Amazon Basin · 700km pipeline across the Andes · 75–90% of Peru's natural gas · advantages vs environmental damage.
—
Best score
—
Last attempt
Best attempt progress
0
XP earned
700km
Pipeline length
75–90%
Peru's gas supply
US$2bn
Annual govt revenue
2004
Project began
Key facts — from Seaford 2025–27 case study notes
Background
Natural gas project in the Urubamba Basin, Amazon, Peru — began operation 2004
Supplies 75–90% of Peru's natural gas via a 700km pipeline across the Andes
One of the most significant energy projects in South America
Advantages
Economic: Generates over US$2 billion per year in government revenue through taxes and royalties
Energy security: Expected to save Peru US$4 billion in energy costs
Employment: Thousands of jobs created during construction and operation
Export earnings: Natural gas exported generating foreign exchange
Disadvantages
Environmental damage: Pipeline construction through sensitive Amazon rainforest caused habitat destruction
Indigenous communities: Pipeline passes through territories of uncontacted indigenous tribes · cultural and health impacts
Oil spills: Leaks from the pipeline have polluted rivers used by local communities for drinking water and fishing
Non-renewable: Natural gas is a finite fossil fuel — not a long-term sustainable solution
Exam questions — 3 questions · 9 marks
⚡ Geography exam tip: Always use named examples with specific data. "An earthquake in Nepal" scores fewer marks than "The 2015 Nepal earthquake (magnitude 7.9, 9,000 deaths)." Learn the statistics on this page.
1 markEnergy contribution
What proportion of Peru's natural gas does the Camisea project supply?
A About 10–20%
B About 30–40%
C About 75–90%
D About 50–60%
4 marksAdvantages and disadvantages
Evaluate the Camisea natural gas project. Consider both the advantages and disadvantages. (4 marks)
Hint: Cover at least 2 advantages AND 2 disadvantages. Use specific figures. Conclude with an overall judgement.