Bigger Panama Canal needs scrutiny
Since Ferdinand de LesPANAMA CITY seps embarked in 1882 on his quest to cut a waterway between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, the Panama Canal has had its moments of mystery and despair.
Landslides, corruption and outbreaks of cholera, malaria and yellow fever that killed more than 22,000 workers doomed the French effort to build the canal. For a while, it seemed as if the jungles of Panama would refuse to be bridled.
American engineers took over, protecting workers by adopting a then- obscure theory that mosquitoes carry disease. They employed smarter engineering and completed the 50- mile canal by 1914.
Walking around this stifling, tropical city, it’s easy to imagine the heat and brutal conditions workers endured more than a century ago as they toiled under the punishing Panamanian sun.
I arrived here recently to witness the official opening of the Panama Canal’s expansion, a monumental feat that allows some of the biggest container ships in the world to transit through. The enhanced canal could reshape global shipping.
It was a well- earned celebration: The $ 5.4 billion project was overseen by Panamanians and delivered pride — and the prospect of increased revenue — to the Central American country. Salsa music blared, and fireworks exploded overhead as the Cosco Shipping Panama, a 694- foot Chinese container ship, slowly made the maiden voyage through the new locks. A Facebook Live broadcast I did via iPhone of the celebrations drew “likes” and enthusiastic well- wishers from Singapore, England, Venezuela and other corners of the globe.
But hanging solemnly over the party was a report, published a few days earlier by The New York Times, detailing how questionable engineering decisions may have placed the project at risk. The article alleged that the Spanish consortium responsible for the expansion, Grupo Unidos por el Canal, cut corners to try to keep the project under budget.
Alarming complaints came from tug captains responsible for guiding the massive ships through the canal, who claim the new locks are too narrow to safely escort the ships through. Work stoppages, porous concrete and a risk of earthquakes also plagued the project, the report said.
At an event hosted by the U. S. Embassy the morning of the inauguration, reporters asked John Feeley, U. S. ambassador to Panama, about the Times report. He said he welcomed robust scrutiny, but 102 years after the canal was completed, the locks still work. “I remain very optimistic that this canal will continue to bring benefits to Panama and the world,” he said.
At the celebration, I met José Peláez, project director for the consortium that led the project. When I asked him about the Times article, he said he didn’t feel it was fair because it quoted a lot of people not directly involved with the project, and stringent quality control measures were used. “I feel very proud about the job that has been done here,” Peláez told me.
We marvel at how man bends nature to his benefit. But as we continue to push the boundaries between nature and technology, we should be increasingly vigilant. Sometimes, nature pushes back.