There are less disruptive and cheaper alternatives than connecting rivers to reduce the misery of floods and droughts.
On February 27 while giving the go-ahead to the controversial project of inter-linking of rivers, the Supreme Court specifically mentioned the benefits — flood control and drought moderation As plans for inter-basin transfers of water across vast distances, from surplus to deficit areas, appear to have got a lot of attraction for a country exposed all too often to droughts and floods, these need to be seriously evaluated and debated. As such while large-scale transfers of water can be expensive, we should also explore whether there are cheaper and better alternatives.
For a high resolution of the image, click this PDF.
The idea of inter-basin transfers is based on the assumption that certain surplus (flood-prone) and deficit (drought-prone) areas exist so that water is readily available without any objection to transfer from the former to the latter. But in practice, people in so-called surplus areas do not agree that they have spare water which can be transferred to other, faraway areas.
At a time when there are problems relating to the sharing of waters, transfer of water across distant areas can easily aggravate these tensions. This should be avoided.
Issue of climate change
Any neat division between “deficit” and “surplus” areas becomes more of a problem in these times of climate change when erratic weather patterns are more frequently seen. Some time ago we had a curious situation when arid, deficit parts of western India (including Rajasthan) had excess rain and experienced floods while flood-prone parts of eastern India (including Assam) had drought-like conditions. If billions had already been spent to create an infra-structure from transferring surplus water from east to west, just imagine what a difficult situation would have arisen at the time of such erratic weather.
So the basic conditions of problem-free transfer of water from the country's “surplus” to “deficit” areas simply do not exist. The tensions are likely to be much greater when inter-basin transfers also involve neighbouring countries, a reality that cannot be avoided in the existing geography of national-level links as many rivers pass through other countries. As soon as the grand looking river-linking plans are transferred from paper to reality, we enter the real world of shifting rivers bringing enormous siltloads, landslides, hills, plateaus, seismic belts, gorges, ravines, bends and curves which make the task of large-scale transfer of water difficult, enormously expensive, energy-intensive and hazardous. If rivers had been created by engineers and not by nature, they would have flowed along predictable straight paths to suit our needs. But rivers do not generally like to abide by the wishes and commands of engineers. Even when the might of modern technology forces them to do so, they sometimes seek revenge in very destructive ways — breaking free and causing floods.
Of course no one has had the time and inclination to explore how the bio-diversity flourishing in a particular river system will react when it is linked to another river. But the problems faced by the vast majority who are adversely affected by dams and displacements of this gigantic river-linking project have to be faced surely and squarely.
This brings us to the question of whether safer, less disruptive and cheaper alternatives are available for reducing the distress of floods and droughts. Evidence suggests that even villages which experience very low rainfall, as in the desert areas of Rajasthan, have evolved a range of local methods of water conservation and collection which, if followed up carefully, take them towards water self-sufficiency to a large extent. It is true that in modern times there is pressure leading to the breakdown or inadequacy of some of these self-reliant systems. Nevertheless it can be said that a combination of traditional water-collection/conservation practices and other drought-proofing methods — which also use modern technology — still provides the best available answer (also the cheapest one) to water scarcity in drought-prone areas.
In the case of flood-prone areas we should not ignore the resilience of local communities where people learnt from early childhood how to cope with rising rivers. Their ability has been adversely affected by increasing drainage obstruction created by thoughtless “development” works because of which floods sometimes become more fierce, creating prolonged water logging. So what people really need is a good drainage plan — so that flood water clears quickly — combined with a package of livelihood, health, education and other support suited to the needs of flood-prone areas and communities. This will work out much cheaper and more effective than all the dams, diversions and embankments put together. So the question of what people of drought-prone areas and flood-prone areas really need should be taken in consultation with them. Do they want huge water diversions and transfers with all their dams and displacements, or do they prefer more funds for trusted, small-scale local solutions?
(The writer is a freelance journalist writing on development issues.)
CONS: Amount involved, Flora and Fauna, People displaced, interstate disputes, inter country disputes, pollution spreading to all rivers, silting of beds PROS: Less floods, Less Droughts, Better irrigation- better agriculture- more grain production, better drinking water facilities, fresh water going waste into sea can be utilized, small hydropower projects can come up QUESTIONS: Does states have excess water, does states having excess water realize about that, are they thinking for nation's good as a whole(brothers in other areas need water) SOLUTION: Alongside making compulsory rain water harvesting, and constructing water storage structures in various villages, Full fledged Committee (comprising scientists, bureaucrats), Land acquisition act, Consult and make aware related states & people affected,soil study & Ground water conditions, Seismic conditions, Implement it step wise(25%) and look for its impact 5 years and then implement 25% and wait for 5 years, but give it a chance
Water diversions are complex undertaking, which should be taken up ONLY IF environmental and equity issues are properly compared against economic, health, safety, security gains, mainly long term. (Unfortunately experts can tweak studies to favor their objectives.) Anyway, to those who are highlighting examples from the USA, please note that US is still struggling to find a balance, even 50 to 70 years after interlinking and diverting rivers! Water issues still make news headlines here in California. They have not found a solution to their greed yet!
