|Water Conflicts and Hydroelectricity in South AsiaThe Indus Water Treaty. A Review article
by Nasrullah Khan Kalair
|Transboundary river water distribution agreements tethering neighboring countries are overstretched, at least between Pakistan and India. Tens of hydropower dam on western Indus Basin Rivers are transforming into a real threat to lower riparian. Industrial expansions, population growth, global warming, oil and gas depletion scenarios further worsen the water situation when the water flow declines 8-9 times bellow the minimum agreed limit. Underground water pumping in excess of natural recharge rates has reached to stage of continued free fall in Indus Basin. Energy crisis, economic meltdown, global warming and climate change scenarios require fine-tuned transboundary laws to share the international rivers. This work points out dire need of new global water laws to sort out real transboundary river conflicts transforming into water wars. Business as usual approach may transform water skirmishes into full fledged armed conflicts. Water is life which virtually drives all the rest of geopolitical realities.
1. Water and Power Nexus
World’s first DC hydropower house, Cragside in Northumberland, was operated in England (UK) in 1878. Thomas Edison invented first long life incandescent lamp in 1879 before which carbon filament based short lived lamps were available. First US Niagara hydropower station started delivering DC electricity in 1881. Nichlas Tesla invented the first three phase AC generator in 1988 that was used in Niagara Fall hydro station in 1885. Most of European countries got hydropower stations from 1880 to 1890 simultaneously. British brought this technology to India in early 1900s. Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) was established in Pakistan in1859. British government had already developed large barrages and canals systems for irrigation. WAPDA engineers constructed 1000 MW Mangla dam in 1867, 3500 MW Tarbella dam in 1976 and 2000 run-of-river Chashma power house in 2004. World’s largest hydropower producers are China, Canada, USA, Brazil, Russia, India, Norway and Japan which have total installed capacities of 196.79, 88.974, 79.511, 69.08, 45.00, 33.60, 27.528 and 27.229GW. Famous Chinese three gorges dam since 1994 produces 22,500 MW electricity and proposed Congo Grand Inga dam will produce 39,000 MW by 2014. A 50,000 MW dam is under proposal on Red Sea in Africa. Chinese install hydropower capacity is more than the total combine hydropower capacities of USA, Canada and Japan. Chinese hydropower generation capacity is about six times more than Indian and 33 times more than Pakistani hydropower generation. Indian hydropower generation capacity is about 5-6 times more than Pakistan’s, yet it is building dozens of dams on rivers which were given to Pakistan under Indus Water Treaty in 1960. India had 300 dams in 1947 which have increased to 4000 by 2000. About 70% of new dams were built during 1971 and 1989.
2. Transboundary Rivers Conflicts
Upper riparian (India) has started diverting and holding off shared rivers waters under its innovatory dam policies which is starving lower riparian Pakistan (Ben and Sing, 2000). May be run-of-river type hydropower stations even low head dam construction could not matter if upper riparian stops diverting shared waters through underground tunnels can canals. India has embarked on diverting western rivers waters through across connecting canals from Jehlum to Chenab through 80km long tunnel, Chenab to Ravi through Marhu tunnel, interconnection of Beas to Sutlej and Sutlej to Ganges through proposed express link canal which is absolute violation of Indus Water Teaty. IPCC experts believe the global warming has caused the August 2010 flash flood in Pakistan which affected 20-25 million people (IPCC, 2010). Climate change experts guess under rapidly rising global warming the water distribution conflicts may lead to armed conflicts among nations in future (Clionadh, 2007). Transboundary river conflicts include water shortages as well as geopolitical reasons (Nils, 2006). Water conflict between Pakistan and India is building up due to fast melting of glaciers. Middle Eastern countries take water availability as a strategic weapon (Alees, 1994). Palestinians per capita water consumption is 60 liters per day in West Bank whereas Israelis use 330 liters per day (5 times more) (Stephen, 2008). Fair water distribution is one of the key issues in Israel-Palestinian agreement today (David and Julie, 2010). Arab-Israel conflict is getting aggravated by water conflicts (Mustafa, 1994). Israel is also trying to secure access to Nile, Euphrates and Ceyhan in Turkey. Global research observers blame Israel for stealing Arab waters (Sawsan, 2010). People have been occupying waters since antiquity but the water flows today and they have gone the same is going to happen with present and future generations.
Historic wrecks are often the source of conflict as well as consensus (Paul and Craig, 2000). Transboundary water conflicts can not be solved using game theory geopolitics bearing undercurrents (Kaveh, 2010) rather fair rules yet to be developed by United Nations in the name of International Rivers Water Sharing Laws. Shared river waters conflicts are both inter and intra state types (Hans et al, 2000) that require global laws to safeguard lower riparian (Paul et al, 2006). Without UN backed water laws the long held agreements may break and old confrontations can resurface (Eran, 2000). Water distribution experts have already proposed several models (Irene et al, 1986; Marc et al, 1987; Giordano et al, 2007, Joseph et al, 2004) that facilitate UN to formulate transboundary water sharing and conflict resolution laws. Mass migrations and water conflicts intensification has been noted in Tanzania since last one decade (Milline, 2005) and Pakistan during August 2010 floods. The developed countries sustain dilemmas in developing countries that lead to talent migration causing serious blows to economies of developing countries (Schon and Ian, 2009).
