1. According to WHO study, the prevalence of arsenic in drinking water (60mg/1) is much above the permissible limit (0.05mg/1) and this supports the fact that some 80 million people are affected with some degree of arsenic contamination in Bangladesh.
This monster silent killer is also spreading fast affecting more and more people with the passage of time making it an endemic health problem in the country.
Most of the people depend on tube wells across the country for safe drinking water and this makes them vulnerable to the threat. Most of these tube wells are installed at about 120 feet deep below the surface where the arseno-pirates charged underground water level exists. As a result, people are naturally being affected silently by arsenic drinking water from these tube wells. Safe water from tube wells thus has turned to be a nightmare. People are being affected by painful skin diseases, cancer and gangrene due to long term intake of arsenic contaminated tube well water across the country.Studies suggest that unilateral withdrawal of water from the trans-boundary rivers is causing rivers and canals to die fast. In fact, the North and Southwest part of the country have now turned into a veritable desert. Due to the severe scarcity of water in the dry season the ground water level dropped sharply and that cannot be recharged sufficiently resulting in further drop of underground water level. Pumping out ground water for irrigation and other uses makes the situation worse further.
Experts suggest that tube wells should be reset at 350 feet deep underground to avoid arsenic contaminated underground water level.
For a sustainable solution to this problem, the government should put pressure on the neighboring country not to divert water from common rivers unilaterally. It should take initiatives to ensure proper treatment of arsenic related diseases and complications under one umbrella.
A holistic effort needs to be initiated throughout the country to stop downward turn of underground water level. Mass awareness through anti-arsenic campaign should also be taken where the media - both print and wire - should play a dominant role (Daily Sun, Editorial,31-03-2014).
Rosy for India, unfortunate Bangladesh
RIVER-LINKING MEGA PROJECT OF INDIA Study on ecological impacts before implementation:
An Indian expert has said that his country would not proceed with the implementation of the planned river-linking mega project if there is any possibility of ecological disaster in the region. Professor Shishir K. Dube, who is actively involved in the much maligned project, said that a study on ecological and other impacts would be conducted prior to kicking off the project. "If the study reveals that the project may harm the ecosystem of the region, we won't go for its implementation," he said while talking to New Age at the Hotel Sheraton on Tuesday.
Professor Dube has been assigned by the India government to assess the ecological impacts of the project on its neighbouring nations. He came to Dhaka to attend a seminar on "Tropical Cyclones and Storm Surges in the South Asian Region and Agricultural Application of Meteorology" and talked to New Age before leaving for India on Tuesday afternoon.
When Bangladesh's apprehension of the likelihood of an ecological disaster if the project is implemented was brought up, he replied, "The project is still in a preliminary stage. We must consider how all concerned parties may be affected by the project before finalising it." In this regard, he said two meetings involving high officials have so far been held, where they had discussed the prospects and potential impacts of the project.
Professor Dube, who is involved in several decision-making bodies formed by the Indian government, said that the feasibility study would resume soon, and once study ended, they would look into the project's engineering aspects. Replying to a question, he said that the ultimate objective of the project is to transfer water from one place to another in the country. "There are some places that have excessive water while there are places suffering from drought. So our plan is to transfer the excess water to the drought areas in our country."
Asked about the protest from several Indian states and some other countries, including Bangladesh, he said, "We will not only study the impacts on the neighbouring countries sharing rivers with India, but will also examine the impacts on different Indian states." He also said that the India government is very much aware of Bangladesh's concern over probable environmental disaster. "But the question arises only after we go for its implementation," said Dube, who is also the director of the Indian Institute of Technology in Kharagpur. (New Age, December 24, 2003).
The ruling BJP passed a resolution in its National Council at Nagpur on August 27-28, 2000, in which the BJP wants to link thirty major rivers including the eastern river Brahmaputra all the way to the southern river Kaberi of Deccan peninsula. The linking distance between Brahmaputra and Kaberi is more than 2,640 kilometer. This is equivalent to bringing water of river Mekong of Vietnam to Nepal irrigating land through Cambodia, Thailand, Myanmar, Bangladesh, India, Bhutan, and Nepal.
This can also be compared to
artificially channeling water of river Tigris of Iraq to Madhya Pradesh of Indiadistributing water through Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Indian province of Rajasthan. With a price tag exceeding 112 billion US dollars, this plan also includes digging hundreds of reservoirs and more than six hundred canals; diverting one third water from Brahmaputra, Ganges, and other eastern rivers; irrigating 135,000 square miles (more than double the area of Bangladesh) of almost un-arable land of India; generating 34,000 megawatts of hydroelectricity.
All these appear rosy to Indians, but at whose definite peril and destruction? The sacrificial lamb would be unfortunate Bangladesh. In fact, this is a lose-lose situation. India too will be a loser in the long run because of the nature's wrath that would be unleashed by the destruction of the entire ecosystem of India.
