Archives




View Full Version : Voters Approve Doubling Panama Canal


Chuck
10-23-2006, 09:18 AM
Voters support referendum doubling waterway's capacity (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10627208/)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/pcanal.jpg

October 23, 2006 - MSNBC.com

PANAMA CITY, Panama - Voters overwhelmingly approved the largest modernization plan in the 92-year history of the Panama Canal on Sunday, backing a multi-billion dollar expansion that will allow the world’s largest ships to squeeze through the shortcut between the seas.

More than 78 percent of Panamanians voted in favor of the expansion with 94 percent of polling stations counted by the country’s electoral tribunal. Only about 22 percent opposed the plan. Almost 57 percent of the country’s more than 2.1 million voters did not turn out.

Thousands of supporters in green “Yes” T-shirts cast ballots endorsing the $5.25 billion overhaul which would allow the canal to handle modern container ships, cruise liners and tankers that are too large for its current 108-foot-wide locks. The plan is to build a third set of locks on the Pacific and Atlantic ends by 2015.

The Panama Canal Authority, the autonomous government agency that runs the canal, says the project will double capacity of a waterway already on pace to generate about $1.4 billion this year. Expansion will be paid for by increasing tolls and take in more than $6 billion annually in revenue by 2025.

“We are going to serve the world better and that means we are going to serve Panama better,” canal administrator Alberto Aleman Zubieta told The Associated Press. “Everyone’s a winner. The shipping industry, the Panamanians and all of the countries that will benefit from international shipping commerce.”

Close watch on corruption
A large chunk of canal revenues go to education and other Panamanian social programs. Still, critics contend that as drawn up, the expansion plan benefits the canal’s customers more than Panamanians, and worry that costs could balloon for this debt-ridden country.

“Voting ’no’ is like closing the door on the canal. It’s the top source of income for Panama and improving it means more money for the government and less poverty,” said Leonardo Aspira, a boat salesman who sported a “Yes” shirt and baseball hat in Kuna Nega, a largely Indian town of dirt roads and banana trees on the outskirts of Panama City.

The canal employs 8,000 workers and the expansion is expected to generate as many as 40,000 construction jobs. Unemployment in Panama is 9.5 percent, and 40 percent of the country lives in poverty.

Critics contend the expansion will benefit the canal’s customers more than Panamanians, and fear it will stoke corruption and uncontrolled debt if costs balloon.

“The expansion is necessary, but we all have to watch closely, make sure there isn’t embezzlement and corruption,” said Igor Meneses, a 34-year-old advertising executive who was waiting to vote in Panama City. “With that kind of money, there’s a lot to steal.”
President Martin Torrijos, an outspoken supporter of expansion, called the referendum “probably the most important decision of this generation,” after voting.

Opponents of the expansion plan complained about electoral foul play.

On the sweltering streets of Panama City, some wore red shirts and smocks supporting a ’No’ vote. But they were far outnumbered by those in shirts, bandanas, caps and vests supporting expansion. Cars and trucks with “Yes” bumper stickers and flags jammed streets.

Voting complaints
Former President Guillermo Endara, who dressed in red from head to toe to show his opposition to expansion, complained that polling place workers wore “Yes” clothing and handed out cards with directions on where and how to vote with propaganda supporting the plan printed on the opposite side.

“That’s vote-buying,” Endara said.

School buses and vans with “yes” signs stuck to the side were also seen whisking voters from poor, crowded neighborhoods to polling places to vote.
But polling place and transportation workers showing which side of the referendum they were on apparently did not constitute a violation of Panama’s electoral laws.

The United States arranged for Panamanian independence from Colombia to build the canal, and ran the canal from 1914 to 1999. Torrijos’ father, strongman Omar Torrijos, signed a treaty with President Carter in 1977 to cede control of the waterway back to Panama, a decision that also was approved by Panamanians in a referendum.

Chuck
10-23-2006, 09:39 AM
Ships can be up to 160ft wide - up from 106ft when the Panama Canal is widened by around 2014
Supertankers are up to 1/4-mile long, 1,400 feet between gates is probably long enough for them to get thru
China seems to be the most interested in this project
5% of the World's shipping goes thru Panama
Cape Horn has never been a safe passage under South America
Nicaruaga has been considering a canal of their own
If ships get larger, trafic might get diverted to the Suez Canal
40% of Panama lives in poverty
25,000 died making the original canal
The cost overruns could be 3-4 times the 5 billion USD estimate.
Concerns over the additional fresh water needed for expansion.UK Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/23/wpanama23.xml)

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6074106.stm)

Wikipedia Article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal)

tbaleno
10-23-2006, 11:00 AM
I moved this thread because I think for the most part car news should be on the front page. Or at least environmental technology. If people dissagree it can be moved back to the news section.

Tochatihu
11-02-2006, 05:43 PM
DeltaFlyer: "...Concerns over the additional fresh water needed for expansion."

To me this is a big deal. I understand that Panama is already increasing the supplying watershed area. During the last El Nino they almost ran out of water to operate the canal during the dry season. It is very easy to imagine a scenario where canal use would have to be subtantially curtailed.

The number I recall is that each ship passage requires 40 million gallons (should confirm that). Thatsa lotta rain, and bigger ships would certainly mean bigger 'flushes'.

DAS

xcel
11-02-2006, 07:32 PM
Hi Tochatihu:

___Is the reason they use Fresh water to keep the two oceans waters from coming in contact with one another at the highest point? If not, why could they not just pump Ocean water from one end or the other to the high point?

___Sorry for not knowing much about the inherent engineering of a canal other then how they work at the most basic level …

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Chuck
11-02-2006, 07:50 PM
I think the reason is they did not have to make a canal all the way across Panama, but just link lakes and other fresh bodies of water between the oceans....

xcel
11-02-2006, 08:03 PM
Hi Chuck:

___Ahh, that makes perfect sense now. I remember reading that there were a few lakes involved in the Panama Canal. Thanks for the info.

___Maybe instead of building a fence across the Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California border, we should build our own East/West canal? Kills two birds with one stone? Some were interested in this a few years ago anyway but I bet it would cost a fortune :(

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Chuck
11-02-2006, 08:13 PM
....the Canal Grande?

Tochatihu
11-04-2006, 10:22 AM
A ship passage currently requires 52 million gallons of water, wihich would be much increased after the expansion. Perhaps then they will be able to pass more than one ship per 'flush'? Doing it with seawater would require lifting 200 thousand tons 85 feet, and *that* would take some megawatts eh? As it is, it can be viewed as a largish passive solar project.

If in the future sea level is 85 feet higher, the canal will be much easier to operate. OTOH, the world's seaports will all be underwater...

Chuck
11-04-2006, 11:00 AM
A ship passage currently requires 52 million gallons of water, wihich would be much increased after the expansion. Perhaps then they will be able to pass more than one ship per 'flush'? Doing it with seawater would require lifting 200 thousand tons 85 feet, and *that* would take some megawatts eh? As it is, it can be viewed as a largish passive solar project.

If in the future sea level is 85 feet higher, the canal will be much easier to operate. OTOH, the world's seaports will all be underwater...

You beat me to the punch - I was going to suggest floating icebergs from the Larsen ice shelf for extra water.

If you want to get a preview of what rising shorelines can do - read this about 100 Dutch horses stranded by a flood (BBC) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6113010.stm). As the waters rose, they were stuck on a standing-room only island and at least 19 of them died before rescuers found a way for them to leave.



Copyright 2006 Clean MPG, LLC. All Rights Reserved.