30-09-2017, 08:02 PM
17-10-2017, 04:20 PM
The interconnection of rivers is a very expensive proposal. It has enormous adverse environmental impacts on land, forests, biodiversity, rivers and the livelihoods of millions of people. It is a socially disturbing proposition. Not only will the impact of climate change increase (destruction of forests means destruction of carbon sinks and reservoirs in the tropical climate are known sources of methane and carbon dioxide), but it will also reduce our ability to adapt to climate change.
For example, the Ken-Betwa link, which is the government's top priority. The link will facilitate drought-prone water export from Bundelkhand to the upper Betwa basin, as the detailed project report (DPR) makes clear. The hydrology of the Ken-Betwa link is effectively a state secret, so there is no way to verify if the Ken River claim is surplus is valid. A credible environmental impact assessment of the link has not been carried out and public hearings have not taken place in the canal and in the affected areas. The environmental management plan for the link is still being prepared.
The Ken-Betwa link threatens about 200 km2 of the Panna Tiger Reserve, and with it the Ken River and large parts of Bundelkhand. However, it does not have a permit for the environment, a final forest permit, and its wildlife authorization is being analyzed by the central committee authorized by the Supreme Court. In fact, forest and wildlife cleanup recommendations are under the condition that the energy project is removed from the forest / protected area, but the environmental cleanup recommendation assumes that the project will be within the protected forest / area. Even that is not valid.
The government justifies the Ken-Betwa link and the river interconnection project in general, by saying that it will provide irrigation, water supply, hydropower and flood control. But we must understand that most of India's water benefits, including irrigation, come from groundwater. In fact, in the last two and a half decades the net national irrigated area of large dams has declined by about 1.5 million hectares from a peak of 17.79 million ha in 1991-92, according to government data . But in the same period, India's total irrigated area has increased, mainly due to groundwater. Groundwater is our aquatic lifeline and whether we like it or not, whether we want it or not, groundwater will remain our aquatic lifeline in the coming decades.
Our current use of groundwater is not sustainable. The focus of our development of water resources must be on how the groundwater lifeline can be sustained. As far as irrigation is concerned, it seems that the river interconnection project will create more problems than benefits. The same is true for the water supply.
As far as hydropower is concerned it is clear that large hydropower projects are no longer a viable option in India. The energy minister has repeatedly said in Parliament over the last two years that hydroelectric projects of more than 11,000MW are stalled due to lack of finances and questions about feasibility. The prime minister of Himachal Pradesh has stated that private developers are leaving the sector because they consider that the projects are not viable. The situation in Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh is similar.
It costs more than Rs10 crore to produce a megawatt of hydroelectric power, which in turn produces less than four million units of electricity. This means that the cost per unit of energy of such projects is higher than Rs8 per unit, when there are no energy takers costing even Rs3 per unit. In any case, the interconnection of the rivers will need more power to raise the water than it is likely to produce.
While in theory a large reservoir can help moderate flooding in downstream areas, our experience on the ground does not inspire such confidence. For example: heads of government, state officials and the Comptroller and Auditor General have repeatedly pointed out that large dams such as the Ranganadi Dam, Damodar Dam, Farakka Dam and Bansagar Dam and Hirakud Dam have led to preventable flood disasters Assam, West Bengal, Bihar and Odisha respectively.
The other problem with the river interconnection project is to store large amounts of water. Most of the sites suitable for large reservoirs are in Nepal, Bhutan and the Northeast, and each has made clear its opposition to large storage reservoirs.
If water can not be stored in large reservoirs during the monsoon, which is when some rivers are flooded, then the other option is to transfer water to deficient basins during this time. But when the Brahmaputra is in the floods, so is the Ganga and all the rivers through which water needs to be transferred, including Subarnarekha, Mahanadi, Godavari, Krishna, Pennar, and so on.
There is no doubt that if we can store water during the monsoon, we can make it available in the months after the monsoon. But the establishment of water resources considers that large dams are the only storage option. However, the largest, cheapest, most benign, possibly most expeditious and decentralized storage option for India is the underground aquifer.
In other words, what India needs is not the interconnection of rivers, but rather more to achieve water, agriculture and livelihood security.