56 replies to this topic

[Phillip Creed]

Very, VERY bad news for professional astronomy if this happens:

https://gizmodo.com/...nomy-2000548070

For God's sake, put the project somewhere else.  Literally anywhere else.  Plenty of available land in northern Chile.

 

Clear Skies,

Phil

[Dynan]

Like other small niche hobbies and activities, Big Money doesn't care about Endangered Telescopes either.

Maybe they have a "You have Hubble and Webb in perfect skies. Go use them" attitude.

 

This is horrific. I believe Mankind will eventually pay for lack of night in many ways.

[Bruce K]

Harumph

[Jethro7]

Hello CNers,

This is unfortunate. AES Andes, may give platitudes to being non invasive but big money tends to win out in the end. 

 

KEEP LOOKING UP Jethro

[jerobe]

That's terrible news.  The project will encompass 7413 acres, include a port, "thousands of electric generators", hydrogen and ammonia production plants AND it's only 3 to 7 miles from the observatory!

 

The Chilean authorities will have to decide whether to protect the country's position as the best place on earth to do astronomical observations, or create another industrial complex.  I know which way I would vote!

[Starsareus]

as usual, money rules our Universe.

[Tony Flanders]

Astronomy is big business in Chile; it brings in a lot of foreign money. And prestige. Don't be too sure this is a done deal.

[petert913]

"A subsidiary of a large USA company".  I'm so proud 

[Jon Isaacs]

Astronomy is big business in Chile; it brings in a lot of foreign money. And prestige. Don't be too sure this is a done deal.

 

 

And tourists..  

 

Jon

[RLK1]

Chile has a national dark sky ordinance: "the Chilean government announced a new National Lighting Standard that will become effective later this year. The updated standards expand restrictions on light luminosity, color, and the hours they can be turned on to protect three major concerns: astronomy, biodiversity, and human health."

 

https://undark.org/2... just 1 percent.

 

 

"Established by the Chilean Ministry of the Environment, the new Norma Luminica, formally titled Supreme Decree No. 1 of 2022, is a revision of Supreme Decree No. 43 of 2012 that expands the scope of regulations on light-emitting sources to the entire country of Chile. And not only does it protect the night skies for astronomical observations, but it also incorporates the protection of biodiversity and human health as environmental objectives.

The new Norma Luminica includes regulations on the brightness of industrial lighting, placing limits on the average light levels (luminance or illuminance) that emitting sources can produce. Similar limits are imposed on vehicular, pedestrian, and sports lighting."

 

https://www.lightnow...ky-regulations/

 

It seems to me that any entity would be required by law in Chile to meet the tenets of the standard.

[Knasal]

"A subsidiary of a large USA company".  I'm so proud 

Exactly. Go ‘Murica.

[bunyon]

I need to read more about this. I'm not sure why they want to put it there. I'd guess the big thing is expansion of the port - probably needed - and power to mining operations. But it seems to me they could move the power generation closer to where people are or to the mines. That is, I don't know why they have proposed THIS location. The mines are much further away.

 

There have been a few new proposed ports on the Chilean coast that didn't win approval. Pretty much the entire coastline has some sort of environmental protection. 

 

If I'm Chile (and I'm very much not), I'd be trying to spur development in the south. The Atacama is probably already supporting more people than it should. 

 

Fingers crossed. Hope this dies or is substantially altered.

[Keith Rivich]

Chile has a national dark sky ordinance: "the Chilean government announced a new National Lighting Standard that will become effective later this year. The updated standards expand restrictions on light luminosity, color, and the hours they can be turned on to protect three major concerns: astronomy, biodiversity, and human health."

 

https://undark.org/2... just 1 percent.

 

 

"Established by the Chilean Ministry of the Environment, the new Norma Luminica, formally titled Supreme Decree No. 1 of 2022, is a revision of Supreme Decree No. 43 of 2012 that expands the scope of regulations on light-emitting sources to the entire country of Chile. And not only does it protect the night skies for astronomical observations, but it also incorporates the protection of biodiversity and human health as environmental objectives.

The new Norma Luminica includes regulations on the brightness of industrial lighting, placing limits on the average light levels (luminance or illuminance) that emitting sources can produce. Similar limits are imposed on vehicular, pedestrian, and sports lighting."

 

https://www.lightnow...ky-regulations/

 

It seems to me that any entity would be required by law in Chile to meet the tenets of the standard.

Like the oil companies do around the McDonald Observatory. Just saying...

