What options do we have?

It was a few months before 'Black July' in the year 1983, but I forgot the exact date. The place was the auditorium of the Sri Lanka Association for the Advancement of Science (SLAAS) at Vidya Mawatha. A day seminar discussion was on. The topic was 'infrastructure and energy options for Sri Lanka'. It was a workshop organized by the SLAAS, where scientists and technocrats from all disciplines, i.e., engineers, atomic scientists, medical professionals, chemists, biologists, economists and other social scientists were participating. There were presentations from many eminent scientists and engineers of the day. This was the time when stars the likes of Engineer Dr A N S Kulasinghe, Professor K K Y W Perera, Professor Priyani Soysa, Dr Granville Dharmawardena, Professor Stanley Wijesundera, Engineer/Sociologist Dr Susantha Goonatilake, Engineer/inventor Ray Wijewardene, Accountant/transport specialist John Diandas were in action in their prime.

Deeply impressed

We as younger members stood deeply impressed, for the spirit and depth of discussion was refreshing. These were also the days when the environmental movement was gaining strong momentum. The Central Environmental Authority (CEA) had been established in 1981. The same year the National Science Council (NSC) was renamed the Natural Resources, Energy and Science Authority of Sri Lanka (NARESA). The first ever rural alternative energy research station in the Asian region was functioning at Pattiyapola in the Deep South, set up under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). That station conducted experiments on the use of solar, wind and bio-gas energy generation providing electricity to an area of about four square kilometers in the remote Pattiyapola village, for a few hours each day.

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant damaged by earthquake. Pic. courtesy: Google

The debates were hot with multi-disciplinary approaches taken in addressing issues. All views were encouraged and healthy discussion took place. Dr Dharmawardena, who later went on to head the Atomic Energy Authority (AEA) that was already in operation at the time, was the strongest proponent of the advantages in using nuclear power to meet Sri Lanka's energy needs and faced major criticism from others who argued on its down-sides. One of them was the safety issue and Sri Lanka's inability to yet develop a strong maintenance culture of its plant and equipment.

Japan was cited as a case for using nuclear energy with intense safeguards and I recall the mention made "even after Hiroshima and Nagasaki". Late last year, there was talk about Sri Lanka exploring the nuclear energy option with assistance from India and a few other nations. Earlier this year, Japan's earthquake hit Fukushima facility stood testimony to the very high cost that option offered humankind. And just last week, another peaceful user of nuclear energy, Germany, voted itself out of the option resolving to close down all its plants by 2022. Some even see it as a strategic ploy, claiming that this decision will make Germany get to the forefront of renewable energy generation making it an even more powerful nation in the future.

Hydro power potential

There were other engineers and scientists both young and old, in the audience that wanted to see, visionary and pioneer Engineer D J Wimalsurendra's work in hydro electricity generation, taken to a logical conclusion. His thoughts were to generate electrical energy harnessing all of Sri Lanka's waterfalls large or small that had the potential. At the time there were many grants of support given to those who took on small-scale hydro generation projects and there were many rural entrepreneurs that took advantage of it. Unfortunately, with changes in policy and the taking on of thermal energy options as a short-term solution, most of these small-scale hydro projects lost its viability and appeal.

OTEC

Then there was the science fiction writer and communications engineer Arthur C Clarke, who urged our scientists to consider the huge potential Sri Lanka had in generating energy through Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC). His claim was that the sea, off the coast of Trincomalee was one of the two most suitable sites in the world to harness ocean thermal energy. The other being in the Philippines. "The depths of 200 meters in close proximity to land allowed the generating facilities to be cited on land, would come to us at costs much lower than those of floating and land-based experimental plants that were being set up in the Pacific ocean close to Hawaii at the time", he said.

Highways with heart

Then, there was discussion on having special sheltered bicycle lanes on our roads, pedestrian walkways to encourage walking and cycling, improvements to rapid public transport and its promotion as against encouraging the use of private means of transport. Calls were made to levy heavy taxes on the importation of energy guzzling private vehicles. I vividly remember to this day, how John Diandas, a partner at a leading accounting firm at the time, who rode his bicycle to the SLAAS each day from his home near Galle Face, asked a highway engineer who proposed the construction of freeways to solve our transport problems "but have you thought of providing options for the elderly, the disabled and children who have to get across your freeway?"

Then came the dark and gloomy days, when terrorism and internal strife held our nation back for most of the next 28 years. When thankfully, we are rid of that and are looking ahead for good times, it will be useful for us to revisit some of the issues and thoughts that were generated at a time, when open, scientific discussion was considered the basis for decision Making.

So lovely

Today, we are a nation that can boast of our pristine green canopy. It is possible that the marketing guru Philip Kotler observed the green canopy, one sees from the sky when the airplane comes into land, traversing across Sri Lanka. It is no different when travelling by land and believe me, there are not many other destinations around on this globe that can boast of such a lush spread. He publicly told those who attended his expensively priced presentation, that ours is an 'eco-destination' and should be promoted as being 'Sri Lanka: So Lovely'.

We are also busy talking about selling off our carbon offsets to others for money and moving on to give monetary values, to the air we breathe and the water we drink. 'Carbon offset Funds' and 'Bio-diversity accounting' have been adapted as innovations, when they are no different to the tools of the economic and financial bubbles that burst recently in the Western financial markets.

Violating policy

We hear in the media of policy makers attempting to ignore basic policy guidelines as outlined in the 'Haritha Sri Lanka' section of the Mahinda Chinthana, by attempting to change laws and ordinances that are meant for the protection of natural areas to allow for tourism accommodation development within buffer-zones of our national parks and prime protected areas such as the Singharaja.

We forget that our Unique Selling Proposition (USP) for tourism for a destination like Sri Lanka is not about having large or even high quality hotels and resorts in the wilderness. It is a misguided notion that quality tourists and travellers want to stay slap-bang within or very close to protected areas. Setting up well managed visitation plans and locating accommodation facilities, are two entirely different things.

State policy as articulated in Mahinda Chinthana clearly states that the state will do it's all to protect Sri Lanka's natural areas and her fauna and flora. Different segments of government must not deviate from the main policy trust to suit situations or to serve calls of individual investors.

Real wonder

Tourism investors who are in it for the long-term will never seek for removal of means of protection, already in place in natural areas. It is only those who are the short-term fly-by-night type operators that will move to convince policy makers to change laws. This is not an issue about hotels, tourism or 'ecotourism'...it is an issue about the future of our country, our people and also of tourism and ecotourism in the true and pristine sense.

The options before us are many. We can move to be like some other countries and do as they have done. Or we can move to be unique and do it our way; be it in exploring our energy, transport or tourism infrastructure development. For a country, being unique raises eyebrows, creates a wow factor, makes her standtall in the crowd and become like no other. That then will make her be a real wonder.

[email protected]