Indus Water Treaty

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 24 May 2015 21:45

Why Pakistan can't stop river projects of India? Bheja Khali Hali & Paani Khali

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 04 Jun 2015 20:48

Baghliar Dam

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Jun 2015 10:29

^That's a remarkable photo. Thanks Jhujar for posting. There are some other Baglihars in the making too.

Paklurkers, we will share those photos here for your enjoyment.

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 05 Jun 2015 12:53

Jhujar, what is the source of the photo? Is it okay to share it on?

amit · Post by **amit** » 05 Jun 2015 13:48

Jhujar wrote:Baghliar Dam

It makes me feel sad to see us siphon off all the electricity from the water and then send the नामर्द water to our younger brother in the West.

No wonder the TFTA are getting smaller in size in all areas save for where the sun doesn't shine. This is a clear demonstration of our small hearted nature.

And to think a senior Mullah of this Kufir phorum just said more such नामर्द water making facilities are coming up.

Shame, shame!

amit · Post by **amit** » 05 Jun 2015 13:49

BTW wait! What a spectacular photo. Cheers the jingo heart!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Jun 2015 21:54

kancha wrote:Jhujar, what is the source of the photo? Is it okay to share it on?

Since its not mine , its free for all as its from public source. Just make sure Paki must see the Nazara of this Dam Hamara Pyara.

neeraj · Post by **neeraj** » 05 Jun 2015 22:01

Jhujar, cannot see the picture - can someone repost.

Thanks

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Jun 2015 03:33

Wonderful and breathtaking photograph.

I am waiting for two photographs in the future
1. Kishenganga on the Kishenganga / Neelum R
2. Dhumkar and Nimoo Bazgo on the Indus

Muuhaaaahaaaaaaaaa

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 20 Jun 2015 21:10

SSridhar Ji :

Here is a Two-Part Article from the Land of Pure and Home of the Terrorists :

The dying civilisation of River Sutlej Part – I

Under international laws, India is a major culprit. Under the United Nations International Watercourse Convention no country has the right to completely block any natural watercourse.

Under the Indus Waters Treaty, India was to release adequate water into River Sutlej – a minimum water level to help save human and river life.

The UN convention binds all member states not to leave the riverbed dry as the water blockade endangers the entire civilisation on the riverbanks. By completely blocking the river water, India is still violating the UN International Watercourse Convention – in particular articles 7, 10, 20, 21, 22, and 23

The dying civilisation of River Sutlej Part – II

Similarly, the government of Pakistan should take up with the government of India the issue of the essential minimum level of water in River Sutlej from the Ferozepur Headworks onward on humanitarian grounds.

Pakistan should also utilise its diplomatic influence on India to have all the guarantees made in the Indus Basin Water Treaty implemented to help save the damage to the 25 million people living in six districts on both sides of the Sutlej river from the Sulemanki Headworks to Panjnad.

Please let us have your views on the above and also can Cwapistan ask for a “Re-Negotiation” of the IWT and if so could India ask for a better share of the Indus Waters which, I believe, at the moment are 80.2% to Pakistan and 19.8% to India?

Cheers

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 20 Jun 2015 21:17

neeraj wrote:Jhujar, cannot see the picture - can someone repost.

Thanks

Alternate link http://i.imgur.com/CKDlewb.jpg

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Jun 2015 05:05

Peregrine ji, this is a clever-by-half attempt, as usual, by the Pakistanis to usurp the Eastern Rivers, awarded to India by the IWT, through backdoor. The IWT clearly specifies what are called 'water accounting periods', during which certain minimum water flow is to be ensured by India in the eastern rivers. India strictly adheres to that because Pakistan had never complained in the last 55 years of the IWT operation. The IWT overrides any other international convention. The IWT is a bilateral agreement. The distinction must be maintained. Also, that author must be questioned if Pakistan has acceded to that convention and ratified that. India has not. This may also be an attempt to demand a re-cast of the IWT hoping to gain more waters for Pakistan in the process, as that country becomes more and more water stressed.

