........the impact of water bottles on the environment, noting landfills cannot support the amount of garbage they generate. She stressed the importance of safe, accessible public water.
Disposable plastic water bottles could be on their way out at 150 Ottawa schools as Ottawa-Carleton District School Board trustees vote tonight on a motion directing staff to create a plan to eliminate regular purchases and sales.
The motion, which would apply to all board facilities, starts a planning process that could see water bottles made unavailable for purchase in schools. Students may still be able to bring their own bottles to school.
"This is very much in keeping with attention to environmental matters that have been an ongoing part of our board's interests," said Lynn Scott, chair of the board.
Tonight will be the first board meeting dealing with the recommendation, which was approved by the board's business services committee nearly two weeks ago.
If a majority of trustees votes in favour of the motion, the Ottawa-Carleton school board would move closer to joining the ranks of Waterloo Region District School Board which voted recently to ban the sale of plastic water bottles starting next year.
The Toronto District School Board is also looking into a possible ban in its 560 schools.
"I don't see any reason why the board would not approve it, but you never know what is going to happen when you get into debates," Ms. Scott said.
The resolution, brought to committee by Zone 9 trustee Rob Campbell, noted disposable plastic water bottle are environmentally unwise and that Ottawa tap water is cheaper, of high quality and widely available.
The proposal also noted using or promoting disposable water bottles acts against the ethic of environmental responsibility that the board seeks to instil in its students.
Ms. Scott said if the proposal were approved, staff will look at a variety of elements including where the board can make the changes.
"What we expect out of that would be a plan that would be directed towards letting us eliminate, whether that be an absolute thing or a phase-out, at this stage we don't know."
As for whether students will be able to bring their own water bottles, Mr. Campbell said: "If people want to bring their bottled water from home, go ahead, don't think it's needed but it's up to you, but it removes us from the business."
Even if the motion is successful today, it could be easily altered or scrapped in the future , including during the planning process, depending on what a majority of trustees want.
Maude Barlow, national chairwoman for the Council of Canadians, is presenting at tonight's board meeting and is encouraging Ontario school boards to follow the Waterloo Region District School Board's example in banning the sale of plastic water bottles.
"The point is to make sure the resolution doesn't get watered down to point where it doesn't mean anything," she said.
Ms. Barlow said she is concerned about the impact of water bottles on the environment, noting landfills cannot support the amount of garbage they generate. She stressed the importance of safe, accessible public water.
This proposal is far from the board's first foray into environmental matters. The board has programs like EarthCare that covers issues from waste reduction to recycling to limiting consumption to reducing reliance on fossil.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Federation of Students unanimously passed a motion at its semi-annual meeting on May 26 that opposed bottled water.
The Student Federation of the University of Ottawa declared that its Board of Administration -- the top governing body for undergraduate students - would be a bottled-water free zone.
http://www.canada.com
मंगलवार, 27 मई 2008
Sand quarrying threatening drinking water schemes
Mediapersons observe a gravel road laid on the river bed
VIZIANAGARAM: Illegal sand quarrying in the river Champavathi that has been going on unchecked is threatening the drinking water wells on its bed. Owing to quarrying, water levels in the infiltration wells (Nos. 1,3,4,5 and 6) depleted to 11 –15 feet in each well against the average 22 feet. The second well had collapsed during cyclone-2006. As a result, the municipality has resorted to supplying water on alternate days.
Mediapersons, who were escorted to the infiltration wells by TDP councillors in the municipality on Sunday, observed a gravel road laid up to the well No.6 in the river bed and trucks lifting sand. K. Appala Naidu, a helper, at the Ramatheerthaalu pump house has informed the visiting correspondents that JCBs are usually used after sunset for lifting sand. Over 100 trucks on an average leave the riverbed with loads of sand every day, he added. “If this illegal quarrying goes unchecked the water scheme would become defunct in the near future,” said V.S. Prasad, TDP floor leader in the Municipal Council. The supply has already been restricted to 16 million litres per day against 29 mld from all sources, including the Mushidipalli scheme.
Power-cuts
Unscheduled power-cuts at the pump house were another major problem. Dr. Prasad said that a paid dedicated feeder line from Garividi sub-station was disconnected and shifted to town feeder for unknown reasons after the Congress took reins of the municipality two and a half years ago. Moreover, he said the municipality made no efforts to get the burnt transformer at the pump house replaced even after seven months. The party district vice-president and former floor leader Prasadula Ramakrishna said the municipality was so irresponsible that it had not even appointed a qualified technician to monitor the supply position. The pumphouses were handed over to a private contractor on a year lease, he said. Party town committee president I.V.P. Raju and others were present.
http://www.hindu.com
VIZIANAGARAM: Illegal sand quarrying in the river Champavathi that has been going on unchecked is threatening the drinking water wells on its bed. Owing to quarrying, water levels in the infiltration wells (Nos. 1,3,4,5 and 6) depleted to 11 –15 feet in each well against the average 22 feet. The second well had collapsed during cyclone-2006. As a result, the municipality has resorted to supplying water on alternate days.
Mediapersons, who were escorted to the infiltration wells by TDP councillors in the municipality on Sunday, observed a gravel road laid up to the well No.6 in the river bed and trucks lifting sand. K. Appala Naidu, a helper, at the Ramatheerthaalu pump house has informed the visiting correspondents that JCBs are usually used after sunset for lifting sand. Over 100 trucks on an average leave the riverbed with loads of sand every day, he added. “If this illegal quarrying goes unchecked the water scheme would become defunct in the near future,” said V.S. Prasad, TDP floor leader in the Municipal Council. The supply has already been restricted to 16 million litres per day against 29 mld from all sources, including the Mushidipalli scheme.
Power-cuts
Unscheduled power-cuts at the pump house were another major problem. Dr. Prasad said that a paid dedicated feeder line from Garividi sub-station was disconnected and shifted to town feeder for unknown reasons after the Congress took reins of the municipality two and a half years ago. Moreover, he said the municipality made no efforts to get the burnt transformer at the pump house replaced even after seven months. The party district vice-president and former floor leader Prasadula Ramakrishna said the municipality was so irresponsible that it had not even appointed a qualified technician to monitor the supply position. The pumphouses were handed over to a private contractor on a year lease, he said. Party town committee president I.V.P. Raju and others were present.
http://www.hindu.com
सोमवार, 26 मई 2008
Small Dams Not Big Dams
Big dams are not the solution of acute water crisis but we need small dams , check dams. furthermore ground water is like a cash deposit You can take the interest but you cannot touch the principal amount without depleting it.
The era of big dams is over. We must have small dams, recharge ground water, harvest rain water’
Union Minister for Water Resources Saifuddin Soz holds a very important charge, and his ministry is trying to tackle the problem of depleting ground water with a Central legislation. In an interaction with Express staff moderated by Senior Editor Sonu Jain, he talks about the plan to link important rivers, flood management, agriculture and food security, and the problems of his native Kashmir Saifuddin Soz at the EXPRESS
SAIFUDDIN SOZ: I would like to enumerate the major areas of concern regarding water resources. A few areas are in sharp focus. One is ground water — it is like a cash deposit. You can take the interest but you cannot touch the principal amount without depleting it. The PM takes considerable interest in water issues and there is an advisory council now that meets every year. We also have a Ground Water Congress. Last year at the Congress, we gave away many awards, especially to NGOs. We realise those people have been doing very good work.
The next area is irrigation. We must increase the potential of irrigation as it is the key to agricultural development. Lots of money is being pumped into irrigation. For instance, the allocation for the 11th Plan is more than double the money that was available for irrigation in the 10th Plan. But personally speaking, I’m still not satisfied because in the 6th Plan perspective. We achieved a miracle — 12.5 per cent of the GDP went to irrigation. Thereafter, the investment in irrigation has been dwindling. Then there is the question of interlinking of rivers. There was some propaganda, last year, that we put this matter on the back burner. That is not the fact: the states have to take decisions regarding this. I have taken considerable interest and there are signs that some states will agree.
We have selected some rivers for conservation. We call them ‘national projects’. It has been a story of terrible neglect. Take the Yamuna: for 30 years a great deal of funding has been wasted — it is still polluted, its hydraulic potential has not been realised, its drinking water is not worth drinking and irrigation lags behind. I would reiterate: water is very important. But in general, people think it is important only when they feel thirsty. It is the key to agricultural development. Climate change is another concern of mine. The National Institute of Hydrology is studying glaciers in Gangotri and Zanzar. In July we shall have the first report.
Then there is the issue of water pricing. I instituted a committee that gave a good report. We plan to go ahead with it. We shall ensure proper pricing concessions go to civil society but industry must pay. It should share its profits. As for flood management, I believe we shouldn’t wait for the monsoons. The monsoons come and troubles follows. At that stage, my ministry cannot do anything. I believe that between monsoons we must build embankments.
Lastly, we must look at dams. I think that the era of big dams is over. We should have small dams and try and do something on rain water harvesting and recharging ground water. We have circulated a model Water Bill which has been accepted by many states except Punjab, where there is lots of politics and they don’t accept that their water table has decreased substantially.
•RAVISH TIWARI: Are you dissatisfied with the budgetary allocation for water?
I am very grateful to the PM, who has a keen interest in water. The 10th Plan funding was Rs 100,150 crore. In the 11th Plan it is Rs 2,33000 crore. But I want more support — irrigation should be accepted as the key to agriculture development, as a key to India’s food needs. In the 6th Plan 12.5 per cent of the budget went to irrigation. During that period, your GDP grew by 5.3 per cent and agriculture growth was at 5.9 per cent. Today GDP is at 9 per cent and agriculture growth rate is a little less than 2 per cent. We need agriculture to grow at a much better rate — maybe 6 per cent — because we can no longer imagine that others will produce our food for us. By 2040 you will require more than 400 million tonnes of food for a population of 1.60 billion people. India’s food security rests purely on agriculture development and that rests squarely on irrigation.
http://www.indianexpress.com
The era of big dams is over. We must have small dams, recharge ground water, harvest rain water’
Union Minister for Water Resources Saifuddin Soz holds a very important charge, and his ministry is trying to tackle the problem of depleting ground water with a Central legislation. In an interaction with Express staff moderated by Senior Editor Sonu Jain, he talks about the plan to link important rivers, flood management, agriculture and food security, and the problems of his native Kashmir Saifuddin Soz at the EXPRESS
SAIFUDDIN SOZ: I would like to enumerate the major areas of concern regarding water resources. A few areas are in sharp focus. One is ground water — it is like a cash deposit. You can take the interest but you cannot touch the principal amount without depleting it. The PM takes considerable interest in water issues and there is an advisory council now that meets every year. We also have a Ground Water Congress. Last year at the Congress, we gave away many awards, especially to NGOs. We realise those people have been doing very good work.
The next area is irrigation. We must increase the potential of irrigation as it is the key to agricultural development. Lots of money is being pumped into irrigation. For instance, the allocation for the 11th Plan is more than double the money that was available for irrigation in the 10th Plan. But personally speaking, I’m still not satisfied because in the 6th Plan perspective. We achieved a miracle — 12.5 per cent of the GDP went to irrigation. Thereafter, the investment in irrigation has been dwindling. Then there is the question of interlinking of rivers. There was some propaganda, last year, that we put this matter on the back burner. That is not the fact: the states have to take decisions regarding this. I have taken considerable interest and there are signs that some states will agree.
We have selected some rivers for conservation. We call them ‘national projects’. It has been a story of terrible neglect. Take the Yamuna: for 30 years a great deal of funding has been wasted — it is still polluted, its hydraulic potential has not been realised, its drinking water is not worth drinking and irrigation lags behind. I would reiterate: water is very important. But in general, people think it is important only when they feel thirsty. It is the key to agricultural development. Climate change is another concern of mine. The National Institute of Hydrology is studying glaciers in Gangotri and Zanzar. In July we shall have the first report.
Then there is the issue of water pricing. I instituted a committee that gave a good report. We plan to go ahead with it. We shall ensure proper pricing concessions go to civil society but industry must pay. It should share its profits. As for flood management, I believe we shouldn’t wait for the monsoons. The monsoons come and troubles follows. At that stage, my ministry cannot do anything. I believe that between monsoons we must build embankments.
Lastly, we must look at dams. I think that the era of big dams is over. We should have small dams and try and do something on rain water harvesting and recharging ground water. We have circulated a model Water Bill which has been accepted by many states except Punjab, where there is lots of politics and they don’t accept that their water table has decreased substantially.
•RAVISH TIWARI: Are you dissatisfied with the budgetary allocation for water?
I am very grateful to the PM, who has a keen interest in water. The 10th Plan funding was Rs 100,150 crore. In the 11th Plan it is Rs 2,33000 crore. But I want more support — irrigation should be accepted as the key to agriculture development, as a key to India’s food needs. In the 6th Plan 12.5 per cent of the budget went to irrigation. During that period, your GDP grew by 5.3 per cent and agriculture growth was at 5.9 per cent. Today GDP is at 9 per cent and agriculture growth rate is a little less than 2 per cent. We need agriculture to grow at a much better rate — maybe 6 per cent — because we can no longer imagine that others will produce our food for us. By 2040 you will require more than 400 million tonnes of food for a population of 1.60 billion people. India’s food security rests purely on agriculture development and that rests squarely on irrigation.
http://www.indianexpress.com
Rainwater Harvesting
How can we save water during the cooler months so we can use it later? Rainwater harvesting refers to the collection and storage of rain to be used at a later date.
With summer right around the corner, many of us are busy thinking about lounging by the pool and soaking up some sun. But summer is also when we usually have to be concerned with water shortages. Here is a way to help you save water, help save the environment, and even save some money.
About 40% of water used in the summer is used outdoors, when plants and trees need it most, but summer is when most areas face water shortages and have water restrictions. So how can we save water during the cooler months so we can use it later? Rainwater harvesting refers to the collection and storage of rain to be used at a later date.
Nick Evans from the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District says, "In a normal year we get enough rainwater to supply the average need of your average house." This water is usually used for gardening, outdoor cleaning, or even washing your car, but can also be used indoors. Brian Buckley, a local rainwater harvester says,"There are more advanced systems where you can incorporate it into your plumbing and use it for flushing and such but for my purposes it's entirely outside, it's coming from a downspout, and there is no interior plumbing. It's a very low-tech system."
When it rains, all of the water from your roof travels along your gutters just as normal, but instead of being pushed into the yard, it is routed towards a large holding tank or barrel. Large objects are filtered out using chains, stones, or mesh and the water is stored. "I just fill up my watering can and water my plants, my flowers, my trees."
For example, if your roof is 1000 square feet and it rains only one inch. You can harvest about 600 gallons. That's 600 gallons that you don't have to pay for, doesn't need to be chemically treated, and doesn't runoff as storm water. "My barrels are often full within the first two hours of a heavy rain." These barrels are fairly inexpensive, very easy to install, and if your worried about curb appeal, they can be hidden behind shrubs or even painted to match your house. "It's not rocket science, it's just plumbing and funneling water where it need to be."
http://www.charlottesvillenewsplex.tv
With summer right around the corner, many of us are busy thinking about lounging by the pool and soaking up some sun. But summer is also when we usually have to be concerned with water shortages. Here is a way to help you save water, help save the environment, and even save some money.
About 40% of water used in the summer is used outdoors, when plants and trees need it most, but summer is when most areas face water shortages and have water restrictions. So how can we save water during the cooler months so we can use it later? Rainwater harvesting refers to the collection and storage of rain to be used at a later date.
Nick Evans from the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District says, "In a normal year we get enough rainwater to supply the average need of your average house." This water is usually used for gardening, outdoor cleaning, or even washing your car, but can also be used indoors. Brian Buckley, a local rainwater harvester says,"There are more advanced systems where you can incorporate it into your plumbing and use it for flushing and such but for my purposes it's entirely outside, it's coming from a downspout, and there is no interior plumbing. It's a very low-tech system."
When it rains, all of the water from your roof travels along your gutters just as normal, but instead of being pushed into the yard, it is routed towards a large holding tank or barrel. Large objects are filtered out using chains, stones, or mesh and the water is stored. "I just fill up my watering can and water my plants, my flowers, my trees."
For example, if your roof is 1000 square feet and it rains only one inch. You can harvest about 600 gallons. That's 600 gallons that you don't have to pay for, doesn't need to be chemically treated, and doesn't runoff as storm water. "My barrels are often full within the first two hours of a heavy rain." These barrels are fairly inexpensive, very easy to install, and if your worried about curb appeal, they can be hidden behind shrubs or even painted to match your house. "It's not rocket science, it's just plumbing and funneling water where it need to be."
http://www.charlottesvillenewsplex.tv
Poor drinking water scenario
In Ganjam district, Orissa people are facing acute water crisis. Sources of water are dried up due to the scortching heat. Four blocks in the district are affected with contaminated water, facing an outbreak of diseas. There is no source of drinking water expect tubewells but they are also defunct and work for newly sanctioned tubewells is yet to be taken up.
During last one month more then 10 persons have died and hundreds been affected by waterborne diseases in various places of Ganjam district.
Even till date dysentery continues to affect the residents in at least four blocks, besides some places in Berhampur.
Though the health officials claimed to have checked the diseases and attributed the outbreak due to use of contaminated water, but no steps have been taken for provision of safe drinking water except disinfecting the water sources casually.
Following scorching heat, all the water sources including ponds and open wells, have dried up and the people in the district are experiencing acute water shortage.
In such a situation, tubewells are the only alternate source and this year also the district got funds to sink another 540 new tubewells with 20 tubewells per block.
But while many of the existing tubewells remain defunct, the work for newly-sanctioned tubewells is yet to be taken up. According to official records around 1026 tubewells in 22 blocks in the district are lying defunct which aggravated the water crisis further.
Apart from new tubewells, rainwater harvesting structures were planned at various places, but no sign of such structures is there in the district barring a couple of places.
While the drinking water scenario is poor in the district, the state of other water sources used for bathing and other purposes is no better. Most of the ponds in the district, including Berhampur city, do not have any groundwater sources, rather store the rainwater and in some places drain water is connected to them.
Even most of the ponds in the district have lost the storing capacity due to rapid siltation. This year steps were taken for renovation of the ponds in various places.
http://www.newindpress.com
During last one month more then 10 persons have died and hundreds been affected by waterborne diseases in various places of Ganjam district.
Even till date dysentery continues to affect the residents in at least four blocks, besides some places in Berhampur.
Though the health officials claimed to have checked the diseases and attributed the outbreak due to use of contaminated water, but no steps have been taken for provision of safe drinking water except disinfecting the water sources casually.
Following scorching heat, all the water sources including ponds and open wells, have dried up and the people in the district are experiencing acute water shortage.
In such a situation, tubewells are the only alternate source and this year also the district got funds to sink another 540 new tubewells with 20 tubewells per block.
But while many of the existing tubewells remain defunct, the work for newly-sanctioned tubewells is yet to be taken up. According to official records around 1026 tubewells in 22 blocks in the district are lying defunct which aggravated the water crisis further.
Apart from new tubewells, rainwater harvesting structures were planned at various places, but no sign of such structures is there in the district barring a couple of places.
While the drinking water scenario is poor in the district, the state of other water sources used for bathing and other purposes is no better. Most of the ponds in the district, including Berhampur city, do not have any groundwater sources, rather store the rainwater and in some places drain water is connected to them.
Even most of the ponds in the district have lost the storing capacity due to rapid siltation. This year steps were taken for renovation of the ponds in various places.
http://www.newindpress.com
Alternative source of potable water
Scientist sought rain as source of potable water
As we all know the limitations of potable water, because of too much wastage and over exploitation we are facing serious water crisis, ground water level is falling down rapidly. In most of the parts people have no water to drink, if they have it that is not potable water. So many individuals and scientists are trying to find out the alternatives of potable water sources.
A Filipino scientist sought rain water as alternative source of potable water through a technology called Innovative Rain Water Harvesting System.
Science and Technology undersecretary Graciano Yumul said a catchment basin will be installed to gather rain water especially during the occurence of storms to save water from wastage or running to the ground.
This will serve as an alternative source of clean water for communities, he said.
The technology, developed by Antonio Mateo of Adamson University, has been granted by P2 million aid through the Philippine Council for Industry and Energy Research Institute (DOST-PCIERD) for fabrication of catch basin or tanks.
The water may cater to domestic and industrial use to lessen their dependency on expensive commercial water and make use of abundant water from rain.
The country experiences 20 typhoons each year, and excessive downpour sometimes cause calamities such as rain-induced flashfloods and landslides.
The PCIERD is enhancing Mateo's technology to enable it to produce safe drinking water, Yumul said.
http://www.tradingmarkets.com
As we all know the limitations of potable water, because of too much wastage and over exploitation we are facing serious water crisis, ground water level is falling down rapidly. In most of the parts people have no water to drink, if they have it that is not potable water. So many individuals and scientists are trying to find out the alternatives of potable water sources.
A Filipino scientist sought rain water as alternative source of potable water through a technology called Innovative Rain Water Harvesting System.
Science and Technology undersecretary Graciano Yumul said a catchment basin will be installed to gather rain water especially during the occurence of storms to save water from wastage or running to the ground.
This will serve as an alternative source of clean water for communities, he said.