Interlinking rivers is not at all simple. I will assume the condition
that the authorities appointed to undertake this scheme are the
experts in their respective fields. I just want to point out more
ominous possibilities which can occur because of interlinking rivers.
None of the states in India actively implement measures in preventing
pollution and contamination of rivers and the connecting lakes,
interlinking such polluted waters just adds to the already
staggeringly intolerable BOD and COD limits of water which is barely
safe enough for domestic and industrial purposes. This directly leads
to another potential disaster if interlinked rivers becomes a reality.
Even if one river in one corner of the country is contaminated by
lethal substances such as oils, heavy metals or even biological
pathogens, it will virtually affect the major water sources of every
state in the country, thereby leaving no room for insulation from what
should essentially be an endemic crisis.
Apart from questionable financial viability of the river linking project, the consequential environmental damage of such a project needs a serious thought. Those who had filed the case in the Supreme Court may not have with them a detailed feedback on all aspects and may not have given necessary to all dimensions of the project. Cost of displacement and rehabilitation of project affected people, as mentioned in the article, are other factors which cannot be ignored. Perhaps one solution for the Supreme Court is to review its decision and invite experts’ comments before giving any further directives to the government.
This one seems to be a good proposition. Linking rivers will certainly eradicate flood and drought conditions. Problems may arise due to politics or due to peoples resilience. But can any one really make sure that our corrupt political system would even allow this proposition to become a reality. Getting things from drawing board to reality is a challenge. Who would ensure that these engineered water channels won't cause havocs like flood (we all know quality of work). Again, there comes the issue of people who would be relocating due to this. Though this project is promising, things that could hinder work should be addressed well before.
The national integration, state re-organisation, centre-state relationships, responsibilities of centre and state, rights of states and federal governments-all these things might have been done in haphazard manner after independence. The political leaders should have monitored the developments after independence,should have identified the problems at the beginning itself and should have made suitable modifications. No one can make a perfect product at the first instance itself. Instead the political leaders involved themselves in making themselves and the party strong. No chief minister trusts the federal government ministers fully and vice versa. The public servants, including ministers, should all fit into the system made for better governance and should not attempt to modify and fit the system to their requirement. Unless we concentrate on the foundation and check its effectiveness, trying to rectify the cracks of superstructure will be waste of time and efforts. We have no vision.
Rain water harvesting, desilting beds of all water bodies,using the silt for converting waste lands into fertile lands are simpler . cheaper ways of protecting people from draughts - floods. The funds of various employment guarantee schemes can be utilised for this purpuse. As implied by the author the current line of thinking is natural flow of river water should not be disturbed as far as possible.
I would thank to the author for putting this article on the opinion site. Inter-linking project is very nice concept to avoid the problem for both regions drought and flood prone. In adverse, we are going to make changes in nature's system so it should be backed with practicality and science. This project is very vast and will have drastic result. So, Government should try this project on small scale first and if it becomes successful then full-fledged work should begin.
I disagree with the author to the most part of this article. The
article carries too much of perceptions and doesn't deal with
practical alternatives to river-linking if any. What ecological impact
on the existing rivers? River interlinking doesn't let any river dry
out. It just creates a link between two rivers, so one need not fear
that the river biom will get affected. The author also goes on to say
it will create 'tensions'; what tension? Do we think we should not
work on national development because of some unscientific narrow-
minded 'tensions' we foresee?
i couldnt agree more with suresh, please keep the chatter from freelance journey out
of this very serious business of life and death for a huge majority of the indian
silent population
There have been several methods of water harvesting and water management for
hundreds of years in india which could solve the problem of water supply even in the
driest areas. But with the arrival of the British, Indians were told that their techniques
were backward and European engineering was the solution to all problems. Instead
of continuing the old technologies Indians after independence began to build canals
which bring the himalaya water into the desert Thar etc. Insane ideas like these
proved ineffective. So, besides the inpredictable environmental consequences India
could solve her water problems by means of cheaper indigenous technologies.
One of the options which needs to be considered in an Indian context is the issue of ground water. While inter basin linkage is a visible opiton for water transfer, what is ignored many a times is that there are deep underground water aquifers which as interlinked. Ensuring that we have enough water recharge within basins over time rising underground water tables across basins should ensure that we have enough basic water availability in every basin
At a time when there are problems relating to the sharing of waters, transfer of water across distant areas can easily aggravate these tensions. This should be avoided.
