DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Interlinking Rivers of India Is It Necessary

ABSTRACT India is going to inter link all of its rivers. Its one of the news in the talk from the past few years. River interlinking is a project that is both visionary and controversial in claiming to cure all of the countrys water problems. The goal is to link all the countrys rivers together with the ultimate aim of diverting the surplus water available to the place were it is not within the country. This also eyes on flood control, hydroelectric power generation and many other similar benefits. However, Interlinking at the same time has the potential to become another grand, large-scale project of the sort that creates more problems than it proposes to solve. In this paper the authors deals with few of those possible merits and demerits of this project. And why our neighboring countries like Bangladesh oppose this project. Is interlinking is the only solution for the water problems existing now in the country. If not so, then what are the other possible solutions to solve this crisis. Is this project needs further analysis and considerations before implementation. Finally, authors solutions for this as conclusion. INTRODUCTION Some parts of the country are experiencing drought conditions, when some other regions are flooded. This has

become a periodic phenomenon, lacking any predictability. Once again, this clearly brings out, the need for the interlinking of our rivers for effective utilization of surplus water in a balanced manner among all geographic regions with enlightened cooperation between the States and the Centre. - Presidents address, 60th Independence Day. In recent times there has been a great deal of talk on interlinking of rivers right from the north to the south and from the west to the east. The concept is very romantic. Fancy some one in Tamil Nadu being able to drink the water of holy Ganga! The thought is mind-boggling. But several questions of late are being asked. Is it really worthwhile to interlink Indian rivers? Is the concept cost-effective? Is it economically viable? Is it ecologically acceptable? The more such questions are asked, the more doubts are being raised and current thinking in responsible quarters is that howsoever noble the aims of our policy-makers, it is wisdom to go slow in pursuing a vain dream. This paper addresses about the extremes of the project and the other options available to meet out the problem. BACKGROUND: The idea of linking rivers for various purposes in the sub-continent is not new. The historical background of this project extends back to nineteenth century as below: Nineteenth century- Sir Arthur Cotton conceived a plan to link rivers in Southern India for inland navigation. The project was partially implemented and dropped due to the decline of water navigation in the face of rapid development of railways. 1972- Ganga Cauverylink proposed by Union Minister Dr. K.L. Rao. 1974- Garland Canal proposal by Captain Dinshaw J Dastur, a pilot. Both plans rejected due to technical infeasibility and huge costs. 1980- Ministry of Water Resources frames the National Perspective Plan (NPP) envisaging inter-basin transfer. 1982- The National Water Development Agency (NWDA) set up to carry out prefeasibility studies. These form the basis of the ILR plan.

1999 A national commission (NCIWRDP) set up to review NWDA reports concluded that it saw no imperative necessity for massive water transfers in the peninsular component and that the Himalayan Component would require more detailed study.

Aug 15, 2002- President Abdul Kalam mentions the need for river linking in his Independence-day speech, based on which senior advocate Ranjit Kumar filed a PIL in Supreme Court.

Oct 2002- Supreme Court recommends that the government formulate a plan to link the major Indian rivers by the year 2012. Dec 2002- Govt. appointed a Task Force (TF) on Interlinking of rivers (ILR) led by Mr. Suresh Prabhu. The deadline was revised to 2016.

THE PROPOSAL: The current proposal is of two components- Himalayan component and peninsular component. The Himalayan Component proposes fourteen canals and the Peninsular Component sixteen. In the Himalayan Component, many dams are slated for construction on tributaries of the Ganga and Brahmaputra in India, Nepal, and Bhutan. The project intends to link the Brahmaputra and its tributaries with the Ganga and the Ganga with the Mahanadi River to transfer surplus water from east to west. The scheme envisages flood control in the Ganga and Brahmaputra basins and a reduction in water deficits for many states. In the Peninsular Component, river interlinks are envisaged to benefit the states of Orissa, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Pondicherry, and Maharashtra. The linkage of the Mahanadi and Godavari rivers is proposed to feed the Krishna, Pennar, Cauvery, and Vaigai rivers. Transfer of water from Godavari and Krishna entails pumping 1,200 cusecs of water over a crest of about 116 meters. Interlinking the Ken with the Betwa, Parbati, Kalisindh, and Chambal rivers is proposed to benefit Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. The river link network envisages knitting together ten major rivers across the nation, unheard of in human history.

