Gas exploitation in the Urubamba valley Camisea, Peru
Description:
Camisea is a key Latin American energy project, located in the tropical and environmentally fragile Urubamba valley of the Peruvian Amazon. This area is the ancestral home of the indigenous Machiguenga people, and other tribes, who live inside the Nahua Kugapakori Reserve. The Camisea project includes the extraction, transport and distribution of natural gas for domestic and overseas markets, heavily financed by the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB or IDB or BID). However, local communities have suffered the serious social and environmental negative impacts of project Camisea, including: deforestation, the contamination of water sources and a dramatic rise in illness rates of affected villages. |
Basic Data
| Name of conflict: | Gas exploitation in the Urubamba valley Camisea, Peru |
| Country: | Peru |
| State or province: | Cuzco |
| Location of conflict: | Urubamba, Camisea |
| Accuracy of location | MEDIUM (Regional level) |
Source of Conflict
| Type of conflict. 1st level: | Fossil Fuels and Climate Justice/Energy |
| Type of conflict. 2nd level: | Oil and gas exploration and extraction Transport infrastructure networks (roads, railways, hydroways, canals and pipelines) |
| Specific commodities: | Natural Gas |
Project Details and Actors
| Project details | Two oil wells San Martin 1 e 2 in the Camisea River basin, a tributary of the Urubamba River; A natural gas separation plant with a 44 hectares, and supposedly 600 million barrels of liquid gas, 60 km (37 mile) pipeline linking the plant to the Urubamba River; A seaport for loading gas with four 3 km (1.8 mile) long underground pipes. The transportation of natural gas to the city of Pisco by a 700 km (435 mile) pipeline, with a separate 540 km (335 mile) pipeline for liquefied gas. |
| Level of Investment for the conflictive project | 2.700.000.000,00 |
| Type of population | Rural |
| Start of the conflict: | 2002 |
| Company names or state enterprises: | Pluspetrol from Argentina Hunt Oil from United States of America SK Corporation from Republic of Korea Tecpetrol from Argentina Mobil Corp Royal Dutch Shell (Shell) from Netherlands Repsol from Spain Transportadora de Gas del Perú (TGP) |
| Relevant government actors: | Ministry of Mines and Petroleum - Ecuador, TGP - Peru, OSINERG - Peru, Grupo Tecnico de Coordinacion (GTCI Camisea), Consejo Nacional del Ambiente (CONAM) |
| International and Finance Institutions | Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) Andean Development Corporation Bank (CAF) |
| Environmental justice organizations (and other supporters) and their websites, if available: | AIDESEP - Peru, CECONAMA - Peru, COMARU - Peru, FECONAYY - Peru, CEDIA - Peru, APRODEH - Peru, Management Committee of Lower Urubamba - Peru, La Esperanza Shintorini Camisea Association - Peru, Oilwatch - Nigeria |
Conflict & Mobilization
| Intensity | MEDIUM (street protests, visible mobilization) |
| Reaction stage | In REACTION to the implementation (during construction or operation) |
| Groups mobilizing: | Indigenous groups or traditional communities International ejos Local ejos Social movements |
| Forms of mobilization: | Creation of alternative reports/knowledge Objections to the EIA |
Impacts
| Environmental Impacts | Visible: Fires, Loss of landscape/aesthetic degradation, Soil contamination, Oil spills, Surface water pollution / Decreasing water (physico-chemical, biological) quality Potential: Air pollution, Biodiversity loss (wildlife, agro-diversity), Desertification/Drought, Global warming, Groundwater pollution or depletion |
| Health Impacts | Visible: Other environmental related diseases Potential: Accidents, Deaths |
| Socio-economical Impacts | Visible: Loss of livelihood, Land dispossession Potential: Displacement, Increase in violence and crime, Loss of traditional knowledge/practices/cultures, Militarization and increased police presence |
Outcome
| Project Status | In operation |
| Conflict outcome / response: | Migration/displacement |
| Proposal and development of alternatives: | Social organisations, and representatives of affected communities, sometimes block the river, demanding the State and involved companies to compensate them for damages caused by gas leaks and that all activities are suspended until their safety is guaranteed. |
| Do you consider this an environmental justice success? Was environmental justice served?: | No |
| Briefly explain: | The indigenous communities have suffered the serious social and environmental negative impacts of project Camisea, including: deforestation, the contamination of water sources and illnesses. |
Sources & Materials
| Juridical relevant texts related to the conflict (laws, legislations, EIAs, etc) |
| ||||
| References to published books, academic articles, movies or published documentaries |
| ||||
|
Meta information
| Contributor: | Lucie Greyl |
| Last update | 18/08/2019 |
| Conflict ID: | 513 |
Images |
|
|
Gas pipeline, in the Lower Urubamba river valley
Survival
|