The technology, developed by Antonio Mateo of Adamson University, has been granted by P2 million aid through the Philippine Council for Industry and Energy Research Institute (DOST-PCIERD) for fabrication of catch basin or tanks.
The water may cater to domestic and industrial use to lessen their dependency on expensive commercial water and make use of abundant water from rain.
The country experiences 20 typhoons each year, and excessive downpour sometimes cause calamities such as rain-induced flashfloods and landslides.
The PCIERD is enhancing Mateo's technology to enable it to produce safe drinking water, Yumul said.
http://www.tradingmarkets.com
शनिवार, 24 मई 2008
'Aaj Bhi Khare Hain Talab'
This is an extract from Anupam Mishra's Hindi classic, 'Aaj Bhi Khare Hain Talab' , on traditional water use in India, published by Gandhi Peace Foundation.
This English translation, by Kamal Kishore appeared in Grassroots magazine, of May,2000.
Update: October,2000
First the name: the pond is commonly referred to as Ghadisar by the local people. In fact, it was difficult to get anywhere, referring to it as Ghadasisar, the name used originally in the article. Therefore, it is changed throughout this article, in order that search engines may assist researchers better. It is hoped 'Grassroots' will appreciate this editing.
Second, the pond no longer supplies any water to Jaisalmer. Jaisalmer's water comes from deep wells bored in the alignment of the 'dead' river Saraswati at Dabla.
But the pond is alive! There is water and there are birds about. People do stroll down and spend long hours, lounging on its banks. The temple attracts congregations. It's more a social centre now. And it remains an architectural and civil-engineering marvel
Anupam Mishra recreates a society that was sensitive to nature's ways!
On the tourist map Ghadisar is as big as the town of Jaisalmer. And the two are inter-existent, just as on paper. Jaisalmer wouldn't be , without Ghadisar, and the reverse is also true. Each day of roughly 700 years of this 800-year old town, is linked to each drop of water in Ghadisar.
A huge sand dune towers in front. Even from close-by you take time to see it's not a sand dune but the huge embankment wall of Ghadisar. A little further in, and you see two tall turrets, with five large and two small windows, covered with beautiful engravings on stone. You see a doorway so high that it cannot be anything but the main entrance. A flash of sky is seen through these big and small openings. As one tracks forward new scenes get added one by one to the canvas. And somewhere at this point, you realise that the blue sky that sparkled through the openings is blue water. Then, to left and right, come up ghats of stone, temples, platforms, verandahs, with innumerable columns, chambers, and heaven knows what else, all adding to an expanding panorama. This procession of scenes that changes by the minute comes to a halt at the edge of the pond. And here the eyes become hyperactive; they cannot rest on any single object. They are as if possessed, to take in, in one all embracing glance, the entire bewildering spectacle.
Maharawal Ghadasi
But the eyes fail in their endeavour. Three miles long and some one mile wide, the catchment basin of this pond spreads over 120 square miles. It was made by the king of Jaisalmer, the Maharawal Ghadasi, in Vikram Samwat 1391, or AD 1336. Other kings have had ponds made too. But Ghadasi was no absentee patron. Everyday he came down from the pinnacles of the fort and personally supervised the digging, filling and other jobs. Jaisalmer was in political turmoil at the time. Snatch and grab for the throne was in full swing; with all the plotting, double-crossings and palace intrigues it entailed. Uncles were at the throats of the nephews, brothers were exiled by brother, or somebody's wine was lovingly laced with venom.
Ghadasi himself had seized Jaisalmer with the help of the Rathod army. In history books the chapter on Ghadasi's reign is strewn with heraldic terms of arousal, like triumph or rout, glory or shame, immortal death of strife.
Even so, work on the pond went on. To his long-term project that went on for years Ghadasi brought unlimited patience and resources. But he had to pay the ultimate price for it. The embankment was being raised. The Maharawal was atop, overseeing the work. For the conspirators watching him from the palace he was easy target. He fell to somebody's arrow. Custom required his rani to burn with him on the pyre. But Rani Vimala did not offer sati. She completed the work on the pond.
Pavilions by the water
In this dream of desert sand there are two colours. Blue is the colour of the water, and yellow the colour of ghats, temples, towers and verandahs built round half the pond area. But the dream is bathed in one single colour two times a day. At dawn and dusk the sun pours molten gold into Ghadisar without let and, until its rays turn. People too poured gold into the pond as much as they could. The pond was the king's, but the people's was the development and decoration work. They expanded the temples, ghats and palaces built in the first lap.
At one time schools were also on the ghats. Students from the town, and the villages nearby, came to stay here and study under the gurus. on one side of the embankment are lodgings and kitchenettes. These were for people caught in legal wrangles in the king's court and elsewhere. Temples for the gods Neelkanth and Giridhari were built here. Yajnashalas - places of special worship- came up. A tomb in memory of Jamalshah pir was built. All this on the same ghat. Emigrants, gone away for livelihood, still had their hearts in Ghadisar. Among these were forefathers of Seth Govind Das who had migrated to Jabalpur. They returned to build a temple in one of the verandahs.
Catching the very last drop
Water went to the whole town from here. It was a round-the-clock activity. But mornings and evenings saw the place transformed into a pageant as women bent and swayed with pitchers of water on their heads. This was a standing sight of the place till piped water began coming to the town. Ummed Singhji Mehta has given a beautiful description of this in one of his ghazals, written in 1919. On the water festivals of Kajari-Teej in Bhadrapad, the entire population turned up at Ghadisar dressed and decked to kill. And then the twin-coloured Ghadisar became a prism of colours.
No matter how little it rained in the desert, the catchment area of Ghadisar was big enough to catch every drop of rain and fill the pond to the brim. At this stage of satiation, the weir took over, relieving the king's garrison of their duty of vigilance. The weir ejected the surplus water that could destroy the pond. The ejection too, was a unique process . For people who gathered every drop of water, surplus water was not simply water, but water wealth, water capital. This capital that flowed out through the weir was collected in yet another pond. If the Ghadisar weir did not stop it, the weir of the second pond got activated. Yet another pond filled up. This process, it is difficult, to believe, continued for nine ponds, one after another. Nautal, Sovindsar, Joshisar, Gulabsar, Bhatisar, Sodasar, Nohtasar, Ratnasar and then Kisanghat. And if water still flowed after filling all these ponds, it was stored in small wells. The expression 'each drop of water', found meaning in the most literal sense in this seven-mile stretch from Ghadisar to Kisanghat.
Disregarding a legacy
Today, when those controlling Jaisalmer and the government have forgotten the very significance of this life-giving pond in their midst, how can they be expected to attend to its chain weirs and nine sister ponds? An air force base squats in the catchment area of Ghadisar now. The water in this part of the catchment, therefore, flows out elsewhere. Unplanned houses, housing societies and, most ironically the office of the water works - the Indira Gandhi Canal Project and its staff quarters - stand in the way of the weirs, and of the nine ponds leading off them.
The ghats, dormitories, schools, kitchens, verandahs and temples are crumbling for lack of maintenance. The town today does not play the happy cum sacral game of cleaning the pond, when the ruler and ruled came together for the task, and enacted a vow. The water gauge made of stone on the bank of the pond leans on one side, its base worn. The ramparts of the turret, which housed the king's garrison, are collapsing.
The pond lives on, nevertheless.
Yet the 668 year old Ghadisar is not dead. its builders had given it enough strength to take the knocks of time. They were builders who were maintenance conscious too. They laid the traditions of maintaining what they build against fierce desert storms. They had not reckoned with the fiercer storms of negligence that were to come. But Ghadisar and the many admirers it still has are game for this climate of decay. They are meeting it with poise. No troops guard the pond today, but the urge to play guard is strong as ever in the hearts of the people.
With the first rays of the sun the temple bells peal. People throng the ghats all day long. Some sit - for hours - soaking in the beauty of the scene. Some sing. Some play the ravanhattha, a kind of sarangi.
Panibarins come to the ghat even today. Water is hauled on camel carts too. And several times a day tankers with generators roll up, sucking away the water. Ghadisar is providing water even now. And the sun too is pouring its fill of gold to Ghadisar, every morning and evening.
सोमवार, 19 मई 2008
water price policy modification and agricultural water saving, may mitigate the acuteness of water scarcity
Environmental Water Requirements and Sustainable Water Resource Management in the Haihe River Basin of North China
The policies or instruments that could be used to address the situation of water scarcity, which directly concern decision-makers, are analyzed through rapid assessment. This paper aims to show the relationship between policies and water use sectors, ecosystems and the environment. Compared with no adoption of measures, three management instruments, the South-North water transfer scheme, water price policy modification and agricultural water saving, may mitigate the acuteness of water scarcity and cause some improvements.
By Wei, Yanchang Miao, Hong; Ouyang, Zhiyun
Lack of consideration of environmental water requirements (EWR) in water resource allocation has caused several environmental problems in the Haihe River Basin, North China. This highlights an urgent need to study EWR and ensure instruments for sustainable water resource management in the basin. In this study, EWR scenarios were calculated for 2010 and 2030, giving values are 6.58 billion m^sup 3^ in 2002, 9.22 billion m^sup 3^ in 2010, and 11.62 billion m^sup 3^ in 2030. Three policies and management instruments were used to address EWR, including the South-North water transfer scheme, water price policy modifications and agricultural water saving. Compared with lack of adoption of such measures, these three management instruments may mitigate acute water scarcity and lead to some improvements. This paper attempts to establish a link between adoption of measures, impact on water user sectors and environmental consequences. It also provides a basis for discussion about the effectiveness of these measures and notes additional controversies among technical, political and economic instruments.
INTRODUCTION
Water resources are the most important factor for promoting or limiting structure, process and function of an ecosystem. Sustainable water resource management is essential for protecting the aquatic environment and for meeting current and future demand. In the past two decades, much attention has been given to the study of environmental water requirements (EWR) (Rowntree and Wadeson 1998; Hughes 2001; Shield and Good 2002). In the USA, the concept of EWR was first defined as the instream flow requirement (Lin 2000). Gleick (1996) presented a framework for the basic ecological water requirement in which he defined the basic quality and quantity of water needed to minimize changes in ecosystem processes and to protect biodiversity and ecological conformity. In 1990, the Chinese Hydrology Encyclopaedia defined EWR as the water used to modify water quality, harmonize ecosystems and improve natural amenities (Cui 1990). In addition, this definition recognized the minimum instream flow needed to support aquatic habitats, wetlands and urban green areas. At the beginning of this century, strategic research focusing on China's sustainable water resource protection was performed by many academicians and specialists. This research aggregated the EWR in several large river basins, such as the Yellow, Huaihe and Haihe Rivers, and estimated the requirement to be 80 billion m^sup 3^ for the whole country (Qian and Zhang 2000).
As a result of economic growth, rapid industrialization and urbanization in China, water availability is more threatened today than ever before. Authorities need to possess the foresight to recognize the environment as a water use sector, not only as a part of domestic or human livelihoods, but also as an independent value in terms of water resource allocation. Ecologists mainly emphasize the needs of the environment and of ecosystems, while economists and social scientists tend to be concerned only with human use. Hence, establishing a link between these two views towards the sustainable management of water resources in China has emerged as a clear priority. Within this context, it is necessary to develop case studies that assess EWR to ensure sustainable water resource management in China. The Haihe River Basin is one of the most important in North China and thus provides a useful case study. The combination of socio-economic and political factors, together with a growing population, have multiplied the effects on water resource scarcity; in addition to a lack of consideration of EWR in water resource management, leading to deteriorating ecological conditions. The object of this study is to determine EWR for this basin. Three instruments for ensuring the reasonable allocation of EWR for water resource sustainable management and availability were assessed. Few previous studies have reported on instruments ensuring EWR and its assessment, especially in China.
STUDY AREA
The study area is located in the Haihe River Basin. The river runs through the political centre of the country as well as the social development and economic centre of the North China Plain. Two municipalities with populations of more than ten million (Beijing and Tianjin) are downstream. The basin consists of three river systems: the Haihe, Luanhe and Tuhai Majia Rivers. These flow through eight provinces and autonomous regions, fanning out from the mountain area in the northwest to the sea. The basin comprises an area of 317,800 km^sup 2^, about 3.3% of China's total area (Yang et al. 2005). It accommodates 123.94 million people, 9.5% of the Chinese population, and its production value accounts for 12% of GDP, about 1112.5 billion RMB.
The basin has a semi-humid and semi-arid temperate continental climate. The average annual temperature is from 0 to 14[degrees]C. Annual water surface evaporation is 1000-1400 mm, and soil surface evaporation is 400-500 mm. Most of the rivers originate in the Yanshan and Taihang Mountains and the Loess Plateau and flow through the North China Plain towards the Bohai Gulf. The elevation varies from above 1000 m in the west to less than 50 m in the east. As the basin has been continuously influenced by human activities for 1500 years, little natural original vegetation has survived, although some natural secondary and artificial forests still remain in mountain areas.
Large-scale exploitation of water has pushed Haihe River Basin water resources to the limit and has resulted in a series of environmental problems and crises. Rivers drying up, wetlands disappearing, groundwater levels declining, and water pollution are the major challenges facing this basin. Since the 1960s, surface water has been over-extracted from the basin. About 1900 dams have been built for irrigation and power generation, causing more than 4000 km of the plains rivers to become seasonal rivers. Total water discharged to the sea has declined from 24 billion m^sup 3^ in the 1950s to 1 billion m^sup 3^ in 2001. Since the 1950s, 94% of the wetlands on the Hebei Plain in this basin have been lost. The wetland acreage has declined from 110,000 km^sup 2^ to 670 km^sup 2^. There are 20 large depressions, naturally formed due to groundwater over-extraction, covering more than 40,000 km^sup 2^. The groundwater level declined from 5 m to 12 m between 1983 and 1999 in Hebei Province, and the annual rate of decline is up to 0.4 m a^sup -1^. Water pollution has intensified since surface runoff reduced in the past decade. More than one-third of the river courses are contaminated and 90% of the urban and suburban rivers are heavily contaminated.
CALCULATION AND SCENARIO ESTIMATES FOR EWR IN THE HAIHE RIVER BASIN
Methodology
Methods used to estimate EWR range from pure hydrological models to holistic multidisciplinary methodologies (WRI 2003). In this study, the basin was divided into five ecosystems: natural vegetation, natural wetland, natural river, artificial wetland (reservoir), urban greenbelt, and urban surface water. All have surface evapotranspiration as the most important consumption characteristic of environmental water. The formulae used in this study have been described in detail in our earlier research (Miao et al. 2003).
Q^sub V^ = natural vegetation EWR (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), n = number of vegetation types, S^sub i^ = acreage of the i type of vegetation (km^sup 2^), E^sub i^ = evapotranspiration of the i type of vegetation (mm a^sup -1^). E^sub t^ = transpiration of plants (mm a^sup -1^), E^sub c^, E^sub l^, E^sub s^, E^sub w^ are evaporation of the canopy, undergrowth, litter and soil (mm a^sup -1^), respectively.
Q^sub R^= natural river EWR (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), Q^sub E^= evaporation of the river (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), Q^sub L^= leakage of the river (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), Q^sub B^= base flow of the river (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^) (calculated according Tennant 1976 or 7Q10).
Q^sub W^ = natural wetland EWR (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), E^sub i^ = evapotranspiration of i wetland (mm a^sup -1^), S^sub i^ = acreage of i wetland (km^sup 2^), determined from the minimal environmental water level. H = minimal environmental water level for natural wetland (m), h^sub 1^, h^sub 2^, h^sub 3^ are the minimal environmental water level for different ecosystem services of wetlands (m).
Q^sub UG^ = urban greenbelt EWR (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), Psi = urban greenbelt water requirement (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^ m^sup -2^) (in the study, Psi was set to 1 m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^m^sup -2^ for Beijing and 0.5 m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^m^sup -2^ for other cities, according to the economic development situation), F = acreage of urban greenbelt (m^sup 2^). Q^sub UW^ = EWR for urban water surface, including urban rivers and lakes (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), E^sub U^ = evaporation of urban surface water (mm a^sup -1^), P^sub U^ = rainfall of urban water surface (mm a^sup -1^), S = acreage of urban water surface (km^sup 2^). Environmental water requirement calculation
Natural vegetation requires water, so-called 'green' water, to support its production and biodiversity; thus protecting the habitat of numerous birds and animals. Natural vegetation in the basin includes 17 types of ecosystem, such as conifer forest, deciduous broadleaf forest, shrubs, grasslands, etc. The area of natural vegetation is about 67,600 km^sup 2^, 21% of the total acreage in the basin. Forest plays an important role, but constitutes only 5% of natural vegetation and is quite fragmented. Natural vegetation in the basin requires 21.09 billion m^sup 3^ of water for evaporation and transpiration according to equation (1), and absorbs 7.2% of total annual rainfall, of which 70% is concentrated in July and August, the peak period of precipitation (Wei et al. 2004). Hence, the amount of water consumed by natural vegetation affects the total runoff and hydrological cycle; however, this water mainly comes from rainfall and does not compete obviously with other uses, and will not be included in EWR in the following discussion.
Some methods to estimate instream river flow have been developed and promoted in the USA, such as the wetted perimeter method (Gippel and Stewardson 1998) and the Tennant method (Tennant 1976). Both are based on historic average flows, the lowest flow month, or annual flow in the studied rivers. The length of the main rivers in the Haihe Basin is 5,574 km. The EWR of natural rivers are 1.69 billion m^sup 3^ according to equation (3), which is about 6.4% of the total average annual surface runoff (Wei et al. 2004). The goal of ecological restoration is to recover 1900 km of watercourses around Beijing and Tianjin by 2010, after completion of the east route of the South-North Water Transfer Project, which was launched in December 2002. The subsequent middle route of the project will restore 2200 km of plain rivers for the basin by 2030. Instream flow will increase correspondingly to 2.27 billion m^sup 3^ and 2.93 billion m^sup 3^.
At the end of the twentieth century there were 670 km^sup 2^ of natural wetlands in the Haihe Basin, only a third of the area found in 1990, with an average water depth from 1.0 to 5.9m. Considering surface evaporation and percolation, EWR was 2.14 billion m^sup 3^ in 2000 from equation (4). According to the target of the natural wetland protection strategy plan (HWCC 2001), three areas of wetland, Tuanbowa, Dalangdian and Qianqingwa, will be improved, and 471 km^sup 2^ of wetland will be restored before 2010. In addition, another six areas of wetland or marshland of 559 km^sup 2^, Ninjinbo, Dongdian, Qingdianwa, Xiqilihai, Great Huangpuwa and Enxianwa, will also be restored by 2030. The requirement has to be met with 3.64 billion m^sup 3^ of water in 2010 and 5.11 billion m^sup 3^ in 2030.
Reservoirs constitute a special kind of artificial wetland. An integrated aquatic ecosystem usually exists in reservoirs, whether on a large or small scale. There are more than 1900 reservoirs in the basin, with a total volume of 28.5 billion m^sup 3^. The surface under normal storage volume is 1610 km^sup 2^. Therefore, EWR for reservoirs is 1.67 billion m^sup 3^ according to equation (4), and is expected to remain steady in 2010 and 2030 (Wei et al 2004).
Urban greenbelt is an independent competing water user because it mainly depends on irrigation. A strong positive relationship exists between urban EWR and urban GDP (Wei et al. 2003). Among 25 cities in the Haihe Basin, the six largest cities have an urban population of more than 1 million each, 13 middle-sized cities have urban populations from half to one million, and six small cities have populations from 200,000 to half a million. The urban population of 35.65 million is 30% of the total in the basin. The area of the urban greenbelt has an EWR of 646.7 km^sup 2^ or 0.43 billion m^sup 3^ in 2000 from equation (6). Urban rivers and lakes have a surface area of 626.6 km^sup 2^ and EWR of 0.65 billion m^sup 3^ from equation (7). According to the target for Urban Construction Planning, the area of urban greenbelt in the basin will increase to 1459 km^sup 2^ in 2010 and 1892 km^sup 2^ in 2030. Assuming pressure on rivers and lakes in the cities will not increase in future, the urban EWR would improve by 50% and 77% in the scenario years 2010 and 2030. The total EWR in 2002, 2010 and 2030 in the Haihe River Basin is shown in Table 1.
EWR review
In discussing EWR, it is necessary to review the three main schools of thought on the water requirement concept. The first common attitude towards water requirements is to consider them as a given need that should be met. In fact, nearly all projections of future water demand have been based on this approach (WRI 2003) because future water demand can be calculated in a relatively simple way, using growth scenarios for population, agriculture, industry and economic needs, and assuming certain improvements in efficiency. The above projection for human use and EWR in the Haihe Basin follows this approach. A major drawback is that many factors, such as social customs, individual preferences, price mechanism, and water policy are ignored (Hoekstra 1998).
The second view of water requirements is that water use is a necessity only if it is related to basic human needs, such as drinking water (Gleick 1996). The basic needs can be described in terms of a 'water footprint', analogous to an 'ecological footprint' , which is a function of population in a country or region (Hoekstra and Huynen 2002). Water demand above the minimum requirement is considered a luxury and is largely subject to social and political desires. Thus, allocation of priorities is supposed to strongly influence the extent of water use by different sectors.
