The first case study I focused on is the Texaco oil production in Ecuador’s rainforests. The study was developed by students at the University of Michigan and can be found at, http://www.umich.edu/~snre492/Jones/texaco.htm#Problem. The issue is Texaco was to set up an extraction plan for the oil in Ecuador. The extraction produced what is called “production water,” which is water brought to the surface after extracting oil. Texaco was then to pump the water back into the ground as to not harm the environment. Instead, they dumped the water into over 300 small waste pits. The pending solution to the problem is still ongoing. An issue which relates to the module is sustainable development. The rate of oil being extracted and the environment being polluted exceeds Ecuador’s ability to replenish it. Future civilizations are put in jeopardy by this meaning that the current civilization is not sustainable. The extraction of oil now and the pollution compromises the future country’s revenue as well. This can also influence the GDP in the future if not treated.
The second case study I focused on is about the Three Gorges Dam in China along the Yangtze River. The study was developed by the University of Buffalo and can be found at, http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/files/three_gorges_dam.pdf. The case describes how the dam is both beneficial and economically unfit. The dam produces about 84 terrawatt-hours of electricity annually which is four times as much energy produced by the largest US dam. However, the dam was a costly 10.4 billion dollar to build, which put more strain on Chinese citizens who earn an average of less than $5000 a year. The reservoir created by the dam also flooded 156,000 acres of land with more than 1 million residents forced to find new homes and jobs. The observation is that although the dam produces energy for China’s growing population, it might actually be doing more harm than good.
My hometown of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania can relate to my case studies because we too have major issues with one of our rivers. The Susquehanna River is highly over polluted mostly due to the runoff of water from coal mines. The orange sulfur water runs off into the river through streams. This is very much like the water pollution issue in Ecuador due to Texaco’s negligence. The “production water” is polluting water in Ecuador and it is all due to production for an energy source in oil, much like the coal in Wilkes-Barre. It does not matter how high a country’s GDP or ends are, it can still have non-economical factors. I feel that it is important to look at development at a more local level to get a better idea.
2 thoughts on “Module 5 – Development Case Studies”
Hi John. My name is Sophia. I found your blog really interesting because I’m from Mountaintop, which is close to Wilkes-Barre, as I’m sure you know. In my blog I also wrote about the water around our area, except I didn’t touch on the Susquehanna River. I did not know that the Susquehanna was as polluted as you said it was. I had no idea that the coal impacted the river in the way that it did. In my blog I wrote about how a nearby factory affected the water supply for one road in Mountaintop. Feel free to check out what I wrote. https://sites.psu.edu/geog30/wp-admin/post.php?post=44426&action=edit
Hi John, my name is Alyssa. Here’s the link to my post: http://sites.psu.edu/geog30/2016/02/25/module-5-develop…t-case-studies-5/
I found your post interesting because I too live near the Susquehanna River and know how polluted it is. I really liked the connections you made between the pollution in Ecuador and the pollution near you. I also liked how you gave an example of development that is doing more harm than good in your second case study. I agree that looking at development at a more local level can be more helpful because you are better able to relate to the situation. Great post!
Hi John. My name is Sophia. I found your blog really interesting because I’m from Mountaintop, which is close to Wilkes-Barre, as I’m sure you know. In my blog I also wrote about the water around our area, except I didn’t touch on the Susquehanna River. I did not know that the Susquehanna was as polluted as you said it was. I had no idea that the coal impacted the river in the way that it did. In my blog I wrote about how a nearby factory affected the water supply for one road in Mountaintop. Feel free to check out what I wrote.
https://sites.psu.edu/geog30/wp-admin/post.php?post=44426&action=edit
Hi John, my name is Alyssa. Here’s the link to my post: http://sites.psu.edu/geog30/2016/02/25/module-5-develop…t-case-studies-5/
I found your post interesting because I too live near the Susquehanna River and know how polluted it is. I really liked the connections you made between the pollution in Ecuador and the pollution near you. I also liked how you gave an example of development that is doing more harm than good in your second case study. I agree that looking at development at a more local level can be more helpful because you are better able to relate to the situation. Great post!