PM calls for making Ganga rejuvenation a mass movement for 'Ganga seva'; chairs first high-level meeting on "Namaami Gange" vision. Pl. read the PIB release in the link below or text thereafter.
The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi, has called for making Ganga rejuvenation a mass movement. He called for specific action plans to unite the strength of various sections of society dedicated to "Ganga Seva."
The Prime Minister was chairing the first high-level meeting on "Namaami Gange" – an integrated plan for Ganga rejuvenation today. The Prime Minister said the first priority should be "Nirmal Ganga" – a clean Ganga. The Prime Minister said the first priority in this mission should be to stop fresh generation of pollutants.
He said teams of volunteers from various parts of the country could be involved in generating public awareness and perform Ganga seva by maintaining specific stretches of the river.
Shri Narendra Modi referred to his vision for solid waste management and waste water management in 500 urban centres across India, through the PPP model, and said the first priority under this vision would be given to towns on the banks of the Ganga.
The Prime Minister said suggestions being received from people on the MyGov website should be carefully studied.
The Prime Minister said that Ganga rejuvenation could also be envisaged as a major mission to conserve the environment, with the involvement of nearly half the country's population. This would invite positive global attention, expertise and commitment, he added.
The meeting was attended by Union Ministers Shri Venkaiah Naidu, Shri Nitin Gadkari, Ms. Uma Bharati, Shri Prakash Javdekar and Ms. Nirmala Sitharaman, and top Government officials.
***
The above mentioned PIB release on yesterday's meeting of the PM with Union Ministers Shri Venkaiah Naidu, Shri Nitin Gadkari, Ms. Uma Bharati, Shri Prakash Javdekar and Ms. Nirmala Sitharaman, and top Government officials is silent on Barrages or Ganga Navigation Plan. Do we take this as dropping of the idea of Ganga Navigation Plan?
+++++++++++++++
From the following Report published in Dainik Bhaskar it appears that Ganga navigation plan for making it a Water ways will not materialise. Let us see the outcome of today's meeting in PMO.
Letter to World Bank and their response
2014-09-03 17:06 GMT+05:30 <Oruhl@worldbank.org>:
Dear Sirs,
Thank you for your email dated August 30, 2014, regarding the proposed World Bank support for the inland waterways systems on the Ganga river.
The World Bank shares your concern that the proposed project, which has been declared a national priority by the Government of India, be designed and implemented in a sustainable manner. We have only recently begun our due diligence on the proposed project, and are in the process of understanding the various technical, environmental, social and cultural issues that could affect this important development initiative.
In this context I would like to thank you for the offer of a discussion around the proposed project. Your inputs and suggestions will be very valuable to us in identifying the critical issues that need to be analysed and studied further before work on the project design can begin.
Mr Arnab Bandopadhyay, the Senior Transport Specialist who leads the World Bank task team working on the project, will be in touch with you to arrange a meeting at a mutually convenient time.
Onno
Onno Ruhl
Country Director, India
The World Bank
70, Lodi Estate, New Delhi
Tel: 91(11) 414 79245
Email:oruhl@worldbank.org
Website: http://www.worldbank.org.in
From: <bharatjj@gmail.com>
To: "WB India Onno Ruhl" <Oruhl@worldbank.org>
Cc: "ramaswamy iyer" <ramaswamy.iyer@gmail.com>, "gopal krishna toxics forum" <gopalkrishna1715@gmail.com>, "Samir Mehta" <samir@internationalrivers.org>, "Samir Mehta two Samir" <takeaction@internationalrivers.org>, "dinesh kumar mishra" <dkmishra108@gmail.com>, "Anil Prakash Farakka" <anilprakashganga@gmail.com>, "Debadityo Sinha Vindhya" <debadityo@vindhyabachao.org>, "V N Sharma Dr" <vnsh44@gmail.com>, "paritosh tyagi" <paritoshtyagi@gmail.com>
Date: 08/30/2014 02:10 PM
Subject: Ganga Waterway
Dear Mr Ruhl:
Greetings!