A third perception of water requirements is economic, in which water demand is considered in relation to the price charged (Kindler and Russell 1984; Ropetto 1985). According to this, water demand should achieve equilibrium through the price mechanism. Critics regard the economic view as an ideal of economists rather than a reflection of the actual world. As it is easily operated, the price mechanism has been chosen more and more frequently by authorities in water resource management.
Ecologists also believe that there is a minimum requirement for ecosystems. If the minimum requirements are not met, the health of ecosystems will be damaged. However, it is difficult to determine the minimum requirements. One aspect of this uncertainty is that an ecosystem is capable of adapting to some environmental change, which is known as its resilience. Ecosystem degradation is a long-term, complex process and difficult to measure with available indicators. In this case, EWR are treated as specfic requirements, although there is much uncertainty. EWR are divided into instream use (retained 'in river' or 'in lake' for aquatic habitats) and offstream use of flow from the river to other places. Furthermore, ecological requirements are divided into consumption and nonconsumption use. Instream use represents the flow towards air and soil, which change water characteristics through evaporation, transpiration and infiltration. Offstream use implies the stock in surface runoff and can possibly be re-used. Table 2 shows EWR categorization in the Haihe Basin, where 83.6% of EWR is instream use and a quarter of the total is non-consumptive requirement. This distinction is expected to be helpful to decision-makers when considering allocation priorities, as it clarifies the difference in strategies.
INSTRUMENTS FOR ADDRESSING EWR
In the foreseeable future, a fundamental issue is how EWR will be met in the Haihe Basin. EWR are 9.22 billion m^sup 3^ for 2010 and 11.62 billion m^sup 3^ for 2030, and account for approximately a quarter of average total annual runoff. This is also nearly half of the surface flow during the drought decade in the 1990s. With the river currently almost fully utilized, and with industrial growth, urbanization and agricultural demand claiming further water resources, the challenge to balance human demand with environmental requirements will be tremendous and difficult to meet.
There are many instruments for addressing EWR and water scarcity in the basin. All are based on the following three criteria: increasing total supply, reducing specific demand, and reallocating scarce water under available mechanisms. For convenience, these instruments are divided into three groups: (1) technical schemes, such as hydrological projects to increase water supply, and water saving technologies to improve water efficiency; (2) command and control instruments, which can be designed to directly control water use sectors through water use per unit production quota, recycling rate, and total water use targets for each sector; and (3) economic incentives or marketbased instruments, including water pricing, subsidies for water suppliers, etc.
South-North Water Transfer Scheme
In order to mitigate increasing water scarcity in northern China, the central government has initiated the South-North Water Transfer Scheme (SNWT). The project will transfer water from the Yangtze River, through a long canal flowing from middle-south China to the Yellow River Basin, Huaihe Basin, and northern Haihe Basin. The SNWT is expected to add about 6.06 billion m^sup 3^ in 2010 and 9.57 billion m^sup 3^ in 2030, which may significantly restore and improve aquatic ecosystems in the Haihe River Basin (Pei et al. 2004). However, transferring water over a long distance might have environmental consequences in both the waterexporting region and the water-importing region. Although additional water is indeed necessary to restore and maintain aquatic ecosystems in the water- importing region, the physical and chemical characteristics of the soil may change because of the different water quality. Several similar projects, such as the west coast water canal in Canada and the USA, have been evaluated by natural and social scientists. Hence, the effect of the SNWT on the Haihe River Basin needs further study in the future. Water price reform
Economics regards demand as a function of price. Although water is a form of public commodity, water prices will be able to modify water demand. In the absence of metering, fixed charges have been widely used in the agricultural sector, which contribute to water resource waste because consumers have absolutely no economic incentive to save water since each additional unit is free of charge (Whittington 2003). Urban water users, to date, have used a common type of volumetric charge - the uniform volumetric charge. A steady water price does not reflect increasing water scarcity; however, water price reform has been promoted since 1998. The increasing block price system has been adopted in some cities in the basin. Some special industries that use more water are legally required to pay more (at a special price). Increasing water price is a typical tool for reallocating water resources, perhaps best used only for intrasectoral allocation, but not for intersectoral allocation. The problem is: who will pay for the fish, animals, birds and ecosystems? A simple answer may be 'the government', but what is the valuation of environmental water? How to value wetland, forest and aquatic ecosystems? Before these questions can be answered, the need for environmental water might be further ignored.
Agriculture water saving
Agricultural water use is the principal element of water resources utilization in the Haihe River Basin. The average agricultural water use is about 30 billion m^sup 3^a^sup -1^, which is 80% of total water consumption in this basin in the past 20 years. In the region's long history of agricultural production, the problem of water resource waste still exists and water use efficiency (WUE) is surprisingly low. Yang et al. (2003) noted that the yield of agricultural water is 0.45 RMB t^sup -1^ while that of environmental water is 1.63 RMB t^sup -1^. Hence, agricultural water saving measures are crucial to alleviate water resource scarcity and ensure EWR.
It is accepted that, in irrigation areas, watersaving agriculture occurs if the WUE is 0.70 and water production efficiency is > 1.2 kg m^sup -3^. If these values exceed 0.85 and 1.8 kg m^sup -3^, it becomes high-efficiency water use agriculture (Duan 2002). The water scarcity problem is so serious in the Haihe Basin that water saving must adopt high-efficiency water use agriculture. There are many ways to save water in irrigation: in this article we consider agronomic measures, implementing watersaving irrigation and rebuilding low-efficiency irrigation systems as examples to analyze potential water saved in the Haihe Basin.
Through implementing agronomic measures, i.e. adjusting agricultural structure, using plastic film or stalk coverage, and optimizing irrigation systems, the proportion of irrigation will be cut to 10 to 20%. But the proportion of irrigation is already very low, and agronomic measures are effective only in those irrigation areas that draw water from the Yellow River adopt furrow (surface, flood) irrigation. In these areas, it is expected to save 10% of the original water demand (4,500 m^sup 3^ ha^sup -1^ a^sup -1^). If we calculate this for 333,000 ha where we can extend this agronomic measure, it will save 0.15 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^. Paddy fields have some water saving potential using technology for shallow irrigation. In the Haihe Basin, paddy field shallow irrigation will save 0.2 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^, of which 50% can be repeatedly recycled, so that the actual amount of water-saving is 0.1 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^. Hence, in the Haihe Basin, the total amount of water-saving from agronomic measures is 0.25 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup - 1^.
The total irrigated area in the basin is 7.73 million ha and the required water-saving area is 4.8 million ha, which is 62.2% of the total irrigated area. The quantities of land needed for water- saving in well-irrigated areas and channel irrigation areas are 2.67 million ha and 2.13 million ha, respectively. The water-saving in the channel and well-irrigated areas are 1,200 m^sup 3^ ha^sup -1^ and 1,350 m^sup 3^ ha^sup -1^, where the irrigation ratios are 50% and 80% (HWCC, 2001). Hence, water-saving is 1.28 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^ and 2.81 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^ for these areas. Total water-saving by implementing water-saving irrigation is 4.09 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^.
According to statistical data, the present water-saving irrigation systems are not yet highly efficient and there are about 1.07 million ha of water-saving irrigation which have potential to save water (HWCC 2001). After rebuilding the original low- efficiency irrigation systems, WUE could be improved by 10%, and the total amount of water saved would be 0.48 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup - 1^. Hence, the total water-saving potential of agriculture in the Haihe Basin is 4.82 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^.
Comparing the availability of instruments
In general, there are many instruments available to attain the target EWR. The best instrument would be one that meets the target with the greatest reliability. Each available instrument can be characterized by a set of attributes, relating to such things as impacts on water use sectors and environmental consequences. A signal can be given to each instrument, depending on how well its attributes match with the objectives. This perspective is useful as it draws attention to what attributes a 'good' instrument might have. Table 3 is an attempt to draw together options available for adapting to the challenges of water scarcity and environmental requirements. The results were drawn by revising Hellegers' method (Hellegers and van Ierland 2003) that describes the relationship between instruments and their impact on water use sectors and environmental consequences using qualitative analysis. Compared with no adaptation, three instruments, the South-North water transfer scheme, water price policy modification and agricultural water saving, may mitigate the acuteness of the water scarcity problems and improve environmental quality. Quantitative analysis will have to rely on the application of advanced assessment models such as WEAP (Levite et al. 2003), STREAM (Aerts et al. 2000) and AQUA (Hoekstra 1998), and the integration of numerous data types for inputs and parameters. It is expected that such methods could be applied to related research in the future.
CONCLUSIONS
There is no doubt that water scarcity has been a bottleneck for social and economic development in the Haihe Basin. This article calculated EWR and estimated scenarios for 2010 and 2030. According to the target declared by the basin management authority, EWR will be up to a quarter of average annual runoff, and has to be considered a priority. Furthermore, the policies or instruments that could be used to address this situation, which directly concern decision-makers, are analyzed through rapid assessment. This paper aims to show the relationship between policies and water use sectors, ecosystems and the environment. Compared with no adoption of measures, three management instruments, the South-North water transfer scheme, water price policy modification and agricultural water saving, may mitigate the acuteness of water scarcity and cause some improvements. The paper only focuses on how to meet water needs or water demands of different water user sectors and their environmental consequences. The social and economic consequences, such as economic growth, jobs, human health and food security, have not yet been included, but will be addressed in future research.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (project No. 70573105), the Knowledge Innovation Project of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (KZCX2-405) and the National Key Research Program of China (G2000046807). We would like to thank J.B. Opschoor, Max Spoor and Kristin Komives, Institute of Social Studies (ISS), The Netherlands, for their supervision. We also thank Erich W. Schienke and Weihua Xu for suggestions and English review.
REFERENCES
Aerts JCJH, Hassan A, Savenije HHG and Khan MF. Using GIS tools and rapid assessment techniques for determining salt intrusion: STREAM, a river basin management instrument. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth Part B 2000;25(3):265-73
Cui ZP. Chinese Hydrology Encyclopaedia. 2nd ed. Beijing: Water Power and Water Electric Press; 1990:183
Duan A, Xin N, Wang L. The Definition and Calculation of Agricultural Water Saving Potential. Irrigation and Drainage 2002;21 (2):25-8, 35
Gippel GJ and Stewardson MJ. Use of wetted perimeter in defining minimum environmental flows. Regulated Rivers. Research and Management 1998; 14(1):53-67
Gleick PH. Basic water requirements for human activities: Meeting basic needs. Water International 1996; 21:83-92
Hellegers P and van Ierland E. Policy instruments for groundwater management in the Netherlands. Environmental & Resource Economics 2003;26(1): 163-72
Hoekstra A. and Huynen M. Balancing the world water demand and supply. In Martens P and Rotmans J (eds), Transitions in a globalising world. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger; 2002:17-35
Hoekstra AY. Perspectives on Water: An Integrated Model-based Exploration of the Future. Utrecht: International Books; 1998
Hughes DA. Providing hydrological information and data analysis tools for the determination of ecological instream flow requirements for South African rivers. Journal of Hydrology 2001;241:140-51
HWCC (Haihe River Water Conservancy Commission) . Reports of Water Resources Planning in Haihe Basin. Ministry of Water Resources, P.R.C.; 2001
Kindler J and Russell CS. Modelling water demands. London: Academic Press; 1984 Levite H, Sally H and Cour J. Testing water demand management scenarios in a water-stressed basin in South Africa: application of the WEAP model. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 2003;28:779-86
Lin C. Environmental water requirements in US. http:// www.cws.net.cn/; 2000
Miao H, Wei YC, Jiang LJ, Ouyang ZY, Shi JT, Wang XK and Zhao JZ. Ecological water use and the estimate method. Acta Ecologica Smzea2003;23(6):1108-14
Pei YS, Wang JH and Luo L. Analysis of effect of South-to-North Water Transfer Project on aquatic ecosystems of Haihe River Basin. Acta Ecologica Sinica 2004;24(10):2115-23
Qian ZY and Zhang GD. Strategic Research on Sustainable Development of Water Resource in China. Engineering Science 2000;2 (8):1-17
Ropetto R. The global possible: Resources, development, and the new century. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1985
Rowntree K and Wadeson R. A geomorphological framework for the assessment of instream flow requirements. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 1998;1:125-41
Shield R and Good R. Environmental water in a regulated river system: the Murrumbidgee River planning approach to the determination of environmental needs. Water Science and Technology 2002;45(11):241-9
Tennant DL. Instream flow regimens for fish, wildlife, recreation and related environmental resources. Fisheries 1976:1 (4) :6-10
Wei YC, Miao H, Ouyang ZY and Wang XK. Primary estimate of ecological water requirement in Haihe Basin. Acta Ecologica Sinica 2004;24(10) :2100-7
Wei YC, Miao H, Ouyang ZY, Shi JT and Wang XK Application and assessment of ecological water demand of urbans. Urban environment & Urban Ecology 2003;16(sup.):18-20
Whittington D. Water tariffs & subsidies in South Asia: understanding the basics, http://www.wsp.org; 2003
WRI (World Resources Institute). Environmental water scarcity index by basin, http://www.wri.org; 2003
Yang ZF, Cui BS, Liu JL, Wang XQand Liu CM. Theory, method and practice of eco-environmental water requirement. Beijing: Science Press; 2003: 235-42
Yang ZF, Liu JL, Xiao F, Jiang J and Lin C. Conformity calculation of river ecological basic flow in the Hai He River Basin. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae 2005;25(4):442-8
Yanchang Wei, Hong Miao and Zhiyun Ouyang
Key Laboratory of Systems Ecology, Research Center for Eco- environmental Sciences, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Correspondence: Hong Miao, Key Laboratory of Systems Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, PO Box 2871, Beijing 100085, China. E-mail: hmiao@mail.rcees.ac.cn
Copyright Sapiens Publishing Apr 2008
(c) 2008 International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.
Source: International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology
http://www.redorbit.com
The policies or instruments that could be used to address the situation of water scarcity, which directly concern decision-makers, are analyzed through rapid assessment. This paper aims to show the relationship between policies and water use sectors, ecosystems and the environment. Compared with no adoption of measures, three management instruments, the South-North water transfer scheme, water price policy modification and agricultural water saving, may mitigate the acuteness of water scarcity and cause some improvements.
By Wei, Yanchang Miao, Hong; Ouyang, Zhiyun
Lack of consideration of environmental water requirements (EWR) in water resource allocation has caused several environmental problems in the Haihe River Basin, North China. This highlights an urgent need to study EWR and ensure instruments for sustainable water resource management in the basin. In this study, EWR scenarios were calculated for 2010 and 2030, giving values are 6.58 billion m^sup 3^ in 2002, 9.22 billion m^sup 3^ in 2010, and 11.62 billion m^sup 3^ in 2030. Three policies and management instruments were used to address EWR, including the South-North water transfer scheme, water price policy modifications and agricultural water saving. Compared with lack of adoption of such measures, these three management instruments may mitigate acute water scarcity and lead to some improvements. This paper attempts to establish a link between adoption of measures, impact on water user sectors and environmental consequences. It also provides a basis for discussion about the effectiveness of these measures and notes additional controversies among technical, political and economic instruments.
INTRODUCTION
Water resources are the most important factor for promoting or limiting structure, process and function of an ecosystem. Sustainable water resource management is essential for protecting the aquatic environment and for meeting current and future demand. In the past two decades, much attention has been given to the study of environmental water requirements (EWR) (Rowntree and Wadeson 1998; Hughes 2001; Shield and Good 2002). In the USA, the concept of EWR was first defined as the instream flow requirement (Lin 2000). Gleick (1996) presented a framework for the basic ecological water requirement in which he defined the basic quality and quantity of water needed to minimize changes in ecosystem processes and to protect biodiversity and ecological conformity. In 1990, the Chinese Hydrology Encyclopaedia defined EWR as the water used to modify water quality, harmonize ecosystems and improve natural amenities (Cui 1990). In addition, this definition recognized the minimum instream flow needed to support aquatic habitats, wetlands and urban green areas. At the beginning of this century, strategic research focusing on China's sustainable water resource protection was performed by many academicians and specialists. This research aggregated the EWR in several large river basins, such as the Yellow, Huaihe and Haihe Rivers, and estimated the requirement to be 80 billion m^sup 3^ for the whole country (Qian and Zhang 2000).
As a result of economic growth, rapid industrialization and urbanization in China, water availability is more threatened today than ever before. Authorities need to possess the foresight to recognize the environment as a water use sector, not only as a part of domestic or human livelihoods, but also as an independent value in terms of water resource allocation. Ecologists mainly emphasize the needs of the environment and of ecosystems, while economists and social scientists tend to be concerned only with human use. Hence, establishing a link between these two views towards the sustainable management of water resources in China has emerged as a clear priority. Within this context, it is necessary to develop case studies that assess EWR to ensure sustainable water resource management in China. The Haihe River Basin is one of the most important in North China and thus provides a useful case study. The combination of socio-economic and political factors, together with a growing population, have multiplied the effects on water resource scarcity; in addition to a lack of consideration of EWR in water resource management, leading to deteriorating ecological conditions. The object of this study is to determine EWR for this basin. Three instruments for ensuring the reasonable allocation of EWR for water resource sustainable management and availability were assessed. Few previous studies have reported on instruments ensuring EWR and its assessment, especially in China.
STUDY AREA
The study area is located in the Haihe River Basin. The river runs through the political centre of the country as well as the social development and economic centre of the North China Plain. Two municipalities with populations of more than ten million (Beijing and Tianjin) are downstream. The basin consists of three river systems: the Haihe, Luanhe and Tuhai Majia Rivers. These flow through eight provinces and autonomous regions, fanning out from the mountain area in the northwest to the sea. The basin comprises an area of 317,800 km^sup 2^, about 3.3% of China's total area (Yang et al. 2005). It accommodates 123.94 million people, 9.5% of the Chinese population, and its production value accounts for 12% of GDP, about 1112.5 billion RMB.
The basin has a semi-humid and semi-arid temperate continental climate. The average annual temperature is from 0 to 14[degrees]C. Annual water surface evaporation is 1000-1400 mm, and soil surface evaporation is 400-500 mm. Most of the rivers originate in the Yanshan and Taihang Mountains and the Loess Plateau and flow through the North China Plain towards the Bohai Gulf. The elevation varies from above 1000 m in the west to less than 50 m in the east. As the basin has been continuously influenced by human activities for 1500 years, little natural original vegetation has survived, although some natural secondary and artificial forests still remain in mountain areas.
Large-scale exploitation of water has pushed Haihe River Basin water resources to the limit and has resulted in a series of environmental problems and crises. Rivers drying up, wetlands disappearing, groundwater levels declining, and water pollution are the major challenges facing this basin. Since the 1960s, surface water has been over-extracted from the basin. About 1900 dams have been built for irrigation and power generation, causing more than 4000 km of the plains rivers to become seasonal rivers. Total water discharged to the sea has declined from 24 billion m^sup 3^ in the 1950s to 1 billion m^sup 3^ in 2001. Since the 1950s, 94% of the wetlands on the Hebei Plain in this basin have been lost. The wetland acreage has declined from 110,000 km^sup 2^ to 670 km^sup 2^. There are 20 large depressions, naturally formed due to groundwater over-extraction, covering more than 40,000 km^sup 2^. The groundwater level declined from 5 m to 12 m between 1983 and 1999 in Hebei Province, and the annual rate of decline is up to 0.4 m a^sup -1^. Water pollution has intensified since surface runoff reduced in the past decade. More than one-third of the river courses are contaminated and 90% of the urban and suburban rivers are heavily contaminated.
CALCULATION AND SCENARIO ESTIMATES FOR EWR IN THE HAIHE RIVER BASIN
Methodology
Methods used to estimate EWR range from pure hydrological models to holistic multidisciplinary methodologies (WRI 2003). In this study, the basin was divided into five ecosystems: natural vegetation, natural wetland, natural river, artificial wetland (reservoir), urban greenbelt, and urban surface water. All have surface evapotranspiration as the most important consumption characteristic of environmental water. The formulae used in this study have been described in detail in our earlier research (Miao et al. 2003).
Q^sub V^ = natural vegetation EWR (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), n = number of vegetation types, S^sub i^ = acreage of the i type of vegetation (km^sup 2^), E^sub i^ = evapotranspiration of the i type of vegetation (mm a^sup -1^). E^sub t^ = transpiration of plants (mm a^sup -1^), E^sub c^, E^sub l^, E^sub s^, E^sub w^ are evaporation of the canopy, undergrowth, litter and soil (mm a^sup -1^), respectively.
Q^sub R^= natural river EWR (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), Q^sub E^= evaporation of the river (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), Q^sub L^= leakage of the river (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), Q^sub B^= base flow of the river (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^) (calculated according Tennant 1976 or 7Q10).
Q^sub W^ = natural wetland EWR (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), E^sub i^ = evapotranspiration of i wetland (mm a^sup -1^), S^sub i^ = acreage of i wetland (km^sup 2^), determined from the minimal environmental water level. H = minimal environmental water level for natural wetland (m), h^sub 1^, h^sub 2^, h^sub 3^ are the minimal environmental water level for different ecosystem services of wetlands (m).
