Who does not want people to know the truth about mini-hydros - opinion

6 July 2014 16:06  352373726 774600
Who does not want people to know the truth about mini-hydros - opinion

Instead of a preface
When there are no arguments, an outright lies and an astute manipulation of facts is used. After all, future cash profits from the exploitation of nature are at stake. And it's a relatively forgiving tactic towards initiators of threats - civil experts: if it fails, the next steps may be blackmail, defamation or even threats and their realization. It is true that for the business, when profits loom on the horizon, there are no barriers for any offense or crime. As a result, articles appear on sites and in reputable regional newspapers, in which real "scientists" through "independent" journalists categorically and strictly criticize community and the so-called "green pioneers" who dared to speak against mass building of SHPPs on mountain rivers of the Carpathians. 
Is small hydropower an alternative to fossil fuel?
In each such miracle article, some journalist enthusiastically tells about sustainability of hydropower and persuades that hydropower is an alternative to oil and natural gas. But is everything so simple in this matter? After all, the devil, as you know, is in the details. So clearly - no.
Let's start with the fact that electricity in Ukraine is not a competitor or a substitute for oil and natural gas neither in household nor in industry use. The balance of natural gas consumption indicates that 40% of the country's natural gas is consumed by industry, 28% - by the population, almost 14% - by district heating companies. The rest is pumped into gas storage facilities, used by public institutions, for industrial and technological needs. In industry, natural gas is used as a highly economical fuel at power plants, in the ferrous and nonferrous metallurgy, cement and glass industry, in the production of construction materials, and for household needs, as well as a raw material for many organic compounds, including plastics, ethanol and acetylene. The main consumer of petroleum products in Ukraine is road transport.
So today, neither industry, nor transport in Ukraine can be quickly retrofitted for use of ecological electricity which, in fact, is not possible anywhere else in the world. Therefore, Ukraine should focus not on increase of electricity and fuel resources production, but on energy conservation and energy efficiency 
As for the small hydropower, in this matter "call journalists" also resort to explicit speculation. Firstly, it is incorrect to compare Ukraine with the EU. Aims of Energy Strategies in our country and those in the united Europe are different at their core. Ukraine's Energy Strategy to 2030 envisages an increase in the share of renewable energy to 10%, where small hydropower should account for up to 1.6% of the total volume of electricity produced in the country, which is, incidentally, an exporter of electricity in the world. But the main sources of electricity generation, in accordance with this strategy, unfortunately, are still nuclear and thermal power. 
Secondly, regarding environmental safety of small hydropower, a very respected in the world environmental organization WWF, which supports and promotes renewable energy in general, back in 2011, published in the PandaMagazin journal 10 myths about small hydropower. One of these myths is the myth about environmental safety. Because each mini-HPP has a particular harmful effect on the river life, often changing it forever. No wonder that in one of the alpine countries - Germany - today, no mini hydropower plants are built on unaltered free flowing rivers. A similar initiative is actively promoted by environmental organizations in Austria. Because on most alpine rivers today, there are dams in every 8-10 km, which has adversely affected the life in these waterways.
The technology of lies and manipulation of facts
When writing their very "objective" and "truthful" articles, authors of outright advertorials strangely choose the same "experts" for interviews. Usually, these "experts" either have nothing to do with ecology or energy or are employed professionals who officially work for mini hydroelectric plants developers. 
For example, it is difficult to understand the comment of the Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor of UzhNU Andriy Kovalchuk that Turya Polyana mini-hydropower plant allegedly does not harm the environment, because there is a huge trout farm nearby. But the trout farm does not have any relation to this mini hydropower plant - because it takes water from the Shipot river well above the dam, and the trout there is reared in fish hatcheries from eggs and to marketable size. 
One of the major research institutions in the field of ecology and nature conservation in the country - the Institute of Zoology named after II Schmalhausen (Kyiv) also expressed their categorical opinion on the construction of small hydropower plants on the rivers of the Carpathians. Environmental specialists and zoologists say that degradation of river ecosystems and the extinction of native species of fish in lowland rivers of Ukraine is the result of the destruction of riparian forests and the construction of dams. Today in Ukraine, only the rivers of the Carpathians are not regulated, therefore this is where most of the native fish species remain, that are extinct in lowland rivers. 
Specialists of the NAAS Institute of Fisheries are concerned about the information on the construction of Nyzhnya Bystra SHPP and the designing of Soymy SHPP on the Rika River. According to the head of the laboratory of salmon breeding and reproduction of rare and endangered species of this research institution Antonina Mruk, the fish fauna of the Rika River includes 20 native species of cyclostomes and fish, 10 of which are listed in the Red Book of Ukraine. The construction of dam of any type will result in the disruption of normal migration flow and the loss of a number of areas of spawning and fattening stock, which would undermine these populations.
In this regard, the official position of the NAAS Institute of Fisheries, announced in the letter from its director, the Doctor of Agricultural Sciences, Academician of the NAAS II Grytsyniak, is unambiguous: any hydraulic engineering on the Rika river, except for that related to the prevention of emergencies, must be strictly prohibited.
So, should we, after these conclusions, believe assurances of the Ph.D., associate professor of LNU Volodymyr Lyesnikat, and the Ph.D., a research fellow of the Institute of Ecology of the Carpathians T. Mykytchak, who after just three (!) short visits to the Rika river convince the public that the dam will not harm Red Book species? 
Oksana Stankevich-Volosyanchuk, Ph.D., co-chairman of the Forum of Environmental Rescue of Transcarpathia, the President of the organization "Ecosphere"
Oleg Luksha, Ph.D., co-chairman of the Forum of Environmental Rescue of Transcarpathia, the director of the International Institute for Human and Globalization "Noosphere"

