KATHMANDU RESIDENTS’ INTEREST BETRAYED
( Melamchi Water Supply Controversy)
By Dr. AB Thapa
We frequently hear controversies over the projects financed by donor banks. Very often it is alleged that the donor banks impose their own terms and conditions which are not in the interest of our country. The most recent controversy is about the financing of the Melamchi Water Supply Project. Asian Development Bank had agreed to provide loan assistance to implement the Melamchi Water Supply Project. The Asian Development Bank is reported to have required that the management of the Kathmandu Water Supply Project be handed over to a foreign company as a precondition for providing the loan assistance. Such transfer of management is to take place based on the agreement already signed between our government and the Asian Development Bank.
Demand Management
It need not be explained that Kathmandu valley at present is suffering from water shortage. There is a great urgency to resolve this problem. It is quite clear that the present water shortage problem would hardly be resolved without augmenting the supply. It has been estimated that onward 2010 the supply to Kathmandu valley would have to be further increased even after the diversion of the Melamchi flow into the Kathmandu valley.
At present some of us have a very false notion that the Kathmandu valley water supply problem would be temporarily solved by improving the management system. Thus we are justifying the policy to hand over the management of the Kathmandu valley water supply to a foreign private company despite the fact that we would have to pay an exorbitant amount of money to that company. The water supply charge to be paid by Kathmandu residents would be greatly increased. It will force a vast number of financially weak Kathmandu residents to cut down their daily consumption of water. In this way it will certainly help privileged people to be provided any additional quantity according to their requirement at the expense of the poor.
Other Options
Demand management is the only recourse in those desert regions where there is not any possibility to augment water supply. How about Kathmandu valley? We have abundant water. We need not cut down the supply to Kathmandu residents to resolve this problem. An enormously large additional quantity of water could be provided to Kathmandu residents almost for free if we linked water supply program with electricity generation. Diversion of regulated Langtang river flow via proposed Melamchi tunnel would provide such opportunity. The super high-head Langtang hydropower stations would be able to produce electricity at an extremely low cost. Several articles have already been published in the journal SPOTLIGHT on Langtang diversion into the Kathmandu and the Kulekhani storage reservoir via Melamchi tunnel. Unfortunately, we are at present following a very irrational method to resolve Kathmandu water supply problem. There is a need to hold widespread consultations to find best solution to resolve Kathmandu valley’s long term water supply problem.
Renegotiation With the Bank
It is reported in local newspapers that the Government is going to renegotiate the Melamchi agreement signed with the Asian Development Bank. Nepal should use this opportunity to reintroduce the hydropower component of the Melamchi project. Similarly Nepal should be on the alert against further acts of those who do not hesitate to kill the interest of the Kathmandu residents to make quick profit. Past decision to allow private developers to implement the Indrawati projects is a typical case how the interest of the Kathmandu residents is sacrificed to favour private developers.
Why Yangri and Larke Were Leased Out?
The UNDP supported feasibility study report of the Melamchi Project explains that around the time 2011 the total system demand for water supply ( in Kathmandu valley) is expected to reach the total supply from in-valley surface sources and Melamchi. Thereafter the next stage of the development of the Melamchi will be required. This entails diversion from the YANGRI and LARKE rivers that flow to the east of the Melamchi. Water would be diverted by tunnels to a point upstream of the Melamchi intake. The total length of the delivery tunnels is expected to be over 12 kilometers. The Larke and the Yangri are the main tributaries of the Indrawati River. After the diversion of the Yangri and Larke rivers into the Melamchi there would hardy be any flow in the upper reach of the Indrawati River during the dry season.
It confuses every common man to understand why it was allowed to lease out the Indrawati River to private developers to build a cascade of hydropower projects. One hydropower project is already completed and the others are at the planning stage. Could not we find some other suitable rivers any where in Nepal to be leased out to private hydropower developers?
Hydropower Component of the Melamchi Project
There exists a big potential to generate cheap electricity by using the diverted flow of the Melamchi river The elevation of the Melamchi intake weir is 1715 m and the inlet to the treatment works near Sundarijal is 1409 m. Thus there is an enormously big gross head of 306 m. The UNDP report has clearly stated that the net increment in investment ( the cost of the powerhouse located near Sundarijal with electromechanical equipment) needed to implement the hydropower element is relatively small as the intake headrace tunnel and penstock are already in place for conveying water to the treatment works. The UNDP study has concluded that it would be worth constructing the hydropower and it could make a contribution to reducing the cost of drinking water to Kathmandu. According to the UNDP report even before the diversion of the Yangri and Larke rivers the total annual generation of the Melamchi hydropower would be 60 GWh and out of it the firm power generation would be 40.5 GWh. The Melamchi hydropower electricity generation would have been close to 50% of the annual generation of the Kulekhani No.1 hydropower. After the diversion of the Yangri and Larke the electricity generation of the Melamchi hydropower would be further increased. It surprises anyone to learn that the Melamchi hydropower component has been dropped. People want to know why our Planning Commission allowed the power component of the Melamchi project to be dropped despite the fact that the UNDP report has concluded that the power station would be worth constructing and could make a contribution to reducing the cost of drinking water to Kathmandu residents.
Diversion from Kathmandu to Kulekhani
The diversion of the surplus Melamchi and Langtang waters from Kathmandu valley to the Kulekhani reservoir could be a very simple and at the same time the most cost effective proposition despite the fact that at first glance it might appear to be a highly complicated engineering task. Let us take a hypothetical case that we are going to draw only 4 cumecs water somewhere near Chobar out of the combined flow of the Bagmati. Melamchi and Langtang rivers. It is explained hereinafter that the benefit accruing to the NEA could be as high as US $ 22.5 million per annum by investing only about US $ 20 million in the construction of the proposed diversion structures.
We might have to build a 15 MW pump station at Chobar to lift 4 cumecs water to a height of about 300 meters which might be equivalent in height to the full supply level (FSL) of the Kulekhani storage reservoir. It is equally possible that instead of one big pump station we might need several small pump stations with a total capacity of about 15 MW that would be completely dependant on topography. A 15 km long waterway might be needed to carry the water into the Kulekhani storage reservoir, out of it the length of the tunnel could be about 9 kilometers. The total cost of such diversion could be about US $ 20 million
After the completion of the above described Langtang diversion into the Kulekhani reservoir, there would be a net increase of about 250 GWh firm power in annual generation of the Kulekhani Nos 1,2&3 hydropower stations even after taking into consideration the energy spent on pumping. Thus the additional generation of the Kulekhani hydropower stations after the Langtang diversion would be two times greater than the present annual generation of Kulekhani No 1 Station. It would be possible to increase to such a great extent the electricity generation absolutely without any additional investment in civil structures and electrical equipments of the Kulekhani dam and hydropower stations.
(Dr. Thapa writes on water resources)
