Environmental Defense Commends Historic "No" Vote On Camisea Project

(28 August 2003 — Washington, DC)  Environmental Defense praised the federal Export-Import Bank for rejecting the controversial Camisea project this morning in a 2-1 vote, marking the first time that the Bank has ever rejected a final application on environmental grounds.  The Camisea project in Peru is one of the world’s most controversial and high-risk projects and clearly violates the Export-Import Bank’s Environmental Guidelines.  The Board rejected guarantees for roughly $200 million in loans to the project. 

“This was an important test, and the U.S. Export-Import Bank made a difficult, historic, and courageous decision,” said Environmental Defense social scientist Aaron Goldzimer.  “This vote reaffirms the Bank’s international leadership on export credits and the environment.  Despite tremendous pressure, a majority of the Bank’s Board of Directors decided to protect the credibility of its Environmental Guidelines.” 

The $1.5 billion Camisea project extends from a Reserve for the protection of nomadic indigenous peoples through some of the most pristine forest regions of the Amazon to one of the most important marine reserves in all of Latin America and the Caribbean. 

Evidence already exists that contractors at the project, which has already begun construction, have contacted and threatened isolated indigenous peoples, many of whom lack immunity to common illnesses.  Local people have reported drastic declines in the fish and game they depend on for food, and local water supplies have been polluted because of the project’s poor erosion control.  The project also involves the construction of a fractionation plant and export loading facility immediately adjacent to the Paracas National Reserve, which is a sanctuary for rare or endangered species like the Humboldt penguin, marine otter, and sea turtles. 

Only one other project, China’s Three Gorges dam, has been turned down on environmental grounds in the history of the Ex-Im Bank, but that was only a Letter of Intent and not a final application. 

“It did not have to turn out this way,” said Goldzimer.  “Local Peruvian citizen groups and indigenous federations tried to work with the project companies and the Peruvian Government to address the project’s problems.  But the Government and the companies were inflexible.  Hopefully they will take this opportunity to improve the project so that it can contribute to the sustainable development of Peru.”