The New Nation - Internet Edition

Missing the river for the sands

Sudhirendar Sharma

Each major flood in Bihar echoes the demand for a high dam in upper reaches of Nepal. But Kathmandu suspects India's special fondness for its water resources and argues that neither high dam nor its exaggerated benefits favour her. Having received raw deal in the previous water-sharing arrangements, including the 1953 Kosi and 1959 Gandak treaties, Nepal hasn't been supportive of Delhi's demand. The present deluge upstream of the Bhimnagar barrage on Kosi has only amplified the accumulated aspersions.

As member of the independent fact-finding mission in early March, the dilapidated state of the barrage could not convince us that it could carry its designed discharge of 950,000 cusecs. The silt choked east and the west bank canals emanating from the barrage, their combined irrigation capacities reduced by two-third on account of defunct silt ejectors, could only add pressure on the main structure and the embankments upstream.

Sharing preliminary findings with the press, the fact finding mission had warned: `..not only are floods in Bihar manmade but that the worse has yet to come should political economy of flood control continue to promote `embankment' as only solution to the scourge of floods.'

Delhi has got its flood action plan consistently wrong over the years, and so has Patna. Yet, both never stop either blaming the rains or Kathmandu for it. Like floods, it is an annual ritual for politicians in Bihar to reiterate that Nepal has released water and that a high dam is the only solution to control floods. Little do unsuspecting masses realize that if there is no dam how water could be stored upstream? But the myth persists!

Shockingly, however, flood control measures over the years have turned north Bihar into

watery grave for millions. Jacketing the silt-laden rivers has helped flood prone area increase three fold in the state since independence, from a low of 25 lakh to a high of 68 lakh hectare today. It amounts to no less than 73 per cent of the entire land mass that remains prone under normal floods.

It is tragic that a worst flood only sends alarming signals, emergency aerial surveys and

fresh relief packages being the temporary outcome. That over 2 million people are permanently trapped between the flood control embankments and an estimated 8 million are faced with acute water-logging outside of the embankments are hard facts that continue to get ignored, year after year.

What instead gets attention is jacketing of the rivers, over 3,465 km long embankments have been built in Bihar since 1952. More are in the offing; a Rs. 792 crore package to tame the Bagmati has been approved and another proposal to embank the tributaries of Mahananda at an estimated cost of Rs 850 crore has been planned. The business of embankment building reflects politician-bureaucrat-contractor nexus at its best.

But for those who stand to gain from it, embankment efficacy has always been suspect. Engineer Captain F.C. Hirst, in 1908, had commented, 'in recent times, on the left bank of the Kosi, in the Purnea district, private enterprise has copied the work of the makers of the Bir Band, giving temporary relief, which, as will be seen later, is probably a menace to `future welfare'. This century old observation has proved prophetic ever since.

Embankments may work on those rivers that are stable and carry moderate silt load. Kosi, in contrast, is a meandering river with maximum available energy producing currents. Having drifted 160 km in past 250 years, the natural tendency of meandering Kosi disproves the traditional 'steady-state' equilibrium approach of the engineers. Once embanked, its incredible silt load only adds to its defiant nature. The embankments have proven counterproductive in the case of Kosi, arresting the natural dispersion of sediment on the floodplains, thereby increasing deposition, raising the level of riverbed and later breaking of embankments, causing floods and water-logging. Thanks to embankments, Kosi riverbed has risen by 12-15 feet on account of silt deposition that otherwise would have been spread on the floodplains.

It is erroneous to assume that north Bihar is geographical positioned to remain flooded. Conversely, it's the state's arrogance and misplaced faith in engineering that has stopped these rivers from performing their natural task of land building. Without the nurturing role of these rivers, Bihar would never have become the apex centre of knowledge. The

collapse of this knowledge culture within the state is an outcome of embankment.

Can high dam over Kosi reverse Bihar's misfortune? Like the embankments, the chances for this Rs 35,000 crore guess (estimated cost of 269 mt high dam) to go wrong are self evident. While silt deposition by the river is one major issue impacting dam's lifespan, its proposed location in Nepal's Brahashetra will capture only 78 per cent of river's catchment leaving significant 22 per cent flows dangerously unattended.

What then is the option? Having failed to tame rivers Rhine and Meuse, the Dutch hydrocracy has come to the conclusion that absolute safety from flooding could not be guaranteed through technical-infrastructural measures. Adopting spatial flood protection measures, they are now implementing `room for the river' approach with broad political support. It is measures like these that need to be negotiated with Kathmandu, but not before the political stables in Patna (and in Delhi) get cleansed of their misconceptions!

An Ashoka Fellowship Initiative (www.ashoka.org), the multidisciplinary fact-finding mission included engineers, hydrologists, sociologists and environmentalists with an aim to get an in-depth assessment of the perpetual flood cycle in north Bihar. The author has been a member of this independent mission.

