Costa Rica is a country rich with renewable energy. In fact, it gets about 99% of all its electrical energy from clean sources, and it’s aiming to be the first country to become carbon neutral (more about that below). Some of Costa Rica’s energy sources include geothermal energy, the burning of sugarcane waste and other biomass, solar and wind energy. However, the largest source of energy is hydroelectricity — its hydroelectric dams provide more than 82% of the country’s electricity.
But the electric needs of Costa Rica are increasing, and the government now wants to build new dams that would displace indigenous villages and flood valuable habitats. Local environmental groups are opposing the construction of new hydroelectric dams.
Also, Costa Rica’s efforts to minimize its own contributions to global warming have made it especially vulnerable to climate changes caused by other countries. The reason is rain. Even a tiny shift in rainfall patterns could leave the country without enough water to meet its growing demand for electricity. And scientists say climate change is likely to have a significant effect on rainfall.
But Costa Rica is working to become the world’s first carbon-neutral country (other countries vying to be first are Monaco, Norway, New Zealand and Iceland). Costa Rica wants to become carbon neutral in time to celebrate 200 years of independence in 2021, says environment and energy minister Roberto Dobles.
Wind power might come to forefront in Costa Rica — a large wind farm with 22 turbines has been working in Tilarán, Guanacaste since 2002 and more are scheduled to be installed in the mountains of Escazú and Santa Ana. A new geothermal plant, using naturally-existing superheated water to power steam turbines, is also scheduled to be producing electricity in 2010 near Rincón de la Vieja Volcano, in the province of Guanacaste.
Via: TierraAmerica
8 responses so far ↓
1 Robin Hak // Apr 8, 2008 at 10:49 pm
The problems with hydroelectric dams are environmentally annoying, though. But it’s better than coal.
2 Bob // Apr 9, 2008 at 5:11 am
Costa Rica has an GDP of 7% compared to us here in Australia, yet has a nearly 21% of our population. This means they have less money per person. Any since money brings personal and social wealth, which means greater power to protect and enhance health, education, and the environment, why would anyone want to replicate the energy constraints of this country, let alone limit it by disallowing more hydro electric stations? By the way, lifespan in Cost Rica is ranked 55 out of the whole 222 nations worldwide, which is not bad. But we Australian’s are at number 8. Long live electricity.
3 Adam // Apr 9, 2008 at 7:42 am
Bob you’re an idiot!
4 Eco Interactive // Apr 10, 2008 at 5:46 pm
I am afraid that I have to agree with Robin. Hydro is probably the lesser of all evils. There is habitat destruction. However the damage is less permanent than other solutions.
The end of fossil fuels needs to be our #1 priority.
5 Alex // Apr 11, 2008 at 10:52 am
You wouldn’t notice this walking around San Jose. Because this is a third world city, there are little or no vehicle emissions regulations.
6 Eco Preservation Society // Apr 13, 2008 at 7:25 am
We applaud Costa Rica for it’s efforts and leadership in environmental issues.
While Alex is correct about emission controls, to be fair, Costa Rica has an excellent public transportation system that is extensively used.
Costa Rica is a Second World country and has a growing economy. There is no doubt that they have made some compromises, but certainly you have to give them credit for their leadership.
I walk in Downtown San Jose often and I do not find the pollution near as bad as other major cities.
7 curt // Apr 19, 2008 at 5:39 pm
I think, that’s really a very nice achievement for one developing country in comparison with G8.
Hydro power is also much, much better than any old fashioned fossil fuels, such as coal, oil, gas. Nuclear is simply far too expensive, if we exclude all state tax benefits and financial injections and include the cost of clearing up old nuclear rubbish and far too dangerous in modern world, which is full of (terror) threats.
8 marina // May 6, 2008 at 12:08 pm
hi, i actually beg to differ. i live in costa rica, and i can tell you that it is not 99% powered by renewable energy. as a matter of fact, if it’s powered by 1% renewable energy, i will be happy.
costa rica, unfortunately, is an excellent marketer when it comes to sustainability, but has yet to come close to even getting an organics food line in this country.
Leave a Comment