In Part-I, the author stridently demands (from whatever you have posted as I didn't read the complete article) taking the matter up under UN Watercourse Convention and in Part-II, he dilutes that to 'humanitarian grounds'.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 22 Jun 2015 15:51

SSridhar wrote:Peregrine ji, this is a clever-by-half attempt, as usual, by the Pakistanis to usurp the Eastern Rivers, awarded to India by the IWT, through backdoor. The IWT clearly specifies what are called 'water accounting periods', during which certain minimum water flow is to be ensured by India in the eastern rivers. India strictly adheres to that because Pakistan had never complained in the last 55 years of the IWT operation. The IWT overrides any other international convention. The IWT is a bilateral agreement. The distinction must be maintained. Also, that author must be questioned if Pakistan has acceded to that convention and ratified that. India has not. This may also be an attempt to demand a re-cast of the IWT hoping to gain more waters for Pakistan in the process, as that country becomes more and more water stressed.

In Part-I, the author stridently demands (from whatever you have posted as I didn't read the complete article) taking the matter up under UN Watercourse Convention and in Part-II, he dilutes that to 'humanitarian grounds'.

SSridhar Ji :

Thank you very much indeed. Oc course the Pakis will try evry trick in the book with the usual results - zilch.

Cheers

member_29040 · Post by **member_29040** » 22 Jun 2015 16:34

I really hope India completes shahpur kandi and ujh barrage as soon as possible.
We might be the only nation who feeds the country which is trying to destroy it.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 23 Jun 2015 15:24

What is the status of SYL Canal?

member_29040 · Post by **member_29040** » 23 Jun 2015 15:49

^^^ Politicians from Punjab are sitting on it. Apparently they are OK with 3 MAF water going to Pakistan but not OK with sharing it to Haryana. Same way they are opposing second Rabi beas link canal.

arun · Post by **arun** » 02 Jul 2015 08:46

X Posted from the “Water Issues In The Indian Sub-Continent” thread.

Hydroelectric power plant: Financiers stop $433m loan for Neelum-Jhelum project:

Express Tribune

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 02 Jul 2015 09:23

^^^^Do the rivers in Panjab flow from somewhere? One hopes they don't change course.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 02 Jul 2015 10:23

Kishenganga project is expected to be completed in 2016- are we on course to finish it on time?

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 03 Jul 2015 03:26

Cross Posted on the STFUP Thread

Hydroelectric power plant: Financiers stop $433m loan for Neelum-Jhelum project

ISLAMABAD: Lenders from the Middle East have stopped a planned loan of $433 million to fund the strategically important 969-megawatt Neelum-Jhelum hydropower project following the surge in cost estimate to $4.21 billion.

Financing was expected to be received from a consortium of financiers but without any firm commitment. Now the prime minister has been told that the project will not be completed even in 2016 and work may be extended to 2017.

They had committed an amount of $692 million, of which $259.5 million had so far been disbursed.

“The release of the remaining $433 million has been stopped by the lenders as they are demanding performance guarantees from the contractors for the additional work (variation orders) and cost escalation,” an official told the meeting.

Cheers

member_29040 · Post by **member_29040** » 03 Jul 2015 06:48

^^^ Work on Neelum Jhelum has been stopped from last 6 months due to lack of money. And looking from Baki army purchases I don't think that any money is left for this project.
And 4.21 Billion for 969 MW!!

Looks like chinis have started looting richer than smallest mountain friend and putting it in debt deeper than Indian ocean.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 03 Jul 2015 07:10

Prashant, nice one.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 03 Jul 2015 10:49

Prashant wrote:^^^ Politicians from Punjab are sitting on it. Apparently they are OK with 3 MAF water going to Pakistan but not OK with sharing it to Haryana. Same way they are opposing second Rabi beas link canal.

looks like part of the private paki pasand pappi jhappi to keep the water flowing to the paki panjab.