Water situation is getting worse in USA and China but extremely critical in Brazil, India and Pakistan where underground water table is falling at rate of 3-5cm per year. India is building several dozens dams and diversion canals on shared rivers, Indian hydro tactics have caused droughts and flash floods horrors in Pakistan. India is constructing 24-25 dams on river Chenab that feeds to central Punjab housing 90-100 million people. India relates it to her growing power needs but Pakistan takes it aqua bomb capable of causing droughts and flash floods. Recent flash flood due to monsoons rains and timed injection of Indian dam waters has inflicted 25000 lives, 1-2 billion crops and 5-7 billion property losses. United Nations have no global law on transboundary water distribution. Due to natural scarcity of freshwaters concerned experts have long been warning of water wars (Swain, 2001; Richard and Robert, 1996; Grayling, 2008; Michael and Glen, 2008, Kay, 2009). European and Americans water agreements under Helsinki Rules and the International Law Commission Convention on Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses have been universalized for global water treaties which have no consensus across the board. Despite 2 dams on Beas, 4 on Sutlej, 6 on Ravi, 7 on Indus, 8 on Jhelum and 24 on Chenab India assumes full right on all six rivers falling down to Pakistan and blames colonial period water laws creating schism that locks the water sector into a developmental catharsis (Radha, 2002).
In response to a satellite research on ground water depletion in Punjab (Matthew and Isabella et al, 2009) reporting underground water table declining rate of 3-5cm/yr, an Indian water expert tried to justify multiple dams policy on western Pakistani rivers as a sensible measure to mitigate their water depletion crisis (Saumitra, 2009). Pakistan, being downstream riparian, supports Radha’s demand for international legislature on transboundary water sharing laws to avoid water conflicts but does not support Saumitra’s innovatory policy to steal others waters to solve own problems. Pakistan proposes United Nations to frame laws governing distribution of international river waters including construction of dams in high hazards seismic areas. In view of multiple river basins shared by two or more countries it has become imperative to formulate global river water distribution laws acceptable to upper and lower riparian, déjà vu, water fracas and frays might escalate to dismal water wars in forthcoming decades. Several water experts have pointed out Indian ingenuity based maneuvers to hoodwink lower riparian (Swain, 2001).
3. Breach of Indus Water Treaty
To build dams on active faults in Zone-V (<7<Meq<9) violating Indus Water Treaty, Indian Government conducted several more studies on geotechnical and hydrological parameters for the design of small earth filled dams in 1990s (Sur, 1999). Initial small dams construction experience using local expertise led to micro-earthquakes around Thien Dam in Himalayas in 1980s ( Bhattacharya et al, 1986) which forced them to seek international assistance on dams. Feasibility studies on 400 MW Hasti Dul (400 MW) and other dams were carried out in Kashmir valley and adjacent provinces Himachal and Punjab in 1990s (Winter et al, 1994). Uri-I (240 MW) dam on river Jhelum and Nathpa (1650 MW) dam on river Sutlej were carried out to test geological and geotechnical responses which hardly complied (Behrestaghi et al, 1996). If Indian dams fail by technical reasons or earthquakes the people who will suffer are Kashmiri or Pakistanis. Building tens of dams without consulting lower riparian renders Indus Water Treaty virtually collapsed. Under the Indus Treat 1960 India is supposed to inform at least six months before launching any hydropower project but she did not and on detection she was asked to holdback the project which was resumed. India has several dam projects including water diversions tunnels and canals. India has sanctioned RS.33 billion for 330 MW Krishanganga and Rs. 18 billion for 240 MW Uri-II hydropower dam on River Jhelum, Rs.51 billion for 1000 MW Pak Dul and 1200 MW Sawalkot dams projects on Chenab. Sawalkot dam has 646-feet height which is more than the 485-feet height Tarbela and 453 feet height Mangla in Pakistan. These dams are 160 km away from Kangra where a 8.0 Richter scale earthquake occurred in 1905 on record (Kiani, 2010).