We are much concerned with the proposal to build a series of barrages on the Ganga from Haldia to Allahabad in order to enable movement of large ships for transport. We are attaching herewith a representation outlining the various problems that will arise in this project. Our considered assessment is that the project as conceived presently will impose huge environmental, social and cultural costs on the people of the country. It will also not be economically viable if proper cost-benefit analysis is undertaken after taking on board various environmental costs.
Sir, the World Bank is committed to the promotion of sustainable and equitable development. This project is against both these mandates.
We request that the World Bank may not finance this project and suggest to Government of India to explore ways of promoting waterway transport within free flow of the Ganga. We also request that you may kindly give us an opportunity to present our concerns before you.
Yours truly,
Bharat Jhunjhunwala (99171-44777)
For Ramaswamy Iyer, Gopal Krishna, Samir Mehta, Dinesh Kumar Misra, Anil Prakash, Debasis Ray, Dr.V.N.Sharma, Debadityo Sinha, Shiva Kumar Upadhyaya and Paritosh Tyagi
""""""""""""""
Similar letters, as given below, have been sent to the Union Ministers and Secretaries of the 5 ministries: Environment, Power, Shipping, Water resources and Tourism.
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
Lakshmoli, Maletha, Kriti Nagar, UKD 24161
August 26, 2014
Sushri Uma Bharati, Minister
Shram Shakti Bhawan,
Rafi Marg,
New Delhi 110001
Sub: Waterway from Haldia to Allahabad
Madam:
We are much concerned with the proposal to
build a series of barrages on the Ganga from Haldia to Allahabad in order to
enable movement of large ships for transport. We are attaching herewith a
representation outlining the various problems that will arise in this project.
Our considered assessment is that the project as conceived presently will
impose huge environmental, social and cultural costs on the people of the
country. It will also not be economically viable if proper cost-benefit
analysis is undertaken after taking on board various environmental costs.
Madam, the NDA Government is committed to
rejuvenating the Ganga and re-establishing riverbed connectivity. The proposed
project will do the opposite. It will cause further fragmentation.
We request that the Government may scrap
this project and explore ways of promoting waterway transport within free flow
of the Ganga.
Yours truly,
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
For Ramaswamy Iyer, Gopal Krishna, Samir
Mehta, Dinesh Kumar Misra, Anil Prakash, Debasis Ray, Dr.V.N.Sharma, Debadityo
Sinha, Shiva Kumar Upadhyaya and Paritosh Tyagi
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
Lakshmoli, Maletha, Kriti Nagar, UKD 24161
August 26, 2014
The Secretary
Paryavaran Bhawan,
CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road,
New Delhi,110003
Sub: Waterway from Haldia to Allahabad
Sir:
We are much concerned with the proposal to
build a series of barrages on the Ganga from Haldia to Allahabad in order to
enable movement of large ships for transport. We are attaching herewith a
representation outlining the various problems that will arise in this project.
Our considered assessment is that the project as conceived presently will
impose huge environmental, social and cultural costs on the people of the
country. It will also not be economically viable if proper cost-benefit
analysis is undertaken after taking on board various environmental costs. We
request that the Government may scrap this project and explore ways of
promoting waterway transport within free flow of the Ganga.
We request that:
1
Receipt of representation may
kindly be acknowledged at bharatjj@gmail.com.
2
A personal hearing may kindly
be granted to us so that we are fully able to place our concerns before you.
3
A reasoned reply to our
submissions may kindly be provided and we may be given an opportunity to respond
to the same.
We are constrained to bring to your kind
notice that we shall have no option but to approach the Courts if we do not
receive any response from you by September 25th, 2014.