The devastating change to the eco-system of Bangladesh, especially to her fisheries as a result of the India's River Linking Plan, could be learnt from two relatively smaller projects in USA involving the Colorado River and the Columbia River.
1. The Ganges Barrage
2. Dams/Barrages Relation to Recent Arsenic Poisoning
A Panos study says that Bangladesh has been maintaining that the reduced natural flow of water in the Ganga has affected agriculture, fisheries and navigation. The lower riparian claims that the Gorai, a distributary of the Ganga, has all but dried up causing increased salinity and endangering the freshwater mangrove forests, the Sundarbans, in the delta. The dispute was even taken up to the United Nations by Bangladesh. After a numThe Farakka Barrage built in 1974 across the Ganges about 17 kilometers from Bangladesh border already limits water flow by half at certain times of the year. The result is the non-availability of irrigation water to adjoining Bangladeshi districts of Kushtia, Jessore, Pabna and Faridpur. The construction of the Barrage has damaged the ecosystem of the Sundarbans, the largest mangrove forest of the world.
ber of ad hoc sharing arrangements a Treaty was signed in 1997, an important element of which is the search for means to augment the flow of water in the Ganga at Farakka.
The gradual exclusion of water from the Ganga, the Teesta and the Mohanada has increased our sufferings since many years. Our natural ecosystem has been gravely damaged by this iniquity, and its reflections can be viewed in all spheres of our life-significant number of jute mills are closed, news print and paper mills shuttered, desertification process began in north and north-western districts, Sunderban mangrove forest shrunken, large number of birds and animal species diminished, many species of fishes at the verge of extinction and above all the increased intensity of flood, flash flood, cyclone, draught etc. At this point in time India's huge project of diverting waters from all the river channels failing into Bangladesh will further caused damage to Bangladesh with infinite natural and human catastrophe.
1. Should we sing a requiem for our rivers?
2. Large Dams And Local Populations
3. The Brahmaputra's Changing River Ecology
4.How can Bangladesh respond to Indian river-linking proposal?
Last modified: August 2, 2014
BE VERY AFRAID
Why India’s $168 billion river-linking project is a disaster-in-waiting
http://qz.com/504127/why-indias-168-billion-river-linking-project-is-a-disaster-in-waiting/
India’s incredibly ambitious—and some say, incredibly reckless—
Rs11 lakh crore ($168 billion) project to interlink its rivers is finally underway.
On Sept. 16, the Godavari and Krishna rivers—the second and the fourth longest rivers in the country—were linked through a canal in Andhra Pradesh. The project was
completed at a cost of Rs1,300 crore ($196 million). A second scheme,
the Ken-Betwa river project—estimated to
cost Rs11,676 crore ($1.7 billion)—is currently under development, with completion likely by December this year.
This is a part of the Narendra Modi government’s plan to revive the river-linking project, which
was first envisioned in 1982, and actively taken up by the Bharatiya Janata Party government under prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2002.
Here is how the river-linking project works: The
big idea is to connect37 Himalayan and peninsular rivers. So, water-surplus rivers will be dammed, and the flow will be diverted to rivers that could do with more water. In all, some
30 canals and 3,000 small and large reservoirs will be constructed
with potential to generate 34 gigawatt of hydroelectric power. The canals, planned between 50 and 100 meters in width, will stretch some
15,000 kilometres.
“If we can build storage reservoirs on these rivers and connect them to other parts of the country, regional imbalances could be reduced significantly and lot of benefits by way of additional irrigation, domestic and industrial water supply, hydropower generation, navigational facilities etc. would accrue,” India’s National Water Development Authority
describes the project on its website.
The project is expected to create some
87 million acres of irrigated land, and transfer 174 trillion litres of water a year. Also, half a million people are likely to be displaced in the process,
according to a report (pdf) by Upali Amarasinghe, a senior researcher at the International Water Management Institute.
Ecologists and environmentalists warn that the project is imprudent and dangerous, especially since there is little clarity on the ultimate impact on such a massive undertaking.
Quartz interviewed a number of Indian environmentalists and activists, and here is what they had to say about this project:
“A river isn’t a pipe that we can control.”
— Dr Latha Anantha, director, River Research Centre
Firstly, there is no concept of deficit and surplus. That’s what we are making it to be. A river has a natural course and for years it has been following that. Who are we to say it has a surplus and it has a deficit? The river will carry as much as it can. Secondly, a river isn’t a pipe that we can control. You can’t compare a Ganga to another. It has different characteristics. And when you build a canal to flow the water that is diverted, you are displacing far too many human lives and the eco-system. For instance, in the Ken-Betwa project, the core area of the Panna national park will be affected. The government, wanting to do the project for political reasons without any sort of clearances, is basically, redrawing the entire geography of the country. Even if there is a surplus and flood, every river needs that. Thats how the natural ecosystem works. You can’t block it.
