目 录
1、澜沧江-湄公河电力互联互通合作项目第一期培训班开学
2、“柬埔寨的三峡工程”投产记
3、老挝柏雷水电项目潜在影响研讨会召开
4、湄公河三角洲因沉降、滑坡而失去土地
5、异想天开的“藏水入疆”
1、澜沧江-湄公河电力互联互通合作项目第一期培训班开学
电力规划设计总院1月17日：1月14日，由国家能源局指导，电规总院和南方电网公司联合主办的澜沧江-湄公河电力互联互通合作项目第一期培训班开学典礼在广州举办。国家能源局总经济师郭智出席典礼并致辞。
郭智指出，互联互通是澜湄合作的优先领域。近年来，澜湄国家电力工业快速发展，区域电力合作不断加强，但仍存在人均用电水平低、水电开发程度不高、骨干电网结构较薄弱等问题。希望通过此次培训，澜湄各国充分交流电力前沿技术，分享实践经验，探讨区域电力互联互通的实现路径，共同推动澜湄区域电力互联互通。
电规总院负责人表示，澜湄国家能源资源互补优势强，能源电力合作空间广阔。电规总院作为国家能源局重要的智力支持机构，一直以来积极参与中国与澜湄国家能源电力项目合作。此次举办澜湄电力互联互通合作培训班，旨在为澜湄国家搭建沟通交流平台，分享经验，增进了解，培养人才，共同促进澜湄区域电力互联互通建设。
来自中国、老挝、缅甸、泰国、越南、柬埔寨等澜湄国家能源主管部门、电力企业、国际组织代表30余人参加培训。培训为期7天，电规总院、南方电网公司、清华大学、华南理工大学，以及中国能建规划设计集团广东院等单位的专家受邀担任授课讲师，培训内容包括电力规划、电力新技术、电力市场建设、电力调度运行、综合能源服务应用、解决无电人口经验等课程及电力示范项目调研考察。
通过举办此次培训班，电规总院将进一步加强与澜湄国家能源主管部门、电力企业和国际组织等的联系，提升国际知名度和影响力。
国家能源局国际司、电力司负责人，电规总院有关负责人参加了开学典礼。
2、“柬埔寨的三峡工程”投产记
国际电力网1月17日报道：草案日前，柬埔寨西北部上丁省桑河上晴空万里，水面波光粼粼。“一带一路”重点工程、柬埔寨最大水力发电工程——桑河二级水电站竣工，正式全面投产。柬埔寨首相洪森、中国驻柬埔寨大使王文天等中柬官员和中国华能集团、柬埔寨皇家集团、越南电力国际股份公司等中柬越企业代表以及4000余名当地民众出席了投产仪式。
扭转依赖进口局面
据介绍，桑河二级电站大坝全长6500米，号称“亚洲第一长坝”。共安装有8台各5万千瓦灯泡贯流式机组，总装机容量为40万千瓦，约占柬埔寨全国总发电装机容量的五分之一，年均发电量约为19.7亿千瓦时，被誉为柬埔寨的“三峡工程”。桑河二级水电站有限公司（简称“桑河水电公司”）副总经理燕翔表示，作为柬埔寨能源建设重点项目，水电站全面投产后，将极大缓解当地电力供应不足的状况，扭转严重依赖进口国外电力的局面。
值得注意的是，桑河二级水电站项目虽然获得中柬两国政府的大力支持，却是一个完全的商业项目，企业是项目投资、开发、建设、运营的主角。负责建设运营的桑河二级水电有限公司是一家中、柬、越三国合资公司，三方分别持有项目股权的51%、39%和10%。项目最终设计方案也是在越南方案的基础上，充分考虑各方意见后，由中方单位优化完成的。项目建设通过银团商业贷款方式获得所需资金，未使用中国援柬两优贷款。项目特许经营期45年，其中建设期5年，商业运行期40年。动工之前，公司就与柬埔寨电力公司签署了《购售电协议》，确定了基础电量和电价，并由柬埔寨政府提供支付担保，这为投资各方未来盈利提供了稳定预期。
充分体现“三共”理念
这项工程从酝酿设计到建设启用，各个环节都充分体现了“共商、共建、共享”的“一带一路”建设理念。
桑河水电站项目的构想最早可追溯到2006年。2006年至2011年间，越柬两国企业就该项目开展了一些合作，但进展不大。2010年12月份，华能旗下澜沧江水电有限公司与柬埔寨皇家集团就共同开发柬电力市场签订了战略合作框架协议。次年6月份，双方再次确认合作意愿。在中柬越三方紧密合作和当地政府的大力支持下，项目快速推进。
由于前期准备充分，2013年10月份桑河二级水电站建设正式启动。在克服了施工资源紧缺、交通运输不便、工作环境艰苦等多重困难之后，仅用了5年时间，就完成了项目建设，实现了全部机组投产发电。
在项目建设过程中，公司为当地提供了大量工作机会。施工高峰时，曾雇佣超过2000名当地员工。目前，项目投入运营后，仍聘用了近百名当地员工。由于工资较高，这份工作明显改善了员工家庭的生活水平。公司还将两国员工混编成组，采用“师傅带徒弟”的方法，让当地员工在工作中学习技术、积累经验。柬埔寨电力发展迅速，对人才的需求巨大，这些有实际工作经验的员工，有望成为柬埔寨电力行业的骨干。
生态保护和移民安置是水电站建设中两个重要环节。桑河水电公司营销主任助理何文辉介绍说，为满足洄游鱼类对通道的需求，保持区域鱼类多样性，减轻对河流生态的影响，公司听取了柬埔寨矿产能源部、环保部及自然遗产协会等各方意见，投入超过100万美元精心设计建造了长约2900米、最大水位差达26.5米的仿自然型鱼道。2017年11月份建成投运以来，效果良好，可以观测到大量鱼类在鱼道中顺利洄游。