India has already built 60 MW Madekheda dam on Indus river and is constructing 130 MW Chuttak, 600 MW Monpreet n Randeep, 44 MW Dumkhar and 60 MW Nimo Bazgo dams on river Indus. After completion of 330 MW Wular barrage and 240 MW Uri-I dam India is further constructing 330 MW Krishanganga and 240 MW Uri-II dams on river Jhelum. India completed 450 MW Baglihar, 345 MW Salal-I and 345 MW Salal-II on river Chenab on which Pakistan objected seriously. India has diverted Jhelum river water to Chenab through a 80km long tunnel which is clear breach of Indus Water Treaty. India is constructing another 1200 MW Bursar dam on this tunnel. Instead of respecting Indus Water Treaty India has started construction of 400 MW Hasti Dul, 460 MW Rattle, 400 MW Gyspa, 100 MW Pakdul, 800 MW Karthai, 180 MW Raoli, 725 MW Seli, 1200 MW Sawalkot, 90 MW Tangat, 50 MW Pattan, 50 MW Teling, 100 MW Tandi, 180 MW Sach Khas, 300 MW Dueli/Dugli, 100 MW Rashal, 100 MW Myar, 190 MW Gondhala, 240 MW Dogar, 100 MW Shatru, 110 MW Dang, 20 MW Thai Rot and Chenai dams (Wikipedia, 2010; Arashad, 2010). After completion of so many dams all the western rivers will become dry. Bhutan has a hydropower potential of 23,000 MW out of which 4,484 MW is expected to be harnessed by constructing six dams by 2024. Pakistan has 50,000 MW hydro potential which is under threat due to 39,000 MW power Indian dams on western rivers. Pakistan is generating 71.9% thermal, 25.2% hydel and 2.9% nuclear power. Our energy mix consists of 43.5% oil, 41.5% gas, 0.3% LPG, 4.5% coal, 9.2% hydropower and 1.1% nuclear electricity (Nayyer, 2004). Pakistan has over 40,000 MW wind, 30,000 MW solar and 800 MW geothermal potential.
India has already dried up eastern rivers Ravi, Sulej and Beas. Water only flows in these rivers when India has serious dam overtopping threat. India is digging a Sulej-Ganges Link canal to divert waters to southern Indian states on which Indian riparian have taken stay from Indian court. India has built 390 MW Pong, 360 MW Pandoh and 126 MW Larji dams on river Beas, 1000 MW Bhakra, 1650 MW Nathpa and 800 MW Kol, 1000 MW Karcham Wang and 77 MW Nangal dams on river Sutlej, 1200 MW Baira Siul, 540 MW Chamera and 600 MW Ranjeet Agar, 120 MW Sewa-II and 70 MW Budhil dams on river Ravi. Indian dam mania is causing drought to both eastern and western riparian farmers. Pakistan has only two dams which usually stay partially filled throughout the year except monsoon months Wikipedia, 2010). Unfortunately, 95% Indian dams in Himachal, Jammu and Kashmir regions are located on dangerous earthquake faults zones. Recently India has launched another dams construction drive in Himachal Pardesh (En.Wikipedia, 2010) to build 300 MW Baspa, 231 MW Holi, 70 MW Dhamwar, 2050 MW Parbati, 192 MW Allian, 162 MW Swara, 370 MW Sham Not, 560 MW Rattle, 430 MW Kiru, 320 MW Kawar and 35 MW Bichlari dams (Ramanathan, 2007). United Nations water experts must formulate global water legislation to avoid water wars especially between India and Pakistan which may engulf many others. When Pakistan came to know of water shortages in rivers India had completed 70% of 48 dams. Indus river system is spread over 944,473 km2 out of which 553,416 km2 lies in Pakistan. Pakistan declared failure of Indus Commission in 2005 referring the case to neutral expert. India has 34 large dams out of which 10 are in Kashmir. Indian links between Neelum, Jhelum, Chenab through Tavi river uplift canal, Ravi, Beas, Sutlej and Yamana transfer western rivers water to Indian highlands as shown in Fig.1
There is no dam on Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej rivers on Pakistani side. However, India is building over three dozens dams on Western rivers which are viewed as a matter of grave concern by Pakistan. Science news and global warming observations conclude Himalaya region is getting heavily damned in near future. Dams worth 150,000 MW have been proposed in India, Nepal, Bhutan and Pakistan. International Rivers point it out as a wrong choice for warming world. Melting glaciers, like Dig Tsho Glof in Nepal in 1985, may lead to glacial lake bursts causing flash floods. Bhutan noted 25 dangerous glacial lakes in 2009. Over one billion people rely on Himalaya waters. Upstream countries should not store waters in dams to starve lower riparian. India must focus US backed nuclear, local clean coal and Indian Ocean wave energy instead of blocking water flow to Pakistan. Water is life but in a driest and hottest global warming hit Pakistan the water becomes a strategic resource like a weapon of mass destruction. United Nations and Indian scientists and engineers must advise resolute Indian Government to refrain dam building in fault zones on western rivers under 1960 Indus Treaty to discourage water war for long term regional security. We have long history of using waters amicably but energy crisis is driving the conflicts. Global irrigation potentials exists 68% in Asia, 17% in Americas, 9% in Europe and 1% in Oceania. Indus Basin western rivers contribute to 15-20% of Asian food cycle. Transboundary rivers are not local rather global assets which need due attention on merits. Indus water treaty went well for last 50 years but recent Indian dam drive is worsening the scenario.