“There is no scientific basis for this”
— Himanshu Thakkar, coordinator, South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People
How do you conclude that river-linking project will be good? There have been no scientific basis to say that. All you have is an incomplete study that says this is good for the country. One has to exhaust all options and potentials before concluding that river-linking is the best alternative. Exhaust options such as watershed development, rainwater harvesting, ground water recharge, optimising existing infrastructure and cropping methods and then we can conclude that water-linking might be good. But there has been no assessments done. For instance, look at Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. The Marathwada region in Maharashtra is the worst drought-hit state in India today, and belongs to the Godavari basin. But at the same time, you want to divert water from Godavari to Krishna. It doesn’t make sense. There has to be assessment done because there is huge impact on the nature.
“Horrifying and ill-planned.”
— Medha Patkar, national convener, National Alliance of People’s Movement
This entire push for the river-linking is horrifying and is ill-planned. The hydrology of the rivers are changing and we are ignoring the cultural and ecological significance. Even the cost that the government is talking about, of Rs5.6 lakh crore ($85 billion) is based on old reports. Now the cost would be much more and would at least be Rs10 lakh crore. The bigger question is, who is going to fund this? Is the private sector going to do that? And if they do, they will only have interest in the land. The other thing is, there is no social impact assessment done on the livelihood of the people who are living in these areas. They don’t even engage the gram sabhas while taking decisions.
“River-linking is a social evil, economic evil”
— V. Rajamani, professor emeritus, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
The interest in river-linking now is due to the big bucks involved in it for dam builders. A canal is not a river and it cannot support an ecosystem. What happens to everything that is living in the river? When water flows, there are a number of factors associated with it. There are micro organisms and there are marine life. We are taking away all of that by building dams and diverting water for something that is not even natural. When you build dams, you are displacing too many people. What will they do? They land up in slums in cities. River-linking is a social evil, economic evil and will ultimately lead to collapse of civilisation.
“These projects are not viable.”
— Sushmita Sengupta, deputy programme manager, Centre for Science and Environment
The basic concept of linking of rivers in India is to transfer water from where there is a surplus to a place where there is a deficit. But when such transfer of water takes place, there is a significant community displacement that happens along with it.
Another major issue in India vis-a-vis river-linking is that water is a state subject. Now states that have surplus water are not ready to give it to other states and there is a huge logjam which is cropping up time and again because of this. Even though the government is thinking of intra-state river-linking processes—where a river of a state is connected to another on in the same state—the environmental issues relating to these projects are very huge.
There is a big problem of desilting and there is no clarity on where the silt be actually dumped. Will it be somebody’s farm and will the farmers be affected or not? The government has not come clear on any of those points. So considering these environmental and community issues, overall I don’t think these projects are really viable.
Itika Sharma Punit contributed to the report.
Indian Rivers Inter-link
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rivers_Inter-link
[
improve it or discuss these issues on the
talk page.
(Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This article
needs more links to other articles to help integrate it into the encyclopedia.
(February 2016)
This article needs to be
updated.
(September 2015)
Indian Rivers Inter-link
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rivers_Inter-link
[
improve it or discuss these issues on the
talk page.
(Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This article
needs more links to other articles to help integrate it into the encyclopedia.
(February 2016)
This article needs to be
updated.
(September 2015)
Indian Rivers Inter-link
Rivers Inter-Link, Himalayan and Peninsular Components
Country India
Status: Active
The
Indian Rivers Inter-link is a proposed large-scale civil engineering project that aims to link
Indian rivers by a network of reservoirs and canals and so reduce persistent floods in some parts and water shortages in other parts of India.
[1][2]
The Inter-link project has been split into three parts: a northern Himalayan rivers inter-link component, a southern Peninsular component and starting 2005, an intrastate rivers linking component.
[3] The project is being managed by India's National Water Development Agency (NWDA), under its
Ministry of Water Resources. NWDA has studied and prepared reports on 14 inter-link projects for Himalayan component, 16 inter-link projects for Peninsular component and 37 intrastate river linking projects.
[3]
The average rainfall in India is about 4,000 billion cubic meters, but most of India's rainfall comes over a 4-month period – June through September. Furthermore, the rain across the very large nation is not uniform, the east and north gets most of the rain, while the west and south get less.
[4][5] India also sees years of excess monsoons and floods, followed by below average or late monsoons with droughts. This geographical and time variance in availability of natural water versus the year round demand for irrigation, drinking and industrial water creates a demand-supply gap, that has been worsening with India's rising population.
[5]
Proponents of the rivers inter-linking projects claim the answers to India's water problem is to conserve the abundant monsoon water bounty, store it in reservoirs, and deliver this water – using rivers inter-linking project – to areas and over times when water becomes scarce.
[4] Beyond water security, the project is also seen to offer potential benefits to transport infrastructure through navigation, as well as to broadening income sources in rural areas through fish farming. Opponents are concerned about knowledge gap on environmental, ecological, social displacement impacts as well as unseen and unknown risks associated with tinkering with nature.
