Punta de Choros: media phenomenon or paradigm shift? RESPONSE TO ARTICLE 
After recent events against the cancellation of the thermal power project of Suez Energy, a 20 km. Punta de Choros, I would like to reflect on the events that occurred and the actions of the authorities towards the issue.
First, I think it is important to note that this is not a minor issue. Not for the particular case, but the issue which concerns, the energy matrix of our country and its intrinsic relationship to the environment. For too long, environmental issues have been secondary, but tertiary, in the list of priorities for our country. In fact, it has been a secondary issue in most of the world for many years, until recent calls attention on the issue of global warming and the need for renewable and clean energy for the maintenance of our planet. But sticking to the case of Chile, renewable energy has been a postponed by all past governments, or at least, has not been addressed effectively and publicized. However, the case of thermoelectric Barrancones attracted enough media attention and public to raise the issue at national level (although, let's say, that the television media were delayed his couple of days to show the news). Beyond analyzing whether coverage was effective or not, I want to hold on the fact that it became an important topic for the public.
For some it is more important to have little support, but committed people who have a lot of support surface and without further commitment. Normally, I think so. But in this case, I think I think of something different, because I think the environmental issue is more important than ideological sincerity behind their followers. In this case, I hate to admit it, I care more about quantity over quality. Why? Mainly because of the above, the environmental issue has so little room on the political agenda, which needs a huge mass of people to call the attention of politicians (remember, people = vote) and thus raise the issue at an institutional level. Therefore, the masses who gather to demonstrate, to be published 8,000 times the same videos on Facebook or Twitter, no matter what you do for fashion what matters is that the subject is spoken. We leave the critical thinking and approach ideas in this area for the truly interested and involved. In addition, the latter we should be enough, since it requires scientific knowledge and legislative enough to make a real contribution to the debate, so it is better to have a minority expert to generate ideas and a majority reported that follow (though in most cases this would go completely against my instincts, but hey, have to be flexible).
Secondly, we have the reaction of our president. Again, we have the dilemma of whether to make this announcement "ask to run the project" because it really is an important issue for him or simply because it brings great political advantage to lining up, so clumsily funcionarilla branded a "fucking hippies ". And again, I would say that does not interest me most. While the environmental issue and take screen take political agenda, we are on track. Remember too, that political preferences are volatile in the citizenry, can vary with a simple act, so do not bother me too much. However, environmental decisions remain, as they affect property which affects us all, so it takes priority over any resentment that might have against the political benefits that can bring Mr. Piñera his sayings.
Finally, I think it's important that we refer to the topic itself, that is, Chile's energy matrix and how we should opt for renewable energy, clean and long-lasting. I think this is an issue that ought not generate more questions, we need renewable energy or yes. I think it should not matter mostly the cost is more, I think the problem here is not the subject of costs, but there are business interests that prevent a change of direction in the energy issue. It can be expensive to implement alternative energy, but eventually we will cheaper and more effective, not only because energy itself may be cheaper, but because we'll save all the expense that could result from having to recover the polluted environment. Hopefully this event will be a catalyst to further discuss the issue of energy and environmental and public policy may emerge after this.
Given this, I consider the title question: Was this simply a media phenomenon or our citizenship is really changing its paradigm, putting environmental issues in a more important role than before? Because it is undeniable, citizen participation was a vital role in the thermoelectric Barrancones not performed. I would think that not all the support received was fashion and that, indeed, the people are changing their paradigm of priorities. It would be great news for our society to our country and our planet.
Soon, if all goes well, I will attend a seminar on institutional reform of environmental law in our country. If I go, I'll post my comments on it and what you learn there that can relate to this issue. It would be good also to see how our government institutional reform to address these issues for the future. But until then, I am aware of what may happen to the issue of power plants. Because we do not forget: Barrancones was 1 of several thermal power projects in the country ... So the problem is not over yet.