The same jokers may also be benefiting exclusively and preferentially from the cross border trade.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Jul 2015 22:29

Libya Under Gaddafi build huge pipeline/s to transport water thousands of KM from coast to the interior of country. Russians are thinking and planning to bring the Siberian water into CAR. Instead of Digging Canal and relying on political shenanigans , India can use pipelines, preferably underground to bring spare water from Himalayas to different parts of country. These pipelines will also work as storage . Is it possible GOI?
Lets spread this good news on Twitter for Paki to Pick this up. IWT do not mention anything about use of Pipelines or siphoning water from underground of the India's rivers flowing free of cost to pakistan.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Jul 2015 23:34

KhottaPoakaLotta Deeplowmatic & Diplomutts
Hydro-diplomacy

WE are a hydro-society where historically our livelihoods, settlements, wealth and culture were defined and inspired by water. Despite the importance of water for Pakistan, we have transformed from a water-abundant state to one of ‘perceived’ scarcity. According to a recent IMF report, “… despite an abundance of water a few decades ago, lagging policies have raised the prospect of water scarcity that could threaten all aspects of the economy”.Pakistan’s water crisis is not one of absolute water scarcity but has over time been transformed into a ticking time bomb due to vested interests, power structures, political rivalries, ineffective governance and flawed policies.In Pakistan, who controls water and who has access to it is at the heart of our water crises. Control and access are governance challenges; and the complexity is magnified when we speak about sharing water among communities, provinces, or countries. A large amount of available freshwater is transboundary and thus has to be shared. Increasing population numbers, competing uses and greater variability due to climate change are intensifying pressure on riparian actors (communities, provinces, states, countries) who share an already strained resource.
Water is an asset which must be negotiated across borders.
According to a recent independent report commissioned by members of the G7, the mounting pressures on available water for Pakistan could translate into political instability and security risk.
Transboundary water is no longer a purely management issue being juggled between competing economic and social demands; it is now a national asset which has to be negotiated diplomatically across international borders. With an increasingly international and interdependent disposition, water is featuring prominently in topics of foreign policy and diplomacy.Historically, the transboundary water debate was played out as a zero-sum game. This is no longer tenable as demographic and economic drivers are straining an already limited resource. With this background, diplomacy in water is being considered an increasingly important avenue to improve water governance. Hydro-diplomacy is particularly relevant for Pakistan due to its unequal power structures in society and the politicised nature of water problems.Most of Pakistan’s water challenges are viewed as technical. But technical solutions can only go so far in addressing water governance issues without a diplomatic approach to grievances, power balance and regional political contexts.
In Pakistan, a number of technical initiatives, such as new dams, hydropower projects and water-pricing proposals were eclipsed because stakeholders weren’t taken on board; power dynamics weren’t addressed; communication of information was insufficient and diplomatic options weren’t fully explored. Water issues then fell hostage to politics.The Kishanganga case and Kalabagh dam are two examples of unsuccessful interstate and inter-provincial initiatives where a diplomatic approach would have led to a technical solution.To use hydro-diplomacy as a tool we need strong institutions and political leadership as a prerequisite to be effective and reap results. According to a recent report by Climate Diplomacy titled The Rise of Hydro-Diplomacy — water conflict hotspots coincide with regions where resilient conflict resolution mechanisms and institutions are absent.The Indus Waters Treaty is an interesting example of part-success, part-failure when it comes to regional cooperation between Pakistan and India on water. Despite three wars and a perpetually tense relationship between the two riparian countries, the treaty is still intact. However, having said this, the treaty is insufficient in the face of emerging challenges such as climate change, groundwater overdraft, etc.For Pakistan, a key institutional arrangement is that of the Indus water commissioner. According to expert Shafqat Kakakhel, “The office of the Indus water commissioner hasn’t played an effective role.” There is need to strengthen the capacity of the commission, revise its mandate and model it on the lines of a foreign diplomatic institution.The condition of our internal institutions managing transboundary waters is not very good either. Irsa internally manages the distribution of water among the provinces as per the 1991 Water Apportionment Accord. As the regulator, Irsa’s mandate is limited to water distribution among the provinces and hence does not include roles such as conflict resolution, negotiation or diplomacy.The water debate in Pakistan should be steered from its focus on dams to where the stakes of various stakeholders can be resolved through a diplomatic process. Technical solutions like building infrastructure are necessary; however, without preconditions like strong institutions and an approach grounded in diplomacy we won’t be able to harness the cooperation and collaboration needed to benefit from our water resources.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 07 Jul 2015 15:48

