I have been reading about Chinese dams in Brahmaputra in Indian newspapers. As a typical lower riparian alarmist, most of the reports also add that China is planning to divert some of its water towards Eastern region, in addition to generation of 40,000 MW of electricity.
Great Bend of Brahmaputra
The Brahmaputra river follows an odd channel to flow to the sea. It flows towards east for almost half of its length in mountainous Tibet and then takes a U-turn (photo) to enter plains in Assam. Ultimately, it enters Bangladesh towards South and meets the Ganges before reaching the sea.
The place where it takes a U-turn, is known as Great Bend of Yarlung Tsangpo/Brahmaputra. At the same place, the river forms the deepest canyon of the world (Grand Canyon??). Only in 1998, a 30 mt waterfall was discovered nearby and since then China is planning to build a huge hydroelectric dam having an installed capacity of 40,000 MW.
The media reports also claim that there are proposals in China to divert some of rivers water too through the same dam to Eastern region. The author also claimed that China is planning to divert 40 BCM of water out of 71.5 BCM carried by Brahmaputra each year. One must remember that the water calculation is based on what it carries from Tibet to India. The same river has a runoff of an average of 550 BCM of water when it reaches Bangladesh. Where from this additional flow comes? There are two answers – the first is the Monsoon waters and the other is the water carried by the tributaries. The monsoon flow of Brahmaputra is almost 10 times that of its dry season flow (Source : Page 39-40, Rivers and Riverine Landscape in North East India By Sutapa Sengupta).
Now let us look at the possibilities. The first is only the hydro-power generation. This does not change anything for India. Hydro-power generation is non-consumptive usage of water and should end up increasing the dry season flow by 10-20% – which should be good for irrigation usage in Assam and Bangladesh. The success of this plan depends on how the irrigation planning is done. I am hopeful that China will also sell some of the electricity to India since it may be a cheaper option for them.
The next topic to discuss the feasibility of this project. There are basically three different ways to implement the project. The first is to build hydro-dam only. The second is to divert water only during monsoon. The third is to divert a constant volume of water throughout the year.
The first sounds feasible and I have already discussed it. The second should also cause no harm to India. It is understandable that during Monsoon, it’s the excess water that causes the problem as it floods vast area in India and Bangladesh. It’s good for China as well since it is diverting the water to an area that does not get rainwater at the same time of the year. It will get water for 3-6 months when India or Bangladesh does not need it.
Chinese river-linking plan
The third one could potentially have dire consequences for both India and Bangladesh. It could be completed as the second phase of Chinese plan to interlink their rivers (this is how the first phase is). For India, the North-East is both food-surplus and water-surplus. After the diversion starts, the dry season flow could diminish by 20-30%. For a sandwiched Bangladesh, it’s time to share water with both Asian Giants – China and India. India is already taking 50% of Ganges water in the East. If Brahmaputra (Jamuna in Bangladesh) is compromised, it would virtually be a dry Bangladesh in lean season. A lot of alarmist authors also mentioned reduction in Hydro-power potential of North-East India due to Chinese diversion. I do not agree to them. First reason is most of planned hydro-power potential is actually in Brahmaputra tributaries. The lack in dry season flow would only block any “run-of-the-river” projects, but not anyone with a plan of reservoirs.
There are ways to cushion against the third problem as well. If Indians build reservoirs in Arunachal to hold the excess monsoon water, the condition should not be that bad. However, the loss of vast forest area and displacement of tribals from their land is regretted. The Indian Govt has already stepped a foot towards this (another post, news).
One thing to keep in mind that if India can not show any meaningful use of Brahmaputra waters, China has a right to divert them. This is why the first two plans has to be accepted by India even if it harms India. India does not “use” monsoon water, neither does it use the gradient of the Great Bend. The International law (though neither India nor China signed it) indicates the existing use as a parameter for equitable water sharing. China has already built a dam (photo) on Indus tributary. The first Chinese dam on Tsangpo is also coming up. So we don’t know what’s coming next.
Chinese diversion of Brahmaputra water
Before signing off, I would like to do a reality check on how this plan would work. If a viewer can identify the river Brahmaputra (Yarlong on the map) on top of India, he can see the red marked channel (or the dotted red line on the map above) from the same river passing a string of rivers to reach the Yellow river. The rivers crossed includes Salween, Mekong and Yangtze – three of the largest in Asia. In the first phase, the plan is to build a connector between Yangtze and Yellow river as a part of Western routes.
It is logical to believe that China cannot divert water from Yarlong (Brahmaputra) before it does so from Salween and Mekong. [Adding later to clarify - because taking water from those rivers involves much less effort than what it takes to move Brahamaputra water]. So far, China has built three dams on Mekong, two are under construction and there are four more to come (map). However, there are no plans to divert Mekong water yet. Once it starts diversion of Mekong, a series of political conflict is expected – especially with ASEAN states – something that China could hardly afford. This could potentially delay the plan to add further water in the channel. Therefore, in my opinion, even if China diverts Brahmaputra, it won’t be soon. Literally, there is no such possibility in next 30 years in my opinion. By that time, energy-hungry India should “tame” the Brahmaputra and have sufficient control over it. If India fails to do that, it would be our problem because we would fail to meet our goal despite the mitigation plan is available. It’s better not to be the “Cry Baby” if we know the problem beforehand.
