29 March 2014 | NewScientist | 27

One minute interview

For more opinion articles, visit newscientist.com/opinion

troubled watersA massive canal across nicaragua would be an ecological disaster, says Jorge Huete-Pérez. He wants the world to help him stop it

ProfileJorge Huete-Pérez is the director of the Center for molecular Biology at the university of Central America and the president of the nicaraguan Academy of Sciences. He is leading opposition to a canal that would bisect the country

You oppose plans for a canal across Nicaragua. What do they entail?there’s not much information. this is a major construction project, crossing from ocean to ocean, but the bill was approved in just three days by the national Assembly. it says the canal could go through any region, but the route preferred by the Chinese company contracted to build the canal seems to be through Lake nicaragua, the largest lake in Central America.

Why are you and others so concerned?environmental impact and economic feasibility studies would take at least a couple years. we haven’t seen either, even though nicaraguan law requires the government to do them before giving consent for any major project. no scientists here were consulted, nor any ethnic communities – whose rights to the land the canal would violate.

What are the arguments in favour of the canal? the government claims that a major infrastructure project will bring a lot of jobs, and

that eventually nicaragua will be making a lot of money. But they’re pulling these numbers out of the air; we haven’t seen any data. Our economists say the numbers just don’t add up.

Also, a major project like this will need a lot of specialists, which nicaragua doesn’t have. that means bringing in outside professionals. People are worried that this canal will be owned and run by a foreign country. i don’t see how that could lift the country out of poverty.

What alternatives are there to improve the economy in Nicaragua?the lake could be used to export water to other Central American countries, like el Salvador, which has serious drinking water issues. Also, in the past 25 years, nicaragua’s tourism industry has grown to the point that we can compete with countries like Costa rica. ecotourism could be a major industry for nicaragua.

What natural heritage is at risk?we can say for sure there will be damage to the lake’s ecosystems. Lake nicaragua is an important drinking water reserve, and communities depend on it for fishing. many species live there, including cichlids, which have been important for studying evolution. On the beaches, there are also nesting sea turtles and as you go inland, many, many species, including jaguars and tapirs. it’s not just a few species under threat, but whole ecosystems containing hundreds of thousands of species.

What action are you and others taking?there were 32 lawsuits filed against the bill, but the government has dismissed them all. So now the Academy of Sciences is trying to organise an independent, multidisciplinary group to study this problem, and we are urgently requesting help from international experts. Caring for the earth is a responsibility for all of humanity. this problem shouldn’t be left for nicaragua to deal with alone. i’m afraid that the government is going to start digging — perhaps as soon as this December — and nobody will have said anything. Interview by Rachel Nuwer

everything else was challenging. Comparisons with pre-spill conditions or between areas with oil deposits and unaffected areas were confounded by environmental variation. Some studies assumed that the spill must have caused damage, while others made no prior judgment, leading to different questions and statistical designs. Studies varied in the criteria used to assess recovery or the standards used to evaluate evidence.

Some disagreements might have been avoided had there been better communication. But scientists were often partitioned by the litigation that followed the spill, stifling communication. Otherwise, unstated assumptions and methodological pitfalls could have been exposed and study designs shared.

Conducting rigorous science after a spill is not easy, but it can be done. Preconceptions must be minimised. Lessons about data and study design are obvious in hindsight, but they can easily be forgotten in the emotional atmosphere and urgency that follow a major spill.

Cooperation and openness are essential. The Exxon Valdez has taught us many things that may help avoid such protracted disputes in the future.

The lessons of the disaster are timely. As the Arctic warms and the ice melts, oil development in remote, cold-water areas like Prince William Sound will accelerate. The likelihood of spills will increase.

The people who have lived in these places for generations, and the biologically rich ecosystems on which they depend, will be especially vulnerable. And if the worst happens, they will want answers too.

John Wiens is chief scientist at ecology research group Point Blue in California, uS. He is also the editor of Oil in the environment: Legacies and lessons of the exxon valdez oil spill (Cambridge university Press)

140329_Op_Comment.indd 27 24/03/2014 12:39