[2] Others are concerned that some projects create international impact and the rights of nations such as Bangladesh must be respected and negotiated.
[6]
Map of the major rivers, lakes and reservoirs in India.
Contents
[
1History
2The need
3Plan
3.1Himalayan component
3.2Peninsular Component
3.3Intra-state inter-linking of rivers
4International comparisons
5Discussion
5.1Costs
5.2Ecological and environmental issues
5.3Displacement of people and fisheries profession
5.4Poverty and population issues
5.5International issues
5.6Political views
6Progress
7See also
8References
9External links
History[edit]
British colonial era
The Inter-linking of Rivers in India proposal has a long history. During the British colonial rule, for example, the 19th century engineer
Arthur Cotton proposed the plan to interlink major Indian rivers in order to hasten import and export of goods from its colony in South Asia, as well as to address water shortages and droughts in southeastern India, now Andhra Pradesh and Orissa.
[7]
Post independence
In the 1970s,
Dr. K.L. Rao, a dams designer and former irrigation minister proposed "National Water Grid".
[8] He was concerned about the severe shortages of water in the South and repetitive flooding in the North every year. He suggested that the Brahmaputra and Ganga basins are water surplus areas, and central and south India as water deficit areas. He proposed that surplus water be diverted to areas of deficit. When Rao made the proposal, several inter-basin transfer projects had already been successfully implemented in India, and Rao suggested that the success be scaled up.
[8]
In 1980, India’s Ministry of Water Resources came out with a report entitled "National Perspectives for Water Resources Development". This report split the water development project in two parts – the Himalayan and Peninsular components. Congress Party came to power and it abandoned the plan. In 1982, India financed and set up a committee of nominated experts, through National Water Development Agency (NWDA)
[1] to complete detailed studies, surveys and investigations in respect of reservoirs, canals and all aspects of feasibility of inter-linking Peninsular rivers and related water resource management. NWDA has produced many reports over 30 years, from 1982 through 2013.
[1]However, the projects were not pursued.
The river inter-linking idea was revived in 1999, after a new political alliance formed the central government, but this time with a major strategic shift. The proposal was modified to
intra-basin development as opposed to
inter-basin water transfer.
[9]
21st century
Drought affected area farm lands in
Karnataka.
By 2004, a different political alliance led by Congress Party was in power, and it resurrected its opposition to the project concept and plans. Social activists campaigned that the project may be disastrous in terms of cost, potential environmental and ecological damage, water table and unseen dangers inherent with tinkering with nature. The central government of India, from 2005 through 2013, instituted a number of committees, rejected a number of reports, and financed a series of feasibility and impact studies, each with changing environmental law and standards.
[9][10]
In February 2012, while disposing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) lodged in the year 2002, Supreme Court (SC) refused to give any direction for implementation of Rivers Interlinking Project. SC stated that it involves policy decisions which are part of legislative competence of state and central governments. However, SC directed the Ministry of Water Resources to constitute an experts committee to pursue the matter with the governments as no party had pleaded against the implementation of Rivers Interlinking Project.
[11]
The need[edit]
Map showing rivers and flood prone areas in India
See also:
Pollution of the Ganges § Ganga Manthan
Drought, floods and shortage of drinking water
India receives about 4,000 cubic kilometers of rain annually, or about 1 million gallons of fresh water
per person every year.
[2] However, the precipitation pattern in India varies dramatically across distance and over calendar months. Much of the precipitation in India, about 85%, is received during summer months through monsoons in the Himalayan catchments of the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM) basin. The northeastern region of the country receives heavy precipitation, in comparison with the northwestern, western and southern parts. The uncertainty of start date of monsoons, sometimes marked by prolonged dry spells and fluctuations in seasonal and annual rainfall is a serious problem for the country.
[1]The nation sees cycles of drought years and flood years, with large parts of west and south experiencing more deficits and large variations, resulting in immense hardship particularly the poorest farmers and rural populations. Lack of irrigation water regionally leads to crop failures and farmer suicides. Despite abundant rains during July–September, some regions in other seasons see shortages of drinking water. Some years, the problem temporarily becomes too much rainfall, and weeks of havoc from floods.
[12] This excess-scarcity regional disparity and flood-drought cycles have created the need for water resources management. Rivers inter-linking is one proposal to address that need.
[1][2]
Population and food security
Population increase in India is the other driver of need for river inter-linking. India's population growth rate has been falling, but still continues to increase by about 10 to 15 million people every year. The resulting demand for food must be satisfied with higher yields and better crop security, both of which require adequate irrigation of about 140 million hectares of land.
[13] Currently, just a fraction of that land is irrigated, and most irrigation relies on monsoon. River inter-linking is claimed to be a possible means of assured and better irrigation for more farmers, and thus better
food security for a growing population.