I can’t term the projected dire consequences of the diversion plan anything other than a mere Conspiracy theory at this point of time. The importance that Indian media attaching to it – proves that lower riparian alarmist nature is Universal. The last thing I want is a political conflict over water. India needs good relationship with China. Alarmist media should do a reality check before they push forward their agenda to inject fear in common Indians.
June 28, 2009 at 2:03 pm
A nation’s history and future is not a matter of a few decades , or even a century for that matter.
Every nation needs people, or institutionalized research & thinking, that would have a clear vision for the future, which again is not few decades, or a century. Thinking well ahead with a clear vision is an essential part of governance, that would help formulate policies.
In India, unfortunately, the important dimension of a serious vision for the future, either at local, regional or national level is missing.
The Chinese are forging ahead with a clear purpose, unlike the Indians that prefer to sleep until the damage is done.
The “alarmists” are those few people in India that do not live for the immediate future, or even for the period of their lifetime. They are doing their job of drawing attention of the nation to the potential disasters waiting to happen in the future, whether due to external act of hostility, or due to internal chaos or mis-governance.
Having spent half of my life in India, I am witness to the ad-hoc ism, incompetence and corruption in every sphere of governance, whether it is in a Central Government organization, at the state level of governance, at local / state level of planning for urban development, or at party level in politics ( this observation, of course does not include a few glorious exceptions here and there).
The author’s re-assuring opinion about Chinese river-diversion plan is a classic example of the state of denial, and selfish existance that most ( so called educated ) Indians live in.
One could not have been more correct, when it was said that ” India is a functional anarchy”.
GOD save India !
June 28, 2009 at 5:05 pm
I didn’t see any facts or figures in your comment. I would like to debate the issue only once you come up with them.
June 28, 2009 at 7:44 pm
The reality is, there is little India can do at this point of time, about diversion of the river. It is besides the point that Assam is blessed with other water sources including adequate monsoon, and hopefully a dying Brahmaputra will not be a complete disaster.
China has less per capita arable land than most countries in the world and therefore has a policy of land grabbing. It is also a nation that faces frequent droughts and short of water in many regions. Chinese have already altered the demography in Russian far east and Myanmar’s bordering regions. It has swallowed Tibet, will eventually swallow a demographically depleting Russia, and if not resisted, would swallow Arunachal too.
Diverting Brahmaputra is one of the many sinister designs that China has against India, and there is a sense of denial amongst the Congress mother fu**ers ( that ruled India for the most part ) about dealing with China, just as they are in denial about the Pak/Bangladesh sponsored terrorist threats that are growing by the day.
June 28, 2009 at 11:19 pm
China won’t divert Brahmaputra because it wants to hurt India – but because they need water to survive. They have right to do that. It’s similar in India. I think if it’s easier to shield ourselves, we should do it.
The other issues you mentioned about China/Others are not related to this post.
September 25, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Your reality check is based on the assumption that china will divert the water of Yarlong across the three rivers to replenish the flow of yellow river in order to irrigate the Gobi desert. But according to the below news this is just a part of the plan. The another part is as follows—
” First, a tunnel would be drilled through Mount Namcha Barwa. At the bottom of the tunnel, the water will flow into a reservoir and then diverted along some 500 miles of the Tibetan upland to the arid fastnesses of Xinjiang and Gansu. There are also plans to replenish the waters of the Yellow river in China’s north through gigantic water diversion schemes. ”
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2000/11/07/stories/040755pr.htm
Now what about the reality check of this option– diverting water through Tibetan upland to Xinjiang and Gansu?
November 2, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Do you know where Xinjiang is located? It’s in the North Western part of China. Water of river Brahamaputra cannot be tunnelled there. The plan was to merge it to Yangtze.
October 31, 2009 at 8:29 pm
[...] 1. http://horizonspeaks.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/dam-on-brahmaputra-consequence-and-reality-check/ [...]
November 4, 2009 at 4:32 am
You seem to be defending china!! Think about wat will happen if they do divert it, Bangladesh and a big chunk of India will be flooded!! I read in another article dat an estimate 600 million will lose their homes and about 200 million will die! U r saying dat d chinese need water rite? Well there’s a hundred thousand other ways to get dat water (without destroying d lives of like 700 million people) CHINA SUCKS!!!
Urgi Jo,
P.S. I’m thirteen
November 5, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Where did you get the calculations of how many will die and how many would lose their homes? Does a dam triggers those? Then all Indians should have been homeless because of 4000+ large dams are in India.