Yours truly,
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
For Ramaswamy Iyer, Gopal Krishna, Samir
Mehta, Dinesh Kumar Misra, Anil Prakash, Debasis Ray, Dr.V.N.Sharma, Debadityo
Sinha, Shiva Kumar Upadhyaya and Paritosh Tyagi
&&&&&&&&&&&&&
REPRESENTATION BEFORE GOVERNMENT OF
INDIA
On
GANGA WATERWAY FROM HALDIA TO
ALLAHABAD
By
Bharat Jhunjhunwala, Former Professor, IIM
Bengaluru
Ramaswamy Iyer, Former Secretary, GOI
Gopal Krishna, Ganga Bachao Samiti,
ToxicsWatch Alliance
Samir Mehta, International Rivers and River
Basin Friends
Dinesh Kumar Misra, Barh Mukti Abhiyan,
Bihar
Anil Prakash, Ganga Mukti Andolan,
Bhagalpur
Debasis Ray, Eco-One BHU, Rajiv Gandhi
South Campus, Mirzapur
Dr.V.N.Sharma, Chairman, Jharkhand Vigyan
Manch
Debadityo Sinha and Shiva Kumar Upadhyaya,
Vindhya Bachao, Mirzapur
Paritosh Tyagi, Former Chairman, Central
Pollution Control Board
List of
Annexures
SL
|
Document
|
01
|
Extracts
from Planning Commission Working Group on Flood Management
|
02
|
Extracts
from Kalyan Rudra, The Encroaching Ganga and Social Conflicts
|
03
|
Riverine
Changes and Human Vulnerability in the ‘Chars’ Of Malda
|
04
|
Report
by WWF on IPCC 4th Assessment Report
|
05
|
Sea
Level Changes by National Institute of Oceanography
|
06
|
Threats
to the Sundarbans Mangrove
|
07
|
Report
of Standing Committee on Water Resources 2013-14
|
08
|
Report
of Disaster Management Department, Government of West Bengal
|
09
|
Runoff
sensitivity of Ganges River Basin by Md Monirul Quader Mirza
|
10
|
MOWR
Report on Effect of Climate Change
|
11
|
WWF
Report on Ganga Basin’s vulnerability to Climate Change
|
12
|
Report
from Economic Times dated Jul 19, 2014
|
13
|
News
Report from PatnaDaily.com dated 05 Oct 2013
|
14
|
Report
from CIFRI on Hooghly Estuary
|
15
|
Statement
by Four Shankaracharyas
|
16
|
Cost
Benefit Analysis, Report of Ganga Flood Control Commission, 2004
|
17
|
Draft
Guidelines of Cost-Benefit Analysis by IIFM
|
18
|
Passive
Use Values by John Loomis
|
19
|
US
Geological Survey, Effects of Dams on Mississippi River
|
20
|
US
Government Accountability Office, Mississippi River
|
21
|
Report
on USACE Cumulative Study of Barrages on the Mississippi
|
22
|
Report
by John Tibbetts on Louisiana Wetlands
|
23
|
Article
from Popular Science
|
24
|
Report
by Institute of Agriculture and Trade Policy
|
Introduction
The Government plans to make about 16
barrages on the Ganga between Haldia and Allahabad for enabling navigation in
the river. The main consideration appears to be lowering of transport costs. We
welcome the government’s resolve in this respect. Our submission is that these
Barrages will impose huge environmental and social costs. The objective of
cheaper transport can be better achieved by other ways without incurring these
costs. In this respect we wish to make the following submissions.
Sediments will be arrested in the
reservoirs behind the Barrages. The level of water in the river will rise as
the river will be flowing above the deposited sediments. The water will hit at
the banks leading to erosion.
|
|
Photo 1: Erosion on Left Bank upstream of
Farakka. A village used to exist here.
|
Erosion will also take place downstream
because release of water from the barrages is made suddenly with full opening at
a particular gate so that the high velocity pulls the sediments and flushes
them downstream. However, this same high velocity leads to erosion of banks
downstream as can be seen at Farakka.
A Report of the Planning Commission accepts
that there is a problem of erosion of banks both upstream and downstream of
Farakka Barrage (Annexure 01).
There is evidence that the Farakka Barrage
has caused huge sedimentation, increasing flood intensity and aggravating
tendency of bank failures in both Malda (upstream) and Murshidabad (downstream)
(Annexure 3).
The deposition of sediments and raising of
river bed will lead to increased risk of the Ganga outflanking these barrages.
The entire area of 1600 km will become devastated in event of this happening in
a high flood. The Irrigation Department of West Bengal has expressed such a
danger for Farakka: “The continued swing of the river Ganga on the left bank in
the district of Malda upstream of the Farakka Barrage is not only eroding
densely populated villages, fertile cultivable lands, roads and communication
systems and causing floods almost every year, but also holds a possibility of
the Farakka barrage being outflanked once the Ganga if allowed to avulse
into one of its abandoned paleo-channel on
the left bank” (Annexure 02).