[mountain monk]

Jon, Tony,

 

Boy, I sure don’t share your optimism. Money is power, and as Lord Acton famously said, “Power corrupts, absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely.” Historically, the cases in which principle wins over power are as rare as hen’s teeth. For me this is just terrible news.

 

Dark, clear, calm skies.

 

Jack

[Jethro7]

Astronomy is big business in Chile; it brings in a lot of foreign money. And prestige. Don't be too sure this is a done deal.

Hello Toney,

I sure hope so.

 

KEEP LOOKING UP Jethro

[louisr65]

 

And tourists..  

 

Jon

 

 

Astronomy is big business in Chile; it brings in a lot of foreign money. And prestige. Don't be too sure this is a done deal.

I was wondering why on earth anybody would stick a project like this in that area - although I haven't been able to find a location more precise than "Taltal, Antofagusta", which covers a good 100km along the coast.

 

I have a sinking feeling that we were our own worst enemies on this one: some executive went swanning around the observatories, looked at the terrain and said 'what an idea location for solar power' and it's gone downhill from there.

[RLK1]

Like the oil companies do around the McDonald Observatory. Just saying...

https://mcdonaldobse...il-gas-lighting

[Rlakjdlsj]

https://mcdonaldobse...il-gas-lighting

Yes,  "gas-lighting".  a very appropriate term,  akin to "Greenwashing."   ' Only you can prevent "gaslighting.'  

 

https://www.preventi...ASAAEgJ4VPD_BwE

 

Putting shields on lights in a previously Bortle 1 dark site, does not return it to  being a Bortle 1  darksite.  

 

To put shields on any sort of new LP source in a Borle 1 area,  is putting lipstick on a PIG -at best.  

 

To have it "endorsed" and declaring it a "Dark Sky Park"  by an organization dedicated to making skies darker not brighter, is just "newspeak" or doublespeak or in modern environmental lexicon, "greenwashing," right out of 1984's  thought police. manual.     

Edited by Ron359, 10 January 2025 - 07:38 PM.

[davidpitre]

The project is not about producing energy for local or even national use. Its focus is to produce cheap hydrogen and ammonia for export. Producing these requires lots of energy inputs, hence the included wind and solar projects. Though some electricity for the local market is part of the sales pitch, the export of hydrogen and ammonia is the expected cash cow.
AES is trying to partner with Samsung on this project, as Samsung just landed a project to build a port in Korea to handle ammonia imports.
And light pollution is not the only concern. The dust created by the project will with out a doubt have significant effects on the quality of the skies there.

Edited by davidpitre, 10 January 2025 - 11:42 PM.

[Rlakjdlsj]

Astronomy is big business in Chile; it brings in a lot of foreign money. And prestige. Don't be too sure this is a done deal.

Once the observatories are built and operating, the only money they bring in, will be the salaries of the "locals" who might be running and maintaining them, materials for maintenance  and what the scientists or astronomers bring in and spend in the local economy while not 'on the mountain.'  Probably a couple million per year at best.  And of course remote operations,  cuts hugely into any local spending by "foreigners. "

 

A huge cut to NSF budgets in the next 4 years seems likely,  so the U.S. contribution could be a pittance.  Who knows what tariffs will do to the 'regular trade' with the country or for science budgets of the EU and Canada, Asia etc.  

Edited by Ron359, 11 January 2025 - 11:16 AM.

[mountain monk]

I have lots of friends in Chile, including quite a number who have retired there. Here’s my take on the issue.

 

If you are think like a state or businessman, then you look at the Atacama and ask: What are the resources there that I can exploit? Copper mines are already the chief economic driver in Chile and it is in the Atacama. Chile also has one of the world’s largest deposits of lithium, if not the largest, and its in the Atacama. And now there is ammonia and a new port that will improve the ability to export all of the above. Not to mention the near endless capacity for solar power. If you think all that will be sacrificed for the benefit of a handful for observatories owned and operated by foreign countries, well, be my guest. You probably also believe in the Tooth Fairy. The sacrifice and exploitation of the natural world continues, its pace quickening. I loath it, but after fighting for the natural world all my life I am not deluded about our profound dependence on that exploitation or its long term consequences for life on the planet and the pursuit of knowledge.

 

Dark, clear, calm skies.

 

Jack

[RLK1]

I seem to recall that the observatories in question did have special protections for dark skies over and above what is included in the national Chilean lighting standard. From what I've seen in google search, that special protection is listed as either as 25km, specific to the actual area in and around the observatories themselves and 150km.

