Post on 02-Feb-2023
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts of Hydro
Power Projects in Uttarakhand:
Governance & Audit Issues
Ravi ChopraPeople’s Science Institute
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Hydropower Development Potential in
Uttarakhand
S.
No
.
Project Status Micro-Mini Small Medium Large Total
≤ 1MW >1MW
≤2
>2MW
<5
≥5MW
<25
≥25MW
<100
≥ 100
MW
1 Commissioned 11.96
(54)
7.15
(5)
31.3
(9)
121.6
(9)
246.15
(5)
3206
(10)
3624.16
(92)
2 Under
Construction
2.78
(15)
3.5
(2)
20.4
(5)
76.5
(8)
175
(2)
3014
(6)
3292.18
(38)
Total 14.74
(69)
10.65
(7)
51.7
(14)
198.1
(17)
421.15
(7)
6220
(16)
6916.3
(130)
Source:UJVNL, December 2013 Figures in () give the number of projects
S.
No.
Project Status Micro-Mini Small Medium Large Total
MW
≤ 1
MW
>1
MW
≤ 2
>2 MW
<5
≥5 MW
< 25
≥25
MW <
100
≥ 100
MW
1 Awaiting
Clearance
1
(1)
1.9
(1)
7
(2)
303.8
(22)
196
(3)
2808
(9)
3317.70
(38)
2 S & I Stage 21.28
(58)
32.85
(18)
101.25
(28)
1086.25
(84)
2233.8
(63)
13330
(31)
16805.43
(282)
GrandTotal 37.02
(128)
45.4
(26)
159.95
(44)
1588.1
(123)
2850.9
(73)
22358
(56)
27039.4
(450)
Source: UJVNL, December 2013: S & I= Survey and Investigation
Under Consideration Installed Capacities (MW)
Installed Capacities of Commissioned & Under
Construction HEPs in Uttarakhand
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Life-cycle environmental and social
impacts of HEPs - Ia
ACTIVITY IMPACT
Pre-Project Construction
Construction of approach
roads
Land acquisition (displacement, loss of lands, homes, and
livelihoods)
Deforestation (loss of tree cover, access to CPRs, soil
erosion and landslides, loss of flora and fauna, changes in
micro-climate)
Disposal of debris and earth (loss of trees, river water
pollution)
Construction of housing
for staff and labour
Deforestation
Pollution due to sewage releases
Quarrying Noise pollution, slopes destabilization, disruption of
underground seepages and damage to houses
Project Construction
Tunneling Air and noise pollution, destabilization of slopes, damage
to houses, disturbing wildlife, drying of springs, disposal
of muck into the river, psychological trauma to people
and animals due to the repeated blasts
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Life-cycle environmental and social
impacts of HEPs - Ib
Dam Construction Disruption of river flows (biotic changes, disruption of
natural functions, e.g., sediments disposal, land shaping,
nutrient cycling), river pollution, loss of aesthetic,
cultural, economic and recreational values.
Project Operation
Testing of Tunnels Slope destabilization (loss of tree cover, land,
livelihoods, water sources and access to CPRs)
Water Storage and
Release
Sedimentation (effect on river water quality)
Disruption of river flow
Secondary effects (release of greenhouse gases, warming
of valleys, increased earthquake risks, floods,
downstream urban and industrial development
Laying of Power Lines Deforestation (loss of wild life habitat), soil erosion
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
CAG Report - 2009
• Reviewed 48 projects (~2423 MW) of IPPs allotted between
1993 and 2006. Till March 2009 only 5 completed (418 MW).
• Delays due to land acquisition, forest clearance and capacity
enhancement problems.
• Poor quality pre-feasibility studies (loss to the state).
• No punitive action against developers for defaulting on IA.
• Poor monitoring of project execution, lack of environmental &
safety concerns, generation losses.
• Dry river beds, muck disposal into rivers & poor afforestation.
• Inadequate state government support for timely land
acquisition, forest clearance, R&R and installation of grid
infra.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
An Expert Body (EB) was set up by
MoEF in October 2013 on the directions of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
ToRs (SC)
• Assess whether the existing and
ongoing/under construction hydropower
projects have contributed to the
environmental degradation
• Make a detailed study and evaluate as to
how far HEPs have contributed to the
aggravation of damage caused by
downstream floods.
• Examine, as observed by WII, whether
the proposed 24 projects in Uttarakhand
are causing a significant impact on the
biodiversity of the Alaknanda &
Bhagirathi river basins.