Climate Change: Rethinking from human perspective

Mohammed Abdul Baten & Ronju Ahammad

Even though man is the best creation by the Almighty, yet humanity is solely responsible for recent crisis of climate change. Evidently, humanity is a major force in global change and shapes ecosystem dynamics from local environment to the biosphere as a whole. United Nations projections for the growth of the world population and consumption show humanity is going to use double the bio-productivity of the planet by 2050. Reaching this level of consumption may be impossible, however, as the natural capital being used to enable this overshoot may well be depleted before the mid century mark, many scientists warned. Now the question arises: are we friend or foe of environment?

Apparently, environmental problems are associated with poverty. In this sense, no other option exists than to overuse resources. Worldwide changes of forests, farmlands, waterways, and air are being driven by the need to provide food, fibre, water and shelter to more than six billion people. In fact, it's simply a matter of survival. In many cases, however, resource degradation is simply the result of human kind's insatiable desire to produce and consume leading to wilful short- term greed and corruption with no heed for the future. But, most unfortunate thing is that the nature is giving negative feedbacks to human behaviour more abruptly and devastatingly than before; complementary situation is now turning to a rival state. No doubt, poorer part of the world is the most affected by nature's cruelty. Adverse impacts of climate change namely tropical storms, floods, and droughts are greater in developing countries and least developed countries. Between 1990 and 2002, 94% of all natural hazards related death occurred in the developing countries.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) presents how human exploited nature unsustainably and made an asymmetrical relationship with nature. In fact, humans have already converted nearly a third of the total arable land area of the world, almost 3.8 million hectares, to agriculture and urban or built-up areas. Most of the remainder is too dry for agriculture or inaccessible. Between 1960 and 2000, the demand for ecosystem services (benefits provided by ecosystems) grew significantly as world population doubled to 6 billion and the global economy increased more than six fold. To meet this demand, food production increased by roughly 2.5 times, water use doubled, wood harvests for pulp and paper production tripled, installed hydropower capacity doubled, and timber production increased by more than half.

Water scarcity and land degradation are already severe enough to reduce yields on about 16 percent of agricultural lands, especially cropland in Africa and Central America, and pasture in Africa. The average annual growth rate of cereal production in developing countries has dropped from 2.5 to 1 percent per year over the past 35 years. The use of two ecosystem services, capture fisheries and freshwater, is now well beyond levels that can be sustained even at current demands, much less future ones. At least one quarter of important commercial fish stocks are over harvested. From 5 percent to possibly 25 percent of global freshwater use exceeds long-term accessible supplies and is now met either through engineered water transfers or overdraft of groundwater supplies

In the last few decades, approximately 20 percent of the world's reefs were lost; an additional 20 percent was degraded. In the Caribbean, 80 percent of coral has been lost in recent decades. Additionally, approximately a third of the world's mangrove areas were lost.

The number of species on the planet is declining. Over the past few hundred years, humans have increased the species extinction rate by as much as 1000 times over background rates typical over the planet's history.

Since 1750, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased by three times, primarily due to the combustion of fossil fuels and land use changes.

Approximately 60 percent of that increase (60 parts per million) has taken place since 1960.

As mentioned earlier, poorer countries are mostly affected by environmental variability. Bangladesh is one of the most vulnerable countries to several natural hazards; and hazards often become disasters because of geographical setting, poor planning, weak infrastructure, high population density, and technological insufficiency to early warning system.

For instance, when Hurricane Andrew, a powerful category storm, struck in Florida in 1992, it caused devastation valued at 26.5 billion and 23 people lost their lives. An equivalent tropical cyclone SIDR that ravaged Bangladesh in 2007 resulted in over 4000 deaths, loss over 50000 cattle lives, displacement of millions of individuals from widespread tidal surge and damage of one third of the Largest Mangrove forest ( The Sundarbans) including its unique flora and fauna ( Data compiled from newspaper reports).

What should we do standing in front of nature's rage with implications of climate change? What would be our future? Sustention or collapse of the current civilization? Though it is difficult to answer all these questions, yet it is obvious that all agree to the point, our present trends of resource use and view to the environment will result worse future.

It is late but not too late to restore the relationship between human and nature. Efforts to stem current wrecked resource use system and avoid to ecosystem collapse must take into account the slow response times of human population and infrastructure.

Innovative approaches to meet human needs should encourage not only at individual level but also at national to global level.

Undoubtedly, to face the challenge of climate change, we should be the steward of nature and be rational of resource use. In this perspective, what would be the basis of Human- Nature relationship is best illustrated by The Surah 55, The Holy Quran, where the Almighty announces "Most Gracious is Allah, who reveals Himself in the Quran, in man's intelligence and in the nature around man. Balance and Justice, Goodness and Care, are the Laws of His worlds……."

(Prepared by Mohammed Abdul Baten & Ronju Ahammad Stockholm Resilience Centre, University of Stockholm, Sweden)

Self labeling will not work: CSE

The auto industry's recent proposal of voluntaryfuel economy labeling will not work. Self labeling cannot be a substitute for mandatory fuel economy standards and an official fuel economy labeling programme," says Anumita Roychoudhury, coordinator of CSE's Right to Clean Air Campaign.So far, the automobile industry has been resisting mandatory fuel economy standards.

