What kind of world is this?

If only it were so...
But instead we get the complicated place we live. Last Friday a small plane crashed into the sea in southern Chile, and all 21 passengers were killed. (That's nearly as many as were killed in auto accidents over a recent holiday weekend. Isn't news cheerful?). Among them was an extremely popular TV host and his crew, so the news has been featuring this story everywhere. Despite this, the president kept his appointment to meet with students, which appears to be a positive development toward resolving some of the disputes over education reform (and larger structural changes, though that may be too much to expect).

A painted protest sign in the channel of the Rio Mapocho reminded us of another ongoing issue related to the plans to build a massive hydroelectric project, the HidroAysén, in a relatively pristine area in the Patagonia region in southern Chile. This has been widely reported in scientific and popular press around the world. There is widespread opposition (there's an impressively produced and organized web site here). It does seem that, without having seen a single building with insulation, and only rarely things like double-paned windows, it is hard for a government to make a strong case for an urgently-needed increase in energy supply. The heating in a house typically consists of an estufa, a steel box with an open flame of burning gas in front. The heat generated by this is absorbed by whatever mass is right next to it, and most quickly escapes through the drafty windows and into cold concrete walls. It's so wasteful I'd rather be cold than light one of these things. Though of course when I find one that's on I do tend to stand next to it. So is building massive dams, permanently submerging stunning valleys (where indigenous people live), and running a 1200 mile long set of transmission lines the best solution for energy? To my outsider eyes it seems pretty misguided. I have heard some say that the energy is really aimed to supply more cheap energy to private mining companies, so the public won't even see a tangible benefit. Maybe this is another manifestation of the Chinese approach to using dams as social engineering, or maybe it just falls under the same criticism Peter Gleick levels toward the World Bank, that governments may (think they) know how to spend $7 billion on one huge water project, but they don't know how to manage 7000 $1 million projects even if they'd reap far more cumulative benefits.

So, how will my work on climate change impacts on water resources fit into the large-scale water development plans of the country? I'm still in the think of working out computer systems and re-writing code to get into that. But hopefully there will be more on this topic.