Good, thought provoking artile. Let us hope that the inter-linking of rivers will not lead us to a situation wherein India totally becomes either drought-prone or flood-prone at the same time, alternately.
this may be a nice project for us. but it will surely be a controversial when it comes to Bangladesh. Even when the water body crosses a state to another(like what we have for kaveri in between Karnataka and T.N)
When there is an important mistake (due to a miscalculation or to the intrusion of an unanticipated factor) in a vast project, then the bad consequences are also vast. The proposed project is vast and extremely complicated (like, for instance, Khrushchev's disastrous scheme for cultivating vast, hitherto uncultivated parts of the Soviet Union, or like the complicated scheme for drawing the borders between Pakistan and India). Many small projects of this kind should be tried out first, in order to learn more about the way in which this kind of operation really plays out. Alternative approaches to the problems should likewise be probed in reality. The experts should avoid hubris. The article is eminently sensible!
Depth is missing. no reference made to specific statistics supporting the argument.. whats wrong if west is flooded and east is not flooded!! if there is a link, the excess water flows from the flood area to a non flood area and its as simple as that..
A very sensible article. A river is not just a carrier of water like a pipe or even a canal. It is an ecosystem with multifarious roles and services to perform many of which donot and best not involve humans. Let them be.
The Supreme court directive to interlink the water-bodies of this vast
nation is bizarre indeed. How can a project so vast and expensive be
carried out straight without even studying the possibilities and
environmental impacts which is normally carried out even in the smallest
of projects? Moreover, the verdict comes at a time when the norms for
constructing multistory buildings stands revised and requires amenities
such as wide roads and fire stations in the vicinity. At such a
juncture, how can the court just order the rivers be linked simply?
Kudos to Mr. Bharat for presenting the recent river linking project of the govt in such a lucid manner. I agree with you about adverse situation due to climate change. Who knows what will happen if river linking causes another calamity type situation. So a through analysis of all possible outcomes should be done.
China is in the process of constructing an underground tunnel from surplus north to the water scarce south covering a distance of over 1000 km. India should look at this and connect all the rivers through underground tunnels. Otherwise land acquisition for the canals will be an endless process and will not happen even in a thousand years.
The label on the map showing number of interlinking river is not clearly visible .
regarding the article which demands the need of other options other than this interlinking, it could be preferred not to implement this project on the wider scale but implement in only semi-arid (not totally arid) areas and wait for a period to understand the dynamics such as mentioned silt loads, landslides, hills, plateaus, seismic belts, gorges, ravines, bends and curves.
and also the wider dynamics such as floods and droughts and change of weather in these areas and the surrounding areas whereas implementing this project would be seriously lead an unseen consequence because of the one-sided what can be called an extreme decision.
We are not sure of the technical and political consequences of linking rivers, particularly in the light of the controversial "Mullaperiyar" issue. Water conversation is the best and cheapest method rather than linking rivers. Every village should have its own system to preserve and recharge the ground water.
The court has given permission to open the Pandora box of conflicts.
Before jumping into water,let us think twice whether there is workable
alternatives.Let us not implement the wishes of those propagating
"the next war will be for water". Already in India a lot of
controversial subjects are available for regional people to fight, why
add one more?
When One person could delay the "koodamkulam" for more than a
year. Think there will be so many to delay the projects. It is a
caution. So try all alternative. Educate the people the "Value of
water" Save Water Save India "
Inter basin transfer of water from one geographic area to another is not a new concept. Existing examples are: 1. Transfer of colorado River Water to Southern California (Los Angeles Basin), and 2. Transfer of San Joaquin River Water from Nothern California to Southern California. Similar examples are existing in Auatralia, Isreal and other regions of Europe. How and when the water in large volumes could be transfered without adverse affects depend on many scientific,social, economical and environmental factors. Because of balanced water development in California, it has been enjoying a very healthy economy and it has a very diverse and vibrant agriculture sector. Therefore, "development" options should not be ruled out and at the same time non-structural options should be given equal weightage while making political,social and economic decisions. Evaluation of trade offs and balancing of benefits and costs should be critically analysed before decision making.
I don't think the author has established a clear a less disruptive and
alternative methods to solve the water crisis, definitely not to the
large scale water scarcity we have in most areas, not sure what his
expertise on building mega structures....so let's just leave it to
experts and not freelance journalist, who just cites a source to write
an article about it. I think we can just ignore the nay sayers for once...
It would be prudent for this publication to sustain a public discourse and raise awareness on this topic of 'river linking'. While no river needs to 'die' before reaching its maker--Samudram (unlike the ill-fated Colorado), all Indian rivers could do with better 'utilization'.To make the predominantly agrarian economy much more efficient, Indian rivers can not alternate between varatci (drought) and vellam (flood). Who knows what Mother Earth has in her plans in terms of tectonic shifts (remember the Saraswati?), or other changes, lest we get caught unable to feed our exploding population! There may even be additional benefits from smaller-scale hydro power in a distributed, off-grid generation. Keep all options open, and discuss in a federal yet regional scale so no parochial opinions produce sub-optimal solutions. Om.
Please Email the Editor