[1] In a tropical country like India with high
evapotranspiration, food security can be achieved with
water security which in turn is achieved with
energy security to pump water to uplands from water surplus lower elevation river points up to sea level.
[14]
Salt export needs
When sufficient
salt export is not taking place from a
river basin to the sea in an attempt to harness the river water fully, it leads to river basin closer and the available water in downstream area of the river basin becomes
saline and/ or
alkaline water. Land irrigated with saline or alkaline water becomes gradually in to
saline or
alkali soils.
[15][16][17]The water percolation in alkali soils is very poor leading to
waterlogging problems. Proliferation of alkali soils would compel the farmers to cultivate
rice or
grasses only as the soil productivity is poor with other crops and tree
plantations.
[18] Cotton is the preferred crop in saline soils compared to many other crops.
[19] Interlinking water surplus rivers with water deficit rivers is needed for the long term sustainable productivity of the river basins and for mitigating the
anthropogenic influences on the rivers by allowing adequate salt export to the sea in the form of
environmental flows.
Navigation
India needs infrastructure for logistics and movement of freight. Using connected rivers as navigation is a cleaner, low carbon footprint form of transport infrastructure, particularly for ores and food grains.
[1]
Current reserves and loss in groundwater level
" style="position: relative; margin-right: auto; margin-left: auto; width: 220px;">
India's worsening water problem – satellite evidence of critical groundwater levels. The blue and purple regions have greatest levels of groundwater depletion. Courtesy – Goddard Space Flight Center, NASA, United States (2010).
India currently stores only 30 days of rainfall, while developed nations strategically store 900 days worth of water demand in arid areas river basins and reservoirs. India’s dam reservoirs store only 200 cubic meters per person. India also relies excessively on groundwater, which accounts for over 50 percent of irrigated area with 20 million tube wells installed. About 15 percent of India’s food is being produced using rapidly depleting groundwater. The end of the era of massive expansion in groundwater use is going to demand greater reliance on surface water supply systems. Proponents of the project suggest India's water situation is already critical, and it needs sustainable development and management of surface water and groundwater usage.
[20]
Plan[edit]
The National perspective plan envisions about 150 million acre feet (MAF) (185 billion cubic metres) of water storage along with building inter-links.
[21] These storages and the interlinks will add nearly 170 million acre feet of water for beneficial uses in India, enabling irrigation over an additional area of 35 million hectares, generation of 40,000 MW capacity hydro power, flood control and other benefits.
The total surface water available to India is nearly 1440 million acre feet (1776 billion cubic meters) of which only 220 million acre feet was being used in the year 1979. The rest is neither utilized nor managed, and it causes disastrous floods year after year. Up to 1979, India had built over 600 storage dams with an aggregate capacity of 171 billion cubic meters. These small storages hardly enable a seventh of the water available in the country to be utilized beneficially to its fullest potential.
[21] From India-wide perspective, at least 946 billion cubic meters of water flow annually could be utilized in India, power generation capacity added and perennial inland navigation could be provided. Also some benefits of flood control would be achieved. The project claims that the development of the rivers of the sub-continent, each state of India, as well as its international neighbors stand to gain by way of additional irrigation, hydro power generation, navigation and flood control.
[21] The project may also contribute to food security to the anticipated
population peak of India.
[21]
The Ganga-Brahmaputra-Meghna is a major international drainage basin which carries more than 1,000 million acre feet out of total 1440 million acre feet in India. Water is a scarce commodity and several basins such as Cauvery, Yamuna, Sutlej, Ravi and other smaller inter-State/intra-State rivers are short of water. 99 districts of the country are classified as drought prone, an area of about 40 million hectare is prone to recurring floods.
[21] The inter-link project is expected to help reduce the scale of this suffering and associated losses.
The National Perspective Plan comprised, starting 1980s, of two main components:
1. Himalayan Rivers Development, and
2. Peninsular Rivers Development
An intrastate component was added in 2005.
Himalayan component[edit]
Map of the Ganges (orange), Brahmaputra (violet), and Meghna (green) drainage basins.
Himalayan Rivers Development envisages construction of storage reservoirs on the main Ganga and the Brahmaputra and their principal tributaries in India and Nepal along with inter-linking canal system to transfer surplus flows of the eastern tributaries of the Ganga to the West apart from linking of the main Brahmaputra with the Ganga.
[21] Apart from providing irrigation to an additional area of about 22 million hectares the generation of about 30 million kilowatt of hydro-power, it will provide substantial flood control in the Ganga-Brahmaputra basin. The Scheme will benefit not only the States in the Ganga-Brahmaputra Basin, but also Nepal and Bangladesh, assuming river flow management treaties are successfully negotiated.
[21]
The Himalayan component would consist of a series of dams built along the
Ganga and
Brahmaputra rivers in India,
Nepal and
Bhutan for the purposes of storage. Canals would be built to transfer surplus water from the eastern tributaries of the Ganga to the west. This is expected to contribute to flood control measures in the Ganga and Brahmaputra river basins. It could also provide excess water for the
Farakka Barrage to flush out the silt at the port of
Kolkata.
