In 1993 Endesa Chile S.A. proposed to the Government of Chile a project for the construction of a hydroelectric power station along the Biobio River basin. Endesa envisaged the flooding of thousands of hectares of land and the consequent displacement of six centuries old indigenous Mapuche-Pehuenches communities, supposedly protected by the 1993 Protection and Development of Indigenous People Law n19,253. The beginning of the indigenous communities’ mobilizations as soon as in 1995 was headed by the woman Pehunche leader Nicolasa Quintremán Calpán, and her sister. In July 1997, the International Federation for Human Rights sent a Commission to Chile to investigate the consequences of the construction of Ralco HEP. The report wrote: “tendría serias implicaciones humanas, étnico-culturales y ecológicas, y graves consecuencias jurídicas históricas. Porque obligaría el abandono, por las comunidades mapuche-pehuenche del Alto Bío Bío, de su hábitat ancestral, y la represa inundaría sus tierras y lugares sagrados, legalmente inenajenables e inembargables, en una región considerada, además, un ecosistema notable que se vería profundamente afectado”. This statement strengthened the communities' struggle around the project, which managed to stop the project construction in several occasions between 1997 and 1999. Endesa and the Eduardo Frei government had to face one of the first major socio-environmental conflicts in Chile. Despite strong opposition by the National Corporation for Indigenous Development (CONADI) and several environmental organisations, the project was approved in 1999 and eventually inaugurated in 2004. Since then, there have been on-going protests and repeated lawsuits against the dam construction. Community cemeteries have been flooded. The agreement before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2003, which ensures to the affected communities access to the land and to water, was never respected. The Ralco-Endesa project was finally completed despite a ten-year dispute involving indigenous communities, the Chilean Government and private interests. This struggle came to symbolize the problems associated with a lack of appropriate mechanisms for the protection of natural resources and ethnic minorities, theoretically protected by the National legislation. The dam had several serious impacts and provoke important damages. In May 2001 the dam wall broke due to important rainfall. The downstream reservoir Pangue avoided a catastrophe for the communities living downstream. In 2003, Nicolasa and her community obtained an agreement with the Government of Lagos and with the participation of Endesa, before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The government promised to give land, water and touristic project for the livelihood of the Pehuenche people, freed political Mapuche prisoners, and made the 169 Convention of ILO adopted in the Congress. However, the Pahuenche communities have remained with no water, no suitable land, no services, no schools for years to come. They even lost their cemeteries, including the ancestral Quepuca Ralco. In July 2006 heavy rains inundated the riverine lands, leaving at least 8 people dead. This was especially due to the construction of a 155 high meter wall to redirect the flow of the river in an area of important water level fluctuation. The Pehuenche people were finally relocated by Endesa and the government in a highly unsuited area, known as El Barco, where husbandry and agriculture were not possible, which left the communities even more poor and vulnerable. Impacts have not been mitigated then, and local communities have not gained any benefit from the project. In 2013, Ñana Nicolasa was found dead on in the lake Ralco under still uncertain circumstances. Today, Chile’s current Minister of Energy is finalizing a Watershed Mapping Study to prioritize hydro development in conflict watersheds. If implemented as policy, the study would facilitate construction of several large dams in the Bio Bio Watershed, as well as dams in at least six other major watersheds. In the Bio Bio watershed, two existing dams built by Endesa have already created conflicts in the region. The companies which own the additional water rights and would benefit from the policy are Brazilian firm Atiaia, and Energía Frontera SPA, which is owned by Energía Llaima. If the Minister of Energy is allowed to implement the study as national policy, it will make it easier for companies to gain approval for building dams in the Bio Bio watershed, particularly along the Bio Bio River. |
Name of conflict: | Ralco HEP and Bio Bio Watershed hydro plans, Chile |
Country: | Chile |
State or province: | Provincias de Bio Bio y de Concepción, Región del Bio Bio, y Provincia de Malleco, Región de la Araucanía |
Location of conflict: | Comunas de Concepción, Alto Bio Bio, Rucalhue, Quilaco, Lonquimay, Ralco, Los Angeles, Coronel |
Accuracy of location | MEDIUM (Regional level) |
Type of conflict. 1st level: | Water Management |
Type of conflict. 2nd level: | Water access rights and entitlements Transport infrastructure networks (roads, railways, hydroways, canals and pipelines) Land acquisition conflicts Dams and water distribution conflicts |
Specific commodities: | Land Electricity Water |