Q^sub UG^ = urban greenbelt EWR (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), Psi = urban greenbelt water requirement (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^ m^sup -2^) (in the study, Psi was set to 1 m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^m^sup -2^ for Beijing and 0.5 m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^m^sup -2^ for other cities, according to the economic development situation), F = acreage of urban greenbelt (m^sup 2^). Q^sub UW^ = EWR for urban water surface, including urban rivers and lakes (m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^), E^sub U^ = evaporation of urban surface water (mm a^sup -1^), P^sub U^ = rainfall of urban water surface (mm a^sup -1^), S = acreage of urban water surface (km^sup 2^). Environmental water requirement calculation
Natural vegetation requires water, so-called 'green' water, to support its production and biodiversity; thus protecting the habitat of numerous birds and animals. Natural vegetation in the basin includes 17 types of ecosystem, such as conifer forest, deciduous broadleaf forest, shrubs, grasslands, etc. The area of natural vegetation is about 67,600 km^sup 2^, 21% of the total acreage in the basin. Forest plays an important role, but constitutes only 5% of natural vegetation and is quite fragmented. Natural vegetation in the basin requires 21.09 billion m^sup 3^ of water for evaporation and transpiration according to equation (1), and absorbs 7.2% of total annual rainfall, of which 70% is concentrated in July and August, the peak period of precipitation (Wei et al. 2004). Hence, the amount of water consumed by natural vegetation affects the total runoff and hydrological cycle; however, this water mainly comes from rainfall and does not compete obviously with other uses, and will not be included in EWR in the following discussion.
Some methods to estimate instream river flow have been developed and promoted in the USA, such as the wetted perimeter method (Gippel and Stewardson 1998) and the Tennant method (Tennant 1976). Both are based on historic average flows, the lowest flow month, or annual flow in the studied rivers. The length of the main rivers in the Haihe Basin is 5,574 km. The EWR of natural rivers are 1.69 billion m^sup 3^ according to equation (3), which is about 6.4% of the total average annual surface runoff (Wei et al. 2004). The goal of ecological restoration is to recover 1900 km of watercourses around Beijing and Tianjin by 2010, after completion of the east route of the South-North Water Transfer Project, which was launched in December 2002. The subsequent middle route of the project will restore 2200 km of plain rivers for the basin by 2030. Instream flow will increase correspondingly to 2.27 billion m^sup 3^ and 2.93 billion m^sup 3^.
At the end of the twentieth century there were 670 km^sup 2^ of natural wetlands in the Haihe Basin, only a third of the area found in 1990, with an average water depth from 1.0 to 5.9m. Considering surface evaporation and percolation, EWR was 2.14 billion m^sup 3^ in 2000 from equation (4). According to the target of the natural wetland protection strategy plan (HWCC 2001), three areas of wetland, Tuanbowa, Dalangdian and Qianqingwa, will be improved, and 471 km^sup 2^ of wetland will be restored before 2010. In addition, another six areas of wetland or marshland of 559 km^sup 2^, Ninjinbo, Dongdian, Qingdianwa, Xiqilihai, Great Huangpuwa and Enxianwa, will also be restored by 2030. The requirement has to be met with 3.64 billion m^sup 3^ of water in 2010 and 5.11 billion m^sup 3^ in 2030.
Reservoirs constitute a special kind of artificial wetland. An integrated aquatic ecosystem usually exists in reservoirs, whether on a large or small scale. There are more than 1900 reservoirs in the basin, with a total volume of 28.5 billion m^sup 3^. The surface under normal storage volume is 1610 km^sup 2^. Therefore, EWR for reservoirs is 1.67 billion m^sup 3^ according to equation (4), and is expected to remain steady in 2010 and 2030 (Wei et al 2004).
Urban greenbelt is an independent competing water user because it mainly depends on irrigation. A strong positive relationship exists between urban EWR and urban GDP (Wei et al. 2003). Among 25 cities in the Haihe Basin, the six largest cities have an urban population of more than 1 million each, 13 middle-sized cities have urban populations from half to one million, and six small cities have populations from 200,000 to half a million. The urban population of 35.65 million is 30% of the total in the basin. The area of the urban greenbelt has an EWR of 646.7 km^sup 2^ or 0.43 billion m^sup 3^ in 2000 from equation (6). Urban rivers and lakes have a surface area of 626.6 km^sup 2^ and EWR of 0.65 billion m^sup 3^ from equation (7). According to the target for Urban Construction Planning, the area of urban greenbelt in the basin will increase to 1459 km^sup 2^ in 2010 and 1892 km^sup 2^ in 2030. Assuming pressure on rivers and lakes in the cities will not increase in future, the urban EWR would improve by 50% and 77% in the scenario years 2010 and 2030. The total EWR in 2002, 2010 and 2030 in the Haihe River Basin is shown in Table 1.
EWR review
In discussing EWR, it is necessary to review the three main schools of thought on the water requirement concept. The first common attitude towards water requirements is to consider them as a given need that should be met. In fact, nearly all projections of future water demand have been based on this approach (WRI 2003) because future water demand can be calculated in a relatively simple way, using growth scenarios for population, agriculture, industry and economic needs, and assuming certain improvements in efficiency. The above projection for human use and EWR in the Haihe Basin follows this approach. A major drawback is that many factors, such as social customs, individual preferences, price mechanism, and water policy are ignored (Hoekstra 1998).
The second view of water requirements is that water use is a necessity only if it is related to basic human needs, such as drinking water (Gleick 1996). The basic needs can be described in terms of a 'water footprint', analogous to an 'ecological footprint' , which is a function of population in a country or region (Hoekstra and Huynen 2002). Water demand above the minimum requirement is considered a luxury and is largely subject to social and political desires. Thus, allocation of priorities is supposed to strongly influence the extent of water use by different sectors.
A third perception of water requirements is economic, in which water demand is considered in relation to the price charged (Kindler and Russell 1984; Ropetto 1985). According to this, water demand should achieve equilibrium through the price mechanism. Critics regard the economic view as an ideal of economists rather than a reflection of the actual world. As it is easily operated, the price mechanism has been chosen more and more frequently by authorities in water resource management.
Ecologists also believe that there is a minimum requirement for ecosystems. If the minimum requirements are not met, the health of ecosystems will be damaged. However, it is difficult to determine the minimum requirements. One aspect of this uncertainty is that an ecosystem is capable of adapting to some environmental change, which is known as its resilience. Ecosystem degradation is a long-term, complex process and difficult to measure with available indicators. In this case, EWR are treated as specfic requirements, although there is much uncertainty. EWR are divided into instream use (retained 'in river' or 'in lake' for aquatic habitats) and offstream use of flow from the river to other places. Furthermore, ecological requirements are divided into consumption and nonconsumption use. Instream use represents the flow towards air and soil, which change water characteristics through evaporation, transpiration and infiltration. Offstream use implies the stock in surface runoff and can possibly be re-used. Table 2 shows EWR categorization in the Haihe Basin, where 83.6% of EWR is instream use and a quarter of the total is non-consumptive requirement. This distinction is expected to be helpful to decision-makers when considering allocation priorities, as it clarifies the difference in strategies.
INSTRUMENTS FOR ADDRESSING EWR
In the foreseeable future, a fundamental issue is how EWR will be met in the Haihe Basin. EWR are 9.22 billion m^sup 3^ for 2010 and 11.62 billion m^sup 3^ for 2030, and account for approximately a quarter of average total annual runoff. This is also nearly half of the surface flow during the drought decade in the 1990s. With the river currently almost fully utilized, and with industrial growth, urbanization and agricultural demand claiming further water resources, the challenge to balance human demand with environmental requirements will be tremendous and difficult to meet.
There are many instruments for addressing EWR and water scarcity in the basin. All are based on the following three criteria: increasing total supply, reducing specific demand, and reallocating scarce water under available mechanisms. For convenience, these instruments are divided into three groups: (1) technical schemes, such as hydrological projects to increase water supply, and water saving technologies to improve water efficiency; (2) command and control instruments, which can be designed to directly control water use sectors through water use per unit production quota, recycling rate, and total water use targets for each sector; and (3) economic incentives or marketbased instruments, including water pricing, subsidies for water suppliers, etc.
South-North Water Transfer Scheme
In order to mitigate increasing water scarcity in northern China, the central government has initiated the South-North Water Transfer Scheme (SNWT). The project will transfer water from the Yangtze River, through a long canal flowing from middle-south China to the Yellow River Basin, Huaihe Basin, and northern Haihe Basin. The SNWT is expected to add about 6.06 billion m^sup 3^ in 2010 and 9.57 billion m^sup 3^ in 2030, which may significantly restore and improve aquatic ecosystems in the Haihe River Basin (Pei et al. 2004). However, transferring water over a long distance might have environmental consequences in both the waterexporting region and the water-importing region. Although additional water is indeed necessary to restore and maintain aquatic ecosystems in the water- importing region, the physical and chemical characteristics of the soil may change because of the different water quality. Several similar projects, such as the west coast water canal in Canada and the USA, have been evaluated by natural and social scientists. Hence, the effect of the SNWT on the Haihe River Basin needs further study in the future. Water price reform
Economics regards demand as a function of price. Although water is a form of public commodity, water prices will be able to modify water demand. In the absence of metering, fixed charges have been widely used in the agricultural sector, which contribute to water resource waste because consumers have absolutely no economic incentive to save water since each additional unit is free of charge (Whittington 2003). Urban water users, to date, have used a common type of volumetric charge - the uniform volumetric charge. A steady water price does not reflect increasing water scarcity; however, water price reform has been promoted since 1998. The increasing block price system has been adopted in some cities in the basin. Some special industries that use more water are legally required to pay more (at a special price). Increasing water price is a typical tool for reallocating water resources, perhaps best used only for intrasectoral allocation, but not for intersectoral allocation. The problem is: who will pay for the fish, animals, birds and ecosystems? A simple answer may be 'the government', but what is the valuation of environmental water? How to value wetland, forest and aquatic ecosystems? Before these questions can be answered, the need for environmental water might be further ignored.
Agriculture water saving
Agricultural water use is the principal element of water resources utilization in the Haihe River Basin. The average agricultural water use is about 30 billion m^sup 3^a^sup -1^, which is 80% of total water consumption in this basin in the past 20 years. In the region's long history of agricultural production, the problem of water resource waste still exists and water use efficiency (WUE) is surprisingly low. Yang et al. (2003) noted that the yield of agricultural water is 0.45 RMB t^sup -1^ while that of environmental water is 1.63 RMB t^sup -1^. Hence, agricultural water saving measures are crucial to alleviate water resource scarcity and ensure EWR.
It is accepted that, in irrigation areas, watersaving agriculture occurs if the WUE is 0.70 and water production efficiency is > 1.2 kg m^sup -3^. If these values exceed 0.85 and 1.8 kg m^sup -3^, it becomes high-efficiency water use agriculture (Duan 2002). The water scarcity problem is so serious in the Haihe Basin that water saving must adopt high-efficiency water use agriculture. There are many ways to save water in irrigation: in this article we consider agronomic measures, implementing watersaving irrigation and rebuilding low-efficiency irrigation systems as examples to analyze potential water saved in the Haihe Basin.
Through implementing agronomic measures, i.e. adjusting agricultural structure, using plastic film or stalk coverage, and optimizing irrigation systems, the proportion of irrigation will be cut to 10 to 20%. But the proportion of irrigation is already very low, and agronomic measures are effective only in those irrigation areas that draw water from the Yellow River adopt furrow (surface, flood) irrigation. In these areas, it is expected to save 10% of the original water demand (4,500 m^sup 3^ ha^sup -1^ a^sup -1^). If we calculate this for 333,000 ha where we can extend this agronomic measure, it will save 0.15 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^. Paddy fields have some water saving potential using technology for shallow irrigation. In the Haihe Basin, paddy field shallow irrigation will save 0.2 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^, of which 50% can be repeatedly recycled, so that the actual amount of water-saving is 0.1 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^. Hence, in the Haihe Basin, the total amount of water-saving from agronomic measures is 0.25 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup - 1^.
The total irrigated area in the basin is 7.73 million ha and the required water-saving area is 4.8 million ha, which is 62.2% of the total irrigated area. The quantities of land needed for water- saving in well-irrigated areas and channel irrigation areas are 2.67 million ha and 2.13 million ha, respectively. The water-saving in the channel and well-irrigated areas are 1,200 m^sup 3^ ha^sup -1^ and 1,350 m^sup 3^ ha^sup -1^, where the irrigation ratios are 50% and 80% (HWCC, 2001). Hence, water-saving is 1.28 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^ and 2.81 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^ for these areas. Total water-saving by implementing water-saving irrigation is 4.09 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^.
According to statistical data, the present water-saving irrigation systems are not yet highly efficient and there are about 1.07 million ha of water-saving irrigation which have potential to save water (HWCC 2001). After rebuilding the original low- efficiency irrigation systems, WUE could be improved by 10%, and the total amount of water saved would be 0.48 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup - 1^. Hence, the total water-saving potential of agriculture in the Haihe Basin is 4.82 billion m^sup 3^ a^sup -1^.
Comparing the availability of instruments
In general, there are many instruments available to attain the target EWR. The best instrument would be one that meets the target with the greatest reliability. Each available instrument can be characterized by a set of attributes, relating to such things as impacts on water use sectors and environmental consequences. A signal can be given to each instrument, depending on how well its attributes match with the objectives. This perspective is useful as it draws attention to what attributes a 'good' instrument might have. Table 3 is an attempt to draw together options available for adapting to the challenges of water scarcity and environmental requirements. The results were drawn by revising Hellegers' method (Hellegers and van Ierland 2003) that describes the relationship between instruments and their impact on water use sectors and environmental consequences using qualitative analysis. Compared with no adaptation, three instruments, the South-North water transfer scheme, water price policy modification and agricultural water saving, may mitigate the acuteness of the water scarcity problems and improve environmental quality. Quantitative analysis will have to rely on the application of advanced assessment models such as WEAP (Levite et al. 2003), STREAM (Aerts et al. 2000) and AQUA (Hoekstra 1998), and the integration of numerous data types for inputs and parameters. It is expected that such methods could be applied to related research in the future.
CONCLUSIONS
There is no doubt that water scarcity has been a bottleneck for social and economic development in the Haihe Basin. This article calculated EWR and estimated scenarios for 2010 and 2030. According to the target declared by the basin management authority, EWR will be up to a quarter of average annual runoff, and has to be considered a priority. Furthermore, the policies or instruments that could be used to address this situation, which directly concern decision-makers, are analyzed through rapid assessment. This paper aims to show the relationship between policies and water use sectors, ecosystems and the environment. Compared with no adoption of measures, three management instruments, the South-North water transfer scheme, water price policy modification and agricultural water saving, may mitigate the acuteness of water scarcity and cause some improvements. The paper only focuses on how to meet water needs or water demands of different water user sectors and their environmental consequences. The social and economic consequences, such as economic growth, jobs, human health and food security, have not yet been included, but will be addressed in future research.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (project No. 70573105), the Knowledge Innovation Project of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (KZCX2-405) and the National Key Research Program of China (G2000046807). We would like to thank J.B. Opschoor, Max Spoor and Kristin Komives, Institute of Social Studies (ISS), The Netherlands, for their supervision. We also thank Erich W. Schienke and Weihua Xu for suggestions and English review.
REFERENCES
Aerts JCJH, Hassan A, Savenije HHG and Khan MF. Using GIS tools and rapid assessment techniques for determining salt intrusion: STREAM, a river basin management instrument. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth Part B 2000;25(3):265-73
Cui ZP. Chinese Hydrology Encyclopaedia. 2nd ed. Beijing: Water Power and Water Electric Press; 1990:183
Duan A, Xin N, Wang L. The Definition and Calculation of Agricultural Water Saving Potential. Irrigation and Drainage 2002;21 (2):25-8, 35
Gippel GJ and Stewardson MJ. Use of wetted perimeter in defining minimum environmental flows. Regulated Rivers. Research and Management 1998; 14(1):53-67
Gleick PH. Basic water requirements for human activities: Meeting basic needs. Water International 1996; 21:83-92
Hellegers P and van Ierland E. Policy instruments for groundwater management in the Netherlands. Environmental & Resource Economics 2003;26(1): 163-72
Hoekstra A. and Huynen M. Balancing the world water demand and supply. In Martens P and Rotmans J (eds), Transitions in a globalising world. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger; 2002:17-35
Hoekstra AY. Perspectives on Water: An Integrated Model-based Exploration of the Future. Utrecht: International Books; 1998
Hughes DA. Providing hydrological information and data analysis tools for the determination of ecological instream flow requirements for South African rivers. Journal of Hydrology 2001;241:140-51
HWCC (Haihe River Water Conservancy Commission) . Reports of Water Resources Planning in Haihe Basin. Ministry of Water Resources, P.R.C.; 2001
Kindler J and Russell CS. Modelling water demands. London: Academic Press; 1984 Levite H, Sally H and Cour J. Testing water demand management scenarios in a water-stressed basin in South Africa: application of the WEAP model. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 2003;28:779-86
Lin C. Environmental water requirements in US. http:// www.cws.net.cn/; 2000
Miao H, Wei YC, Jiang LJ, Ouyang ZY, Shi JT, Wang XK and Zhao JZ. Ecological water use and the estimate method. Acta Ecologica Smzea2003;23(6):1108-14
Pei YS, Wang JH and Luo L. Analysis of effect of South-to-North Water Transfer Project on aquatic ecosystems of Haihe River Basin. Acta Ecologica Sinica 2004;24(10):2115-23
Qian ZY and Zhang GD. Strategic Research on Sustainable Development of Water Resource in China. Engineering Science 2000;2 (8):1-17
Ropetto R. The global possible: Resources, development, and the new century. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1985
Rowntree K and Wadeson R. A geomorphological framework for the assessment of instream flow requirements. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 1998;1:125-41
Shield R and Good R. Environmental water in a regulated river system: the Murrumbidgee River planning approach to the determination of environmental needs. Water Science and Technology 2002;45(11):241-9
Tennant DL. Instream flow regimens for fish, wildlife, recreation and related environmental resources. Fisheries 1976:1 (4) :6-10
Wei YC, Miao H, Ouyang ZY and Wang XK. Primary estimate of ecological water requirement in Haihe Basin. Acta Ecologica Sinica 2004;24(10) :2100-7
Wei YC, Miao H, Ouyang ZY, Shi JT and Wang XK Application and assessment of ecological water demand of urbans. Urban environment & Urban Ecology 2003;16(sup.):18-20
Whittington D. Water tariffs & subsidies in South Asia: understanding the basics, http://www.wsp.org; 2003
WRI (World Resources Institute). Environmental water scarcity index by basin, http://www.wri.org; 2003
Yang ZF, Cui BS, Liu JL, Wang XQand Liu CM. Theory, method and practice of eco-environmental water requirement. Beijing: Science Press; 2003: 235-42
Yang ZF, Liu JL, Xiao F, Jiang J and Lin C. Conformity calculation of river ecological basic flow in the Hai He River Basin. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae 2005;25(4):442-8
Yanchang Wei, Hong Miao and Zhiyun Ouyang
Key Laboratory of Systems Ecology, Research Center for Eco- environmental Sciences, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Correspondence: Hong Miao, Key Laboratory of Systems Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, PO Box 2871, Beijing 100085, China. E-mail: hmiao@mail.rcees.ac.cn
Copyright Sapiens Publishing Apr 2008
(c) 2008 International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.
Source: International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology
http://www.redorbit.com
शनिवार, 17 मई 2008
Vijay Kedia
'Where there is a will there is a way', goes a popular saying, which perfectly applies to Vijay Kedia, an Aurangabad-based mechanical engineer/builder. While working on his family farm, his improved his understanding of water and its various facets. Further, the knowledge of raditional rainwater harvesting systems of Rajasthan encouraged him to innovatively modify the existing techniques to suit the local context. The Dewas roof water filter, Kedia-farm pattern bandhara (an earthen dam, commonly found in Maharashtra) and a rain gauge are the result of eight years of exploration. The potential of these low cost structures in eradicating ecological and economic poverty has been widely acknowledged.
A Kedia bandhara costs only Rs 5,000 and can capture 70 - 80 per cent of the monsoon runoff, while keeping the soil moist for next five to six months. It is constructed by digging a two feet wide and eight to ten feet deep trench before the bandhara, and refilling it with soil after vertically lining it with a PVC sheet. The trench acts as a vertical aquifer. The PVC sheet stops the water from percolating outside. In his farm, following the seventh century model at Ghadasisar in Jaisalmer, the bhandaras are constructed in a series - thus, preventing the runoff going waste. The wells are constructed in the bottom of the bhandara - ensuring a sustained availability of water.
These days he is actively spreading the knowledge around with one message - "Sai jitna dee jiye, wame kutumb samaye" (the rain god is giving us enough water, it has to be managed intelligently), which Kedia believes can sustainably solve the water scarcity.
He has also designed a simple rain gauge, which costs only Rs 2, with a two-litre plastic bottle.
For details:
72, Pannalal Nagar
Aurangabad 431 005
Maharashtra
Tel: 0240-2337974 / 2339934
Anupam Mishra
A Gandhian and an environmental activist, Anupam Mishra is among the most knowledgeable persons in India on traditional water harvesting systems. He has travelled to various part of the country, especially Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh, visiting various water harvesting systems managed by people.