Salaman’s (Salman, 2010) claim the lower riparian (Pakistan) can harm upper riparian (India) is not valid argument as Pakistan and India have divided rivers instead of sharing. Eastern rivers Sutlej, Beas and Ravi were chosen by India and Western rivers Indus, Jhelum and Chenab were left for Pakistan due to geographical locations. Eastern rivers had annual water capacity of 41 billion cubic meters (33 MAF) whereas western rivers had capacity of 188 billion cubic meters (135 MAF). Uri dams have storage capacity of 3.07 MAF in 1999 which increased to 6.37 MAF in 2002. Sutlej-Yamana (SYL) can transfer 3.5MAF water. India is transferring this water from western rivers into eastern rivers through Tavi-Ravi 31 meter high uplift link canal. India stopped Neelum River to divert water to Wular Barrage through 27 km long tunnel which is further diverted from Jhelum to Chenab through 77 km long tunnel. Asia Times called it race to death over Kashmir waters (Asia Times, 2009).
Salman’s foreclosure concept could be applicable to shared but not to the rivers which have been divided. Unfortunately, Salman’s ingenuity based approach to use more water at expense of lower riparian is a nuisance which can only drive water conflicts to real wars. Salaman’s claim of Nehru’s fifty years ahead of time thoughts again represent ingenuity based criminal thinking to which most European (Swain, 2001), British (Guardian, 2002) and American (Basharat, 2010) scientists, journalists and philanthropists flay. History shows how wisely her family enchanted Lord Mountbatten to divide Punjab and Kashmir dishonestly. There is little difference between doing and thinking evil. Nehru’s sleeping with stranger policy is the root cause behind all conflicts we face today. Chairman US Atomic Energy Commission and Head of Tennessee Valley, David Lilienthal after visiting India and Pakistan in 1951 commented in August 1951 issue of the Collier Magazine “With no water for irrigation, Pakistan would be desert. No army can destroy Pakistan by bombs and shell fires but India can devastate by shutting down and diverting waters. Water is Punjab power keg which is vulnerable to Indian water closure. River water dispute is dynamite”. Water bomb threat over unsettled Kashmir issue evolves Kashmir as a nuclear flash point. Pakistan takes Indian agriculture trade offers using Pakistani waters as respite for the spite.
Pakistan wanted to go to International Court of Justice but India insisted to resolve it bilaterally. On report of David Lilienthal the World Bank seriously considered the issue and agreed to adjudicate which resulted in The Indus Waters Treaty 1960. This treaty gives three eastern rivers to India and three western rivers to Pakistan. It allows India to store water to a maximum extent of 3.6 MAF on western rivers. Indus Water Treat 1960 Annexure D part 2 (3) allows India to complete construction ongoing 186kW Pahalgam, 30kW bandipura, 40 kW Dachigam, 1.2 MW Runbir canal, 640 kW Udhampur, 160 kW Poonch hydropower projects. Subsection Part 2 (4) also allows India to complete 12 MW Mahara, 15 MW Gandierbal, 150 kW Kupwara, 350 kW Kishtwar, 650 kW Rajouri, 14 MW Chinani and 600 kW Nichalani Banihal hydropower stations on western rivers (IWT, 2010). Now India has launched a massive drive of building 33 new dams on western rivers feeding to Pakistan.
The Indus Waters Treaty 1960 Annexure D Part 2 (8, 9, 13, 15, 16 and 18) allows India to build even new run-of-river power plants without interfering the water flow and diversion. Indian decision to build large dams instead of run-of-river power stations is clear violation of above subsections. Part 2 section 15 restricts India to deliver volume of water varying from 30% to 130% of river water. India can divert water from one to other tributary of the same river but not the other rivers like Jhelum to Chenab and build 1200 MW dam on the tunnel. It must be run-of-river design not the dam capable holding waters for months. India has the right to stop water flow to Pakistan when dead storage of run-of-river powerhouse is being filled not several MAF dam which exceeds her permitted 3.6 MAF limit. Treaty section 18 (a, c) permit India to use 300 cusecs discharge turbines along with storage capacity 20 feet above mean bed level of tributary but the new 33 dams have been raised up to several tens of meters which contradicts the agreement. Part 4 (24) also allows India to build hydropower plants on any irrigation channel taking off western rivers without storage other than the poundage but is required under Part 5 (1-3) to supply location, hydrodynamic, design details such as spill ways, head tail etc to Pakistan 6 moths before starting construction work that has been covertly violated in last two decades. Indus Waters Treaty 1960 Annexure E related to water reservoir, dead, live, flood, surcharge, conservation and power storage capacities restricts India to values shown in Table 2.
Indus Water Treaty Annexure E allows India enjoy general, power and flood storage limits of 1.25, 1.60 and 0.75 MAF which is consistent with 3.6 MAF restriction of Part 2 section 15 as discussed above. Ground reality is the India has already build 14 power houses and working on the construction of another 33 medium size dams with storage capacities exceeding several tens of MAF instead of allowed 3.6 MAF. Pakistan used to get over 156 MAF earlier which despite fast snowmelts and monsoon runoff has reduced to just 134 MAF per year. Indus Waters Treaty 1960 Annex E (10) restricts India to not exceed storage beyond 10,000 acre feet above 3.6 MAF during even emergency and do not release it all of sudden to cause difficulty for Pakistan. Annexure E (18) restricts India to not let the water flow go bellow 55,000 cusecs it has been going bellow 20,000 in routine since many years.
