[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
dam-l Dr. Gopal Krishna Siwakoti on Kali Gandaki A HEP in Nepal (fwd)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:26:25 +0530
From: Himanshu Thakkar <cwaterp@del3.vsnl.net.in>
Subject: Dr. Gopal Krishna Siwakoti on Kali Gandaki A HEP in Nepal
Source: Kathmandu Post March 16, 2000
Harnessing hydro-dollar with conscience
By Dr Gopal Krishna Siwakoti
The Kali Gandaki ‘A’ (KGA) Hydroelectric Project is the largest and
most cherished project ever initiated
in Nepal. The project is supposed to create an installed capacity of
144 MW of power per annum. The
proponents of the project label it as the most studied run off river
project in Nepal in terms of
environmental mitigation while some locals have a contradictory view
with regard to redressing negative
social impacts. Some self-styled environmental fundamentalists have
been amplifying the issue of non
compliance to a height of entirely scrapping the already half
accomplished project with a suicidal
motivation. It is noteworthy that the same ultra activists had praised
the KGA as a precious project
during its inception.
The environmental mitigation programme of the mega project is a new
concept and experience in
Nepalese context. Thus, certainly, the reality of practical experience
in accommodating the socio enviro
dimensions in development activities seems to lag behind the rhetoric.
If we take a look at the possible
environmental impacts assessment (EIA) of the KGA in the context of
internationally accepted
requirements and conditionalities, there exists a below standard
compliance of a comprehensive EIA
and other components associated with it.
Major river water projects are known to have large scale impacts on the
physical and biological
environment. Direct impacts are felt in four broad regions: upstream of
the dam (submergence and
catchment areas), downstream of the dam (riverine and estuarine
ecosystems), command area (canal
impact region), areas away from the above three regions where project
related activities are carried out
(eg resettlement areas).
The KGA has demonstrated comprehensive studies on EIA of the project in
all these four areas.
Because of inadequate coordination among all stake holders on the
implementation level, the activities
seem to have proceeded without some of the requirements being
fulfilled, for instance, ensuring the
drinking water facility as an integral component of the project and
guaranteeing job for Seriously Project
Affected Families (SPAF) and project conditionalities laid down in the
Contract and the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) and the conditional environmental and social
clearance granted to the project
seem to have been duly upheld in good faith and intention. Some of the
ample evidence are the
construction of link roads, bridges, schools, electrification and the
proposed hospital and hatchery.
One of the greatest advantages of the project is that the Kali Gandaki
is a run off river with very little
habitation around the reservoir zone. Thus, fortunately, the project
does not have serious environmental
impacts in terms of situation displacement and waterlogging, except for
shortening the rafting
destination. The loss of 13 km long river bank, which will be converted
into a lake like strait is
predominantly not an agricultural land. This saves it from economic
threat of epic magnitudes. This
notwithstanding, some environmental impacts are anticipated downstream
of the project due to quota
fixation of the water flow especially in the dry season.
An operational rehabilitation programme for the Bote community is in
progress but does not seem to be
envisaged as a durable solution. Some key studies of the rehabilitation
programme and environmental
impacts affecting the Bote community have been undertaken. SPAF and PAF
still remain incomplete in
the absence of effective liaison between NEA and the Italian contractor
Impregilio SpA and also due to
legal complications. The vacuum of dialogue between the project and
certain sections of the community,
has temporarily led to unwanted tensions resulting in delay in
effective realization of environmental
mitigation measures and collective achievements. This has to be
immediately rectified to establish a
precedent on KGA that meets the parameter of trickle-up development
with human face and also to
strike a greater balance between the notion of development and
environmental conservation.
Although several studies and documents which the authorities have
prepared are publicly available,
there is an absence of full knowledge of the multitude of problems such
as environmental impacts which
are essentially unquantifiable. Often, some uncertainties are involved
due to lack of a system to
measure such impacts (eg mircoclimatic changes resulting from reservoir
filling and the fate of the 70
different species of fish available in the river). Since, the vast
majority of locals are economically
challenged and uneducated, in many instances, they often tend to be
more interested in demanding
token assistance for immediate relief and individual gain
(sub-contract, petty contract, etc) than
approaching collective bargaining for the benefit of the entire
community. The bitter reality is that, for
some, renovation of a hairline crack of the house is of first priority
than building a hospital, road, bridge
and even drinking water.
Loss of forests and terrestrial biological diversity is one of the
major grievances in any river project
worldwide. In the case of KGA, there is a little forest degraded in the
submerged zone. The project
territory does not contain a large diversity of flora and fauna that is
capable of affecting a large number of
populace similar to the Sardar Sarovar (Narmada) Dam in India. The
Three Gorges Dam of Yangtse River
in China to the Great Whale River Project in the Hudson Bay of Canada.
The impact in KGA does not
demand a mega plan for compensatory afforestation and wildlife measure.
Nonetheless, it has a
negative impact on the fishermen community resulting in complete
joblessness after the project is over
as the fish-rich river will no longer be conducive to fishing unless a
dream project of cage-culture
materializes. An alternative feasible way of recovering the loss of the
livelihood of the Bote community is
vital. It is advisable to mandatorily secure their involvement and
ownership in the proposed fish hatchery.
This is heightened by the fact that some Bote families have lost their
job for good and do not have any
alternative for their future.
The diverse range of environmental impacts of major river projects
requires a comprehensive EIA before
any project can be considered for clearance. This fact has been
recognized in the case of KGA following
systematic campaign and lobby on the part of civil society. The project
authorities are thus currently
pushing full steam to establish an effective liaison between the
community and the project in terms of
mitigating environmental impacts and minimizing social tensions. This
is definitely an affirmative signal.
It is imperative that any river project goes through the following
three steps regarding environmental
impacts:
A complete environmental impact analysis should be conducted before the
project is considered for
clearance and the results of the analysis be used for judging the
viability and desirability of the project.
If the project is considered viable and desirable on social, economic,
environmental and technical
grounds, it is necessary to take preventive and ameliorative measures
related to the negative
environmental impacts. This requires complete workplans and their
implementation.
Finally, once the project is built, it is important to constantly
monitor environmental impacts, and
measures taken to address them.
These three steps: prior impact analysis, implementation of
environmental workplans, and post
construction monitoring are now well accepted parts of the planning
process of river projects the world
over. Nepal has to cautiously move forward in advancing towards
harnessing hydro dollar as this is the
only staple nature’s gift. To restore credibility, politicians and
planners have obligations to ensure the full
participation of citizens from planning to decision making to
implementation and refrain from politically
polluting the river water.