由于需要筑坝蓄水，淹没地区的村民需要迁出库区。桑河水电公司于2017年10月22日前，完成了全部840户3690名移民的搬迁工作，这也是柬埔寨规模最大的移民安置。同时，公司还从当地移民利益出发，主动提高补偿标准：将每户耕地面积从原来的不到3公顷提高到5公顷，移民安置房标准由此前的3个标准统一上调为80平方米。不仅如此，还为3个移民村修建了学校、医院、警察局和寺庙等公共服务设施，配套建设了排水系统、电网、公路等基础设施。当地居民表示，以前村里不通电，不通公路，很多人家都住在茅草顶的棚屋里。现在路也通了、电也通了，电价还便宜，村里还打了水井，配套建设了学校和诊所，生活条件比以前有了明显改善。
有力保障经济发展
柬埔寨从“一带一路”建设中获益良多。以电力行业为例，根据柬埔寨中国商会电力企业协会统计，截至2017年，中资投产6个项目，共10座水电站、1座火电站，装机总量1433兆瓦，占柬国内常规电源装机总量的76.9%。在建水电、火电装机840兆瓦，均为中资企业以BOT方式投资建设。2017年，中资水、火电站发电55.75亿千瓦时，占柬国内上网电量85.1%。截至2017年，中资企业建成115千伏和230千伏高压线路共600公里，占柬高压线路总长的35%，签约和在建高压线路1506公里，建成后将使原有线路总长增加近一倍。已建成农村中压电网2587公里，占柬中压农网总长近四分之一。随着桑河二级水电站全面投产，中资对柬埔寨电力发展的贡献率将进一步提升。
洪森表示，电力是国家发展的重要因素之一。电力供应的改善不仅惠及民众生活，还为农业、工业、服务业等的发展提供了有力保障。随着柬埔寨经济的快速发展，未来还将对电力生产和传输提出更高要求，这也为中资企业“走出去”提供了重要机遇。桑河二级水电站项目是“一带一路”对促进柬埔寨经济发展、民生改善方面发挥积极影响的一个缩影，相信“一带一路”建设将为柬埔寨国家和人民带来更多获得感。
3、老挝柏雷水电项目潜在影响研讨会召开
VietNamNet Bridge网1月15日报道: Conference discusses potential impact of Laos’ Pak Lay hydropower project.
Representatives of Mekong Delta localities, central departments, and agencies, as well as scientists gathered at a conference in the city of Can Tho on January 15 to discuss the potential impacts of the Pak Lay hydropower project in Laos, especially to Vietnam’s Mekong Delta region.
The event, the second of its kind so far, was chaired by Le Cong Thanh, Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Environment and Vice Chairman of the Vietnam National Mekong Commission.
Participants were updated on the progress of the Mekong River Commission (MRC)’s technical assessment report on documents related to the project. Experts also gave their ideas on the Pak Lay hydropower plant and other projects in the Mekong River and recommendations to the Vietnam National Mekong Commission.
Deputy Minister of Natural Resources Le Cong Thanh said that Vietnam is paying great attention to the possible effects from hydropower plant construction to the environment and the socio-economic situation in the Mekong Delta region, which also go hand-in-hand with impacts from climate change.
