|
Open Page
Solutions to the Cauvery water dispute
VENKATESH HEMMIGE
On February 5, 2007, the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal announced its much awaited award, which however does not seem to have provided the final solution to this century old dispute. The verdict has been challenged and the grievances have been referred back to the tribunal and the Supreme Court. That this state of affairs was bound to happen does not surprise many observers.
To start with, the available quantum of water for apportionment (740 tmcft) is based on 50 per cent availability, which means that in one out of every two years there is bound to be a shortfall in this quantity! The standard is usually 75 per cent availability and if this is taken as the yardstick then the total availability in the Cauvery is just 671 tmcft — a clear shortfall of 69 tmcft over and above the existing apportionment.
This is further aggravated by the fact that no clear distress sharing formula has been provided for in the award.
The basic problem at hand is the fact that the Cauvery basin is a water deficient one. As against a total average annual runoff of 790 tmcft the total demanded quantity of water is 1,135 tmcft. This implies that no matter what the method of apportionment there is always bound to be a shortfall if one looks to solutions within the Cauvery basin.
The problem calls for a two-pronged approach: (a) an additional terminal storage reservoir of at least 50-60 tmcft capacity to store and carry over the flows from a healthy monsoon year to a drought year and (b) inter-basin transfer of water from external catchments into the Cauvery.
In 1998, the NHPC had proposed four hydro power projects on the Cauvery. These were Shivasamudram and Mekedatu in Karnataka and Rasimanal and Hogenakal in Tamil Nadu. The reservoirs at Mekedatu and Rasimanal would be of 130 tmcft capacity. Construction of a large terminal storage at one of these two points would ensure that considerable water is available to Tamil Nadu even during drought years.
For point (b) there are two solutions that present themselves at this point: (1) transfer of water from the Godavari to the Cauvery via the Krishna and Pennar basins and (2) transfer of water from the west flowing coastal rivers of Karnataka (total annual availability is 2,000 tmcft) into the Cauvery basin. We will keep aside option 1 for now as this would involve construction of dams on the Godavari at Polavaram and/or Inchampalli and involve the consent of the Godavari basin States like Andhra Pradesh.
The best bet is for interbasin transfer of water from the Netravati into the Hemavathy, a major affluent of the Cauvery. However augmentations from other west flowing rivers of Dakshin Kannada and Udupi districts like the Chakranadi, Varahi, Swarna, Sita and Yennehole would be required. The Government of Karnataka had in fact set up a committee to probe the above option.
Headed by G.S. Paramashivaiah, it has already submitted two feasibility reports. The first report that aims to divert 90.73 tmcft of Netravati waters east to seven districts of Chikmagalur, Hassan, Mandya, Tumkur, Kolar, Bangalore Rural and Urban is of interest and should be pursued.
With the 90 tmcft of Netravati waters diverted east into the Cauvery basin and the terminal storage reservoir taking care of excess monsoon flows, the problem of shortages in the Cauvery basin in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu will be largely mitigated. In fact these measures should be placed on a fast track by the States concerned instead of waiting for a favourable judgment from the Tribunal on the water sharing dispute.
ven777us@yahoo.com
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Open Page
|