Water went bellow 6,233 cusecs from the average flow of 118,000 cusecs recently on 20 January 2010 (Kiani, 2010). India had only Ranbir & Pratap canals at time of agreement but later many new canals such as Kashmir canal, Ravi-Tavi link canal, Igo-Phey canal in Leh and Kurbathang canal in Kargil have been dug to divert western rivers waters. Indian Prime Minister declared himself whilst inaugurating the Baglihar power house that India has completed 19 out of 67 hydropower projects in Kashmir. India plans to produce 8,696 MW out of river Chenab alone. Pakistan considers Indian dam policy on Western rivers as a deliberate attempt to break Indus Water Treaty (Khan, 2010). If water storage and diversion to eastern rivers continues then Pakistanis will face 108MAF water shortage by 2013 and 151MAF shortage by 2025. Declining waters and rising population is snowballing skirmishes to conflicts leading to collapse of economy and evolution of law and order problems. Current and future freshwater and population scenarios are shown in Fig.2. Western rivers annual flow was 154-168 MAF and eastern rivers just 33 MAF. Due to across river links and huge number of dams the average annual flow in western rivers has declined to 135 MAF is continuously running down. India was allowed to construct run-of-river power projects not storage dams like Dulhasti, Nimoo Bazgo, Pakdul and Barsar etc on western rivers. Water flow was expected to increase due to global warming but due to enhanced stage dams it is falling even bellow earlier levels.
4. Water, Power and Energy Confluence
Enhanced recovery of oil and currently gas to liquid (GTL), coal to liquid (CTL) and bio-fuels have not been included in above statistics. Measures taken to reduce oil dependence are implicitly coordinated with global warming and climate change. The ultimate aim is to shift primary energy focus to alternative and renewable energy sources improving energy efficient technologies. Energy saving lamps such as CFL or LED as well as energy efficient motors, pumps and processes also increase indirect generation capacity. Global warming believers guess during energy transition period the price of oil is likely to increase. Oil peaking believers ask to reduce energy consumption in view of depleting oil reserves. World consumes oil at a rate over 1000 barrels per second today (Tertzakian, 2006) that is increasing over time. Pakistan discovered 934 million barrels oil, 54 trillion cubic feet gas, and 190 billion tons coal out of which 313 million barrels oil, 30 trillion cubic feet gas and 185 billion tons coal reserves. Pakistan is consuming oil, gas and coal at rate of 69,954 barrels oil, 3.973 billion cubic feet gas, and little coal per day. Oil and gas may deplete, subject to future explorations, by 2022 and 2030. Pakistan has 185 billion tons coal reserves which are being developed for use beyond 2020 (OGDC, 2009). Pakistan’s primary energy supply was 60 MTOE in 2010 which is being met with gas, oil and hydro etc as shown in Fig.5. Pakistan consumes 2% energy for agriculture and same amount to power government offices. There is a general perception the government machinery wastes lot of oil, gas and electricity on room heating and cooling for government officers and incumbent politicians. Power and energy experts blame the corrupt practices responsible for power, energy and water crisis. Pakistan has 70,000 MW theoretical and 50,000 MW practical and 30,000MW the most economic hydropower potential but misleading policies spend 27MTOE energy for power generation as shown in Fig.6. Power politics, traditional bureaucratic red tapes and lack of vision has entangled the nation into an energy knot despite existence of huge natural resources as shown in Fig.7. Pakistan has started underground coal gasification for power and coal to liquid (CTL) for fuels which is in process of prototype syndrome. Water and power treaties can only succeed of all parties declare projects transparently (Noah et al, 2008) or look for more innovatory terms instead of breaching existing agreements ( Rossi, 2002).
Population growth, industrial expansions and easy lifestyles have increased electricity demand from 17PWh in 2000 to 20PWh in 2010 that is likely to increase to 24 PWH by 2020 and 30PWh by 2030. About 2.5 billion people out of global 6.8 billion population lived with severe water conditions in 2005 which are likely to increase to 3.95 billions out of 8.5 billions population by 2030. IEEE believes trading water for watts is start of hard choices era. Hydroelectric, solar, nuclear and wind power plants consume 5.4, 2.5-2.8, 1.5 and 0 liters water per kWh but produce no carbon. Coal and gas fired power plants consume 1.1-1.8 and 0.5-1.8 liters per kWh energy producing 0.43 to 0.96 kg/kWh carbon. Photovoltaic power generation uses 0.1 liter/kWh water producing 0.02 kg/kWh carbon. Wind power is the cleanest form energy which neither uses water nor produces carbon (IEEE Staff, 2010). Pakistan is among least coal burning countries but global warming is hitting hard on it since 1998. A recent temperature rise to 54°C in Mohenjo Daru followed by 1200,000 cusecs flash floods has affected over 2 to 2.5 million people across Pakistan. The climatologists say it makes no difference whether a single country increases or decreases greenhouse gases emissions at global scale. A country injecting thousands miles away can affect you through the common atmosphere. Recent industrialization in China and India has led to accumulation of green gases over Pakistan that has changed monsoon flow patterns from Bangladesh to India to Southern Punjab to northern mountains exacerbating glacier melting.