The deposition of sediments in the
reservoirs behind the barrages will lead to less flow of sediments at the mouth
of the Ganga and lead to increase in coastal erosion. The natural hunger of the
sea for sediments will not be met and the seas will erose the coasts to meet
its hunger. The sea will advance towards the mainland accompanied with salinity
ingress . The IPCC
4th Assessment Report says that 1 million people will be affected by
coastal erosion due to decreased sediment delivery by the rivers (Annexure
04). This has been happening at Ganga Sagar at increased rate. A study
by National Institute of Oceanography indicates that the Delta at Diamond Harbour
is sinking rapidly (Annexure 07). Therefore, there is need for
extreme caution in undertaking any activity that will further reduce the flow
of sediments to the Harbour.
The sediment that is flowing into the Ganga
will be arrested in the multiple barrages that are proposed. This has to be
flushed out for the Project to be sustainable. Presently huge amount of
sediments get flushed out during the high flows. This entire sediment will have
to be dredged. The cost dredging will be prohibitive. The Kolkata Port Trust is
constantly facing financial burden of dredging. This means that the revenue
from dredged material is small in comparison to the cost. This is the situation
at Kolkata where demand for construction is large. The situation would be much
worse upstream.
A further problem is that of storage or use
of the dredged material. The prevalent practice is to dump the excavated
material near the riverbanks from where it flows back into the river
repeatedly.
There may be positive impact on Sunderbans
due to increased flow of water in the Hooghly. However, there will be negative
impact due to this water carrying less sediments. Presently available evidence
indicates that the diversion of Ganges water at Farakka Barrage has led to an
increase in both sedimentation and salinity in the Sunderbans which is
threatening its ecosystem. The Sundari and Goran species are affected by
top-dying disease (Annexure 08).
Counterargument: MOWR has contended that
there is no increase of flooding due to the Farakka Barrage because there is no
ponding during lean season (Annexure 09).
Reply: This is correct to the extent that
there is no increase in flooding due to release of impounded waters. However
that is not relevant. Flood intensity has increased because of deposition of sediments
upstream and consequent rise in level of
water of the Ganga upstream. The Indian branch of the Mahananda faces one foot
of rise of the Ganga water during the flood season.
Counterargument: Construction of several
barrages upstream will arrest the sediments and reduce sedimentation at
Farakka.
Reply: It is true that there will be
reduction of problem at Farakka. However, this only transfers the problem
upstream. The sediment that is presently deposited at Farakka will in future be
deposited upstream at other barrages and have similar consequences. Secondly, a
good amount of sediment is flushed out at Farakka during monsoons presently. This
flushing will get restricted because multiple barrages will prevent the Ganga
from carrying them to the sea.
Counterargument: Dredging will enable utilization
of the sediments for other construction purposes. The revenue generated from
regulated river bed mining will be further used for maintenance activities of
the river.
Reply: The cost of dredging the sediments
is exorbitant. The demand for sediments in upstream areas will be less.
The Kosi brings huge amount of coarse sediments
which has found no use at all as construction material. As said previously,
Kolkata Port Trust is not able to generate net revenue from dredging.
Counterargument: The sediment runoff
will be controlled by plantation of suitable native trees with strong soil
holding capacity. This green belt along the bank of Ganga will help in
minimizing the sediment load of the river greatly.
Reply: Large areas have been planted in the
last few decades but sedimentation becomes worse by the year. Sediments are
released from bank erosion as well as fields. These are not managed by
plantations.
Counterargument: Embankments will be made
to solve the problem of river bank erosion.
Reply: Embankments are helpful only in the
short run. The sediments get deposited and lead to rising of the riverbed
between the embankments. Soon the river starts flowing above the level of the
surrounding ground level. This requires further increase in level of the
embankments. There is a limit to the increase in height of embankments. And,
the water gushes out if there is a breach and causes sudden floods.
|
Photo 2: This embankment was made to
prevent erosion at Village Madanpara downstream of Farakka on left bank. The
embankment was itself eroded within one month of being made.
|
The Ganga carries the flood waters of the
many tributaries including the flood-prone Ghaghra, Gandak and Kosi. The capacity
of the Ganga to carry the flood waters of the incoming tributaries depends upon
the velocity and volume of water that the Ganga can carry. The gates of the
barrages may be fully opened during such flood events. However, the cross
section of the river would be reduced due to sediment deposition. The gradient
of the river will also become less in large stretches due to this deposition. The
reduction of live cross-section of the river and gradient will lead to flood
waters of incoming tributaries not being carried by the Ganga and the flood
intensity in the tributaries will be much aggravated.
