa is an energy company that creates these structures, while Transelec is a company that figures out how to get the energy from there to the distributor. Both of these companies are clients of my institute; Endesa actually being our major client. The situation made for investigative conversation today.
What struck me was how easy it is to demonize companies, when really, no one wants to destroy Patagonia. The other week, two managers of Endesa spent our time telling me all the places I needed to see in Chile, promoting Patagonia immensely. One manager was recommending taking a trip on a boat there, taking me to a glacier along the way, just like he did years ago. He was looking up the information for me and giving me the name of his friend who works for a travel agency.
The problem is, in order to develop, one needs energy. However, if people really want, they can protest that Patagonia be removed from the list of places they can obstruct. Or, can they? At the moment, 60% of Chileans disagree with this decision. Can they create enough commotion to actually redirect the rationale behind this decision?
Usually money wins these types of things. Highly-paid people sit down and reason out all the options, finally settling on a practical or lucrative direction for a country. But what if Chile didn’t even own the Patagonia area? What if people could protest enough to just eliminate this prized possession from the running – and force politicians and CEOs to find another way, because they have to?
Finding another way is the challenging part. Chileans saw the destruction of Japan, instantly reminded of their own possible fate if they were to build a Nuclear power plant. The technology and money doesn’t exist here to build solar panels in the desert, as it does in California. At the moment, coal is the most popular resource in use which also causes more local damage. Perhaps the hydro-electric option is the best, or seems most justified – being clean energy, but yet, it sits in such a beautiful sanctuary.
However, I am very demanding – sitting here between two laptops with the light on and an electric heater warming my feet while an electric blanket warms my bed. I arrived to this country via jets and use public transportation everyday. I like cooking my food on a stove, washing my clothes in a machine, and refrigerating my food. Often I forget a cloth bag when I go to the grocery store and I enjoy taking warm showers. Though most days the mountains are barely visible due to a thick layer of smog and I know that babies sometimes need the dirt from the air cleaned out of their lungs, I wouldn’t recommend living in the dark or going back to the days of just walking from place to place.
However, I am very demanding – sitting here between two laptops with the light on and an electric heater warming my feet while an electric blanket warms my bed. I arrived to this country via jets and use public transportation everyday. I like cooking my food on a stove, washing my clothes in a machine, and refrigerating my food. Often I forget a cloth bag when I go to the grocery store and I enjoy taking warm showers. Though most days the mountains are barely visible due to a thick layer of smog and I know that babies sometimes need the dirt from the air cleaned out of their lungs, I wouldn’t recommend living in the dark or going back to the days of just walking from place to place.
But…. Patagonia? We're going to mess with Patagonia?
No comments:
Post a Comment