From: aparna@mipos2.intel.com (Aparna Krishnan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.tamil,soc.culture.indian.telugu,sci.environment,soc.human.rights,alt.activism
Subject: Narmada - Update ! Are we opposing dev ? - PART II
Date: 16 Oct 92 21:29:59 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, CA

WHY SOME PEOPLE ARE SUPPORTING THE PROJECTS :
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There can be two reasons for supporting the dam
   a) people actually believe in the claimed figures and don't know better.
   b) people have other interests in the continuance of the project.

Claimed Benefits, a myth :
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

1) Claim : The projects together have a capacity of 3000MW of power.
TRUTH : 3000MW is the installed capacity, the firm power that the two
projects together can supply on an average is only 550MW.
The amount of 550MW is only in the
initial stages, in another 20 years this figure will reduce to about 
300MW. This amount is really no too much, a bad day in calcutta implies
just a power shortage of about 300MW. Also the focus of the project is
mainly irrigation.

2) Claim : It will bring water to the drought prone areas of Gujarat.
TRUTH : The driest areas of Gujarat namely kutch, saurashtra lie at the
end of the canal system, so it is questionable how much water they will
get. All the alternatives that have been proposed do a better job at
this than the projects as planned now.

3) Claim : Irrigation will increase the productivity of the land by a
factor of 6 and 8.
TRUTH : The maximum increase in productivity achieved in India so far
has been about a factor of 2.5, so this is a highly exaggerated figure.

4) Claim : Future generations will benefit, the life-span is 110 years.
TRUTH : The life-span was estimated assuming the rate of siltation of
the dam would be 1.55 hectometers per 100 sqkm, but it is actually 5.65
hectometers per 100 sqkm. The life-span is 35 years. The construction
itself will take about 15-20 years.

5) Claim : World Bank cannot make a mistake
TRUTH : About 60% of large scale projects promoted by WB have resulted
in failures and the countries involved incurring huge debts. The WB is
not an altruistic organization, after all its a bank and its repayment is
guaranteed by the Indian government.

6) Claim : The project will start an industrial revolution, and benefits
will soon come pouring in.
TRUTH :  Large dams are plagued with a large gestation period. It will
take another 15-20 years before  we see any substantial returns.

7) Claim : This is much better than smaller dams economically.
TRUTH : Large dams cost much more and have a large gestation period. The
smaller dams are more economical. The above view was the belief in 1979,
but recent studies and history has shown otherwise.

8) Claim : The NVDA will compensate for the forests by upgrading degraded
forest land area equal to twice the area lost by submergence.
TRUTH : This is the responsibility of the department of forests anyway.
Plus the feasibility of upgrading the forests in the land that has been
identified for that purpose has not been studied at all.

9) Claim : Problem of waterlogging and salinity has been solved.
TRUTH : The solution is to provide only 70% of water through irrigation
and 30% from wells. One well for every 6.2 hectares of land has to be
dug. The cost of installing the wells and the electricity required to 
draw water out of those wells is not considered.

10) Claim : Engineers can design dams to bear the strain of earthquakes.
TRUTH : Narmada basin is an area of moderate seismicity, where
an earthquake of scale 6.3 could be expected. In 1938 there was an
earthquake in this region (Satpura). In 1967 on a similar site in the
Koyna dam, there was an earthquake that caused  death of more than 200
people and injury to 1500 (official figures). Though the dam is going to
be intact, the surrounding area will be devastated.

11) Claim : Every person who loses land will get 5 acres...
TRUTH : 40% of the villages are landless labourers, they do not have a
right to a future since the village they live in will be broken up.

-----------------------------------------
One of the main reasons alternatives are not being considered because 
the tribunal had earlier  taken 10 years to  decide on this project. 
So if it were opened up again it will again take a lot of time.
-----------------------------------------

OTHER INTERESTS :
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(these are conjectures)

1) Industrialists in the already developed areas of Gujarat are going to
get cheaper water and electricity(?).
2) The land prices around the project will shoot up tremendously.
3) There will be millions of contracts given out, companies of all sorts
will be making it big over there.
4) People would have actually invested in the project (NRIs).
5) Politicians might be influenced by the votes from the people in the
impact area of the project and the contributions from organizations that
stand to gain from this project.
6) Companies that have already committed their manpower and  capital to
the project oppose its reversal, or re-thinking of its structure.

------------------------------------------

Why is World Bank hesitating to reverse its decision :
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(these are conjectures)

1) Most of the cash spent was from the world bank which will have to be
written off if it withdraws from its commitment.

2) Irrespective of the success of the dam India will have to pay back
the debt incurred ( at 10.75% interest) so the world bank money is
secure if it continues.

3) Though a number of the regulations of the WB regarding oustees,
environment etc are being violated, the WB can look away and blame it on
the Indian Government. It can satisfy itself by what is shown to it on
paper and hence avoid responsibility (infact statement of the president
of WB on seeing the Morse report reflects this attitude).

4) It is a matter of its reputation.
-------------------------------------------

In short, even without taking environmental, rehabilitation and
other concerns into account, the Narmada Valley Project is economically
NOT advisable.

More details on this project, is avilable through anonymous ftp
from nacho.cs.wisc.edu (128.105.8.15).


Jagan (jagan@ctr.columbia.edu) and Bindu (UK00006@ukpr.uky.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian