Sanremo. This year the section of Ponente Ligure of Italia Nostra conducted the Members’ Assembly in the city of Sanremo to recognize the generous attention it is receiving from the population of Sanremo and the Argentina Valley. After the portion dedicated to statutory obligations, President Daniela Cassini opened the Assembly to the public, greeting the Arch. Carmen Lanteri, Provincial President of the FAI, and starting a program of interventions that illustrated environmental problems and the role of associations throughout Western Liguria, from Savona to Ventimiglia. Roberto Cuneo spoke about the Vado regasification plant, Mauro Giampaoli about water management, Raffaello Anfossi about the Valle Argentina dam, Bianca Pigati about the Giardini Regina Elena in Sanremo, Luca De Vincenzi and Laura Rebaudo about the monumental trees of Bordighera and Pigna, Andrea Floris of the Special Conservation Zones in the Intemelia area, Daniela Lantrua of the hinterland, and Carlo Bagnasco of Villa Mariani as historical heritage.
«For many of the problems examined, a common denominator emerged: the lack of technical-scientific analyzes and public discussion to support the administrations’ choices. Even when the environmental impact is huge and far-reaching. An example is the Vado regasification terminal. The Eng. Cuneo, National Councilor of Italia Nostra, asked himself why position the Golar Tundra in Vado Ligure, where the sudden depth of the seabed forces mooring no more than 4 km from the shore. Floating LNG terminals and the ships that supply them with liquefied natural gas are potentially highly polluting: why not try to avoid conflict with port activities? Why not do a systematic analysis of which seabeds far from ports would best lend themselves to hosting the Golar Tundra? Two thirds of the Italian coasts have seabeds less than 100 meters deep, ten to twenty km from the coast and far from the ports: such seabeds are lacking precisely in Liguria! The only factor in favor of the choice of location in Vado seems to be the proximity to the consumer market, but this characteristic is not critical in view of the low cost of transporting gas via pipeline.
Another example is the dam on the Argentina stream. Dr. geologist Anfossi wondered why in 2023 a project from 60 years earlier, which had already been set aside 3 times, was re-proposed. One answer is “project approximation”: European funds had become available to direct towards the water crisis, to obtain them it was necessary to propose projects, and probably no others were ready for this territory. A territory whose geological characteristics are not suitable for the construction of a dam, but which knows and fears drought; and would need interventions to correct existing waste (renovate the old water network, not use drinking water for agricultural crops, recover rainwater), and increase the availability of water without distorting the environment (aquifers, reservoir rocks, wells in correspondence with landslides). But efficient, integrated, sustainable solutions require dedicated studies and projects. Which clearly aren’t there.
There is a lack of projects and instead regulatory labyrinths abound. Dr. Floris of Natura Intemelia recalled how many different bodies often have jurisdiction over the same naturalistic area, resulting in institutional inertia and frustration for the Associations that do not find the interlocutor useful. In a world that valued the effectiveness, efficiency and public interest required by law for administrative action, environmentalist associations including Italia Nostra would be consulted as preliminarily as possible on planning with environmental impact. They would bring voices from civil society, dedication to scientific rigor, commitment and skills of their members and supporters. Instead, the comparison that arises late, on things done poorly or with approximation, almost inevitably becomes antagonistic” they comment from Ponente Ligure of Italia Nostra.