Post comment

Users posting offensive comments as to other participants of discussion will be banned by moderator without prior warning or explanation. The information related to these users may be provided to law enforcement authorities upon relevant request.Links and advertising messages are prohibited in the comments!

Comments (7)

Евгений   26/12/2014 3:17 pm

Очередная ФСБшная статья про ужас от малых ГЕС. Вот Норвегии 90 % электроенергии вырабатывают мГЕС это при том, что у них куча нефти (ни одной ТЕЦ и нет атомнмых). Уже давно всем известно, что так званая Екологична Лига, работает на Путина и его ФСБ. Задача №1 которой является не дать строить альтернативную энергетику в Украине и не допустить добычу сланцевого газа.
На открытые дебаты псевдо экологи не идут, а могут устраивать только балаган!!

прохожий  13/10/2014 1:52 pm

кто такой Лукша??? да никто! В их сборище нет ни одного эколога по сути. Когда-то Лукша лично хотел заниматься строительством ГЭС, но его близко даже не пустили в эту тему (кому нужны дурные советы) вот он и гадит всем подряд. Все аргументы их компании сплошная ложь и построена только на лжи! А самый главный вопрос на какие деньги существует данный проект по названием Лукша и К, но этим должны интересоваться соответствующие органы СБУ (если деньги поступают к ним из-за границы (возможно с русских фондов и используются наверное не только на борьбу с ГЭС )) МВД и Прокуратура за откровенную ложь и подтасовку фактов.

Богдан  13/07/2014 11:26 pm

Дериваційні ГЕС- це смерть малих річок.Ідіть нах... зі своїми гесами. і зеленими тарифами!

циган лоці ковач  08/07/2014 2:05 pm

Яка різниця, всі ГЕС будуть належати ковачу,а не громаді і зиск з них буде отримувати лише іх сімя

Евгений  06/07/2014 4:29 pm

Смысл статьи заключён в первом предложении. " Когда нет аргументов, используется откровенная ложь и подтасовка фактов". Вы бы хоть узнали как правильно пишется стоимость и для чего в энергетике восновном используються ГЭС.

Юрий  06/07/2014 4:21 pm

А в чем по вашему правда? Прагматичные люди предпочитают факты и результат, а не голые расчеты в воздухе. Создайте опытный образец мини-ГЭС, покажите его в работе, тогда будет о чем говорить.

влад  06/07/2014 4:20 pm

лукша извесный подтасовщик фактов
просто он пусть он расскажет почему в австрии строят - а там лучше относятся к природе чем у нас, а у нас нельзя

Total 7 comments