 

Here's the just of what I've seen on it thus far:  

 

"A major step in this struggle was the publication in Chile's Official Gazette on June 27, 2023, of Decree No. 43.586, which creates areas with scientific and research value for astronomical observation or "astronomical areas", covering a total of 31 of the 34 communes present in the regions of Antofagasta, Atacama and Coquimbo."

 

"This new norm protects a radius of 150 kilometers around the main astronomical observatories, identifying as "astronomical areas" 8 communes in the Antofagasta region, 7 in the Atacama region and 14 in the Coquimbo region."

 

"This norm has been applauded by the national and international scientific community, but the fear of non-compliance is latent." 

"The big problem is oversight. The Chilean state does not have sufficient resources to effectively enforce an illumination standard. The Superintendency of the Environment should oversee and sanction, but the existing programs are not really effective and it is difficult for them to be effective in the near future,..."

 

https://www.lco.cl/t...the-dark-skies/

 

As for the proposed industrial project itself, here's the latest I've been able to find on it:

 

" A press release from the company from the company does not mention a start date for the project and says no decision on investment has been made yet."

 

“Even if [AES] do a perfect job, using perfect lights that probably don’t even exist and perfect shielding, there will be an impact and that will be significant,.."

 

"ESO has argued that other sites in the sparsely populated Antofagasta region would be equally suitable for the project, and that relocating it 50 kilometers from the observatories would minimize the harm. “We’re very supportive of sustainability,” Barcons says. But he adds, “Paranal and Armazones are the darkest places in the world for optical and infrared observations. There’s no reason to challenge that to produce green hydrogen.”

 

"A spokesperson for the company defended the project in a statement sent to ScienceInsider: “The INNA project will be located in an area that the State of Chile has defined for the development of renewable energies... and specifically incorporates in its design the highest standards in terms of lighting.” The statement added: “We understand the concerns raised by ESO ... and are are committed to collaborating with all interested parties in the environmental processing process.”

 

https://www.science....gest-telescopes

[Rlakjdlsj]

 

"A spokesperson for the company defended the project in a statement sent to ScienceInsider: “The INNA project will be located in an area that the State of Chile has defined for the development of renewable energies... and specifically incorporates in its design the highest standards in terms of lighting.” The statement added: “We understand the concerns raised by ESO ... and are are committed to collaborating with all interested parties in the environmental processing process.”

 

https://www.science....gest-telescopes

There is are two very simple effective solutions to all mining-oil- and gas drilling in dark sky "sensitive areas".  Only mine or drill in the daylight hours and never at night.  Workers go home, and turn out the lights.  And spraying water to keep dust down if it's open pit or surface mining.  There is of course very little water available on the driest desert on Earth.  Underground mining could be another alternative for some resources, but probably not this "green resource."  

 

 Of course these simple alternatives are never ever mentioned or if they are, "shot-down" as "over-regulation,"  too costly to production which is the bottom-line of all extraction mining profits.  Given unregulated capitalism,  extraction of mineral resources is unprofitable, unless the local "environment" is destroyed.  Mining-oil-gas company & government exec's or bean counters assume a natural pristine dark sky has 0 monetary value and so its loss means nothing to them.  Regulations to mitigate the loss only add expense to the production. Essentially they assume a  mineral resource is free for only  the cost of  taking.

 

--And we'll 'take Greenland' or Canada' for a new example in the news. 

 

"There would be painful irony in Chilean authorities allowing a green energy project to proceed at the expense of clear skies for astronomers."

 

But you know,  all of us have faced not being able to use public parks or other public spaces to observe in dark sites, because the 'park' or site,  is only open from sunrise to sunset or dusk at best.  The sheriff or ranger comes along and boots you out if you're lucky. Or sometimes worse happens.  

Edited by Ron359, 11 January 2025 - 05:37 PM.

[RLK1]

My feeling is that if the observatories dodge a bullet here and the company elects to build elsewhere, they should consider this a wakeup call for further funding for lobbying efforts for additional safeguards. From what I've read, the ongoing funding for these sites is quite impressive and a portion of it needs to be directed to help enact sufficient safeguards to prevent this from happening again, assuming it doesn't happen now...

[aatt]

Extractive economies…. Of course this will happen. Nothing is sacred except money.
I know someone on a planning and zoning commission and the developers were arguing about morals because they could not just develop all the wetlands. The irony of that argument was likely lost on them.
I am sure the “ concern” for dark skies will inform all the mining companies practices, particularly if it costs them money to comply.