Links Identified in Himalayan Component 1. Brahmaputra-Ganga 2. Kosi-Ghagra 3. Gandak-Ganga 4. Ghagra-Yamuna 5. Sarda-Yamuna 6. Yamuna-Rajasthan 7. Rajasthan-Sabarmati 8. Chunar-Sone Barrage 9. Sone Dam-Southern tributaries of Ganga 10. Brahmaputra-Ganga 11. Kosi-Mechi 12. Farakka-Sunderbans 13. Ganga-Damodar-Subernarekha 14. Subernrekha-Mahanadi

Links Identified in Peninsular Component 15. Mahanadi (Manibadra)-Godavari (Dowlaiswaram) 16. Godavari (Inchampalli lowdam)-Krishna (Nagarjunsagar tail) 17. Godavari (Inchampalli)-Krishna Nagarjunsagar) 18. Godavari (Polavaram) - Krishna (Vijayawada) 19. Krishna (Almatti)-Pennar 20. Krishna (Srisailam)-Pennar 21. Krishna (Nagarjunsagar)-Pennar (Somasila) 22. Pennar (Somasila)-Cauvery (Grand Anicut) 23. Cauvery (Kattalai)-Vaigai-Gundar 24. Ken-Betwa 25. Parbati-Kalisindh-Chambal 26. Par-Tapi-Narmada 27. Damanaganga-Pinjal 28. Bedti-Varda 29. Netravati-Hemavati 30. Pamba-Achankovil-Vaippar

Proposed links BUDGET AND COST ESTIMATES: The estimated cost (in 2002) of interlinking rivers stands at Rs. 5,60,000 crores (Goyal 2003)equivalent to approximately $122.7 billionwith an annual outlay over thirty-five years of Rs. 16,000 crores ($3.5 billion). Another estimate puts it close to 5, 56,000 crores ($121.8 billion), out of which Rs. 3, 30,000 crores ($72.3 billion) is earmarked for linking the Himalayan rivers with the various peninsular rivers (Sharma 2003). The Central Government is estimated to need Rs. 20,000 crores ($4.4 billion) a year to execute the project (Goyal 2003). Gujja (2003) estimates Rs. 5, 50,000 crores ($120.5 billion) as the cost of completing what would be the largest civil engineering project ever in India. As a long term project, the actual inflation and potential cost increases during such

a long span are anybodys guess. Long term planning and a sound financial simulation are required to meet the standard of due diligence for such proposals. Yet, the government seems ready to commit this huge expenditure mostly because of popular sentiment.

Main Budgetary and Other Features of the River Interlinking Plan

EXPECTED BENEFICTS: The following are few expected benefits of the project: Agriculture - totally 35 million hectares will be irrigated Power generation -34,000 MW of HEP is expected to be generated Flood control in surplus areas Drought control in scarce areas Inland navigation GDP growth, nearly 4% Creation of employment activities National unity and integration EXPECTED ILL EFFECTS: Submergence of large areas of forests, lands, and reserves Displacement of large population Increased Political pressures and conflicts Change in climatic pattern

PROBLEMS IN IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT: Political consensus: The linking itself demands cooperation and coordination between various states. Not only between states, also between our neighboring countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, China. But even within India we have unsolved conflicts between surplus states and scarce states. For example Cauvery issue (between Karnataka and Tamil nadu), Mullai Periyar issue (between Tamil nadu and Kerala). The states which are having surplus water shows no interest over this proposal. Even few states like Kerala, Punjab is against this project. Thus before the implementation all this issues should be solved and a centralized law should be created for future control. Financing : The project needs huge amount of money for implementation. The estimated cost according to 2002 is - 250% of the Indias entire tax revenues in 2002 - 1/4th of Indias annual GDP. - More than twice the entire irrigation budget of India since 1950. But it will increase with years. India as a developing country cannot spend that much. Even though World Bank, Asian bank, etc are ready to give loan we have to consider it thereby not losing our independence. The additional cost to be spent for future maintenance of canals and dams is also to be considered. Flood period: The basic idea of networking rivers is to convey unwanted floodwaters from one place to another where it is deficient and needed. But this idea does not consider that the period when it is surplus in the donor area (July to October in the Ganga-Brahmaputra basins) is not the time when it is needed most in the recipient area (January to May in the peninsular rivers). In such a situation, it will be necessary to construct enormous holding reservoirs that will add to financial, social and environmental costs. Desertification:

Flooding is not undesirable because it results in deposition of alluvium particularly in the delta areas of rivers to maintain the fertility of the land by compensating loss of topsoil due to natural erosion. Any system that prevents or severely reduces natural flooding (by diversion of floodwater) will cause land fertility to gradually reduce over the years, thus desertifying the land. The greatest loss that land can suffer is desertification by loss of topsoil. The land that will be so lost to cultivation is the most fertile delta land, and therefore the impact of this on total food production needs to be factored into the discussion. History tells us that entire civilizations have vanished due to desertification. Pollution: Annual floods flush industrial and municipal pollution in the Ganga down to the ocean. Reducing the flow in the Ganga by diversion will increase the concentration of pollution in the river. A live example is the Yamuna, from which Haryana and Delhi draw so much water that it barely flows after Delhi and the water quality at Delhi is so poor as to be positively poisonous. It is relevant to note that the expensive project to clean the Ganga has not succeeded even with annual flooding. This is not to argue that pollution of river water is inherent and may never be checked at source, but that this factor is yet another that needs to be included in the legitimacy check for the project. Chance for disaster: As this requires pumping and storing of large amount of water, any malfunctioning in these components will lead to a huge disaster both by lives and properties. It may be either due to nature, poor maintenance or human activity. Thus security of the network will be an enormous load on security forces of Central and State Governments. Land acquisition and rehabilitation: One cannot consider the acquisition of 8000 sq km of land when acquisition of land even in acres is a vexed issue, which has taken years. Even if fresh legislation makes it possible within a short period, its implementation will cause untold misery and injustice to the displaced people in obtaining compensation due to systemic corruption. Besides, land for resettlement is mostly not available.

From a humanitarian perspective, millions of people will be forcibly displaced by this project. A sound rehabilitation and resettlement program for these people needs to be put in place. It has been estimated that 21-56 million people have been displaced by large dams over the past 50 years in India, 40% of them tribal people. Less than 50% of those displaced were rehabilitated. In this situation this project demands 2 to 3 times of the land required above. Technology challenges: This networking involves connection by three methods: pumping, canals, and tunnels. The above requires suitable topography and technical feasibility. These technological options envisaged have both economic as well as socio-environmental consequences to deal with.

Experience from similar projects: Large scale river diversions that have been attempted in other countries have proved to be ecologically disastrous and the benefits short-lived. These countries today spend billions of dollars in decommissioning dams and reversing damages. Examples: 1) Aral Sea, Soviet Union 2) The Case of the Colorado, USA 3) Irtysh-Karaganda (Satpaevs) Canal 4) The South-eastern Anatolia Project (GAP), Turkey 5) The Three Gorges and The North- South Transfer project 6) The Spanish National Hydrological plan, Spain Though the conditions and population distribution pattern is entirely different from above cases in our country, these conditions have to be considered before implementation. Other factors: In spite of the above the coming factors also needs consideration. Possibility for Increase in salinity,

Possibility for drying up of surplus rivers, Possibility for Change in monsoon and climatic pattern thus spoiling our entire plan, Depletion of flora and fauna

IMPACT OF NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES: Bangladesh: Bangladesh receives its water mainly through Brahmaputra River which mixes with sea there. The interlinking project requires a dam to be constructed at Bengal to convert water to south. As the neighbor is located at the downstream the diversion will reduce the water supply to them. If it is more then the countries agriculture which mainly depending on this water will be a question mark. Even our project has the tendency to desertify the entire Bangladesh. So Bangladesh is strongly opposing this project. A mutual treaty is thus required before implementation of the project. Now Bangladesh claims that India is flouting the Ganges treaty, 1996. Nepal, Bhutan : Dams will need to be built in Nepal and Bhutan, in order to store the surplus water and later divert it to deficit regions. Thus land has to be acquitted from these countries. But this is not an easy task to carry with. China : China controls the flow of water in the Brahmaputra, Indus and Sutlej Rivers. China is considering a proposal to build a dam on Yarlung Tsangpo (which becomes Brahmaputra in India) which will generate 40000 megawatts of energy (more than twice generated by the Three Gorges dam). If this project goes through, the entire equation of surplus and deficit in India will change. This project and other similar grand projects being planned by China have the capacity to completely throw Indias plans off the mark.