Dar rejects proposal to privatise Neelum-Jhelum project

ISLAMABAD: Finance Minister Ishaq Dar rejected on Monday proposals for privatisation of the Neelum-Jhelum hydropower project to meet a financing gap caused by an escalation of its cost by 52 per cent.

Informed sources said the cost of the 969MW strategic project had risen to Rs418 billion from Rs274bn approved at the fag-end of the PPP government. A revised PC-1 finalised with fresh cost estimates is awaiting clearance by the Central Development Working Party and the Executive Committee of National Economic Council.

The finance minister presided over on Monday a meeting to review hydel projects in view of the June 18 directive of the prime minister to remove irritants in the flow of financing of the Neelum-Jhelum project that could add more than six per cent additional generation to the national grid by the end of next year.

The sources said arrangements had been finalised with the National Bank of Pakistan to lead a syndicate of banks for around Rs100bn Islamic Sukuk bonds to meet the local financing component with sovereign guarantee of the federal government. A term sheet with banks has already been approved.

They said the authorities were also in contact with China Exim Bank for a $576 million loan to meet the foreign exchange component. The loan is now in approval stage.

But there are some glitches in obtaining about $40m of foreign financing from Middle Eastern lenders and Islamic Development Bank. While the major part ($47m) of this head has been taken care of, the sources said, some technical issues relating to segments lacking government guarantee would need to be settled through top-level intervention.

They said that despite being a strategic project which was also meant to secure Pakistan’s water rights, Neelum Jhelum had been one of the unfortunate projects. It was launched a decade ago but is yet to complete its financial close – normally a perquisite for launching any project.

The sources said the Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) had suggested two options to bridge the financing gap of over Rs160bn – inviting important investors to participate as financing partner or engage the Chinese contractor currently working on the Neelum-Jhelum project to become its strategic partner or rope in other Chinese investors.

The finance minister did not agree with the ideas because there would be many valuation issues relating to an ongoing project or unfinished asset. Also the process of engaging private investors or Chinese participation will require a minimum of six months.

The meeting was informed that at least four major cost components had not been made part of the overall project cost. These include interest during cost (IDC), annual contract escalation, foreign exchange price difference and taxes and duties. More than Rs100bn is needed to meet these requirements.

Mr Dar said the completion of hydropower projects was top priority of the government, adding that the cost of Neelum Jehlum project had increased because of delays in its execution, changes in the original design after the 2005 earthquake and the resultant escalation in the scope of work.

“It is our firm commitment that the project will now be taken up on a priority basis and all international donors and lenders will be re-engaged in the process of expediting release of funds for this project and for achieving this objective we will try to satisfy them on all their concerns,” he said.

Retired Gen Mohammad Zubair, CEO of the Neelum-Jhelum Power Project Company, told the meeting that 72 per cent physical work on the project had been completed.

The minister asked Wapda and the company to firm up their final cost estimates so that these could not be revised again and again.

Wapda Chairman Zafar Mahmood told the meeting that the board of directors of the project representing all ministries had approved the final cost estimate of Rs418bn and submitted the PC-1 to the Planning Commission for approval.

The project was originally estimated to cost Rs130bn in 2007 with a plan to generate half of the financing through Neelum-Jhelum Surcharge at a rate of 10 paisa per unit. But subsequent geological changes and project delays increased the cost to Rs274.9bn in 2012.

The project is important because it will ensure Pakistan’s rights over Jhelum river, partially lost to India due to Kishenganga hydropower project being built across the Line of Control.