World power demand is 17 PWh whereas thousands of dams installed electric power capacity is 777 GWe that supplies just 2.9 PWh which is 18% of total demand. The remaining 82% demand is met with fossil fuels which are likely to deplete after 2050. Individual nation’s policy to dam the international rivers to meet her power demands by starving neighbors, instead of looking for alternative technologies, is like sleeping on a spinning wheel. Hydroelectricity accounts of 88% of renewable energy and the remaining 12% is obtained from solar and wind farms. We urgently need 13600 TWh electricity from more large, small, micro or pico dams, artificial photosynthesis, hydrogen, laser fusion and nanotechnology based high efficiency solar cells. Energy experts believe water, fusion (Parkins, 2006) and sun can be the ultimate energy sources. US Department of Energy (DOE) and NASA started several programs, such as Supernova Acceleration Program (SNAP), Advanced Dark Energy Physics Telescope (ADEPT) and Dark Energy Space Telescope (Destiny) to explore dark energy (Eric, 2008). Current energy conversion technologies, hydropower, internal combustion engines, were developed in 1880s and nuclear and gas turbines in 1930s. Scientists and engineers are trying to harness nuclear fusion, artificial photosynthesis, CO2 and H2Ointeractions to reverse global warming and obtain energy.
5. Dams Hazards & Drawbacks
Dam construction devastates lot of fertile land causes evacuation of quite few tens of villages. Dam construction often becomes issue that has to be sorted out by giving people distinct advantages. To an estimate 50-80 million peoples have been displaced worldwide due to dam constructions. Awan Dam in Egypt, Three Gorges Dam in China, Clyde Dam in New Zealand and Ilisu Dam in Turkey led historic places to flood exposures. Dam reservoirs often fill up with silt reducing water storage capacities. Tarbella and Mangla dams water storage capacities declined from 10 to 7 and 5.5 to 4 million acres feet (MAF) during 34 and 41 years. Warsak dam has completely filled by silt long ago. Due to deep water levels in dam lakes the oxygen content decreases hurting fish and other aquatic animals. It is recommended to aerate water at regular intervals. A water dam having capacity of 100 watts/m2 of surface area produces with trees intact may produce more green gases by anaerobic digestion than oil fired power plant. If the trees are removed before impounding reservoir that limits green gases emission down to 2-8%.
Water dams produce the least amount of CO2. Natural freeze and thaw cycle cause water fluctuations from 1 to 10 times in winters and summers. Large hydro dams not only support power generation and irrigation but also flood control. Pakistan badly felt the need of dams during 2010 flood which affected over 20 million people, causing $10-15 billion property and over 2000 people life losses. Impact of Indian dams overflow during monsoon on flood in Pakistan is shown in Table 1. Hydrodynamic timing analysis of Indian barrages and dams controlling water tides propagation in Pakistani rivers confirms possibility of confluence of various rivers waters at Mithonkot exceeding barrages capacity as illustrated in Fig.8. Water flow timing analysis of rivers from fastest river Chenab waters reaching at Panjnad/Mithonkot first (00 Hrs) followed by Jhelum, Indus, Ravi and Sutlej after 18, 8-29 and 33 hours delays. Variable time delays of Indus may amplify Jhelum or Ravi & Sutlej waters at Mithonkot and Guddu barrage. There come floods periodically in Pakistan but their intensities are noted increasing exponentially with increasing number of dams over Indus, Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej by upper riparian India. Growing intensities of floods in Pakistan over last 63 years are shown in Fig.9. This natural calamity has displaced over 20 million people from homes to relief camps. UN Secretary General visiting flood hit areas said “I have seen many dreadful calamities but none bigger than this”. GIS map of flood August 2010 is shown in Fig.10.Water experts believe it was a 50 MAF flood out of which 10 MAF was stored in Tarbella and Jhelum rivers. If Pakistan had build Kalabagh dam then it could have stored another 10 MAF to reasonably reduce the peak intensity of flood causing over $10-15 billions life and property losses. Pakistan has one million tube wells out of which 30% (300,000) use 2500 to 3000 MW electricity which is 20-25% of national power generation capacity. We waste 3000MW electricity to pump 35MAF underground water for irrigation which may be saved by storing 36MAF water falling into sea every year.
Nasrullah Khan Kalair, Department of Electrical Engineering, Comsats Institute of Information Technology Islamabad, CIIT, Park Road, Islamabad, firstname.lastname@example.org
Airtricity (2008) ‘Airtricity’, World Future Energy Summit, Dubai, January 2008
Alees, S. (1994) ‘Conflict over water in the Middle East: From a security and strategic point of view’, Studies in Environmental Science, Vol. 58, pp.505-514
Arshad, H. A. (2010) ‘Climate change and transboundary water issues’, UNDP consultant for Ministry of Water and Power, Government of Pakistan.
Asia Times (2009) ‘Race to death over Kashmir water’, 13 January 2009.
Basharat, H.Q. (2010) ‘How India betrayed Pakistan’, The Nation, September 18, 2010.