Expert Body ToRs
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Minimal flows released downstream of HEPs leading to loss of river
integrity, disruption of fish migration, loss of acquatic biota and diversity.
Environmental Impacts: River Flows (a)
R. Bhagirathi upstream & downstream of MB-I
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts: River Flows (b)
R. Alaknanda upstream & downstream of Vishnuprayag HEP
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts: River Flows (c)
Courtesy: SANDRP
Construction of multiple projects fragments river length affecting the riverine
biota & diversity. Between Maneri (Uttarkashi) and Koteshwar (Tehri
Garhwal) 110 km of the Bhagirathi is disrupted, almost half its total length.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts: Water Quality (a)
River water quality is severely impacted during the construction stage due to
unscientific & unlawful muck dumping from roads & tunnel construction. Poor
monitoring by regulatory authorities.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts : Water Quality (b)
A comprehensive study by NEERI has highlighted the deleterious effect of the
Tehri dam on the unique self purifying ability of Gangajal in R. Bhagirathi.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts : Water Quality (c)
Cascading decline of self cleansing ability of R. Bhagirathi due to multiple dams.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts: Biodiversity (a)
The most serious impact on biodiversity is the loss of the riverine ecosystem
along the rim of the Tehri reservoir .
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts: Slope Stability (a)
The destruction does not end even after the dams are built. Landslides due to
repeated raising and lowering of the water level in the Tehri reservoir.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts: Slope Stability (b)
Land subsidence and fissures in Mohan Negi village on the rim of the Tehri reservoir.
Courtesy: Navin Juyal
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Environmental Impacts: Slope Stability (b)
Land subsidence at Chayeen village in Chamoli district after commissioning of
the Vishnuprayag HEP
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Social Impacts
(a) Drying of springs and (b) Housing damages due to blasting
(a) (b)
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Aggravate Disaster Impacts (a)
The Phata – Byung dam at Sitapur on R. Mandakini was not designed to take the
flood of about 2000 cumecs that swept down the valley in June 2013.Water level
rose almost 36 ft behind the dam.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Aggravate Disaster Impacts (b)
Himalayan rivers carry huge amounts of sediments besides water. But the dams in
the IHR are not designed for the sediment loads. Destruction at the Vishnuprayag
HEP due to the heavy sediment load.
Ravi Chopra
Navin Juyal
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Aggravate Disaster Impacts (c)
Temporal changes in the landscape at Srinagar. (a) 2007 when there was no muck
dumped at the river bank. (b) 2009 muck dumping in progress and (c) after the flood
when a part of the muck and the university stadium ground was washed away.
Navin Juyal
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Aggravate Disaster Impacts (d)
Geochemical analyses of flood sediments collected along the course of R. Alaknanda
below the barrage indicate significant phyllite contribution (from muck) varying
from 47% to 23% thereby raising the river bed during the flood and inundating the
lower parts of Srinagar. MD indicates muck dumping sites.
Navin Juyal
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Glacier Impacts (a)
Distribution of glaciers in different river basin of Uttarakhand Himalaya (Raina and
Srivastava, 2008)
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Glacier Impacts (b)
Hyperconcentrated sediment laden water was obstructed by the Vishnuprayag
barrage which caused a temporary lake. The lake finally breached along the weak
debris laden left flank. As a result the sudden sediment laden flood surge caused
large-scale damage downstream (Pandukeshwar and Govindghat
Navin Juyal
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Recommendations for immediate action – (a)
•Cancellation of 23 out of 24 Projects recommended for review by WII
•Ensure Environmental Flows
•No Dams in the Paraglacial Zone
•Legislate Eco-Sensitive Zones and Pristine in the Ganga river system
•Review EIA Procedure and insulate the EIA agency from the project
developers.
•All projects > 2 MW in the Ganga river system shall require prior ECs
from MoEF and where necessary from the NBWL.
•Fresh Clearances for old projects like Lakhwar (300 MW) and Vyasi
(120 MW) that do not have the now mandatory EIA/EMP/DMP studies.
•CEIA/REIA/SEA:should be done by MoEF for all rivers in the Ganga
river system.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Recommendations for immediate action – (b)
•River Water Quality: Evolve technically better & ecologically sustainable
methods for muck disposal at HEP construction sites. Strengthen MoEF’s
personnel and procedures for post-sanction monitoring.