Counterargument: The sediments will be
flushed out from the Barrages.
Reply: Flushing leads to removal of
sediments for only a small distance upstream of the Barrage. The deposited
sediments form a slope and only sediments above this slope are flushed out. One
can see deposition of sediments about 1 km upstream of Farakka. Sediments in
long stretches of 100 km will not be flushed out.
A Report of the Disaster Management Department,
Government of West Bengal explains that one of the causes of flood is backing
of water in tributaries at their confluence with main river. The Ganga is not
able to drain the waters of Mahananda and other rivers when the Ganga rules
high upstream and downstream of the Farakka Barrage (Annexure 10).
This situation will be created in the entire stretch of 1600 km where barrages
will be made leading to increase in damages due to floods.
Counterargument: The backward flow of water into the
tributaries will be checked by regulating the flow of river by upstream
barrages.
Reply: Barrages do not have any storage
capacity. They will have to release all the water that they receive. Some
sediments may be held in the upstream barrages but volume of water released
will remain unchanged. Therefore there will be no change in downstream flood
situation.
A Study by National Institute of Hydrology
indicates that the rainfall and river flow in the Ganga may increase due to
climate change (Annexure 11). Simultaneously the number of rainy
days will be fewer and heavy rain events will be more (Annexure 12).
WWF
has assessed that the rainfall will be concentrated in the month of August only
(Annexure 13). This means that the there will be increased demand
on the flood conveyance capacity of the Ganga in August. The cascade of
Barrages will have the opposite impact of reduction of flood conveyance
capacity.
Construction of a cascade of Barrages will
led to multiple fragmentation of the migration path of fish—Hilsa and Prawns in
particular. The Farakka Barrage has already led to the fragmentation of the
habitat of these fish as indicated by a report by Central Inland Fisheries
Research Institute (Annexure 14). Hilsa and prawns are no longer
found above the Farakka Barrage. Making a series of barrages will limit
migration of these fishes to a many disjointed stretches of 100 km each and
prevent them from reaching areas that are suitable for their different life
cycle requirements like spawning, etc. This will totally decimate these fishes.
Livelihood of fishermen dependent on
fishing will be affected.
Former Chief Minister Nitish Kumar has said
that the Farakka Barrage has led to accumulation of sediments, reduction of depth
of watercourse and decline in the number of dolphins (Annexure 15).
Dolphins are the keystone species to assess the health of the riverine
ecosystem. Decline in dolphins indicates that the entire ecosystem is
degrading.
Moving of ships will create disturbance
from the turbulence, noise and pollution. The Dolphin is a blind animal which
navigates and preys using sound to locate objects. The noise from ships will
create disturbance to the Dolphin’s ability to sense and navigate. The barrages
will fragment their natural path by creating obstructions.
The Project will have a negative impact on
the Turtle Sanctuary at Varanasi and Vikramshila Dolphin Sanctuary at
Bhagalpur.
The quality of river water is a function of
aquatic biodiversity and the same will be adversely impacted.
Counterargument: There has been an
increase in catch of Hilsa downstream Farakka due to the expansion of the
mixing zone (Annexure 16). Increased water in the Hooghly has led
to an increase in the contact zone between incoming sweet river water and
receiving salt water. This zone is most productive.
Reply: The increase of fish catch in the
mixing zone would be much less than the loss in 1600 km length upstream.
Counterargument: The cause of decline of
Hilsa is bagnet fishing.
Reply: This is true but barrages will
exacerbate this negative impact. Need is to put a stop to bagnet fishing.
Counterargument: Reservoirs behind the
barrages will lead to an increase in fish catch.