By 2015, fourteen inter-links under consideration for Himalayan component are as follows, with feasibility study status identified:
[22][23]
· Ghaghara–Yamuna link (Feasibility study complete)
· Sarda–Yamuna link (Feasibility study complete)
· Yamuna–Rajasthan link
· Rajasthan–Sabarmati link
· Kosi–Ghaghara link
· Kosi–Mechi link
· Manas–Sankosh–Tista–Ganga link
· Jogighopa–Tista–Farakka link
· Ganga–Damodar–Subernarekha link
· Subernarekha–Mahanadi link
· Farakka–Sunderbans link
· Gandak–Ganga link
· Chunar–Sone Barrage link
· Sone dam–Southern tributaries of Ganga link
river interlink project in India
Peninsular Component[edit]
This Scheme is divided in four major parts.
17. Interlinking of Mahanadi-Godavari-Krishna-Pennar-Cauvery,
18. Interlinking of West Flowing Rivers, North of Bombay and South of Tapi,
19. Inter-linking of Ken with Chambal and
20. Diversion of some water from West Flowing Rivers
This component will irrigate an additional 25 million hectares by surface waters, 10 million hectares by increased use of ground waters and generate hydro power, apart from benefits of improved flood control and regional navigation.
[21]
The main part of the project would send water from the eastern part of India to the south and west.
[21] The southern development project (Phase I) would consist of four main parts. First, the
Mahanadi,
Godavari.
Krishna and
Kaveririvers would all be inter-linked by canals. Reservoirs and dams would be built along the course of these rivers. These would be used to transfer surplus water from the Mahanadi and Godavari rivers to the south of India. Under Phase II, some rivers that flow west to the north of
Mumbai and the south of
Tapi would be inter-linked. The water would supply additional drinking water needs of Mumbai and provide irrigation in the coastal areas of
Maharashtra. In Phase 3, the
Ken and
Chambal rivers would be inter-linked to serve regional water needs of
Madhya Pradesh and
Uttar Pradesh. Over Phase 4, a number of west-flowing rivers in the
Western Ghats, would be inter-linked for irrigation purposes to east flowing rivers such as Cauvery and Krishna.
The 800-km long
Mahanadi-
Godavari interlinking project would link River
Sankosh originating from
Bhutan to the Godavari in
Andhra Pradesh through rivers like
Teesta-
Mahananda-
Subarnarekha and Mahanadi.
[24]
The inter-links under consideration for Peninsular component are as follows, with respective status of feasibility studies:
[25][26]
Almatti–Pennar Link (Feasibility study complete)(Part 1)
Bedti–Varada Link (Part 4)
Damanganga–Pinjal Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 2)
Inchampalli–Nagarjunasagar Link (
Halted construction by
Telangana) (Part 1)Inchampalli–
Pulichintala Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 1)
Kattalai–Vaigai–Gundar Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 4)
Ken–Betwa Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 3)
Mahanadi–Godavari Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 1)
Nagarjunasagar–
Somasila Link (construction to be started soon) (Part 1)
[27]
Netravati–Hemavati Link (Part 4)
Pamba–Anchankovil–Vaippar Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 4)
Par–Tapi–Narmada Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 2)
Parbati–Kalisindh–Chambal Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 3)
Polavaram–Vijayawada Link (
link canal constructed and partly in use with Pattiseema lift) (Part 1)
Somasila–Grand Anicut Link (Feasibility study complete) (Part 1)
Srisailam–Pennar Link (
link canals constructed and in use) (Part 1
Intra-state inter-linking of rivers[edit]
India approved and commissioned NDWA in June 2005 to identify and complete feasibility studies of intra-State projects that would inter-link rivers within that state.
[28] The Governments of Nagaland, Meghalaya, Kerala, Punjab, Delhi, Sikkim, Haryana, Union Territories of Puducherry, Andaman & Nicobar islands, Daman & Diu and Lakshadweep responded that they have no intrastate river connecting proposals. Govt. of Puducherry proposed Pennaiyar – Sankarabarani link (even though it is not an intrastate project). The States Government of Bihar proposed 6 inter-linking projects, Maharashtra 20 projects, Gujarat 1 project, Orissa 3 projects, Rajasthan 2 projects, Jharkhand 3 projects and Tamil Nadu proposed 1 inter-linking proposal between rivers inside their respective territories.
[28] Since 2005, NDWA completed feasibility studies on the projects, found 1 project infeasible, 20 projects as feasible, 1 project was withdrawn by Government of Maharashtra, and others are still under study.