He has also interacted with grassroot-level water harvesters, inspired and supported them and helped them in their traditional water harvesting systems campaign. He has written two books on traditional tank management in India and various traditional water harvesting systems in Rajasthan titled Aaj bhi khare hai talab and Rajasthan ki rajat boonde. Mishra continues to travel to different parts of the country, while keeping in touch with grassroot-level water harvesters and NGOs and inspiring them. The mission of the Gandhi Peace Foundation is to promote the environmental activities of rural development agencies; to prepare survey reports on distressed areas and place them before concerned authorities; to disseminate environmental information through the publication of up-to-date reports on environmental issues; to organise workshops and seminars for environmental experts, policy makers, individuals and organisations engaged in environmental issues.
For details:
Gandhi Peace Foundation
221 - 223, Deendayal Upadhyaya Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Tel: 23237491, 23237493
Anil Agarwal: Founder of the CSE
Anil Kumar Agarwal, the founder of the Centre for Science and Environment, spearheaded the Jal Swaraj campaign. His thoughts, ideas and opinions remain the driving force behind the movement. Agarwal conceptualised and edited Dying Wisdom, that explore the tremendous potential of India's traditional water harvesting systems; and Making Water Everybody's Business, that documents technologies that are being practiced even today by communities in various parts of the country. These two widely-read publications have gone a long way in putting the issue of community-based water management. in the national agenda.
Agarwal, who passed away on January 2, 2002, graduated as an engineer from one of India's leading engineering colleges in 1970, but gave up a promising technical career to become a science journalist in order to explore the country's scientific and technological needs. He joined Delhi's leading daily, Hindustan Times, as a science correspondent in 1973 and soon discovered India's most evocative environmental movement known as the Chipko Movement in 1974. The reportage of this movement not only led to a nationwide interest in environmental conservation but also brought home to Agarwal the importance that the environment and its natural resource base hold for the local village economy and for meeting the daily needs of village people in terms of water, firewood, fodder, manure, building materials and medicinal herbs. This was still a time when the leadership of the developing world still believed that economic development must take precedence over environmental conservation. But this understanding of the relationship between the poor and their environment soon turned Agarwal into a lifelong environmentalist and a reknowned environmental analyst and writer.
Agarwal, who passed away on January 2, 2002, graduated as an engineer from one of India's leading engineering colleges in 1970, but gave up a promising technical career to become a science journalist in order to explore the country's scientific and technological needs. He joined Delhi's leading daily, Hindustan Times, as a science correspondent in 1973 and soon discovered India's most evocative environmental movement known as the Chipko Movement in 1974. The reportage of this movement not only led to a nationwide interest in environmental conservation but also brought home to Agarwal the importance that the environment and its natural resource base hold for the local village economy and for meeting the daily needs of village people in terms of water, firewood, fodder, manure, building materials and medicinal herbs. This was still a time when the leadership of the developing world still believed that economic development must take precedence over environmental conservation. But this understanding of the relationship between the poor and their environment soon turned Agarwal into a lifelong environmentalist and a reknowned environmental analyst and writer.
Atrazine: An Endocrine Disruptor In Humans
Alarm at weed-kill chemical in water
AUSTRALIAN regulators have allowed a widely used weed killer to be present in drinking water at levels twice those now shown to cause damaging genetic changes in human cells.
A new study by the University of California, San Francisco, has found atrazine increases activity of human genes linked to fetal growth retardation and infertility. Atrazine is used to control weeds in forest plantations and crops such as canola, sugarcane, maize, sorghum and lupins across Australia.
Holly Ingraham, study senior author and UCSF professor of cellular and molecular pharmacology, told The Australian significant effects on human placental cells were seen when exposed to as little as 20 parts per billion of atrazine.
This is half the 40ppb atrazine health value limit under the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. The US has a drinking water maximum of 3ppb for atrazine, while Europe has refused to approve it for use.
Professor Ingraham said as a scientist she had "no agenda" in terms of regulation, but she believed Australia's health value of 40ppb was "worrying".
"If it were me drinking water, I would want it as low as possible," she said.
The study also exposed zebrafish to the chemical, finding significant effects at 2ppb and changes to sex ratios at 20ppb.
Earlier this month, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority announced its review of atrazine had concluded "no changes to the existing health standards" were needed.
This was because while atrazine had been shown to disrupt the nervous, hormone and reproductive systems of rats, it was "unlikely that atrazine is an endocrine (hormonal) disruptor in humans".
However, the UCSF study drew the opposite conclusion. "Our results strongly suggest that atrazine is an endocrine disruptor - it is indirectly estrogenic, and it most certainly has the potential to influence reproduction, as well as other endocrine functions," Professor Ingraham said.
Endocrine disruptors affect the body's hormonal system, potentially affecting growth, development and reproduction.
"Would a fetus or child be especially sensitive to this herbicide? Probably. Our study shows that some of the genes targeted by atrazine have already been linked to intrauterine growth retardation and infertility."
APVMA public affairs manager Simon Cubit said the regulator's decision not to toughen atrazine restrictions was based on "weight-of-evidence" from many studies.
However, APVMA had sought expert advice from Australia's Office of Chemical Safety and drawn its attention to Professor Ingraham's study.
The Health and Medical Research Council said it would consider "all the latest evidence" as part of its review of drinking water guidelines.
Atrazine producer Syngenta did not comment but has insisted the product poses no risk to human health.
Tasmanian GP Alison Bleaney, who believes atrazine may be linked to high rates of cancer and auto-immune disease, demanded an urgent regulatory rethink.
"One would hope that our regulators would be protecting us and protection means occasionally that you have to take a stand on the balance of probabilities," she said. "And the balance of probabilities has shown for some years that atrazine is not a safe chemical to have in our environment."
Matthew Denholm
http://www.theaustralian.news.com
AUSTRALIAN regulators have allowed a widely used weed killer to be present in drinking water at levels twice those now shown to cause damaging genetic changes in human cells.
A new study by the University of California, San Francisco, has found atrazine increases activity of human genes linked to fetal growth retardation and infertility. Atrazine is used to control weeds in forest plantations and crops such as canola, sugarcane, maize, sorghum and lupins across Australia.
Holly Ingraham, study senior author and UCSF professor of cellular and molecular pharmacology, told The Australian significant effects on human placental cells were seen when exposed to as little as 20 parts per billion of atrazine.
This is half the 40ppb atrazine health value limit under the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. The US has a drinking water maximum of 3ppb for atrazine, while Europe has refused to approve it for use.
Professor Ingraham said as a scientist she had "no agenda" in terms of regulation, but she believed Australia's health value of 40ppb was "worrying".
"If it were me drinking water, I would want it as low as possible," she said.
The study also exposed zebrafish to the chemical, finding significant effects at 2ppb and changes to sex ratios at 20ppb.
Earlier this month, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority announced its review of atrazine had concluded "no changes to the existing health standards" were needed.
This was because while atrazine had been shown to disrupt the nervous, hormone and reproductive systems of rats, it was "unlikely that atrazine is an endocrine (hormonal) disruptor in humans".
However, the UCSF study drew the opposite conclusion. "Our results strongly suggest that atrazine is an endocrine disruptor - it is indirectly estrogenic, and it most certainly has the potential to influence reproduction, as well as other endocrine functions," Professor Ingraham said.
Endocrine disruptors affect the body's hormonal system, potentially affecting growth, development and reproduction.
"Would a fetus or child be especially sensitive to this herbicide? Probably. Our study shows that some of the genes targeted by atrazine have already been linked to intrauterine growth retardation and infertility."
APVMA public affairs manager Simon Cubit said the regulator's decision not to toughen atrazine restrictions was based on "weight-of-evidence" from many studies.
However, APVMA had sought expert advice from Australia's Office of Chemical Safety and drawn its attention to Professor Ingraham's study.
The Health and Medical Research Council said it would consider "all the latest evidence" as part of its review of drinking water guidelines.
Atrazine producer Syngenta did not comment but has insisted the product poses no risk to human health.
Tasmanian GP Alison Bleaney, who believes atrazine may be linked to high rates of cancer and auto-immune disease, demanded an urgent regulatory rethink.
"One would hope that our regulators would be protecting us and protection means occasionally that you have to take a stand on the balance of probabilities," she said. "And the balance of probabilities has shown for some years that atrazine is not a safe chemical to have in our environment."
Matthew Denholm
http://www.theaustralian.news.com
The Importance of Water to Human Health
True health cannot occur without proper hydration of the body. We need to drink half our body weight in ounces minimum each day . For instance, if you weigh 200 lbs, you should consume 100 ounces of water. Every organ in the body heavily depends on water to function properly and to its capacity. We are mostly water. The human body is 69% water. The brain is 85% water, bones 35% water, blood 83% water and the liver 90% water.
Water has traditionally been considered mere packing material that served little purpose other than to give the body its weight and bulk. Medieval thinkers still believe water is there to give the body volume, otherwise it would be nothing but dry chemicals. To this day, the medical establishment sees water as little else, when in fact water serves to energize every cell and organ in the body. It is crucial to every bodily operation and when we become dehydrated, the body instinctively begins to ration water to each organ. The brain, being the most important organ, gets the most water. The skin, being the least important, is rationed the least amount of water. Chronically dry skin and/or dandruff are signs of advanced bodily dehydration , as are asthma and hyperventilation . It is the law of vital adaptation at work; that the body will do what it has to do to survive, which in this case means the most important organs get served first. If the body didn't do that we would suffer the ill effects of dehydration much more rapidly.
75% of Americans are chronically dehydrated. (Likely applies to half world pop.)
In 37% of Americans, the thirst mechanism is so weak that it is often mistaken for hunger.
Even MILD dehydration will slow down one's metabolism as much as 3%.
One glass of water deters hunger pangs for 98% of the dieters observed in a University of Washington study.
The biggest trigger of daytime fatigue is lack of water.
Preliminary research indicates that 8-10 glasses of water a day could significantly ease back and joint pain for up to 80% of sufferers.
A mere 2% drop in body water can trigger fuzzy short-term memory, trouble with basic math, and difficulty focusing on the computer screen or on a printed page.
Drinking 5 glasses of water daily decreases the risk of colon cancer by 45%, breast cancer by 79%, and develop bladder cancer by 50%.
A person's minimal water requirements is half their body weight in ounces. For instance, a 200 pound person should drink at least 100 ounces of water.
by Bob McCauley
http://watershed.net
Water has traditionally been considered mere packing material that served little purpose other than to give the body its weight and bulk. Medieval thinkers still believe water is there to give the body volume, otherwise it would be nothing but dry chemicals. To this day, the medical establishment sees water as little else, when in fact water serves to energize every cell and organ in the body. It is crucial to every bodily operation and when we become dehydrated, the body instinctively begins to ration water to each organ. The brain, being the most important organ, gets the most water. The skin, being the least important, is rationed the least amount of water. Chronically dry skin and/or dandruff are signs of advanced bodily dehydration , as are asthma and hyperventilation . It is the law of vital adaptation at work; that the body will do what it has to do to survive, which in this case means the most important organs get served first. If the body didn't do that we would suffer the ill effects of dehydration much more rapidly.
75% of Americans are chronically dehydrated. (Likely applies to half world pop.)
In 37% of Americans, the thirst mechanism is so weak that it is often mistaken for hunger.
Even MILD dehydration will slow down one's metabolism as much as 3%.
One glass of water deters hunger pangs for 98% of the dieters observed in a University of Washington study.
The biggest trigger of daytime fatigue is lack of water.
Preliminary research indicates that 8-10 glasses of water a day could significantly ease back and joint pain for up to 80% of sufferers.
A mere 2% drop in body water can trigger fuzzy short-term memory, trouble with basic math, and difficulty focusing on the computer screen or on a printed page.
Drinking 5 glasses of water daily decreases the risk of colon cancer by 45%, breast cancer by 79%, and develop bladder cancer by 50%.
A person's minimal water requirements is half their body weight in ounces. For instance, a 200 pound person should drink at least 100 ounces of water.
by Bob McCauley
http://watershed.net
Measures to control Storm-water Runoff
Have some of areas of your yard turned to mud from all the rain in the past few days? Many residents have experienced erosion and washouts of their yards.
In the Piedmont area our average rain is 1.2 inches, and we get over 40 inches of rain annually. Last week we got nearly 4 inches at the Cooperative Extension Service office in Winston-Salem.
With all this rain, it would seem that we were coming out of the drought. But according to the state (http://www.ncdrought.org/), we are still in a moderate to severe drought in the Piedmont. As we remove vegetation like trees, grass and shrubs and replace them with hard surfaces such as concrete or asphalt, the rainwater is unable to soak into the ground (a process called infiltration).
This is an important process that helps to recharge groundwater levels. Most streams in this area begin from springs or boils in the ground. When precipitation is reduced or deficient for a long time, this storage is reflected in declining surface and subsurface water levels.
What happens when all this rain falls on impervious surfaces? If it cannot soak into the ground, rainwater collects in large quantities. As the water moves, it gains energy, erodes whatever lands the current contacts, and travels to the nearest storm drain or waterway.
There is a common misconception that water traveling into storm drains ends up treated at the local wastewater treatment plant. Because of this misunderstanding, many citizens use storm drains and ditches as places to dispose of all kinds of pollutants.
The rainwater also can pick up pollutants (pesticides, engine drippings, street litter, pet waste) from our driveways and parking lots as well as sediment from uncovered land. Thus, storm drains carry large amounts of pollution away from urbanized areas mixed with the excess stormwater.
Because storm drains can be a major source of pollution to our waterways, it is important to keep polluting materials out of them.
Although we cannot control the amount of rain we get, we can try reusing or harvesting some of the water and even try to control some of the runoff from taking away our landscape by slowing the water down.
A new program called the Community Conservation Assistance Program (CCAP), which was created by 2006 legislation, provides technical assistance and cost-share money for urban landowners to install best management practices that improve water quality.
Under the program, homeowners, civic groups, municipalities and others can apply for cost-share funds to incorporate storm-water Best Management Practices (BMPs). This program will reimburse the applicant 75 percent of average installation costs for projects such as cisterns, backyard rain gardens, backyard wetlands, grassed swales, critical area plantings, impervious surface conversion, riparian (woody and herbaceous) buffers, and pet waste receptacles.
This program is implemented across the state of North Carolina through local Soil and Water Conservation Districts. In Forsyth and Stokes County, the district and Cooperative Extension Service work together to design these BMPs for citizens to install within their landscapes.
Some measures to control storm-water runoff are:
□ Rain garden: A depression, like a bowl, meant to capture diverted storm water from downspouts and hard surfaces using fast draining soil, compost, water-tolerant plants and mulch. Rain gardens can be designed by color or to attract wildlife and butterflies while blending into the surrounding landscape.
The options are numerous; lots of plant varieties can be incorporated but the purpose is to collect runoff from your roof and driveway and allow the water to infiltrate slowly into the ground within two days.
□ Backyard wetland: A rain garden meant to stay wet all the time.
□ Cistern: A specialized container above or below-ground to harvest rainwater from downspouts for outdoor water uses such as irrigation and car washing.
□ Critical area planting: Establishing permanent vegetation on sites that have steep slopes with high erosion rates, and on sites that have physical, chemical, or biological conditions that prevent the establishment of vegetation with normal practices.
□ Grassed waterway (swale): Have you ever driven into a rural community and noticed small grassy ditches (better known as swales) in everyone's front yard? These swales or channels are shaped or graded to required dimensions and established in suitable vegetation for the stable conveyance of runoff.
□ Impervious surface conversion: Removal of concrete or other hard surfaces to replace with vegetation.
□ Riparian buffers: An area dominated by trees and/or shrubs located adjacent to and up-gradient from water courses or water bodies.
□ Pet-waste receptacles: Receptacles and supplies to better manage pet waste, usually in public areas.
If you are interested in learning more about the Community Conservation Assistance Program, call the Forsyth County Agriculture Building at 703-2850 or e-mail bowmanml@forsyth.cc or me ag wendi_hartup@ncsu.edu.
By Wendi Hartup
Wendi Hartup is a natural-resources agent for the Forsyth and Stokes County Cooperative Extension Service.
http://www2.journalnow.com
In the Piedmont area our average rain is 1.2 inches, and we get over 40 inches of rain annually. Last week we got nearly 4 inches at the Cooperative Extension Service office in Winston-Salem.
With all this rain, it would seem that we were coming out of the drought. But according to the state (http://www.ncdrought.org/), we are still in a moderate to severe drought in the Piedmont. As we remove vegetation like trees, grass and shrubs and replace them with hard surfaces such as concrete or asphalt, the rainwater is unable to soak into the ground (a process called infiltration).
This is an important process that helps to recharge groundwater levels. Most streams in this area begin from springs or boils in the ground. When precipitation is reduced or deficient for a long time, this storage is reflected in declining surface and subsurface water levels.
What happens when all this rain falls on impervious surfaces? If it cannot soak into the ground, rainwater collects in large quantities. As the water moves, it gains energy, erodes whatever lands the current contacts, and travels to the nearest storm drain or waterway.
There is a common misconception that water traveling into storm drains ends up treated at the local wastewater treatment plant. Because of this misunderstanding, many citizens use storm drains and ditches as places to dispose of all kinds of pollutants.
The rainwater also can pick up pollutants (pesticides, engine drippings, street litter, pet waste) from our driveways and parking lots as well as sediment from uncovered land. Thus, storm drains carry large amounts of pollution away from urbanized areas mixed with the excess stormwater.
Because storm drains can be a major source of pollution to our waterways, it is important to keep polluting materials out of them.
Although we cannot control the amount of rain we get, we can try reusing or harvesting some of the water and even try to control some of the runoff from taking away our landscape by slowing the water down.
A new program called the Community Conservation Assistance Program (CCAP), which was created by 2006 legislation, provides technical assistance and cost-share money for urban landowners to install best management practices that improve water quality.
Under the program, homeowners, civic groups, municipalities and others can apply for cost-share funds to incorporate storm-water Best Management Practices (BMPs). This program will reimburse the applicant 75 percent of average installation costs for projects such as cisterns, backyard rain gardens, backyard wetlands, grassed swales, critical area plantings, impervious surface conversion, riparian (woody and herbaceous) buffers, and pet waste receptacles.
This program is implemented across the state of North Carolina through local Soil and Water Conservation Districts. In Forsyth and Stokes County, the district and Cooperative Extension Service work together to design these BMPs for citizens to install within their landscapes.
Some measures to control storm-water runoff are:
□ Rain garden: A depression, like a bowl, meant to capture diverted storm water from downspouts and hard surfaces using fast draining soil, compost, water-tolerant plants and mulch. Rain gardens can be designed by color or to attract wildlife and butterflies while blending into the surrounding landscape.
The options are numerous; lots of plant varieties can be incorporated but the purpose is to collect runoff from your roof and driveway and allow the water to infiltrate slowly into the ground within two days.
□ Backyard wetland: A rain garden meant to stay wet all the time.
□ Cistern: A specialized container above or below-ground to harvest rainwater from downspouts for outdoor water uses such as irrigation and car washing.
□ Critical area planting: Establishing permanent vegetation on sites that have steep slopes with high erosion rates, and on sites that have physical, chemical, or biological conditions that prevent the establishment of vegetation with normal practices.
□ Grassed waterway (swale): Have you ever driven into a rural community and noticed small grassy ditches (better known as swales) in everyone's front yard? These swales or channels are shaped or graded to required dimensions and established in suitable vegetation for the stable conveyance of runoff.
□ Impervious surface conversion: Removal of concrete or other hard surfaces to replace with vegetation.
□ Riparian buffers: An area dominated by trees and/or shrubs located adjacent to and up-gradient from water courses or water bodies.
□ Pet-waste receptacles: Receptacles and supplies to better manage pet waste, usually in public areas.
If you are interested in learning more about the Community Conservation Assistance Program, call the Forsyth County Agriculture Building at 703-2850 or e-mail bowmanml@forsyth.cc or me ag wendi_hartup@ncsu.edu.
By Wendi Hartup
Wendi Hartup is a natural-resources agent for the Forsyth and Stokes County Cooperative Extension Service.
http://www2.journalnow.com
Threat To Water Availability
Water figures grim
A LEADING scientific analysis of future water availability in northern Victoria under various climate change scenarios has highlighted the need for changes in irrigation.
The CSIRO Sustainable Yields Report, commissioned in 2006 to measure the amount of water available in the Murray-Darling Basin system, has found the threat of decreased inflows in the Loddon, Campaspe and Goulburn systems demands a review of water use in the region.
The report was commissioned by the Howard Government to provide a scientific analysis of surface and ground water quantities across the entire basin, with the three specific northern Victorian reports released this week.
The reports found if climate conditions of the last ten years continued, water availability would decrease by 54 per cent for the Campaspe and 50 per cent in the drier Loddon system.
The Goulburn system would suffer a lower reduction of 41 per cent, but as present water extraction of 1606 gigalitres amounted to 50 per cent of available water, the impact would be more significant.
Report director Dr Tom Hatton said the study incorporated numerous climate change models from high to low change, but water availability for the three Victorian catchments were all below the long-term average.
"We’ve been very honest in incorporating the best available science for all the levels of climate modelling," Dr Hatton said.
He said the advantage of the spectrum of climate change possibilities in the next 22 years was that it enabled governments and the agricultural industry to prepare for those scenarios.
