|
Dave Batker, Asia Pacific Environmental Exchange
January 21, 2005
Dave gave us an important background on the problems with the extractive industry and introduced the Camisea project. He focused on sustainability, equity, contribution to economic efficiency, and democracy. His charge to us was to evaluate the current pipeline and then provide recommendations for a new paradigm for oil and gas extraction. He informed us that APEX would be working with us on the educational documentary. |
Grace Stahre, Next Mountain Media and Versant Films
January 21, 2005
Grace also spoke with us during the first day of class. She discussed her role in the project as filmmaker as well as the process for getting a movie made. She stressed that the movie would mirror the class in that it would cover service learning, ecological economics, cross-boarder issues, American view on the world, and how graduate students understand global issues.
|
|
Patricia Zurita, Conservation International
February 9, 2005
Conservation International’s work involves trying to build harmony between humans and nature. Patricia explained that CI’s focused on biodiversity issues. She also said that at some point that CI realized that the Camisea pipeline was going forward and began trying to get the best possible environmental standards for the project. The December dispersment of the loan was a major issue because of the recent oil spill. |
Maria Ramos, Amazon Watch
February 9, 2005
Otosa discussed the Camisea project and its close ties to the Peruvian government. Amazon watch is very concerned about the impact on indigenous peoples. They are specifically concerned about the non-contacted peoples whose immune systems and food sources are in danger. She explained that there are many opinions about how the oil spill in December 2004 effected the environment. Unlike CI, Amazon Watch does not support any part of the project and has a continued stance that Camisea is non-negotiable. |
|
Jamie Cavelier, Moore Foundation
February 22, 2005
Jamie told us about his experiences in Peru. He expressed that timing was the biggest issue with the pipeline. This is also not the last pipeline in Peru. The Peruvian government, especially the Ministry of Energy, has been inviting companies who may be interested in development opportunities. He stressed that the independent agency and monitoring was never put in place. There have also been clear impacts on local peoples as a result of the pipeline. |
Ryan Valdez, Smithsonian Institute
March 2, 2005
Ryan talked about the biodiversity project he is currently working on in Peru and Panama. This web-based tool will have GIS maps with several different levels of information. He hopes SI will remain a neutral body that is a clearinghouse of information.
|
Yasmin Tayyab, World Bank
March 9, 2005
To get a different perspective, we got to speak to Yasmin at the World Bank. She talked about various open meetings that the World Bank has held with communities affected by resource extraction. She doesn’t believe that certain advocacy NGOs will ever be satisfied with World Bank practices and expressed frustration at them for never being able to “agree to disagree”. The reason that the World Bank did not get the project was that the IDB was more interested in Camisea. She believes that in future conversations about resource extraction the local NGOs are the best groups to communicate with. |
Aaron Goldzimer, Environmental Defense
March 9, 2005
Aaron gave the class an overview of some of the legal and political issues in Camisea. He said that the President of Peru had been very supportive of Camisea and has not received criticism well. He also revealed that he had seen an updated environmental policy for the IDB and, although it was better than the one written in 1979, it was not extremely impressive. His general impression was that there had been declines in fish, declines in game, and erosion and water pollution as a result of the pipeline. He believes the best course of action is to continue to demand independent monitoring and full compliance with the original conditions of the loan. |
Luis Pinto, Council of the Americas
April 6, 2005
The Council of the Americas represents the oil and gas industry in the amazon region. Luis believes that Camisea has had a positive effect because the government, industry, NGOs, indigenous groups, and international financing agencies came together and got the gas to Lima. In addition, they were able to invest in communitites where gas is located, though much of this funding was provided by the private companies, and he believes that the governement should become more involved. In general he throught Camisea laid the groundwork for future best practices in the industry. |
Elizabeth Brito and Carlos Perafan, IDB
April 20, 2005
Elizabeth and Carlos from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), one of the major institutions funding the pipeline, spoke to us about their work on Camisea. Elizabeth was proud of the IDBs work on Camisea. She also talked about loan safeguards and how signing off on the loan didn’t necessarily mean that the money would be dispersed. Carlos talked about the indigenous people’s policy that he is working on at the IDB. He expressed that health concerns are most important when working in an area with indigenous people. |