•Bumper-to-Bumper Dams: Scientific baseline studies required on diversity
and populations of floral and faunal species in different rivers of the Ganga
river system to decide the minimum distances between two consecutive HEPs.
Restoration: River bed profiles at Phata-Byung, Singoli-Bhatwari,
Vishnuprayag and Srinagar HEPs have changed significantly. Prior clearance
from MoEF after fresh analysis of the project hydrology and necessary
redesigning for river restoration.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
•Catchment Area Treatment: Community-based CA and CAT plan execution
must be done by the State FD within the construction period of the project.
•Redesigning Dams: Model studies of structures needed to withstand heavy
sediment loads in the Ganga river system during floods.
•Issue River Regulation Zone (RRZ) guidelines: Civil works along the
banks of River Ganga and encroachments in its flood plains must be monitored
and avoided.
•Enforce a Total Ban on River Bed Sand Mining: In the main stem of the
river and its major tributaries.
•Assessing Cultural Impacts of HEPs on the Ganga: Assess the impacts of
HEPs on age-old traditions associated with the flow of Ganga and impacts on
holy sites, historical places.
Recommendations for medium term action
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
I hold that economic progress in the sense I
have put it (of material advancement without
limits) is antagonistic to real (moral) progress.
--Mahatma Gandhi
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Thank You
653, Indira Nagar
Dehra Doon - 248 006
Uttarakhand
Web : www.peoplesscienceinstitute.org
Mail : psiddoon@gmail.com
Phone : +91 135 2763649, 2763650
Fax : +91 135 2760334
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
fo’oL; ekrj% loZ loZ’pso egkQyk% AbR;srk lfjr% jktu~ lek[;krk ;FkkLe`fr AA
“O king! Rivers are mothers of the world; all of them bestow great rewards.
I have enumerated as many as my memory enables me to.”
-- Mahabharat, Bhishma Parva, Ch 9, verses 37/38
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Expected Climate Change Impacts
Temperatures in the Indian sub-continent will rise between 3.5 and5.5ºC by 2100 (Rupa Kumar et al. 2006)
Impacts are expected to intensify in the Himalayas – due to theirbeing a very sensitive system.
Many Himalayan glaciers are retreating faster than the worldaverage.
The rate of retreat of the Gangotri Glacier over the last threedecades was more than three times the rate during the preceding200 years
Rapid reduction of glaciers – impacting stream flows, hydrology andbiodiversity downstream.
Increased disasters, glacial lakes outbursts and landslides.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
River Flows
• Shrinking glaciers, loss of year round flows and construction of HEPs
threaten river flows
• Hence reviving subsurface flows, minimizing short and long range
threats to glaciers and environmental flows d/s of dams are essential.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Protection of Wild & Scenic Rivers
• Upper reaches of Himalayan rivers have high wilderness value
• Legislation required to protect such wilderness and scenic stretches.
• 135km Gaumukh to Uttarkashi eco-sensitive area and declaration of
Tirthan river in HP as a wild river are important steps.
• Wild & scenic river stretches offer livelihoods possibilities.
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
• The current opposition is due to perceived loss of resources, threats
to life and livelihoods, no direct benefits to local people and cultural
issues.
• Conceptual shift from maximum resource exploitation to sustainable
& optimum resource use.
• Environmental flows d/s of dams must be guaranteed; monitoring
by local communities.
• Sanctioning of projects only after approval by affected Gram Sabhas
and open/transparent procedures
• Priority to locally owned micro and mini hydro projects.
• Community friendly R&R policies required; all villages lying above
or below tunnels are project affected villages.
• Need to reassess hydropower potential keeping in mind
environmental and social aspects.
Safe & Sustainable Hydropower
Development -- I
iCED Jaipur – July, 2015
Safe & Sustainable Hydropower
Development -- II
• Safe technologies – tunnel boring machines, insurance coverage, new
dam designs and use of the Precautionary Principle.
• Green restoration with CAMPA funds to be done locally through
Gram Panchayats.
• A Himalayan Rivers Commission to prepare a publicly accepted
rivers conservation and hydropower policy is needed – first focus on
demand management & alternate power sources. Basin-scale
hydropower planning approach.
• Honesty in compliances – EIAs, Jan Sunwais, approval conditions.
Monitoring by local communities.
• Shares in companies & investments in local SHGs, small production
units as part of CSR activities.
• Local communities must be partners in development.