Reply: The experience of Farakka indicates
otherwise. The total fish catch has declined. Number of fishermen coming to the
area is nearly one-half of the pre-Farakka period. The catch of preferred
species such as the Hilsa, has much declined. Artificial prawn cultivation has
also not succeeded.
The cascade of barrages will lead to
increased impoundment of water and correspondingly much reduced velocity of
flow. This will lead to growing of water hyacinth on the river banks. Water
hyacinth can be seen growing in the Ganga upstream on right bank above Farakka
Barrage (Photo 3). The hyacinth kills other aquatic flora which are habitat and
food for fishes.
|
Photo 3: Water hyacinth at Village Palasi
on Right Bank upstream Farakka.
|
A US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Report
on the cascade of barrages on the Mississippi says that “in the late 1980s
large beds of underwater plants, such as wild celery, all but disappeared in
much of the Upper Mississippi. While some plant beds have partially recovered,
they may never return to their previous state, taking with them thousands of
acres of habitat for young fish and the small animals that fish and other wildlife eat” (Annexure
23). The growth of Hyacinth upstream of Farakka indicates similar
impact in India.
The riverine ecosystem requires variation
of water levels and velocity of flows. A seasonal and gradual variation in
river flows takes place in natural condition. The aquatic flora and fauna get
time to adjust to the varying levels. Making a cascade of barrages will lead to
the water level remaining almost constant for most of the year. There will be sudden
variation in flows as and when water is released from the barrages for
flushing. This sudden variation will be another impediment to the ability of
flora and fauna to adjust and harm the riverine and riparian ecosystems.
The four Shankaracharyas are on record that
obstruction of the flow of Ganga due to the construction of dams and barrages
leads to decline in the spiritual quality of its waters (Annexure 17).
Ganga has been declared as National River because of this socio-cultural value
which is sacrosanct and should not be destroyed.
People living along the banks of the Ganga
will have to immerse the ashes of their dead in the reservoirs. The ashes will
settle in the lakes instead of being carried to the sea.
The series of reservoirs will lead to
increased groundwater recharge. This is a fortuitous impact. But this will also
lead to reduction of downstream flow and may even lead to zero flow in
downstream stretches during lean season leading to anaerobic conditions. The
water may stink and will not be fit for religious or tourism purposes.
Discharge of carbon emissions by ships will
be more absorbed by the river water because of close proximity leading to
decline in its quality. Some amount of lubricant or other oil is leaked by
ships. The colour of water near the ports becomes nearly black for this reason.
These leakages will have a negative impact on water quality.
Disasters take place in shipping. Barges
loaded with coal, fuel oil or other materials may sink or otherwise spill their
cargo into the river leading to deterioration of water quality. These discharges
by the ships will remain stagnant due to the formation of barrages and the
natural purification of the river will not take place.
It is necessary to undertake a
comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of the project. The Ganga Flood Control
Commission has prescribed a format for assessment of Cost-Benefit Analysis of
flood management schemes (Annexure 18). This format excludes many
costs. The Indian Institute of Forest Management has drafted guidelines for
undertaking cost-benefit analysis of irrigation projects which are more
comprehensive (Annexure 19). The IIFM Guidelines indicate the following
costs that must be accounted for: human resettlement costs, reduction in value
of land, habitat fragmentation costs, loss of public infrastructure, loss due
to increase in water-borne diseases, loss of flood-recession agriculture, loss
of fisheries, decreased sand harvesting, decline in water quality, loss of
aesthetic value of the river, landslides and impact on terrestrial and aquatic
biodiversity. These are enumerated here only to indicate the wide range of
costs that need to be included in such a analysis.
Of particular importance are non-use, passive-use
or existence values. People may not use the river but they are willing to pay a
price to keep the river free flowing. They derive satisfaction from the knowledge
that the sacred river is flowing freely. The Elhwa Dam in the United States was
removed mainly because these passive values (Annexure 20). These
values are routinely ignored in Cost-Benefit Analysis done in India. Inclusion
of these values will tilt the scales in favour of free flow of rivers.
The Directive Principles enshrined in our
Constitution require the Government to make policy that is equitable. The
negative impact of the Barrage Project will mostly affect the poor due to coastal
erosion, riverbank erosion, loss of fisheries, increase in water-borne
diseases, loss of aesthetic value of free-flowing river, etc. The benefits, on
the other hand, accrue mostly to the well-off sections—tourism on luxury ships,
etc. An assessment of the differential impact of the project on different
strata of the society is necessary before a decision to implement this project
is made.