According to head of the Vietnam National Mekong Commission’s Office Le Duc Trung, the MRC Secretariat will analyse information from the project and consider the ideas of experts as to how to best evaluate the impacts of the project and measures to reduce them. It will then propose that the MRC Joint Committee ask Laos to make appropriate adjustments.
The consultation plan will prepare Vietnam for the upcoming special meeting of the MRC Joint Committee in February 2019, he said.
Participants at the event raised concern that the Mekong Delta region of Vietnam will be greatly affected by hydropower development activities along the Mekong River mainstream, especially in the context of increasing demand for water resources in the river basin and impacts from climate change.
They held that the Vietnam National Mekong Commission should build a detailed evaluation system on the Pak Lay hydropower project, especially its impacts to the Mekong Delta region before it is launched.
Vice Director of the Dong Thap Department of Natural Resources and Environment Huynh Van Nguyen expressed that he was worried about the effects of the project to agricultural production in the lower Mekong river.
4、湄公河三角洲因沉降、滑坡而失去土地
VietNamNet Bridge网1月14日报道: Mekong Delta losing land from subsidence, landslides
Every year, the southern region loses 300 hectares of land because of subsidence and landslides. The Mekong Delta, for example, is sinking faster than predicted.
The landslides in the Delta have been described as ‘extremely serious’. Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Hoang Van Thang reported that there are 49 landslide spots with total length of 266 kilometers. In some places, the sea has entered 80 meters into the mainland.
The eastern and western parts of Ca Mau and Kien Giang provinces suffer most from erosion. More seriously, the sedimentation in river systems has been lower than erosion since 2000.
According to the Mekong River Committee, the volume of sediment in Mekong Delta will decrease by 67 percent by 2020. The countries on the upper course of Mekong have built so many hydropower plants and water reservoirs (two large reservoirs built by China alone have capacity of 22 billion cubic meters). Silt is retained at the reservoirs and cannot reach Vietnam’s Mekong Delta.
Scientists have warned about the disintegration of Mekong Delta. In the past, it was consolidated by 145 million tons of sediment. But now, it receives only 40 million tons, and sediment has been taken away by hydropower plants.
The landslides in the Delta have been described as ‘extremely serious’. Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Hoang Van Thang reported that there are 49 landslide spots with total length of 266 kilometers. In some places, the sea has entered 80 meters into the mainland.
The eastern and western parts of Ca Mau and Kien Giang provinces suffer most from erosion. More seriously, the sedimentation in river systems has been lower than erosion since 2000.
According to the Mekong River Committee, the volume of sediment in Mekong Delta will decrease by 67 percent by 2020. The countries on the upper course of Mekong have built so many hydropower plants and water reservoirs (two large reservoirs built by China alone have capacity of 22 billion cubic meters). Silt is retained at the reservoirs and cannot reach Vietnam’s Mekong Delta.
5、异想天开的“藏水入疆”
chinadialogue网1月17日: Plans to divert a major river from Tibet to Xinjiang owe more to fantasy than science, argues Fan Xiao.
Last year a proposal to divert the Brahmaputra, one of Asia’s major rivers, from Tibet into Xinjiang province was posted online, causing quite a buzz.
It’s the sort of crazy idea that pops up in China now and then. Others include blowing a hole in the Himalayas to bring warm Indian Ocean winds, and taking water from the Bohai Sea, the innermost gulf of the Yellow Sea in north-eastern China, across the country to Xinjiang.
The problem with these proposed mega-projects is that they fail to give even the most basic consideration to social and environmental consequences. What will be lost under rising waters? What are the consequences of resettling people? And what of the cultural damage?
The inventors of such schemes seem to work on a map free of people. Erase a mountain range here, draw a river in there. Their schemes are not worthy of consideration. But in a society with low levels of environmental awareness and scientific training, these ideas actually garner attention, are even welcomed. And so it is necessary to offer a simple rebuttal.
Water transfer controversy
The idea of taking water from Tibet and into Xinjiang was an offshoot of work on the western route of the South-North Water Transfer Project. The scheme had three planned routes; east, central and west. The eastern and central routes are complete, but feasibility studies for the western route are still being carried out. The aim would be to redirect water from the Yangtze to the Yellow River.
However, as the Yangtze riverbed lies between 80 and 500 metres lower than that of the Yellow River a series of dams would be necessary on the Tongtian, Jinsha, Yalong and Dadu rivers, as well as many tributaries, to raise the water to a point where it could flow naturally to the Yellow River. Most of these dams would need to be 150 metres or more in height, with the highest 292 metres. It would also be necessary to build a series of tunnels across watersheds – the longest of which would be 164 kilometres.