Behrestaghi, M.H.N. and Rao, K.S, Ramamurthy, T. (1996) ‘Engineering geological and geotechnical responses of schistose rocks from dam project areas in India’, Engineering Geology, Vol.44, pp.183-201.
Ben, C. and Nirvikar, S. (2000) ‘Impediments and Innovation in International Rivers: The Waters of South Asia’, World Development, Vol. 28, pp.1907-1925
Bentley, R.W (2002) ‘Global oil and gas depletion: a review’, Energy policy, Vol.30, pp.189-205
Clionadh, R. and Henrik, U. (2007) ‘Climate change, environmental degradation and armed conflict Political Geography’, Vol.26, pp.674-694.
Cyranoski, D. (2010 ‘Japan plans nuclear power expansion’, Nature, Vol. 464, pp.661.
Darley, J. (2005) ‘High Noon for Natural Gas: The New Energy Crisis’, Chelsea Green.
David, B. and Julie, T. (2010) ‘Confronting water in an Israeli–Palestinian peace agreement’, Journal of Hydrology, Vol.382, pp.103-114.
Eric, H. (2008) ‘Terms merge for dark energy mission’, Nature, Vol.455, pp.577.
Eran, F. (2000) ‘The ebb and flow of Arab–Israeli water conflicts: Are past confrontations likely to resurface?’, Water Policy, Vol.2, No. 4-5, pp. 343-363.
Franklin, W. (2002) ‘Water: Life force or instrument of war’, The Lancet, Vol. 360, 29-30.
Giordano, R., Passarella, G., Uricchio, V.F. and Vurro, M. (2007) ‘Integrating conflict analysis and consensus reaching in a decision support system for water resource management’, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol.84, pp.213-228.
Grayling, A. C. (2008) ‘Mind fields: We must avert the water wars’, The New Scientist, Vol. 198, No. 2660, pp. 52.
Guardian (2002) ‘War over water’, 3 June 2002.
Hans, P.W.T., Nils, P. G. and Håvard, H. (2000) ‘Shared rivers and interstate conflict’, Political Geography, Vol.19, pp.971-996.
Harper, F. (1999) ‘Ultimate hydrocarbon resources in the 21st century’, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Conference on Oil and Gas in 21st Century, Birmingham, UK.
Heinberg, R. (2005) ‘Party’s over: Oil, war and the fate of industrial societies’, New Society Publishers Limited, 2005.
Hugo, K. M. (1994) ‘Magneto-hydrodynamic power generation’, John Wiley, Chester.
IEEE Staff (2010) ‘The coming clash between water and energy’, Spectrum, Vol. 610, pp. 22-23
Irene, L.M, J. and Eleonora, S. (1986) ‘International river basins: A policy model for conflict resolution’, Resources Policy, Vol.12, pp.133-144.
IWT (1960) ‘Indus water treaty 1960’, Annexure D & E.
IPCC (2010) ‘IPCC representative’s interview on CNN’, August 2010.
Jarunee, W. (2010) ‘Technological change of the energy innovation system: From oil based to bio-based energy’, Applied Energy, Vol.87, pp. 749-755.
Jindal, P.K, Rao, B.N. and Sur, H. S. (1991) ‘Performance evaluation of mini dams in Kandi area of Punjab state a Case study’, Symposium on Small Vs Large Dams, Delhi, 1991.
Joseph, E. M. (2004) ‘Causes and possible solutions to water resource conflicts in the
Okavango River Basin: The case of Angola, Namibia and Botswana’, Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Vol. 29, pp.1319-1326.
Kaveh, M. (2010) ‘Game theory and water resources’, Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 381, pp.225-238.
Kay, D. (2009) ‘Water management’, International Encyclopedia of human geography, pp. 207-214.
Khan, Z. A. (2010) ‘Indus Water Treaty 1960 in Doldrums’ Pakspectator.com 20/2/2010
Kees, V. D. E and Frederik, G. 2007) ‘Blue Energy’, http://www.leonardo-energy.org
Kiani, K. (2010) ‘Five dams being built in occupied Kashmir’, Dawn, February 3, 2010.
Kiani, K. (2010) ‘Drastic decline in Chenab water flow’, Dawn, 21 January, 2010.
Kumar, V. and Jain, S. K. (2010) ‘Trends in seasonal and annual rainfall and rainy days in Kashmir valley in last century’, Quarterly Journal, Vol. 212, pp. 64-69.
Marc, D. K., Keith, W. H. and Liping F (1987) ‘The graph model for conflicts’, Automatica, Vol.23, pp.41-55
Matthew, R., Isabella,V. and James, S.F. (2009) ‘Satellite based estimates of groundwater depletion in India’, Nature, Vol. 460, pp. 999-1001.
Michael, C. and Glen, L. (2008) ‘Accounting for war’, Accounting Forum, Vol. 32, pp. 313-326.
Milline, J. N. (2005) ‘Migration and intensification of water conflicts in the Pangani Basin, Tanzania’, Habitat International, Vol. 29, No.1, pp. 41-67.