It is necessary to make a holistic
strategic assessment of various alternatives to water transport. The factors to
be induced in such an assessment would be:
1 Shipping necessarily involves increased dependence on fuel oil while
rail transport is undertaken by electricity that can be generated from renewable energy; and, as second option, by coal or
nuclear power. Increase of shipping will lead to greater import dependence and
impair our economic sovereignty.
2 Indications are that price of solar power may decline to levels of
other sources in a few years; on the other hand fuel oil may become more
expensive. This is one of the reasons why there has been a thrust on solar and
wind power in the budget for 2014-15. In such a scenario the shipping project
will become unviable yet we would have destroyed our river.
3 The environmental costs of waterway are high while those of rail
transport are relatively less. The assessment of alternative modes of transport
should be made after including these environmental costs.
4 Shipping can be undertaken by small ships on the presently
free-flowing river. Some increase in size of ship can be obtained by dredging a
channel in the Ganga though environmental impacts of such dredging will have to
be separately assessed. The correct comparison, therefore, is not between waterway,
road and rail. The correct comparison is between (1) Small ships on presently
available waterway; (2) Medium ships on dredged waterway; and (3) Large ships
after construction of barrages.
5 It would be possible to design barges that have reduced draft
requirement and that can ply on present natural flows or dredged flows of the
Ganga without making barrages.
6 The demand for shipping on the Ganga waterway is arising mainly from
the need to ship imported coal to upstream thermal power plants. These power
projects can be located nearer to the ports such that it minimises
transportation costs.
Any decision on the project must be taken
after considering these factors.
Ways must be explored to redesign the
Farakka Barrage to enable free-flow of the Ganga while also providing increased
water to the Hooghly. We give below three examples of similar structures.
Tajewala
The old Tajewala Barrage on Yamuna was a
partial obstruction. This has since been decommissioned and Hathnikund Barrage
has been made upstream. The Tajewala Barrage was made in a ‘L’ shaped structure
with Offtake on the west bank of the river. The abutment in the river did not
extend across the river. The river flows in a circular fashion at this point
thus water naturally flows towards the west bank.
|
Photo 4: Tajewala Barrage supplying to
Western Yamuna Canal
|
The above system of partial obstruction was
in operation for nearly 100 years. Problem was that water supply to the canals
was not ‘proper’. This can be managed by better engineering designs.
Bhimgoda
An agreement was reached between the British
Government of India and representatives of the Hindu community under the
leadership of Shri Madan Mohan Malviya in 1916 providing that a ungated opening
will be kept open at the Bhimgoda Barrage which was supplying irrigation water
to Western UP. The structure was like two spurs from two sides with an ungated
opening in the middle which established riverbed connectivity.
The opening was progressively reduced and
sometime in the last decade it has been totally blocked. The Bhimgoda Barrage
now is a conventional barrage extending across the riverbed. Nevertheless, this
indicates that a ungated opening is technically feasibly as was in operation
for nearly eighty years.
Ruparel
|
Photo 5: Structure on Ruparel River
|
The water of Ruparel River in Alwar had to
be divided between the States of Alwar and Bharatpur. A structure was made such
that the water got divided between the two states in ratio of 55:45. There is
no gate in the structure. There is aviral flow on both offtakes. This structure
is still operative.
Similar structures can be made to divide
the water of the Ganga in two parts. One part can be diverted to the Hooghly
and other can be allowed to flow to the Padma.
A cascade of barrages have been built on
the Mississippi River in the 1930s in the United States to enable shipping.
However, many negative impacts of that project have become known and there is
even a call for “letting the river go its own way.”
|
Photo 6: View of Lock and Dam 27 on the
Mississippi River (Annexure 21).
|
Environment
The US Government Accountability Office has
said that the USACE, which maintains the barrages, assesses the hydrologic
impacts but not the environmental impacts of the barrages on the Mississippi. This
means that the environmental aspects of the barrage system have not been taken
on board. The Report says “Researchers have highlighted two key areas of
concern with river training structures—degradation of river habitat and
increased flooding” (Annexure 22). These are precisely the major
impacts of Farakka Barrage that are noticed in India.