Experts and the public have always been sceptical about the feasibility of this engineering project. Construction would have to take place at an altitude of 3,000-4,000 metres in frozen conditions, with poor transportation and amid complex terrain. The region is prone to geological disasters, its environment is vulnerable, and it is home to ethnic and religious minorities. The costs of construction and maintenance, as well as the environmental and social costs, would be huge.
Furthermore, the natural water supply would be insufficient for the demands of the project. Even if the planned quantities of water were transferred it would not be enough to supply the needs of the arid and semi-arid north-west. But it would have a huge negative impact on the downstream ecologies of the Yangtze. Even if environmental and social costs are ignored, the construction and maintenance costs alone mean the scheme is not feasible.
But even grander plans are afoot, which date back to the 1950s when China’s authorities considered a number of schemes to supply China’s north-west with water from the Brahmaputra, Nu and Lancang rivers, as well as the upper reaches of the Yangtze. In those days there were no worries about environmental or social costs, about protecting the water supply or about what such use of water would mean for sustainable development.
But tentative plans for the western route of the South-North Water Transfer Project, put forward by the Ministry of Water Resources’ Yellow River Conservancy Commission early this century, only considered the Yangtze as a potential water source. They did not consider taking water from a wider area to be feasible.
The Shuotian Canal
Those plans were considered by specialist bodies, experts and government and were, at least, a somewhat professional discussion. The “Shuotian Canal” proposal talked up around 2006 was somewhat more fantastical.
The Shuotian Canal – referring to plans to bring water from Tibet to the rest of China, as proposed by Guo Kai and others – would see water taken from further west, from the Lancang, Nu and Brahmaputra. Dams would be built to raise the water level, then tunnels dug across the watersheds, thereby channelling the water flow directly into the Yellow River.
Former Minister for Water Resources Wang Shucheng and the hydrologists Pan Jiazheng and Qian Zhengying, who worked on the Three Gorges Dam, have all been explicit in their opposition to the idea.
According to Pan: “In the past we emphasised the conquering and rebuilding of nature, but we’ve seen many losses and built up a lot of debt. It’s time to realise we can’t just keep taking from nature – we need to learn to adapt to it, to live in harmony with it. Ideas like taking water from Tibet to Xinjiang, or opening up a pass in the Himalayas to bring in warmer winds from the Indian Ocean, are better left in science fiction novels. These are nonsensical fantasies.”
The 2017 revival
The latest version of the plan is particularly mind-boggling.
It includes a 750-kilometre tunnel traversing the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, from the river’s Great Bend to Golmud; and a number of tributary tunnels to bring in water from the Parlung Tsangpo; the Nu and the Tongtian rivers. It claims water will flow naturally towards Golmud, but the altitude at the start of the tunnel is less than 2,000 metres – and Golmud is at 2,700 metres. It is unclear how water will flow uphill.
The mountain valleys of south-western Tibet are prone to earthquakes and rock and mudslides. This is particularly the case at the Great Bend, where history records numerous strong earthquakes and landslides damning the river and causing flooding. The environmental and economic costs of such a huge project here are hard to imagine.
Rivers need a certain amount of water to supply their ecosystems and the needs of sustainable development for local societies – it is generally thought that no more than 30-40% of a river’s natural flow should be exploited. These schemes would see unreasonable quantities of water diverted from the rivers – 83.3% to 91.5% in the Shuotian Canal proposal. The more recent proposal does not give a specific figure, but says “most” or “all” water from the source rivers will be taken.
The rivers involved all flow across international borders. In 1972 the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment stated that: “States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.”
The 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development reaffirmed that principle and stressed that development, particularly joint development, is important. The architects of these plans show nothing but ignorance and arrogance regarding the concept of international rivers.
Both plans repeatedly use water shortages in northern China as a justification, but this is a mistake.
Some parts of the north are semi-humid, and even in some arid and semi-arid areas glacier melt creates fertile zones, such as the Hexi corridor and Xinjiang. Many water shortages are due to environmental damage, often arising from inappropriate human activity or misuse of water resources.
It is also the case that ecosystems form according to the resources available; demand arises according to supply. To increase supply to meet demand is a mistake. We cannot steal from one place to make up a shortage elsewhere, nor can we reallocate natural resources and change the natural environment at will. We will fail to achieve our goals and ultimately pay a huge price.
These schemes claim they will remake China and turn deserts into farmland. But the scientific foundation and the authors’ understanding of nature show they are using imagination in place of facts and fantasy in place of science. We must ask ourselves: Why do so many people seem to regard these schemes as feasible?