Mirza, M.M.Q (2002) ‘The Ganges water sharing treaty: Risk analysis of the negotiated discharge’, International Journal of Water, Vol.2, pp. 57-74.
Mustafa, I. (1994) ‘The Arab-Israeli Conflict Over Water Resources’, Studies in Environmental Science, Vol.8, pp.123-133.
NDMA (2010) ‘National Disaster Management Authority’, http://ndma.gov.pk/
NAP (2005) ‘Controlling the Quantum World of Atoms, Molecules, and Photons’,
National Academic Press, ISBN 0-309-65565-X
Nayyer, A.Z. and Zeeshan A.N (2004) ‘Prospects of renewable energy sources in Pakistan’, Proceedings of. Renewable Energy Technology & Sustainable Development Conference, COMSATS, 2004.
Nils, P. G., Kathryn, F., Håvard, H., Bethany, L. and Taylor, O. (2006) ‘Conflicts over shared rivers: Resource scarcity or fuzzy boundaries?’, Political Geography, Vol. 25, pp. 361-382
Noah, C.G., Robin, L.N., Burton, E., James, E., M, Girish, G. and Deborah, W. M. (2008) ‘The energy-water nexus and information exchange: Challenges and opportunities’, International Journal of Water, Vol. 4, pp. 5-24.
OGDC, Oil and Gas Development Authority (2009) ‘Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Resources’, www.mpnr.gov.pk.
Parkins, W.E. (2006) ‘Fusion power: will it ever come?’, Science, Vol. 311, pp.1380.
Paul, F. T., Craig, F. (2000) ‘Historic wreck in international waters: conflict or consensus?’, Marine Policy, Vol. 24, pp.1-10.
Paul, R. H., Sara, M. M. and Thomas, E. S. (2006) ‘Conflict management of riparian disputes’, Political Geography, Vol. 25, pp.383-411.
Peak water (2010) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_water
Psatskin, O. B. (2008) ‘ Peak oil in the light of oil formation theories’, Energy Policy, Vol.36, pp.1826-1828.
Radha, D. (2002) ‘At the confluence of law and geography: contextualizing inter-state water disputes in India’, Geoforum, Vol.33, pp. 255-269.
Ramanathan, K. and Abeygunawardena, P. (2007) ‘Hydropower development in India’, Asian Development Bank.
Richard, A. E. and Robert, J.C. (1996) ‘Sunbelt water war: The El Paso-New Mexico water conflict’, Vol.33, pp. 359-379.
Rogner, H.H. (1997) ‘An assessment of world hydrocarbon resources’, Annul Rev
Energy Environ, Vol. 22, pp. 217-62.
Rossi, G. and Anxarani, A. (2002) ‘Innovations in water legislation in Italy: Ecosystem protection and stakeholder’s participation’, International Journal of Water, Vol. 2, pp.17-34.
Salman, M.A.S. (2010) ‘Downstream riparian can also harm upstream riparian: The concept of foreclosure of future uses’, International Journal of Water, Vol. 35, pp. 350-364.
Saumitra, M (2009 ‘Sensible measures to guard India’s groundwater supply’, Nature, Vol. 462, pp. 296.
Sawsan, R. (2010) ‘Israel stealing Palestinian and Arab waters’, Global Research.
Schon, B. and Ian, C.W (2009) ‘The global “war for talent”’, Journal of International Management, Vol.15, pp.273-285
Smil, V. (2006) ‘Energy at cross roads’, Global Science Forum Conference on Scientific Challenges for Energy Research, Paris, May 17-18, 2006
Starr, J.R. (1991) ‘Water wars’, Foreign Policy, pp. 82.
Stephen, L. (2008) ‘Drought and Israeli policy threaten West Bank Water security’, Global Research, January 2008, pp.1-6.
Swain, A. (2001) ‘Water wars: facts or fiction’, Futures, Vol. 23, pp. 769-781.
Sur, H. S., Anil, B. and Jindal, P.K. (1999) ‘Some hydrological parameters for the design and operation of small earthen dams in lower Shiwaliks of Northern India’, Agriculture Water Management, Vol.1479, pp. 111-121.
Tertzakian, P. (2006) Thousands barrels a second: The coming oil break point and the
challenges facing an energy dependent world, McGraw-Hill Companies USA.
Walling, M.Y. and Mohanty, W. K. (2009) ‘An overview on the seismic zonation and microzonation studies in India’, Earth Science Reviews, Vol. 96, pp. 67-91.
Winter, T., Binquet, J., Szendroi, A., Colombet, G., Armjo, R. and Tapponnier, P. (1994) ‘From plate tectonics to the design of the Dul Hasti hydroelectric project in Kashmir (India)’, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, Vol. 31, pp. 252.
Winter, T., Binquet, J., Szendroi, A., Colombet, G., Armjo, R., Tapponnier, P. (1994) ‘From plate tectonics to the design of the Dul Hasti hydroelectric project in Kashmir (India)’, Engineering Geology, Vol. 36, pp. 211-241.
World Bank Technical Paper No.414, Washington, World Bank, 1998.