A
study by USACE pointed out that the ecosystem of the Illinois
River, which is a tributary of the Mississippi, collapsed in 1950s. Many plant,
duck and fish populations declined very quickly. Similar collapse of the
Mississippi is feared.
Sediments
A Report by US Geological Survey says:
“Since the early 20th century, approximately 4,900 km2 of coastal
lands have been lost in Louisiana. One of the primary mechanisms (for this
happening)… is believed to be the disconnection of the river distributary
network from the delta plain by the massive system of levees on the delta top,
which prevent overbank flooding and replenishment of the delta top by sediment
and nutrient deliveries. Efforts by Federal and State agencies to conserve and
restore the Mississippi River Delta Plain began over three decades ago and have
accelerated over the past decade. Regardless of these efforts, however, land
losses are expected to continue because the reduced upstream sediment supplies
are not sufficient to keep up with the projected depositional space being
created by the combined forces of delta plain subsidence and global sea-level
rise” (Annexure 21). A similar loss of coastal lands is already
happening at Ganga Sagar.
In 1996, the State of Louisiana created a
document named Coast 2050, which outlined strategies and measures needed to
restore the state’s wetlands and barrier islands. Coast 2050 proposed that the
Mississippi River be re-engineered to imitate natural processes. Some portion
of the river’s flow should be re-diverted via pipelines or canals to flush into
the delta so that South Louisiana’s sinking ecosystems could be built up (Annexure
24). There is much criticism of this report. Many observers feel this
will not work. Be that as it may this debate indicates that after nearly 80
years the US Government is still trying to grapple with the problem of coastal
erosion created by the cascade of barrages on the Mississippi.
Other observers give a grave warning:
“Oliver Houck, who directs the environment program at Tulane University Law
School, says that nothing less than letting the river go its own way will solve
the land loss problem… What has to be done now is to let the Mississippi River
take its natural course and allow the full bed load of the river to rebuild the
marsh.” He adds, “The problem with Coast 2050 and other restoration plans is
that they fail to halt wetland destruction in the same areas they are trying to
restore. New canals, deeper canals, expanded ports are all on the table. No way
that works.”
A Report in Popular Science says the
Mississippi is topping its banks and barriers more frequently and with greater
consequences than flood models tend to predict. The writer says, “one thing is
abundantly clear: the mighty Mississippi wants out of the path that humans have
determined for it, and it is increasingly finding ways to escape” (Annexure
25). Similar fears that the Ganga may outflank the Farakka Barrage have
been expressed by the Government of West Bengal (quoted above).
Economics of the Waterway
A Report by Institute of Agriculture and
Trade Policy says that transport of cargo by barges on the Mississippi waterway
is economical only because it is not taxed while user fees are charged from rail
and road transport (Annexure 26). The proposed cascade of
barrages on the Ganga is similarly likely to be economical only due to
subsidies provided by the Government. Our situation is likely to be worse. The
Mississippi Waterway is used to transport bulk agricultural exports from
upstream states to the coastal ports for exports. The Ganga Basin does not have
such export-oriented bulk commodities. The Ganga Waterway will be mainly used
for transport of imported coal. This will be small in quantity to make the
Waterway economically viable.
Counterargument: A study was
commissioned by the USACE to assess the feasibility of expanding the locks and dams to
accommodate more shipping on the Mississippi River.
Reply: There is a tendency among engineers
to make big structures. This does not mean that these structures will be
sustainable or viable. USACE has made a mistake in making bigger structures on
the Mississippi. We must learn from their continuing mistake and not follow
that path.
The NDA Government is committed to the
maintenance of Aviral flow of the Ganga. The present project will break this.
It will additionally impose huge environmental and social costs, especially due
to intensification of flood and riverbank and coastal erosion.
We welcome the efforts of the Government to
reduce the cost of transport and exploring the option of shipping. The way
forward is to explore various ways of promoting shipping without obstructing
free flow of the Ganga. We request the Government to scrap this project and commission
a Strategic Impact Assessment of various non-obtrusive alternatives.
