Why Argentina’s $5B Patagonia Dams Are So Controversial
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
- Patagonia-a land of breathtaking glaciers, wild rivers, and windswept plains. Argentina’s Santa Cruz River Project aims to harness the energy of its wild rivers with two massive dams, the Néstor Kirchner and Jorge Cepernic. With a combined cost of $5 billion, these dams are designed to generate 1,310 megawatts of power, enough to meet 5% of the nation’s electricity needs and light up over 1.5 million homes.
But this ambitious project comes with complex trade-offs. From engineering challenges and seismic risks to the impact on Indigenous communities, endangered species, and glaciers, the Santa Cruz dams have sparked significant debate.
#infrastructure #construction #patagonia #argentina #engineering
By the end of the video the project begins to sound like there are more negatives then positives.
Argentina is better off not building such costly and destructive projects. Ideas from the 1950s always need to reevaluated because they were based on low information. Argentina would likely be better served with wind and solar given their declining costs.
Cool
According to your map (at 0.50) the reservoirs don’t reach back to Lago Argentino, so how can they possibly affect the glaciers there? Then you talk about a “170km” transmission line to Buenos Aires (6.14). Don’t you want to add a zero? Do your research!
Hey Eric! While the reservoirs don’t physically reach Lago Argentino, the Santa Cruz River system is connected to it, and the dams will alter the entire hydrological system. This can increase lake levels, change water pressure, and even cause a flotation effect at the glacier bases, potentially accelerating glacier retreat.
As for the transmission line, it actually spans 170 kilometers across the Patagonian steppe, connecting the project to the local grid-not directly to Buenos Aires.
Thanks for watching our video and taking the time to comment.
im thumbnail designer
twice the size of Buenos aires? check it on that please
the map you show shows a distinct gap between hydro lake and glacier lake. Either the map is wrong or you are hand wringing about something that is not true. If there is a river segment between the two lakes there can be no upstream effects. If so stop mentioning them.
Secondly there are plenty of hydro schemes nearly abutting glacial systems.
In NZ there is Pukaki and Tekapo dams, and lakes. Like the map you show, the lakes do not quite reach back to the glacier lake. The European alps are full of hydro lakes at high altitude in the mountains.
Thirdly you say the dam height was reduced due to the soft ground, so again this would reduce lake size.
I don't understand the direction you took with this. The greatest risk appears to be corruption of deals involving Chinese easy money while having an economy going down the toilet....