Project details | Chile's famous Bio Bio River, already severely impacted by two large dams, as well as its tributaries are at risk of being diverted if this study is implemented as policy, in addition to rivers in at least six other major watersheds in Chile. While the final results of the study have yet to be released, several projects ranging from 2 MW up to 200 MW have been proposed. Ralco Project envisaged the creation of a 370 m long and 155 m high water containment system along the upper Biobio River, covering an area of 3,467 hectares, with a capacity of 1,220 million m3 of water. The power station had a capacity of 570 MW, which was later raised to 690 MW, with a level of investment of 582,000,000 US$ |
Project area: | 2,426,200 |
Level of Investment for the conflictive project | 700,000,000 |
Type of population | Rural |
Affected Population: | 1,480,000 |
Start of the conflict: | 1996 |
Company names or state enterprises: | Endesa (Endesa) from Italy ENEL Group (Enel) from Italy Atiaia Energia from Brazil - Would benefit from the study if it became policy |
Relevant government actors: | Minister of Energy; Minister of Environment; Minister of Indigenous Affairs |
Environmental justice organizations (and other supporters) and their websites, if available: | Aguas Libres; Kayak Stewards Alliance; Bestias del Sur Salvaje; Ecosistemas; MVMT Comunicaciones |
Intensity | MEDIUM (street protests, visible mobilization) |
Reaction stage | PREVENTIVE resistance (precautionary phase) |
Groups mobilizing: | International ejos Recreational users Farmers Local ejos Social movements Fisher people Local government/political parties Indigenous groups or traditional communities Local scientists/professionals Neighbours/citizens/communities Women Informal workers Local Tourism Businesses |
Forms of mobilization: | Artistic and creative actions (eg guerilla theatre, murals) Creation of alternative reports/knowledge Development of a network/collective action Development of alternative proposals Involvement of national and international NGOs Lawsuits, court cases, judicial activism Media based activism/alternative media Official complaint letters and petitions Public campaigns Referendum other local consultations Street protest/marches Arguments for the rights of mother nature Appeals/recourse to economic valuation of the environment |
Environmental Impacts | Potential: Biodiversity loss (wildlife, agro-diversity), Desertification/Drought, Floods (river, coastal, mudflow), Food insecurity (crop damage), Global warming, Loss of landscape/aesthetic degradation, Noise pollution, Soil contamination, Soil erosion, Deforestation and loss of vegetation cover, Surface water pollution / Decreasing water (physico-chemical, biological) quality, Groundwater pollution or depletion, Large-scale disturbance of hydro and geological systems, Reduced ecological / hydrological connectivity |
Health Impacts | Visible: Mental problems including stress, depression and suicide, Health problems related to alcoholism, prostitution Potential: Deaths, Violence related health impacts (homicides, rape, etc..), Occupational disease and accidents |
Socio-economical Impacts | Visible: Displacement, Loss of livelihood, Militarization and increased police presence, Social problems (alcoholism, prostitution, etc..), Violations of human rights, Land dispossession, Loss of landscape/sense of place Potential: Increase in violence and crime, Increase in Corruption/Co-optation of different actors, Lack of work security, labour absenteeism, firings, unemployment, Loss of traditional knowledge/practices/cultures, Specific impacts on women |
Project Status | In operation |
Conflict outcome / response: | Corruption Migration/displacement |
Proposal and development of alternatives: | Proposals for Chile to move towards 100% renewable energies with no new hydro, submitted by the Mesa Ciudadana del Cambio Climatico (Chile), a coalition of over 20 NGOs; Proposals for Chile to establish Wild & Scenic Rivers Designation and permanently protect key waterways in at-risk watersheds, being developed by International Rivers (global) and several local Chilean NGOs and attorneys. |
Do you consider this an environmental justice success? Was environmental justice served?: | Not Sure |
Briefly explain: | The Watershed Mapping Study is being finalized and will be presented in September 2016. While the methodologies used in the study has created some conflict in the seven watersheds being prioritized for hydro development, the full outcome of the study will only be seen if it is allowed to become national energy policy. |
Juridical relevant texts related to the conflict (laws, legislations, EIAs, etc) |
| ||||||||
References to published books, academic articles, movies or published documentaries |
| ||||||||
| |||||||||
Other comments: | This is a local, regional, national and global conflict. Several watersheds in Chile are threatened by the same Watershed Mapping Study. These are rivers that deserve protected status, and it is expected that conflicts in Chile surrounding water rights will continue indefinitely until the country establishes new wild & scenic rivers legislation. Please review the map for information on the other watersheds at risk should the study become energy policy. |
Contributor: | Director, Futaleufu Riverkeeper, [email protected] |
Last update | 18/08/2019 |
Conflict ID: | 2330 |
Images |
|
![]() |
Ralco dam & hydroelectric plant
Ralco dam & hydroelectric plant, Veoverde
|
![]() |
Source: https://elpais.com/elpais/2014/02/20/planeta_futuro/1392913018_924314.html
|
![]() |
Murales de Nicolasa
Source: https://elpais.com/elpais/2014/02/20/planeta_futuro/1392913018_924314.html
|