 Pakistan : The Indus (known as Sindhu) is the principal river of Pakistan. Its source is actually in Tibet; it flows through Kashmir coming out of the hills between Peshawar and Rawalpindi. The remainder of its route to the sea is in the plains of the Punjab and Sind. Passing by Hyderabad, it ends in a large delta to the south-east of Karachi that has now been recognized by conservationists as one of the world's most important ecological regions. India and Pakistan partition created a conflict over the waters of the Indus basin. In 1960, after several years of arduous negotiations at the behest of the World Bank, the Indus Waters Treaty was signed. Till date, this is the only agreement that has been faithfully implemented and upheld by both India and Pakistan. In future if Pakistan has any second thoughts in this then our project will become meaningless. Thus a lasting peace with Pakistan is a must for development of the interlinking project. OTHER POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS: As interlinking of rivers is not economically viable and in fact raises numerous socio-political and environmental problems, the feasibility of many decentralized small scale projects as an alternative to the centralized interlinking of rivers project or a combination of the two needs to be assessed. Following are some of the structural and institutional alternatives to the interlinking of rivers. Rainwater and floodwater harvesting: One possible solution to the water crisis being faced by the country is going back to the old tried and tested methods of the past, those of rainwater harvesting. Rain is the source of all water on the earth. If we capture rain where it falls, it will be sufficient to fulfill the needs of that particular area. India receives an average of 100hrs of rain in a year. The challenge is to capture this rain and use it over 8660hrs that make up the rest of the year. The method of capture and the amount of capture varies from one region to another, depending on the topography, amount of precipitation, type of soil, etc. For this purpose India can be divided into various ecological regions and the harvesting techniques accordingly implemented. Few successful methods are already in use in India, like

1) Kuis/Beris Rajasthan 2) Bamboo Drip Irrigation Meghalaya Similar suitable methods can be adopted to improve efficiency. Rooftop rainwater harvesting In urban areas where a lot of open space is not available for harvesting rain water, rooftops can be utilized for this purpose. This does not require very high capital investment or restructuring of existing building. It can facilitate recharging of groundwater, which is major issue in urban areas having a high percentage of impermeable surface area. Rooftop water harvesting can also helping reducing the pollution caused in the surface water bodies by urban water runoff. For large scale implementation, governmental support will be required in terms of providing incentives to the citizens to do so or by making it a national policy. It has been made mandatory for all government building in Chennai and other big cities to meet their demands of water to certain extent. Improving efficiency of already existing infrastructure Improving the efficiency of the water already available to us and the structures that already exist is the other possible way. Investment of our limited resources in these is likely to be fruitful. Expanding the irrigated area, getting more water will be useful only in tandem with efforts to build highly efficient new structures and improvement in efficiency of what we already have. CONCLUSION: Every project needs complete assessment before implementation. Thus this needs a thorough feasible study before implementation. The studies and research done by the government agencies have been kept strictly confidential. Information regarding this project should be made available to the scientific community and the public so as to enable them to judge, comment and if required contest the project that has the potential to change their lives and the lives of the future generations dramatically.

According to our point of view, India as a developing country is not in a position to undertake such a huge experimentation which has the tendency to turn the clock around. Thus as a first step, few links which are not having much conflicts and problems, and independent can be tried first before implementing the entire proposal as it is. If that proved to be fruitful we can slowly move on to complete networking. During this testing period we should try to solve the conflicts within state and with our neighbors. Till that we can follow any of the above other solutions either alone or as a combination to meet out our water demand. No doubt that we will become the extreme power of this world in case of success of this project. REFERENCES: Agarwal, A., S. Narain, and I. Khurana. 2001. Making water everybodys business. New Delhi: Centre for Science and Environment. Goyal, J.2003. Is interlinking of rivers viable? Chandigarh: The Tribune (March 13). http://tribuneindia.com/2003/20030313/science.htm#1. Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. 1980. The national perspective. New Delhi.http://wrmin.nic.in/interbasin/perspective.htm. Articles on - The Hindu, New Indian Express, Frontline. http://www.riverlinks.nic.in (Task Force on Interlinking) Dev Goel, Florida State University, Interlinking Indian Rivers: Bane or Boon? http://dscholarship.lib.fsu.edu/undergrad/132 Google search engine