But Dr Hatton said the problem was that even under the best climate change estimates water availability in 2030 would drop by 14 per cent in the Goulburn to 18 per cent in the Loddon system, while water diverted for use would only drop by five or six per cent.
There was political consensus on the gravity of the irrigation problem, but not on the action needed.
Federal Minister for Water Penny Wong said the report highlighted the need for integrated ground water and surface water caps and the importance of the $400 million allocation buy back announced in this weeks Federal Budget.
Victorian Water Minister Tim Holding said the impact of climate change underlined the importance of the $2 billion investment proposed by State and Federal governments in the northern Victorian irrigation systems that would save an estimated 425 gigalitres though faulty gates and channels.
But the opposition said the situation showed the folly of removing more water from already struggling catchments for urban use.
Liberal member for northern Victoria Wendy Lovell also called for Victoria to ensure a four per cent cap on permanent water trading out of any water region remained, saying otherwise the result could be disastrous for small rural communities.
Ms Lovell said water brokers had already predicted the cap would be reached within days of the 2008-09 seasons starting in July and scrapping it would lead to even more water leaving irrigation communities.
http://bendigo.yourguide.com
A LEADING scientific analysis of future water availability in northern Victoria under various climate change scenarios has highlighted the need for changes in irrigation.
The CSIRO Sustainable Yields Report, commissioned in 2006 to measure the amount of water available in the Murray-Darling Basin system, has found the threat of decreased inflows in the Loddon, Campaspe and Goulburn systems demands a review of water use in the region.
The report was commissioned by the Howard Government to provide a scientific analysis of surface and ground water quantities across the entire basin, with the three specific northern Victorian reports released this week.
The reports found if climate conditions of the last ten years continued, water availability would decrease by 54 per cent for the Campaspe and 50 per cent in the drier Loddon system.
The Goulburn system would suffer a lower reduction of 41 per cent, but as present water extraction of 1606 gigalitres amounted to 50 per cent of available water, the impact would be more significant.
Report director Dr Tom Hatton said the study incorporated numerous climate change models from high to low change, but water availability for the three Victorian catchments were all below the long-term average.
"We’ve been very honest in incorporating the best available science for all the levels of climate modelling," Dr Hatton said.
He said the advantage of the spectrum of climate change possibilities in the next 22 years was that it enabled governments and the agricultural industry to prepare for those scenarios.
But Dr Hatton said the problem was that even under the best climate change estimates water availability in 2030 would drop by 14 per cent in the Goulburn to 18 per cent in the Loddon system, while water diverted for use would only drop by five or six per cent.
There was political consensus on the gravity of the irrigation problem, but not on the action needed.
Federal Minister for Water Penny Wong said the report highlighted the need for integrated ground water and surface water caps and the importance of the $400 million allocation buy back announced in this weeks Federal Budget.
Victorian Water Minister Tim Holding said the impact of climate change underlined the importance of the $2 billion investment proposed by State and Federal governments in the northern Victorian irrigation systems that would save an estimated 425 gigalitres though faulty gates and channels.
But the opposition said the situation showed the folly of removing more water from already struggling catchments for urban use.
Liberal member for northern Victoria Wendy Lovell also called for Victoria to ensure a four per cent cap on permanent water trading out of any water region remained, saying otherwise the result could be disastrous for small rural communities.
Ms Lovell said water brokers had already predicted the cap would be reached within days of the 2008-09 seasons starting in July and scrapping it would lead to even more water leaving irrigation communities.
http://bendigo.yourguide.com
Alive old, non-technology-driven practices of treasuring water
WATER FOR ALL
In recent times, the citizens in Mumbai have lost lives, business and property worth crores due to heavy rains and consequent floods. Ironically, the water stress in the city is slowly but inexorably reaching threat proportions. And clearly, and not as slowly, the authorities are losing this battle. Already there is talk of reducing per capita supply to citizens in the near future.
The time has come to review the futile “allopathic” approach adopted so far, which is resulting in huge amounts of public funds going down the drain! The crux of the problem lies in capturing the rain precipitation flowing away into the drains. When we get bountiful, clean water on our heads, we let it run away – onto the road creating floods! It might appear naïve to point out, like the boy who declared the emporer was nude, that if we were able to harness the rain, we would be eliminating both these vexatious issues at one go. It will be relevant to point out that in Israel a fine is levied if rain water runs out of the compound!
As responsible citizens, we can keep ahead of the water crisis by taking recourse to the following time-tested schemes:
I. Rain-water harvesting
There are 3 essential vectors for harvesting rain, viz rooftop and paved areas, trees and ground-water recharging.
1. Rooftop / Paved areas run-off: Mumbai is spread over 437 sq.km (approx) and blessed with over 900/600 MLD easily catchable precipitation, after discounting Borivli National Park, efficiency, etc.
2.Trees:
For us city slickers who use water coming from villages upto 100 km away and base our life aspirations on concrete, a change of perspective is imperative. Any child in Rajasthan will tell you that the tree is the father of water. Trees perform multiple functions for the environment to tick:
• Attract rain precipitation
• Provide the path for water, via the roots, to reach the ecology in the earth, which sustains all living organisms
• Release oxygen into the surroundings
• Remediate excess carbon and nitrogen in the air
• Regulate ambient heat (ever wondered why one sweats in Mumbai even after prolonged rains?)
(for more, one would only need to bone up from a Class V book)
3. Ground-water recharging:
Depleted ground-water cause sea-water ingress, leading to non-potable water from existing wells. This causes unseen danger to building foundations across the city. Hence, percolation of rain into the ground is to be greatly increased on roads, paved areas, parks et al.
II. Re-Cycle waste water
Liquid waste, including sullage and sewage, can be profitably recycled by organic methods to yield bio-rich water for secondary applications like gardening, flushing,etc. This reduces the water demand all round.
III. Reduce consumption
The simplest solution is also the most difficult to practice. Leaky taps, “long showers”, hosing cars, windows, floors, etc lead to avoidable wastage of this precious element so vital to Life.
In conclusion, it seems the dual problem of flooding and water shortage can be resolved with age-old, non-technology-driven practices of treasuring water. And at a low cost too.
Traditionally one's worth was not measured in money, but "kitne paani mey hai"? Like the wizened red Indian chief said, until man destroys all the forests, contaminates all the soil and pollutes all the rivers, he will not realise he cant eat money!
(for more info, visit www.jalsangrah.org)
Water Community India, Mumbai Paani
Saving Water: From Field to Fork : ALARMING REPORT
Staggering food waste places water and land resources in distress
As governments struggle with a sudden crisis in the price of food, a companion crisis in availability of water also threatens billions of people. To meet the challenge of feeding growing populations and the global hungry, massive reductions in the amount of food wasted after production are needed. The Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) will call on governments to reduce by half, by 2025, the amount of food that is wasted after it is grown. The report “Saving Water: From Field to Fork – Curbing Losses and Wastage in the Food Chain,” will be launched on Wednesday, May 14th 2008 at the 16th Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development and outlines concrete steps to achieve a 50 percent wasted food reduction.
Tremendous quantities of food are discarded in processing, transport, supermarkets and people’s kitchens. This wasted food is also wasted water. In the US, for instance, as much as 30 percent of food, worth some USD 48.3 billion, is thrown away each year. That’s like leaving the tap running and pouring 40 trillion litres of water into the garbage can - enough water to meet the household needs of 500 million people. Through international trade, savings in one country might benefit communities in other parts of the world.
More than enough food is produced to feed a healthy global population. Distribution and access to food is a problem – many are hungry, while at the same time many over-eat. The Report highlights an often overlooked problem: we are providing food to take care of not only our necessary consumption but also our wasteful habits.
“As much as half of the water used to grow food globally may be lost or wasted,” says Dr. David Molden, Director of Research at IWMI. “Curbing these losses and improving water productivity provides win-win opportunities for farmers, business, ecosystems, and the global hungry. An effective water-saving strategy will first require that minimising food wastage is placed firmly on the political agenda.”
Food production is constrained by the availability of water and land resources. An estimated 1.2 billion people already live in areas where there is not enough water to meet demand. And with rising demand for water-intensive agricultural products, such as beef and bioenergy, pressure mounts. According to the Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture 2007, these trends will lead to crises in many parts of the world, particularly South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. “Unless we change our practices, water will be a key constraint to food production in the future,” said Dr. Pasquale Steduto of FAO.
Saving Water from ‘Field to Fork’
Water losses accumulate as food is wasted before and after it reaches the consumer. In poorer countries, a majority of uneaten food is lost before it has a chance to be consumed. Depending on the crop, an estimated 15-35 percent of food may be lost in the field. Another 10-15 percent is discarded during processing, transport and storage. In richer countries, production is more efficient but waste is greater: people toss the food they buy and all the resources used to grow, ship, and produce the food along with it.
The Report stresses that the magnitude of current food losses presents both challenges and opportunities. "Improving water productivity and reducing the quantity of food that is wasted can enable us to provide a better diet for the poor and enough food for growing populations,” says Prof. Jan Lundqvist of SIWI. “Reaching the target we propose, a 50 percent reduction of losses and wastage in the production and consumption chain, is a necessary and achievable goal.” The Report outlines a number of attainable steps, such as supporting farmers with improved harvesting and food storage facilities; benchmarking standards for businesses to minimise waste in processing and transport; and educating consumers on the impacts of over-eating and food waste on water resources.
A draft of the Report was made available at www.siwi.org on May 14, 2008.
href="http://http://www.lifegen.de/newsip/shownews.php4?getnews=m2008-05-14-3819&pc=s02">
As governments struggle with a sudden crisis in the price of food, a companion crisis in availability of water also threatens billions of people. To meet the challenge of feeding growing populations and the global hungry, massive reductions in the amount of food wasted after production are needed. The Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) will call on governments to reduce by half, by 2025, the amount of food that is wasted after it is grown. The report “Saving Water: From Field to Fork – Curbing Losses and Wastage in the Food Chain,” will be launched on Wednesday, May 14th 2008 at the 16th Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development and outlines concrete steps to achieve a 50 percent wasted food reduction.
Tremendous quantities of food are discarded in processing, transport, supermarkets and people’s kitchens. This wasted food is also wasted water. In the US, for instance, as much as 30 percent of food, worth some USD 48.3 billion, is thrown away each year. That’s like leaving the tap running and pouring 40 trillion litres of water into the garbage can - enough water to meet the household needs of 500 million people. Through international trade, savings in one country might benefit communities in other parts of the world.
More than enough food is produced to feed a healthy global population. Distribution and access to food is a problem – many are hungry, while at the same time many over-eat. The Report highlights an often overlooked problem: we are providing food to take care of not only our necessary consumption but also our wasteful habits.
“As much as half of the water used to grow food globally may be lost or wasted,” says Dr. David Molden, Director of Research at IWMI. “Curbing these losses and improving water productivity provides win-win opportunities for farmers, business, ecosystems, and the global hungry. An effective water-saving strategy will first require that minimising food wastage is placed firmly on the political agenda.”
Food production is constrained by the availability of water and land resources. An estimated 1.2 billion people already live in areas where there is not enough water to meet demand. And with rising demand for water-intensive agricultural products, such as beef and bioenergy, pressure mounts. According to the Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture 2007, these trends will lead to crises in many parts of the world, particularly South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. “Unless we change our practices, water will be a key constraint to food production in the future,” said Dr. Pasquale Steduto of FAO.
Saving Water from ‘Field to Fork’
Water losses accumulate as food is wasted before and after it reaches the consumer. In poorer countries, a majority of uneaten food is lost before it has a chance to be consumed. Depending on the crop, an estimated 15-35 percent of food may be lost in the field. Another 10-15 percent is discarded during processing, transport and storage. In richer countries, production is more efficient but waste is greater: people toss the food they buy and all the resources used to grow, ship, and produce the food along with it.
The Report stresses that the magnitude of current food losses presents both challenges and opportunities. "Improving water productivity and reducing the quantity of food that is wasted can enable us to provide a better diet for the poor and enough food for growing populations,” says Prof. Jan Lundqvist of SIWI. “Reaching the target we propose, a 50 percent reduction of losses and wastage in the production and consumption chain, is a necessary and achievable goal.” The Report outlines a number of attainable steps, such as supporting farmers with improved harvesting and food storage facilities; benchmarking standards for businesses to minimise waste in processing and transport; and educating consumers on the impacts of over-eating and food waste on water resources.
A draft of the Report was made available at www.siwi.org on May 14, 2008.
href="http://http://www.lifegen.de/newsip/shownews.php4?getnews=m2008-05-14-3819&pc=s02">
शुक्रवार, 16 मई 2008
"Water Undervalued and Not Treated With Respect"
A Report Of Conference on Water Issues in SADC
A two-day conference on water issues in the Southern African Development Community (SADC), which opened Wednesday in Maseru, Lesotho, has seen representatives of government, civil society, the private sector, donors and other groups discuss the likely effects of climate change on development in the region.
Keynote speaker Torkil Jønch-Clausen emphasised that practical solutions were needed to help countries cope with these effects: "...climate change is an added challenge to achieving the Millennium Development Goals," he said. "We need to rise above the challenges..."
Eight goals, or MDGs, were agreed on by global leaders at the United Nations Millennium Summit in 2000 in a bid to raise living standards around the world by 2015. MDG seven, on environmental sustainability, commits nations to halving the number of people who lack access to ,.
According to the latest data from the Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation, an initiative of the World Health Organisation and United Nations Children's Fund, 40 percent of people in sub-Saharan Africa do not have access to a safe and adequate water supply. The figures, from 2004, also show that people living in rural areas are much worse off than their urban counterparts: only 26 percent of rural Africans have adequate access, compared to 55 percent of city dwellers.
While the numbers are generally better in Southern Africa -- with Botswana reporting 95 percent coverage, and South Africa 88 percent -- Zambia and Angola with 58 and 53 percent coverage respectively show the region has some way to go with providing water to its citizens. Mozambique, at 43 percent, has the lowest coverage in SADC -- although this figure marks an improvement from the 36 percent coverage registered in 1990.
According to the United Nations, obstacles to providing clean water in sub-Saharan Africa include population growth, the relatively low priority given to water and sanitation management, and the frequent failure of water supply systems.
Jønch-Clausen is a Danish engineer and researcher who has advised the organisations that convened this week's meeting, the United Nations Environment Programme and the Global Water Partnership: a Stockholm-based organisation that brings together governments, companies and development agencies -- amongst others -- to help meet water-related needs and improve management of the resource.
He said there was a range of solutions at hand to help communities adapt in situations where the availability of water was declining, and that governments should look into rationing water to meet the competing needs of manufacturing, agriculture and households. New pricing structures for water, greater re-use of the resource and the introduction of drought-resistant crops could also assist.
Maieane Khaketla, chief public relations officer in Lesotho's Ministry of Natural Resources, who officiated at the opening of the meeting, also raised the issue of wide- ranging demand for water -- saying the biggest challenge in meeting development goals was ensuring citizens' access to water for basic needs, while responding to increased demands for the same resource from the industrial and agricultural sectors.
With several countries in the region planning increased hydro-electric power generation to meet their future energy needs, Belinda Petrie of OneWorld Sustainable Investments urged caution in this regard: "What is the use of investing in a huge hydro-power plant that will in a few years to come have no water?" OneWorld Sustainable Investments is a South African consultancy firm working on sustainable development.
She said the answer to uncertain rainfall could be to build small hydro-electric plants, and that governments should also consider alternative, renewable energy sources such as wind power.
Pete Ashton, an aquatic ecologist from South Africa's Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, told the conference that to avoid conflict and improve water management, Southern African states needed to address delicate issues such as control over shared water basins, at once. The Orange, Limpopo and Zambezi Rivers are amongst the region's trans-boundary water resources.
Ashton also said that urgent attention needed to be given to use of alternative water sources such as harvesting rain water, and to new technologies for sustainable use of these sources.
"We need to improve the way we understand the value of water," he observed. "It is undervalued and not treated with respect."
By Lawrence Keketso
A two-day conference on water issues in the Southern African Development Community (SADC), which opened Wednesday in Maseru, Lesotho, has seen representatives of government, civil society, the private sector, donors and other groups discuss the likely effects of climate change on development in the region.
Keynote speaker Torkil Jønch-Clausen emphasised that practical solutions were needed to help countries cope with these effects: "...climate change is an added challenge to achieving the Millennium Development Goals," he said. "We need to rise above the challenges..."
Eight goals, or MDGs, were agreed on by global leaders at the United Nations Millennium Summit in 2000 in a bid to raise living standards around the world by 2015. MDG seven, on environmental sustainability, commits nations to halving the number of people who lack access to ,.
According to the latest data from the Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation, an initiative of the World Health Organisation and United Nations Children's Fund, 40 percent of people in sub-Saharan Africa do not have access to a safe and adequate water supply. The figures, from 2004, also show that people living in rural areas are much worse off than their urban counterparts: only 26 percent of rural Africans have adequate access, compared to 55 percent of city dwellers.
While the numbers are generally better in Southern Africa -- with Botswana reporting 95 percent coverage, and South Africa 88 percent -- Zambia and Angola with 58 and 53 percent coverage respectively show the region has some way to go with providing water to its citizens. Mozambique, at 43 percent, has the lowest coverage in SADC -- although this figure marks an improvement from the 36 percent coverage registered in 1990.
According to the United Nations, obstacles to providing clean water in sub-Saharan Africa include population growth, the relatively low priority given to water and sanitation management, and the frequent failure of water supply systems.
Jønch-Clausen is a Danish engineer and researcher who has advised the organisations that convened this week's meeting, the United Nations Environment Programme and the Global Water Partnership: a Stockholm-based organisation that brings together governments, companies and development agencies -- amongst others -- to help meet water-related needs and improve management of the resource.
He said there was a range of solutions at hand to help communities adapt in situations where the availability of water was declining, and that governments should look into rationing water to meet the competing needs of manufacturing, agriculture and households. New pricing structures for water, greater re-use of the resource and the introduction of drought-resistant crops could also assist.
Maieane Khaketla, chief public relations officer in Lesotho's Ministry of Natural Resources, who officiated at the opening of the meeting, also raised the issue of wide- ranging demand for water -- saying the biggest challenge in meeting development goals was ensuring citizens' access to water for basic needs, while responding to increased demands for the same resource from the industrial and agricultural sectors.
With several countries in the region planning increased hydro-electric power generation to meet their future energy needs, Belinda Petrie of OneWorld Sustainable Investments urged caution in this regard: "What is the use of investing in a huge hydro-power plant that will in a few years to come have no water?" OneWorld Sustainable Investments is a South African consultancy firm working on sustainable development.
She said the answer to uncertain rainfall could be to build small hydro-electric plants, and that governments should also consider alternative, renewable energy sources such as wind power.
Pete Ashton, an aquatic ecologist from South Africa's Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, told the conference that to avoid conflict and improve water management, Southern African states needed to address delicate issues such as control over shared water basins, at once. The Orange, Limpopo and Zambezi Rivers are amongst the region's trans-boundary water resources.
Ashton also said that urgent attention needed to be given to use of alternative water sources such as harvesting rain water, and to new technologies for sustainable use of these sources.
"We need to improve the way we understand the value of water," he observed. "It is undervalued and not treated with respect."
By Lawrence Keketso
Thrust Of river valley project
B
A Critique of Loharinag-Pala, Pala-Maneri and Other Hydroelectric Projects on R. Bhagirathi
In single-minded pursuit of its agenda for economic advancement, for which cheap energy availability is a major requirement, the Government of India has been proposing and/or promoting a number of hydro-electric projects on various rivers of the Ganga valley including the Bhagirathi to tap their enormous hydro-power potential. In its desire to make India stand somewhere in the long queue of so-called “developed” nations, the GoI is willing to destroy the
traditional Indian ethos of worshiping nature and living in harmony with it slowly destroying any and all links that connect the vast Indian masses to this tradition, heritage and cultural ethos and at the same time erasing what is special, even unique, in the land that is India.
Besides the controversial Tehri Dam, which was ultimately cleared by the Apex Court in 2002 and was commissioned in 2005, a medium “run-of-the-river” hydro-electric scheme at Maneri-Bhali on R.Bhagirathi had become operational as early as the late seventies. Another five projects on various tributaries before they join at Devprayag, to be reverently called GANGAji are currently under construction, including the Pala-Maneri and Maneri-Bhali stage II on Bhagirathi. About twenty more medium schemes are at different stages of planning in the reaches upstream of Devprayag, Two of these are on the Bhagirathi proper. Loharinag-Pala, one of these, recently got a clearance from MoEF, GoI.
It is highly unfortunate that both the environmentalists who never tire of talking of the
fragility and uniqueness of the Himalayan environment, as also the devout Hindus, who swear in the name of Gangaji, remained sleeping when Maneri-Bhali was built, and also the agitation
against Tehri Dam proved to be miserably inadequate, ill-prepared and primarily concentrating on the vested self-interests of a few. In the absence of support both from competent cientific/ environmental professionals and the devout Hindu cultural ethos, even a towering leader like Sunder Lal Bahugunaji could not lead the Tehri movement to success. With his secular and socialist inclinations, Bahugunaji did not even think of taking help of the 1916 agreement between the Indian Governemnt (then under British control) and the Hindu community which, as a legal instrument, would have been able to stop Tehri Dam or to make substantial changes in its designs and plans. His scientific base and support could also not be called strong.