[29]
International comparisons[edit]
ce
Krishna–Pennar Link 587.2 ₹6,599.80 crore (US$980 million) 258,334 42.5 MW 56
[44]
Godavari–Krishna Link 299.3 ₹26,289 crore (US$3.9 billion) 287,305 70 MW 237
[45]
Parbati Kalisindh Chambal 243.7 ₹6,114.5 crore (US$910 million) 225,992 17 MW 89
[46]
Nagarjunasagar Somasila Link 393 ₹6,320.54 crore (US$940 million) 168,017 90 MW 124
[47]
Ken Betwa Link 231.5 ₹1,988.74 crore (US$300 million) 47,000 72 MW 2,225
[48]
Srisailam Pennar Link 203.6 ₹1,580 crore (US$230 million) 187,372 17 MW 49
[49]
Damanganga Pinjal Link 42.5 ₹1,278 crore (US$190 million) - - 44
[50]
Cauvery-Vaigai-Gundar Link 255.6 ₹2,673 crore (US$400 million) 337,717 - 185
[51]
Polavaram-Vijayawada Link 174 ₹1,483.91 crore (US$220 million) 314,718 72 MW 664
[52]
Mahanadi Godavari Link 827.7 ₹17,540.54 crore (US$2.6 billion) 363,959 70 MW 802
[53]
Par Tapi Narmada Link 395 ₹6,016 crore (US$890 million) 169,000 93 MW 91
[54]
Pamba Achankovil Vaippar Link 50.7 ₹1,397.91 crore (US$210 million) 91,400 500 MW 150
[55]
#The cost conversion in US $ is at latest conversion price on the historical cost estimates in Indian rupees
Ecological and environmental issues[edit]
Some activists and scholars have, between 2002 and 2008, questioned the merits of Indian rivers inter-link projects, and questioned if appropriate study of benefits and risks to environment and ecology has been completed so far. Bandyopadhyay et al. claim there are knowledge gaps between the claimed benefits and potential threats from environment and ecological impact.
[2] They also question whether the inter-linking project will deliver the benefits of flood control. Vaidyanathan claimed, in 2003, that there are uncertainty and unknowns about operations, how much water will be shifted and when, whether this may cause waterlogging, salinisation and the resulting desertification in the command areas of these projects.
[56] Other scholars have asked whether there are other technologies to address the cycle of droughts and flood havocs, with less uncertainties about potential environmental and ecological impact.
[57]
Displacement of people and fisheries profession[edit]
Water storage and distributed reservoirs are likely to displace people – a rehabilitation process that has attracted concern of sociologists and political groups. Further, the inter-link would create a path for aquatic ecosystems to migrate from one river to another, which in turn may affect the livelihoods of people who rely on fishery as their income. Lakra et al., in their 2011 study, claim
[58] large dams, interbasin transfers and water withdrawal from rivers is likely to have negative as well as positive impacts on freshwater aquatic ecosystem. As regards to the impact on fish and aquatic biodiversity, there could be positive as well as negative impacts.
Poverty and population issues[edit]
India has a growing population, and large impoverished rural population that relies on monsoon-irrigated agriculture. Weather uncertainties, and potential climate change induced weather volatilities, raise concerns of social stability and impact of floods and droughts on rural poverty. The population of India is expected to grow further at a decelerating pace and stabilize around 1.5 billion by 2050, or another 300 million people – the size of United States – compared to the 2011 census. This will increase demand for reliable sources of food and improved agriculture yields – both of which, claims India's National Council of Applied Economic Research,
[4] require significantly improve irrigation network than the current state. The average rainfall in India is about 4,000 billion cubic metre, of which annual surface water flow in India is estimated at 1,869 billion cubic metre. Of this, for topological and other reasons, only about 690 billion cubic metre of the available surface water can be utilised for irrigation, industrial, drinking and ground water replenishment purposes. In other words, about 1,100 billion cubic metre of water is available, on average, every year for irrigation in India.
[4] This amount of water is adequate for irrigating 140 million hectares. As of 2007, about 60% of this potential was realized through irrigation network or natural flow of Indian rivers, lakes and adoption of pumps to pull ground water for irrigation.
80% of the water India receives through its annual rains and surface water flow, happens over a 4-month period – June through September.
[4][5] This spatial and time variance in availability of natural water versus year round demand for irrigation, drinking and industrial water creates a demand-supply gap, that only worsens with India's rising population. Proponents claim the answers to India's water problem is to conserve the abundant monsoon water bounty, store it in reservoirs, and use this water in areas which have occasional inadequate rainfall, or are known to be drought-prone or in those times of the year when water supplies become scarce.
[4][59]
International issues[edit]
Misra et al. in their 2007 report,
[6] claim inter-linking of rivers initially appears to be a costly proposition in ecological, geological, hydrological and economical terms, in the long run the net benefits coming from it will far outweigh these costs or losses. However, they suggest that there is a lack of an international legal framework for the projects India is proposing. In at least some inter-link projects, neighboring countries such as Bangladesh may be affected, and international concerns for the project must be negotiated.