While disclosure of certified fuel economy data by the industry is needed for crafting of fuel economy standards and labeling, the car industry will have to accept mandatory standards and an official labeling programme to benchmark technology improvement, prevent the drift towards oil-guzzling cars, and help achieve targeted improvement in fuel savings, feels CSE. Already, the Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE), an autonomous body under the Union ministry of power, has taken the lead to craft fuel economy standards under the Energy Conservation Act that empowers it to set norms for any equipment or appliances "which consumes, generates, transmits or supplies energy". The overarching scope of this Act is to conserve energy. The bee's initiative is further reinforced by the Integrated Energy Policy and the National Action Plan on Climate Change that have categorically asked for fuel economy standards for vehicles.

CSE is very concerned that this initiative is being opposed by the car industry. Its patron ministry-the ministry of heavy industries is also supporting the industry's voluntary initiative. This must not be allowed to dilute the stand on the mandatory fuel economy standards.

Legally enforceable standards a must

Volantarism, according to CSE, has not worked anywhere in the world. Europe has failed to meet its targeted CO2 reduction (which is directly linked to fuel consumption of cars) due to voluntary approaches of the industry and is now moving towards mandatory standards.

Only legally enforceable standards can ensure targeted improvement in technology and have in-built safeguards to prevent the drift towards heavier vehicles that guzzle more fuel. In India, not only have car numbers increased, demand is also shifting towards mid-sized and bigger cars. The share of mini cars in total car sales has dropped from 21 per cent in 2001-02 to 6 per cent in 2006-07. A staggering 48 per cent growth has been reported in the mid-size segment, while sales of compact cars have grown by a paltry 0.3 per cent in June. Luxury car numbers are also increasing. Industry's voluntary efforts cannot reverse this trend.

Energy security a key priority

Energy security and fuel savings are India's national priority. India imports 75 per cent of the crude oil requirement. Already under recoveries of oil prices is increasing off budget liability and inflation. Indian consumers are more sensitive to fuel efficiency. Fuel economy regulations can be successful only if consumers are able to understand and respond. This will help to change the market fast.

The Integrated Energy Policy 2006 estimates that 50 per cent improvement in fuel efficiency can help save nearly 86 million tonnes of fuel by 2030-31 which is estimated to be nearly 65 per cent of total current consumption and in terms of carbon dioxide emissions reduction it is equal to removing 7 million of today's four wheeled vehicles. Climate benefit will thus be an ancillary benefit of the fuel economy regulations.

CSE strongly urges the government to enforce mandatory fuel economy standards for cars, labeling of all car models based on their fuel economy levels and a policy of mandatory disclosure of fuel economy of vehicle for all car models.

(Source: Centre for Science and Environment)

IUCN joins forces with businesses

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has joined forces with the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) for its World Conservation Congress, the world's largest ever conservation event. The agreement is designed to address ecosystem degradation, strengthen the business case for biodiversity conservation and put biodiversity considerations at the heart of the business operations of WBCSD member companies.

"We felt that the old model of treating the environment as separate from economic decision-making did not work," said Björn Stigson, president of the WBCSD. "We all must make economic decisions based on environmental realities. To put a value on our use of natural resources is one way to create that link, bringing us to truly integrated decision-making." "The private sector, like other sectors, uses and affects nature in multiple ways and simply cannot be left out of this equation," said Julia Marton-Lefèvre, IUCN Director General. "We are very pleased to have this opportunity to work closely with WBCSD and its members - companies that are committed to making positive environmental changes - to ensure that all parts of society are involved in a more sustainable future." Based in Switzerland, and with offices and members throughout the world, both organizations are widely recognized as global leaders in their respective fields. By promoting the presence of a major business NGO, business is now acknowledged as an equal stakeholder when it comes to solving the world's biodiversity crisis. The World Conservation Congress 2008 to be held in Barcelona, Spain, during October provides an extraordinary opportunity for governments, researchers, civil society, NGOs and the private sector to work together and start taking action. Some 8,000 participants and over 300 international journalists are expected to attend.

The WBCSD is leading the coordination of private sector participation during the first four days of the event. It is expected that some 70 global corporations will attend. The WBCSD will also coordinate a number of workshops and events aiming to present thoughtful business responses to the simultaneous requirements of ecosystem protection and economic development.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (http://www.wbcsd.org) is a unique, CEO-led, global association of some 200 companies dealing exclusively with business and sustainable development. The Council provides a platform for companies to explore sustainable development, share knowledge, experiences and best practices, and to advocate business positions on these issues in a variety of forums, working with governments and non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations. IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (http://www.iucn.org), helps the world find pragmatic solutions to our most pressing environment and development challenges by supporting scientific research; managing field projects all over the world; and bringing governments, NGOs, the UN, international conventions and companies together to develop policy, laws and best practice.

The world's oldest and largest global environmental network, IUCN is a democratic membership union with more than 1,000 government and NGO member organizations, and 11,000 leading scientists and experts. IUCN's work is supported by over 1,000 professional staff in 60 offices and hundreds of partners in public, NGO and private sectors around the world. IUCN's headquarters are located in Gland, near Geneva, in Switzerland.