From the above, it is obvious that it is not enough to say we do not support these projects - it is necessary to be specific as to which of these projects and on what grounds. The grounds can be either (i) scientific and environmental or (ii) related to faith, culture and sentiments. If the grounds are scientific/environmental/legal, they have to be strong enough and be presented by competent professionals, to be able to defeat the project promoters. Such grounds shall also need to keep economic aspects in mind and could be rectified by appropriate design or site changes. If the grounds are related to faith, culture, tradition and sentiments, one has to be bold to strongly and openly state so. Of course one has to be “totally convinced” of his faith, culture and sentiments and be able to ensure that these do not involve any sort of primary violence (“Hinsa”) from his side, but a human who cannot stand (or fall) to defend his faith is no human, as a nation which cannot stand to defend it’s sovereignty is no nation.
Below are discussed the grounds related to (A) our Faith, Culture, Tradition and Sentiments and (B) those related to Environmental/Scientific considerations, due to which we oppose the proposed hydro-electric projects on Bhagirathi, particularly the Pala-Maneri and the Loharinag-Pala projects for which MoEF has granted environmental clearances and construction work has started. We may repeat again and again that the considerations of Group A (those related to faith, culture and sentiments) are the PRIMARY ones, those of Group B (scientific/environmental) only meaningless auxilliaries from our point of view.
A. Faith/Culture/Sentiments vis-à-vis Projects on the Bhagirathi
A-1: Gangaji, a very special river demanding special treatment
In Indian cultural ethos (essentially Hindu ethos since the Islamic/Parsi/Jewish/Christian ethos is in no way linked to the land and geography of India) Gangaji is no ordinary river it is “Sur-Sari”, divine flow of energy, a living entity; “mother”,revered and worshipped by tens of crores of Hindus – all the Indians who accept and value their links with this land - over not just a few centuries but several millennia. If crores of Hindus from all parts of the country, as far as Kerala, Tamilnadu, Saurashtra, Kashmir etc. flock to Hardwar, Allahabad, Varanasi, Gangasagar and other spots along Gangaji, it is not because Gangaji has built or irrigated their farmlands, or supplies their drinking water or electricity or even helps to drain away their wastes to the sea. NO! Gangaji is no ordinary river in our ethos to be related to these lowly tasks that other rivers and streams also perform. Gangaji is not Nile or Euphrates, or Thames, or Danube or Mississippi, or even Indus (Sindhu). No one ever craves to visit any of these rivers, their origin, their confluence or any spots on them, as crores of Hindus crave for Gangaji. They want to be near Gangaji even in death; at least have a few drops of Ganga Jal.
The water flowing in Gangaji is not ordinary water to a Hindu, it is “GANGAJAL”, not meant for mere drinking, domestic use, irrigation or pisciculture and hence not needing to meet any criteria or standards set by WHO or MoEF. It is a matter of the life and death of Hindu faith, culture, tradition, sentiments and ethos. One has to think of Kumbh Mela, the Kanwad tradition, the “Chhath” of Bihar and all the other cultural rituals on the banks of Gangaji.
The main problem of scientists, engineers, planners, economists the so-called “educated”, and of recent Indian Governments is that they wish to first treat and then make Gangaji like any other river. They want to apply all the common criteria, the same standards,the same objectives, the same EIA guidelines the same economic planning to Gangaji as to some nondescript stream. They consider Gangajal as any other surface water, inferior to treated tap-water or “Bisleri/Aqua Fina”. They have never considered it necessary to explore and understand the basis of the Indian faith and reverence for Gangaji. Their real aim and intention is to insult denounce and destroy all that is unique to India’s land, it’s culture and it’s people, to be counted as second rate cousins of the other nationalities of the world, far behind those of European origin. I would wish to be forth-right; to me the effort to equate or consider Gangaji to any other river is an attack by the modern scientific/economic culture on the traditional Indian culture, faith and ethos and has to be fought at that level. Let us be clear and straight forward:
Gangaji is our cultural mother. Gangaji is from Gangotri to Ganga Sagar.
We shall not let Gangaji be treated like an ordinary river and harnessed for irrigation city water-supply, hydro-electricity, pisciculture etc. or be fouled with waste discharges.
A special code for reverently using Gangaji has to be evolved.
A 2. The unique, superior and very special quality of GANGAJAL
A significant and very important aspect of Hindu culture, faith and tradition is the belief,
rather conviction, in the superior and unique quality of GANGAJAL. In a highly intelligent and intellectual group, that we believe our Rishis belonged to, this had to be based on long-time experience and observation and not be mere blind faith. Besides the high and unique spiritual
and mental impacts of contacts with GANGAJAL, (which can only be felt or experienced, and not be measured in the laboratory), it is believed to have bactericidal, disease-curing, healthpromoting,
non-putrefying and purifying properties at levels much beyond any other waters known. While all educated and believing in modern science, would like to discard these as mere rubbish and blind-faith, they have no data or proof from a comprehensive scientific study, planned to satisfy their own criteria for such a study, to establish this. It is essentially the responsibility of the modern scientific community to conclusively prove it, if they think the centuries old faith in the unique quality of GANGAJAL to be baseless and mere blind faith.
And it may be stressed that to-date there has been no such comprehensive, properly planned and conducted study. On the other hand there are a number of stray observations and short studies by scientists, all of which support the Hindu faith in the unique non-putrefying, bactericidal and health promoting properties of GANGAJAL. Some of these are listed below:
Bactericidal properties of Gangajal at Varanasi and other locations observed by several Indian as also European biologists, argued to be due to presence of bacterio-phages.
E.Coli-cidal properties of Gangajal at Kanpur observed by Shri Kashi Prasad in his IIT Kanpur M.Tech Thesis. This property was unchanged by autoclaving and hence could not be due to phages or any other living agent but was removed on filtration or ultracentrifuge and hence seemed to be caused by ultra-fine silt or micro-nucleii present in the Jal.
Unbelievably high BOD exertion (or removal) rate constants (several times of the values in other waters) in GANGAJI observed by Dr D.S. Bhargava in his IIT-Kanpur PhD. Thesis argued to the due to the presence of large amounts of “exo-cellular polymers” excreted by certain bacteria in endogenous phases (but could also be coming from extracts of some specific vegetal species present in Himalayan uplands).
Bactericidal and purifying properties of Gangajal observed by NEERI in their study on “Self-Cleaning” properties of Gangaji in relation to Tehri Dam, found to be related to a unique mix of heavy and radioactive metals present in Gangajal. The study was toned down to keep within interests of the client and never brought into highlight in keeping with official objectives.
Even the EIA study conducted by WAPCOS for the Loharinag-Pala Hydro-eclectic Project found fecal coliforms to be totally absent at all the six locations in Bhagirathi in both the Pre-monsoon (low flow) and Post-monsoon (high flow) samplings (see Tables 3.4a and 3.4b of the EIA report). How would one explain this total absence of fecal coliforms at all the six stations and in both samplings with so many pilgrims visiting, bathing and fouling Gangaji at Gangotri and the significant township and army establishment at Harsil upstream, if not due to the special coli-cidal properties in GANGAJAL? Well, WAPCOS was vain; RITES was wise enough not to test for coliforms or bacteria at all, and played safe. CPCB was forthright in their objective of equating Gangaji to other streams; so they probably sampled an incoming drain carrying septic tank overflow to find 377 MPN of fecal coliforms and 17000 of total coliforms at GANGOTRI. I would challenge them putting at stake all that I have, including my life, to prove these numbers for Gangaji at Gangotri following the standard river sampling and analytical techniques.
It is obvious that what science has done has biased, even fouled, our minds against everything that our sages said or believed. And poor Gangaji has been an easy prey. Like the axiom in law to treat every one as not guilty unless proven to be guilty, there has to be an axiom in culture-related matters to accept, respect and protect all issues of faith and conviction of our age-old tradition, unless and until they are conclusively proven to be false or wrong. Let those who feel that Gangaji or Gangajal have nothing special and can be treated and used for economic anthropocentric purposes like ordinary waters, carry out a comprehensive study to conclusively negate the cultural notions of special properties. And still they shall have no right to trounce on the cultural faith of the corers of believing, devout Hindus; they can only use the data to gradually dampen the faith.
B Scientific/Environmental Points Against Proposed Projects
B-1 Feasibility, safety and economic viability:
Obviously these three aspects of any project have to be fully ensured for any project right at the Feasibility study stage. The feasibility Reports for these two (Loharinag- Pala and Pala-Maneri) projects have not been available to us for any critical appraisal, but from the information quoted in the EIAs for the two projects, it is clear that adequate examination of these aspects was not done before deciding to proceed with the projects. This is briefly discussed below:
Hydraulic Feasibility:
River valley projects of this size are undertaken only after detailed data of hydraulic flows over a long enough period (at least 30 years, preferably 100 years) have been analyzed and not only frequency analysis but probabilities of various flows worked out. The EIA reports only mention 90% assured availability flows. It is not clear if this implies the assured flows available in 90% of the year examined, or on 90% of the days of a particular year. The EIA for Pala-Maneri project states that the average flow in the river is 170.18 m3/sec during April to November and 30.87 m3/sec during December to March giving an annual average flow of 124 m3/sec. However it is not stated whether these are for a particular year (if so, which year) and if they are averages over several years, how many and which years were taken for averaging. It may be appreciated that river flows a very from year to year and that for designing such a project, the flows available in a dry or low-flow year should be considered rather than the average flow of several years. For this desirably, 100 years and minimum 30 years data is considered necessary.
It is also interesting to note that while an up-stream project, viz., Loharinag-Pala has been designed for a nominal average available flow of 145m3/sec. the downstream project Pala-Maneri considers the nominal average flow to be only 124m2/sec, though the intake has been designed to take 156m3/sec. Obviously the flow available at a downstream project cannot be less than that at an upstream station. It is nowhere clear as to where the flows were measured and over what period. The notion seems to be, that an average of around 120-150m3/sec is generally available and whatever becomes available shall be picked up and used. A thorough probability study of the flows likely to be available, does not appear to have been carried out. If really so, the feasibility cannot be stated to have been adequately established.
ii. Geological Safety:
Himalayan geology, the presence of faults, the active Munsiari thrust, the accumulation of debris and boulders due to frequent land-slides, the earthquake proneness, the presence of fossil-valleys and other highly sensitive and fragile features in the project areas have all been extensively studied and documented by various authors. All these are mentioned in the EIA reports and had probably been considered in examining the feasibility, since some technical measures to safeguard against them (e.g. slightly shifting the site, or providing steel lining in the pressureshafts over highly vulnerable stretches) have been proposed. How adequate the proposed design measures would be in the Himalayan condition ?
iii. Economic Viability:
While economic viability of a hydro-electric project is rarely in question, the escalation of costs of the projects due to the severe geologic conditions and the cost-intensive measures that shall need to be adopted (past experience with such projects in the Beas-Sutlej or Yamuna-Tons schemes shows this) coupled with the uncertain and receding glacial flows in R. Bhagirathi are feared to make the project economically unsound, unless very high sale-tariffs for the power generated are adopted – like in the case of Enron. This is bound to be counter-productive.
All-in-all one can only say that from all information available to us, the issues of hydraulic feasibility, geologic safety and economic viability, have not been adequately addressed or assured.
B-2 Environmental Impact Assessment:
B-2.1 The environmental impacts of a river valley project can be classified into three
categories:
(a) Environmental Impacts caused by the long-term changes brought about by the project in the riverine regime, including flows, water-spreads, velocities of flow, silt loads, bed-topography, bed-character, soil-moistures, drainage-routes, groundwater- tables, etc. which ultimately affect the aquatic and terrestrial ecology and even the land-use, cultivated crops and over-all environment. Such impacts may appear only slowly but continue for all times. Often they are cumulative and keep growing with time. Flood-balancing may not only deprive neighbouring areas of
the fertile river silt, but may seriously affect some sensitive biological species, the life cycles of which are related to the normal water-level and water-table regimes as was found in the basin of R. Snowy (very similar to Bhagirathi) in Australia leading to the demolition of a major dam and major changes in the operation schedules of some hydro-electric stations, rendering them un-economical.
(b) Environmental Impacts due to construction activities of various structures of the project including land-acquisition with it’s accompanied land-use changes, displacement of people/ activities, deforestation etc, procurement and transport of materials and equipment for construction, the actual construction of the main and appurtenant structures including roads, bridges, colonies etc. often even the impacts visible shortly after the project goes into operation/production are included in this category.
(c) Impacts likely to be caused in case of an accidental breach or failure in the project structure generally termed a hazard and tackled under risk-analysis and disastermanagement.
B-2.2 Rationally the group (a) viz., the long-term impacts caused by the changes brought about
by the project in the riverine regime, should be the most critical and important when considering environmental clearance to a river valley project and the other two categories only subsidiary. Unfortunately, these changes are subtle and take a long time to become visible, as such they are generally ignored both by project planners as also by EIA consultants. The MoEF also has little understanding or experience of these, and it’s bulky EIA Guidelines and formats are essentially designed for polluting industries and not for river-projects. In this particular case the two EIA consultants did not even care to clearly state the present (or preproject) riverine regimes (viz., the cycles of the flow variations, water-spreads, water-depths, velocities, silt-loads etc) or the post-project situation much less to try to assess the impacts of the changes brought about in various stretches in and around the projects. The EIAs only tendto state and believe that the impacts would be minimal even though almost the entire flows are proposed to be diverted away from long stretches of the river channel for long periods. Even the question of impacts on aquatic ecology including migratory fish, algae and benthic invertebrates are brushed aside as being minimal. It would be obvious that changes in waterdepths and velocities (and silt-loads) over long periods of time is bound to cause very significant changes in the distribution of species of flora and fauna both in as well as along the river-channel.
B-2.3 A significant scientific problem shall be how to realistically estimate the likely ecological changes even after knowing the changes that the project is going to bring about in the riverine regime. For this the only rational methodology shall be to compare with the observations in several similar earlier projects in similar conditions. Learning from experience, or simulation
modeling, is the only option when it comes to environmental predictions. Comparisons with other similar rivers such as the glacial-fed river Snowy in eastern Australia could have been logical. Fortunately now Maneri-Bhali, a much smaller but similar, project on Bhagirathi itself, is at least 30 years old and similar projects in Yamuna-Tons valley have been in operation for some 35 years. The actual impacts or changes caused by these projects could have been assessed in detail and used as basis for simulation modeling. Even the mega-project Tehri Dam on Bhagirathi itself has been now in operation for some 3 years and the actual changes it is bringing about in river water quality and aquatic and benthic ecology could have been measured by a comparison of samples from Gangotri, Maneri, Uttarkashi and down stream of Tehri as a base study for the EIA. None of this has been done, not even mentioned. This should be understandable once it is realized that the objective of the study was only to satisfy the formalities to obtain MoEF clearances and not any sincere or realistic assessment of likely impacts.
B-2.4 Ignoring all the above basic and critical flaws which make the two EIAs fundamentally
inadequate, let us examine some specific impacts as assessed by the EIA consultants.
(i) Loss of forests and terrestrial vegetation:
While good field work has been done in enumerating the species, their counts, canopy-coverage and measurements seem to have been manipulated to yield low diversity indices and say that the natural vegetation in the affected pockets is of poor quality and hence the impact shall be minimal. It is un-believable that the vegetation in these pockets on Bhagirathi is of poor quality and that out of the more than 20 tree species listed to be present in each pocket only four are of any economic value, and none of them is endangered, rare, endemic or sensitive. And what about shrubs, grasses etc., which have also been enumerated but not mentioned when talking of impacts. Most of the herbs of medicinal value are shrubs or grasses found in such pockets of sensitive vegetation and these have been totally ignored when assessing impact of projects.
(ii) Impacts on Wildlife:
It is just stated that all the wildlife has already fled-away or vanished. Is this not a serious indictment of the “development” processes that have been going on? If there is no wildlife all along Bhagirathi, where would wildlife be in India? Would not these projects, the blasting and tunneling in the Himalayas and the heavy transport vehicles and activity drive the wild-life away even from their present hide-outs?
(iii) Migratory Fish Species:
Many important fish species including the famous Hilsa are known to migrate to Himalayan uplands for spawning. When talking of any impact on these it is argued that since Maneri and Tehri have already disrupted such migration along Bhagirathi, the proposed projects shall not any further damage and may be allowed? How funny! Rather than assessing the damage caused by Maneri/Tehri and suggest correcting the mistake, only support further sealing up of Bhagirathi. How DISASTROUS in the long-term ecology? The importance given by the consultants to commercial fishing is un-ethical.
(iv) Benthic Flora and Fauna:
With serious changes in the seasonal water-spreads, flows and water depths in the river-streches both in the upstream submergence and in the downstream of the barrage/weir where the water has been diverted away the whole world would change for the benthic worms, insects, larvae, invertebrates, eggs and the entire life. Who knows what role all these play in the miraculous properties of Bhagirathi water, silt and ecology? Would it be O.K. to discard all this impact, calling it minimal as the EIA consultants have done?
(v) Algal growth and algal blooms:
Before discarding any risk of algal bloom due to low presence of nutrients in Bhagirathi water, the experience of the shallow parts of Tehri Reservoir and of Maneri “Lake” should have been assessed and quoted. And if the proposed projects are only part of the chain of “development” projects, the likely increase in nutrients due to increasing townships and human activities should have been assessed before discarding the risk of algal blooms in the project pondages as also in the “Kuhl”-like river stretches downstream of the barrage/weirwhich may turn into series of pools and falls.
(vi) Impact on Fossil Valleys:
The likely impact on these ecologically important features have not been detailed. Although their presence in the region is accepted, neither they have been marked on the map, nor the likely impacts examined.
(vii) Impacts of Quarrying for Raw materials:
The Maneri-Pala project is estimated to consume 200,000m3 of sand and 400,000m3 of coarse aggregates while the Loharinag-Pala project shall consume more than double these amounts. Almost all of these, particularly all of the sand, shall be taken out from quarrying in the riverbed and the neighbouring slopes. The impacts of such manipulations at locations selected only on considerations of quality and quantity of materials available and their economics, have been just stated to be minimal without any effort at quantification or even a crude estimate. When even the proposed locations of the quarries have not been pointed out, where is the question of assessment of impact of blasting, other quarrying operations or the long-term consequences of the removal of these huge quantities of river-bed or side-slope material from it’s present locations.
(viii) Impacts of transport and construction activities:
Significant effort has been invested by the two EIA consultants in modeling and predicting the impacts on the ambient air-quality and noise due to the transport and construction activity. All this is in terms of noise decibel and SPM/RSPM/SO2/NOx as specified by MoEF. This would be relevant only in the usual industrial-urban situations, not in Bhagirathi valley, as this does not differentiate between the decibels due to the gushing waters, rustling of leaves and chirping of birds from the headache-causing decibels generated by heavy vehicles, earth-movers, crushers, concrete-mixers and other machinery. The consultants seem to have no ears to appreciate the tranquility, or the mucous membranes to enjoy the fragrance, of Bhagirathi valley.
(ix) Social and cultural Impacts:
Under these heads the EIA consultants have only considered the neighbouring populations and totally ignored the millions of the Indians proud of their natural heritage and hankering to just once in their life, visit and enjoy the tranquil, fragrant, beautiful, scintillating Bhagirathi valley which does not merely fills the mind with extreme joy (“Anand”), but lifts up the soul. The consultants may say this to be merely blind-faith. But is the impact on and deprivation of millions of devout believers to be ignored by an EIA or environmental clearance?
EPILOGUE: The construction of these projects on Bhagirathi would be disastrous to the cultural and environmental identity of India.
By Dr G.D.Agrawal
Currently: Honorary Professor of Environment Sciences, MGCGV, Chitrakoot and above all A Devout Hindu Formerly (i) Design Engineer, Central Designs Directorate, Irrigation Department, U.P.,
(ii) Professor & Head, Civil (and Environmental) Engg. Deptt IIT, Kanpur, U.P.,
(iii)Member Secretary, Central Pollution Control Board, Delhi,
(iv) EIA Expert and (v)Director, Envirotech Instrument (P) Ltd, New Delhi.
A Critique of Loharinag-Pala, Pala-Maneri and Other Hydroelectric Projects on R. Bhagirathi
In single-minded pursuit of its agenda for economic advancement, for which cheap energy availability is a major requirement, the Government of India has been proposing and/or promoting a number of hydro-electric projects on various rivers of the Ganga valley including the Bhagirathi to tap their enormous hydro-power potential. In its desire to make India stand somewhere in the long queue of so-called “developed” nations, the GoI is willing to destroy the
traditional Indian ethos of worshiping nature and living in harmony with it slowly destroying any and all links that connect the vast Indian masses to this tradition, heritage and cultural ethos and at the same time erasing what is special, even unique, in the land that is India.
Besides the controversial Tehri Dam, which was ultimately cleared by the Apex Court in 2002 and was commissioned in 2005, a medium “run-of-the-river” hydro-electric scheme at Maneri-Bhali on R.Bhagirathi had become operational as early as the late seventies. Another five projects on various tributaries before they join at Devprayag, to be reverently called GANGAji are currently under construction, including the Pala-Maneri and Maneri-Bhali stage II on Bhagirathi. About twenty more medium schemes are at different stages of planning in the reaches upstream of Devprayag, Two of these are on the Bhagirathi proper. Loharinag-Pala, one of these, recently got a clearance from MoEF, GoI.