Political views[edit]
BJP-led
NDA government of
Atal Bihari Vajpayee had propagated the idea of interlinking of rivers to deal with the problem of drought and floods afflicting different parts of the country at the same time.
[10]
The
Congress general secretary
Rahul Gandhi said in 2009 that the entire idea of interlinking of rivers was dangerous and that he was opposed to interlinking of rivers as it would have "severe" environmental implications. BJP MP
Rajiv Pratap Rudy suggested that Gandhi should do some research on the interlinking of rivers and its benefits and then arrive at a conclusion.
Jairam Ramesh, a cabinet minister in former
UPA government, said the idea of interlinking India's rivers was a "disaster", putting a question mark on the future of the ambitious project.
[60]
Karunanidhi, whose
DMK has been a key ally of the Congress-led
UPA at the Centre, wrote that linking rivers at the national level perhaps is the only permanent solution to the water scarcity problem in the country.” Karunanidhi said the government should make an assessment of the project’'s feasibility starting with the south-bound rivers.
DMK for 2014 general elections added Nationalisation and inter-linking of rivers to its manifesto.
Kalpasar Project is an irrigation project which envisages storing
Narmada River water in an off-shore fresh water reservoir located in
Gulf of Khambhat sea for further pumping to arid
Sourashtra region for irrigation use. It is one of the preferred project for implementation by the Prime Minister of India,
Narendra Modi.
[61]
Progress[edit]
On 16 September 2015, first linking was completed of rivers
Krishna and
Godavari.
[62] It is still under review.
See also[edit]
Kalpasar Project
Water export
Pollution of the Ganges
Water security
Ganges Barrage Project
Farakka Barrage
Electricity sector in India#Solar power
Interstate River Water Disputes Act
Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal
Geography of Nepal
Geography of Sri Lanka
Geography of Bangladesh
References[edit]
34^
Jump up to:a b c d e f g
12:00 AM, July 22, 2015 / LAST MODIFIED: 12:00 AM, July 22, 2015
Pinaki Roy
Bangladeshi river experts and environmentalists expressed concern over India's fresh move to implement the controversial river linking project that will connect trans-boundary rivers and divert water to southern Indian states.
The project, if implemented, will diminish the water flow in Bangladesh's rivers like the Teesta, Jamuna and the Padma and affect the country's environment and economy, they say.
The issue came up again as different Indian media published reports, signalling Indian government's intent to go ahead with a grand plan of linking rivers across the country connecting Teesta-Ganga-Manas-Sankosh covering three Indian states -- West Bengal, Assam and Bihar.
“Definitely it will reduce the water flow if they divert water from our common rivers,” said Prof Ainun Nishat, hydrologists and former member of joint river commission.
Though Bangladesh and India share 54 common rivers, the upstream India is yet to communicate the matter with downstream Bangladesh.
Asked, Water Resources Minister Anisul Islam Mahmud said India has not communicated Bangladesh regarding the matter yet.
“I am yet to see the report. But if it is true, we will send a letter asking them to explain the matter,” he told The Daily Star last Wednesday.
Over the years, India has assured Bangladesh that it will not take any project that may be harmful for Bangladesh, the minister said.
Referring to media reports, Mir Sazzad Hossain, member of Bangladesh-India Joint Rivers Commission (JRC), said interconnecting Teesta-Ganga-Manas-Sankosh is one of the 14 components of India's project to link 30 Himalayan rivers.
“They are not supposed to divert water from any of the Himalayn river without the consent of Bangladesh. They cannot do it without taking Bangladesh on board,” Mir Sazzad said.
Quoting Indian Water Resources Minister Sanwar Lal Jat, several Indian newspapers published reports, saying the water resources ministry would soon be taking up the planning of a very important link, Manas-Sankosh-Teesta-Ganga, in consultation with the governments of Assam, West Bengal and Bihar.
“This link project will not only provide large irrigation and water supply benefits to Assam, West Bengal and Bihar but will also make available large quantum of water for transfer subsequently to southern states,” he said in an official statement.
The governments in West Bengal, Assam and Bihar will soon be approached for their consent, Jat said.
When this correspondent drew his attention to the minister's statement, Prof Nishat said the Manas and Sankosh rivers are tributaries of India's Brahmaputra river which is called the Jamuna in Bangladesh. These rivers feed the Brahmaputra and if they divert their water, it will decrease the water flow in the Jamuna. It will decrease our share of water and also have an impact on the environment.
“As per the joint communiqué signed by the two prime ministers of Bangladesh and India in 2010, the trans-boundary rivers would be managed basin-wide and that India cannot do it alone,” he said.
Abdul Matin, general secretary of Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon (Bapa), said India had already made some progress in connecting the Teesta with the Ganges through the Mahananda river.
“Many environmentalists in India do not support this controversial project. If the Indian government really tries to implement the plan, Bangladeshi environmentalists will launch a movement against this controversial project,” Matin said.