It is highly unfortunate that both the environmentalists who never tire of talking of the
fragility and uniqueness of the Himalayan environment, as also the devout Hindus, who swear in the name of Gangaji, remained sleeping when Maneri-Bhali was built, and also the agitation
against Tehri Dam proved to be miserably inadequate, ill-prepared and primarily concentrating on the vested self-interests of a few. In the absence of support both from competent cientific/ environmental professionals and the devout Hindu cultural ethos, even a towering leader like Sunder Lal Bahugunaji could not lead the Tehri movement to success. With his secular and socialist inclinations, Bahugunaji did not even think of taking help of the 1916 agreement between the Indian Governemnt (then under British control) and the Hindu community which, as a legal instrument, would have been able to stop Tehri Dam or to make substantial changes in its designs and plans. His scientific base and support could also not be called strong.
From the above, it is obvious that it is not enough to say we do not support these projects - it is necessary to be specific as to which of these projects and on what grounds. The grounds can be either (i) scientific and environmental or (ii) related to faith, culture and sentiments. If the grounds are scientific/environmental/legal, they have to be strong enough and be presented by competent professionals, to be able to defeat the project promoters. Such grounds shall also need to keep economic aspects in mind and could be rectified by appropriate design or site changes. If the grounds are related to faith, culture, tradition and sentiments, one has to be bold to strongly and openly state so. Of course one has to be “totally convinced” of his faith, culture and sentiments and be able to ensure that these do not involve any sort of primary violence (“Hinsa”) from his side, but a human who cannot stand (or fall) to defend his faith is no human, as a nation which cannot stand to defend it’s sovereignty is no nation.
Below are discussed the grounds related to (A) our Faith, Culture, Tradition and Sentiments and (B) those related to Environmental/Scientific considerations, due to which we oppose the proposed hydro-electric projects on Bhagirathi, particularly the Pala-Maneri and the Loharinag-Pala projects for which MoEF has granted environmental clearances and construction work has started. We may repeat again and again that the considerations of Group A (those related to faith, culture and sentiments) are the PRIMARY ones, those of Group B (scientific/environmental) only meaningless auxilliaries from our point of view.
A. Faith/Culture/Sentiments vis-à-vis Projects on the Bhagirathi
A-1: Gangaji, a very special river demanding special treatment
In Indian cultural ethos (essentially Hindu ethos since the Islamic/Parsi/Jewish/Christian ethos is in no way linked to the land and geography of India) Gangaji is no ordinary river it is “Sur-Sari”, divine flow of energy, a living entity; “mother”,revered and worshipped by tens of crores of Hindus – all the Indians who accept and value their links with this land - over not just a few centuries but several millennia. If crores of Hindus from all parts of the country, as far as Kerala, Tamilnadu, Saurashtra, Kashmir etc. flock to Hardwar, Allahabad, Varanasi, Gangasagar and other spots along Gangaji, it is not because Gangaji has built or irrigated their farmlands, or supplies their drinking water or electricity or even helps to drain away their wastes to the sea. NO! Gangaji is no ordinary river in our ethos to be related to these lowly tasks that other rivers and streams also perform. Gangaji is not Nile or Euphrates, or Thames, or Danube or Mississippi, or even Indus (Sindhu). No one ever craves to visit any of these rivers, their origin, their confluence or any spots on them, as crores of Hindus crave for Gangaji. They want to be near Gangaji even in death; at least have a few drops of Ganga Jal.
The water flowing in Gangaji is not ordinary water to a Hindu, it is “GANGAJAL”, not meant for mere drinking, domestic use, irrigation or pisciculture and hence not needing to meet any criteria or standards set by WHO or MoEF. It is a matter of the life and death of Hindu faith, culture, tradition, sentiments and ethos. One has to think of Kumbh Mela, the Kanwad tradition, the “Chhath” of Bihar and all the other cultural rituals on the banks of Gangaji.
The main problem of scientists, engineers, planners, economists the so-called “educated”, and of recent Indian Governments is that they wish to first treat and then make Gangaji like any other river. They want to apply all the common criteria, the same standards,the same objectives, the same EIA guidelines the same economic planning to Gangaji as to some nondescript stream. They consider Gangajal as any other surface water, inferior to treated tap-water or “Bisleri/Aqua Fina”. They have never considered it necessary to explore and understand the basis of the Indian faith and reverence for Gangaji. Their real aim and intention is to insult denounce and destroy all that is unique to India’s land, it’s culture and it’s people, to be counted as second rate cousins of the other nationalities of the world, far behind those of European origin. I would wish to be forth-right; to me the effort to equate or consider Gangaji to any other river is an attack by the modern scientific/economic culture on the traditional Indian culture, faith and ethos and has to be fought at that level. Let us be clear and straight forward:
Gangaji is our cultural mother. Gangaji is from Gangotri to Ganga Sagar.
We shall not let Gangaji be treated like an ordinary river and harnessed for irrigation city water-supply, hydro-electricity, pisciculture etc. or be fouled with waste discharges.
A special code for reverently using Gangaji has to be evolved.
A 2. The unique, superior and very special quality of GANGAJAL
A significant and very important aspect of Hindu culture, faith and tradition is the belief,
rather conviction, in the superior and unique quality of GANGAJAL. In a highly intelligent and intellectual group, that we believe our Rishis belonged to, this had to be based on long-time experience and observation and not be mere blind faith. Besides the high and unique spiritual
and mental impacts of contacts with GANGAJAL, (which can only be felt or experienced, and not be measured in the laboratory), it is believed to have bactericidal, disease-curing, healthpromoting,
non-putrefying and purifying properties at levels much beyond any other waters known. While all educated and believing in modern science, would like to discard these as mere rubbish and blind-faith, they have no data or proof from a comprehensive scientific study, planned to satisfy their own criteria for such a study, to establish this. It is essentially the responsibility of the modern scientific community to conclusively prove it, if they think the centuries old faith in the unique quality of GANGAJAL to be baseless and mere blind faith.
And it may be stressed that to-date there has been no such comprehensive, properly planned and conducted study. On the other hand there are a number of stray observations and short studies by scientists, all of which support the Hindu faith in the unique non-putrefying, bactericidal and health promoting properties of GANGAJAL. Some of these are listed below:
Bactericidal properties of Gangajal at Varanasi and other locations observed by several Indian as also European biologists, argued to be due to presence of bacterio-phages.
E.Coli-cidal properties of Gangajal at Kanpur observed by Shri Kashi Prasad in his IIT Kanpur M.Tech Thesis. This property was unchanged by autoclaving and hence could not be due to phages or any other living agent but was removed on filtration or ultracentrifuge and hence seemed to be caused by ultra-fine silt or micro-nucleii present in the Jal.
Unbelievably high BOD exertion (or removal) rate constants (several times of the values in other waters) in GANGAJI observed by Dr D.S. Bhargava in his IIT-Kanpur PhD. Thesis argued to the due to the presence of large amounts of “exo-cellular polymers” excreted by certain bacteria in endogenous phases (but could also be coming from extracts of some specific vegetal species present in Himalayan uplands).
Bactericidal and purifying properties of Gangajal observed by NEERI in their study on “Self-Cleaning” properties of Gangaji in relation to Tehri Dam, found to be related to a unique mix of heavy and radioactive metals present in Gangajal. The study was toned down to keep within interests of the client and never brought into highlight in keeping with official objectives.
Even the EIA study conducted by WAPCOS for the Loharinag-Pala Hydro-eclectic Project found fecal coliforms to be totally absent at all the six locations in Bhagirathi in both the Pre-monsoon (low flow) and Post-monsoon (high flow) samplings (see Tables 3.4a and 3.4b of the EIA report). How would one explain this total absence of fecal coliforms at all the six stations and in both samplings with so many pilgrims visiting, bathing and fouling Gangaji at Gangotri and the significant township and army establishment at Harsil upstream, if not due to the special coli-cidal properties in GANGAJAL? Well, WAPCOS was vain; RITES was wise enough not to test for coliforms or bacteria at all, and played safe. CPCB was forthright in their objective of equating Gangaji to other streams; so they probably sampled an incoming drain carrying septic tank overflow to find 377 MPN of fecal coliforms and 17000 of total coliforms at GANGOTRI. I would challenge them putting at stake all that I have, including my life, to prove these numbers for Gangaji at Gangotri following the standard river sampling and analytical techniques.
It is obvious that what science has done has biased, even fouled, our minds against everything that our sages said or believed. And poor Gangaji has been an easy prey. Like the axiom in law to treat every one as not guilty unless proven to be guilty, there has to be an axiom in culture-related matters to accept, respect and protect all issues of faith and conviction of our age-old tradition, unless and until they are conclusively proven to be false or wrong. Let those who feel that Gangaji or Gangajal have nothing special and can be treated and used for economic anthropocentric purposes like ordinary waters, carry out a comprehensive study to conclusively negate the cultural notions of special properties. And still they shall have no right to trounce on the cultural faith of the corers of believing, devout Hindus; they can only use the data to gradually dampen the faith.
B Scientific/Environmental Points Against Proposed Projects
B-1 Feasibility, safety and economic viability:
Obviously these three aspects of any project have to be fully ensured for any project right at the Feasibility study stage. The feasibility Reports for these two (Loharinag- Pala and Pala-Maneri) projects have not been available to us for any critical appraisal, but from the information quoted in the EIAs for the two projects, it is clear that adequate examination of these aspects was not done before deciding to proceed with the projects. This is briefly discussed below:
Hydraulic Feasibility:
River valley projects of this size are undertaken only after detailed data of hydraulic flows over a long enough period (at least 30 years, preferably 100 years) have been analyzed and not only frequency analysis but probabilities of various flows worked out. The EIA reports only mention 90% assured availability flows. It is not clear if this implies the assured flows available in 90% of the year examined, or on 90% of the days of a particular year. The EIA for Pala-Maneri project states that the average flow in the river is 170.18 m3/sec during April to November and 30.87 m3/sec during December to March giving an annual average flow of 124 m3/sec. However it is not stated whether these are for a particular year (if so, which year) and if they are averages over several years, how many and which years were taken for averaging. It may be appreciated that river flows a very from year to year and that for designing such a project, the flows available in a dry or low-flow year should be considered rather than the average flow of several years. For this desirably, 100 years and minimum 30 years data is considered necessary.
It is also interesting to note that while an up-stream project, viz., Loharinag-Pala has been designed for a nominal average available flow of 145m3/sec. the downstream project Pala-Maneri considers the nominal average flow to be only 124m2/sec, though the intake has been designed to take 156m3/sec. Obviously the flow available at a downstream project cannot be less than that at an upstream station. It is nowhere clear as to where the flows were measured and over what period. The notion seems to be, that an average of around 120-150m3/sec is generally available and whatever becomes available shall be picked up and used. A thorough probability study of the flows likely to be available, does not appear to have been carried out. If really so, the feasibility cannot be stated to have been adequately established.
ii. Geological Safety:
Himalayan geology, the presence of faults, the active Munsiari thrust, the accumulation of debris and boulders due to frequent land-slides, the earthquake proneness, the presence of fossil-valleys and other highly sensitive and fragile features in the project areas have all been extensively studied and documented by various authors. All these are mentioned in the EIA reports and had probably been considered in examining the feasibility, since some technical measures to safeguard against them (e.g. slightly shifting the site, or providing steel lining in the pressureshafts over highly vulnerable stretches) have been proposed. How adequate the proposed design measures would be in the Himalayan condition ?
iii. Economic Viability:
While economic viability of a hydro-electric project is rarely in question, the escalation of costs of the projects due to the severe geologic conditions and the cost-intensive measures that shall need to be adopted (past experience with such projects in the Beas-Sutlej or Yamuna-Tons schemes shows this) coupled with the uncertain and receding glacial flows in R. Bhagirathi are feared to make the project economically unsound, unless very high sale-tariffs for the power generated are adopted – like in the case of Enron. This is bound to be counter-productive.
All-in-all one can only say that from all information available to us, the issues of hydraulic feasibility, geologic safety and economic viability, have not been adequately addressed or assured.
B-2 Environmental Impact Assessment:
B-2.1 The environmental impacts of a river valley project can be classified into three
categories:
(a) Environmental Impacts caused by the long-term changes brought about by the project in the riverine regime, including flows, water-spreads, velocities of flow, silt loads, bed-topography, bed-character, soil-moistures, drainage-routes, groundwater- tables, etc. which ultimately affect the aquatic and terrestrial ecology and even the land-use, cultivated crops and over-all environment. Such impacts may appear only slowly but continue for all times. Often they are cumulative and keep growing with time. Flood-balancing may not only deprive neighbouring areas of
the fertile river silt, but may seriously affect some sensitive biological species, the life cycles of which are related to the normal water-level and water-table regimes as was found in the basin of R. Snowy (very similar to Bhagirathi) in Australia leading to the demolition of a major dam and major changes in the operation schedules of some hydro-electric stations, rendering them un-economical.
(b) Environmental Impacts due to construction activities of various structures of the project including land-acquisition with it’s accompanied land-use changes, displacement of people/ activities, deforestation etc, procurement and transport of materials and equipment for construction, the actual construction of the main and appurtenant structures including roads, bridges, colonies etc. often even the impacts visible shortly after the project goes into operation/production are included in this category.
(c) Impacts likely to be caused in case of an accidental breach or failure in the project structure generally termed a hazard and tackled under risk-analysis and disastermanagement.
B-2.2 Rationally the group (a) viz., the long-term impacts caused by the changes brought about
by the project in the riverine regime, should be the most critical and important when considering environmental clearance to a river valley project and the other two categories only subsidiary. Unfortunately, these changes are subtle and take a long time to become visible, as such they are generally ignored both by project planners as also by EIA consultants. The MoEF also has little understanding or experience of these, and it’s bulky EIA Guidelines and formats are essentially designed for polluting industries and not for river-projects. In this particular case the two EIA consultants did not even care to clearly state the present (or preproject) riverine regimes (viz., the cycles of the flow variations, water-spreads, water-depths, velocities, silt-loads etc) or the post-project situation much less to try to assess the impacts of the changes brought about in various stretches in and around the projects. The EIAs only tendto state and believe that the impacts would be minimal even though almost the entire flows are proposed to be diverted away from long stretches of the river channel for long periods. Even the question of impacts on aquatic ecology including migratory fish, algae and benthic invertebrates are brushed aside as being minimal. It would be obvious that changes in waterdepths and velocities (and silt-loads) over long periods of time is bound to cause very significant changes in the distribution of species of flora and fauna both in as well as along the river-channel.
B-2.3 A significant scientific problem shall be how to realistically estimate the likely ecological changes even after knowing the changes that the project is going to bring about in the riverine regime. For this the only rational methodology shall be to compare with the observations in several similar earlier projects in similar conditions. Learning from experience, or simulation
modeling, is the only option when it comes to environmental predictions. Comparisons with other similar rivers such as the glacial-fed river Snowy in eastern Australia could have been logical. Fortunately now Maneri-Bhali, a much smaller but similar, project on Bhagirathi itself, is at least 30 years old and similar projects in Yamuna-Tons valley have been in operation for some 35 years. The actual impacts or changes caused by these projects could have been assessed in detail and used as basis for simulation modeling. Even the mega-project Tehri Dam on Bhagirathi itself has been now in operation for some 3 years and the actual changes it is bringing about in river water quality and aquatic and benthic ecology could have been measured by a comparison of samples from Gangotri, Maneri, Uttarkashi and down stream of Tehri as a base study for the EIA. None of this has been done, not even mentioned. This should be understandable once it is realized that the objective of the study was only to satisfy the formalities to obtain MoEF clearances and not any sincere or realistic assessment of likely impacts.
B-2.4 Ignoring all the above basic and critical flaws which make the two EIAs fundamentally
inadequate, let us examine some specific impacts as assessed by the EIA consultants.
(i) Loss of forests and terrestrial vegetation:
While good field work has been done in enumerating the species, their counts, canopy-coverage and measurements seem to have been manipulated to yield low diversity indices and say that the natural vegetation in the affected pockets is of poor quality and hence the impact shall be minimal. It is un-believable that the vegetation in these pockets on Bhagirathi is of poor quality and that out of the more than 20 tree species listed to be present in each pocket only four are of any economic value, and none of them is endangered, rare, endemic or sensitive. And what about shrubs, grasses etc., which have also been enumerated but not mentioned when talking of impacts. Most of the herbs of medicinal value are shrubs or grasses found in such pockets of sensitive vegetation and these have been totally ignored when assessing impact of projects.
(ii) Impacts on Wildlife:
It is just stated that all the wildlife has already fled-away or vanished. Is this not a serious indictment of the “development” processes that have been going on? If there is no wildlife all along Bhagirathi, where would wildlife be in India? Would not these projects, the blasting and tunneling in the Himalayas and the heavy transport vehicles and activity drive the wild-life away even from their present hide-outs?
(iii) Migratory Fish Species:
Many important fish species including the famous Hilsa are known to migrate to Himalayan uplands for spawning. When talking of any impact on these it is argued that since Maneri and Tehri have already disrupted such migration along Bhagirathi, the proposed projects shall not any further damage and may be allowed? How funny! Rather than assessing the damage caused by Maneri/Tehri and suggest correcting the mistake, only support further sealing up of Bhagirathi. How DISASTROUS in the long-term ecology? The importance given by the consultants to commercial fishing is un-ethical.
(iv) Benthic Flora and Fauna:
With serious changes in the seasonal water-spreads, flows and water depths in the river-streches both in the upstream submergence and in the downstream of the barrage/weir where the water has been diverted away the whole world would change for the benthic worms, insects, larvae, invertebrates, eggs and the entire life. Who knows what role all these play in the miraculous properties of Bhagirathi water, silt and ecology? Would it be O.K. to discard all this impact, calling it minimal as the EIA consultants have done?
(v) Algal growth and algal blooms:
Before discarding any risk of algal bloom due to low presence of nutrients in Bhagirathi water, the experience of the shallow parts of Tehri Reservoir and of Maneri “Lake” should have been assessed and quoted. And if the proposed projects are only part of the chain of “development” projects, the likely increase in nutrients due to increasing townships and human activities should have been assessed before discarding the risk of algal blooms in the project pondages as also in the “Kuhl”-like river stretches downstream of the barrage/weirwhich may turn into series of pools and falls.
(vi) Impact on Fossil Valleys:
The likely impact on these ecologically important features have not been detailed. Although their presence in the region is accepted, neither they have been marked on the map, nor the likely impacts examined.
(vii) Impacts of Quarrying for Raw materials:
The Maneri-Pala project is estimated to consume 200,000m3 of sand and 400,000m3 of coarse aggregates while the Loharinag-Pala project shall consume more than double these amounts. Almost all of these, particularly all of the sand, shall be taken out from quarrying in the riverbed and the neighbouring slopes. The impacts of such manipulations at locations selected only on considerations of quality and quantity of materials available and their economics, have been just stated to be minimal without any effort at quantification or even a crude estimate. When even the proposed locations of the quarries have not been pointed out, where is the question of assessment of impact of blasting, other quarrying operations or the long-term consequences of the removal of these huge quantities of river-bed or side-slope material from it’s present locations.
(viii) Impacts of transport and construction activities:
Significant effort has been invested by the two EIA consultants in modeling and predicting the impacts on the ambient air-quality and noise due to the transport and construction activity. All this is in terms of noise decibel and SPM/RSPM/SO2/NOx as specified by MoEF. This would be relevant only in the usual industrial-urban situations, not in Bhagirathi valley, as this does not differentiate between the decibels due to the gushing waters, rustling of leaves and chirping of birds from the headache-causing decibels generated by heavy vehicles, earth-movers, crushers, concrete-mixers and other machinery. The consultants seem to have no ears to appreciate the tranquility, or the mucous membranes to enjoy the fragrance, of Bhagirathi valley.
(ix) Social and cultural Impacts:
Under these heads the EIA consultants have only considered the neighbouring populations and totally ignored the millions of the Indians proud of their natural heritage and hankering to just once in their life, visit and enjoy the tranquil, fragrant, beautiful, scintillating Bhagirathi valley which does not merely fills the mind with extreme joy (“Anand”), but lifts up the soul. The consultants may say this to be merely blind-faith. But is the impact on and deprivation of millions of devout believers to be ignored by an EIA or environmental clearance?
EPILOGUE: The construction of these projects on Bhagirathi would be disastrous to the cultural and environmental identity of India.
By Dr G.D.Agrawal
Currently: Honorary Professor of Environment Sciences, MGCGV, Chitrakoot and above all A Devout Hindu Formerly (i) Design Engineer, Central Designs Directorate, Irrigation Department, U.P.,
(ii) Professor & Head, Civil (and Environmental) Engg. Deptt IIT, Kanpur, U.P.,
(iii)Member Secretary, Central Pollution Control Board, Delhi,
(iv) EIA Expert and (v)Director, Envirotech Instrument (P) Ltd, New Delhi.
सदस्यता लें
संदेश (Atom)