After completion, the project is estimated to produce more than Rs45bn worth of “cheaper and cleaner” energy every year and contribute over Rs5bn annually to the Azad Kashmir government. It will also improve Wapda’s financial position and replace some of the expensive thermal projects being run on imported furnace oil.

The project located near Muzaffarabad in Azad Kashmir envisages diversion of water from the Neelum river through a 42km tunnel underneath the Jhelum river.
Cheers

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 09 Jul 2015 13:49

Neelum Jhelum project : Govt rejects higher interest payments on Chinese loan

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has turned down China’s demand for higher interest payments on a $576-million loan for the Neelum Jhelum hydroelectric power project in Azad Jammu and Kashmir, fearing it may have adverse impact on national finances and foreign currency reserves of the country, officials say.

Though the Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) had expressed its willingness to pay the high interest rate, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his cabinet members dismissed the talk of expensive borrowing and proposed China should be asked to charge the same interest rate as collected on a previous loan for the project.

Lenders from the Middle East have already stopped a planned $433 million loan to fund the strategically important 969-megawatt Neelum Jhelum project following the surge in cost estimates to $4.21 billion.

During the previous administration of Pakistan Peoples Party, the project cost had jumped to $2.74 billion from $1.8 billion and now the estimated cost has gone up further to $4.21 billion.

Earlier, the project had to be completed by October this year, but the deadline has been revised to November 30, 2016. Financial close of the project has also not yet been achieved.

Pakistan had kicked off work on the Neelum Jhelum River in Azad Jammu and Kashmir to secure water supplies but India also started developing the Kishanganga hydroelectric power project on the river, which sparked a legal battle between the two countries in the International Court of Arbitration.

According to officials familiar with the developments, Pakistan has placed a request with the Export-Import (Exim) Bank of China, a state bank solely owned by the Chinese government, for a loan of $576 million to meet foreign currency needs of the project. Negotiations on the terms and conditions for the loan were under way through the Economic Affairs Division (EAD).

“However, there are differences over the rate of interest. Exim Bank demands a higher rate of 7% compared to the 4.4% it charged on the previous loan for the same project,” chief financial officer of the Neelum Jhelum Hydropower Company told the Cabinet Committee on Energy in a meeting held in mid-June.

Wapda Chairman Zafar Mahmood expressed the willingness to accept the higher interest payment on the Chinese loan, arguing that the organisation had to bear a far higher interest cost on cash development loans (CDL).

However, some cabinet members pointed out that expensive borrowing from foreign sources would have adverse implications for local finances as well as foreign currency reserves of the country. Every effort should be made to get the new loan on the interest already being charged, they said.

It was also emphasised that loan negotiations should reach a conclusion soon preferably before the end of September.

Responding to the emphasis, the cabinet committee decided to press ahead with the negotiations at a fast pace to secure the fresh loan at the interest rate already being charged.

Cheers

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 11 Jul 2015 22:56

All set: Funding resumes for Neelum Jhelum project

ISLAMABAD: Putting an end to funding woes, Gulf lenders have agreed to resume financing for the 969-megawatt Neelum Jhelum hydropower project, addressing one of the major obstacles threatening its completion in the next year and a half.

The delegation of Islamic Development Bank (IDB) and Saudi Fund for Development announced their decision to resume $433 million funding during a meeting with Finance Minister Ishaq Dar that was held on Friday.

“It gives me great pleasure to announce that IDB and the co-financers on the project have agreed to continue funding of the Neelum Jehlum hydropower project,” said Finance Minister Dar. The project will be completed in the tenure of the current government and will prove to be a symbol of pride for the nation, he added.

Cheers

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Jul 2015 08:17

^ But, what about the Chinese refusal of roughly half-a-billion USD, citing higher interest rates? That still remains to be solved. This whole Neelum-Jhelum project was conceived to stop the run-of-the-river Kishenganga and once that failed, it is being touted as a project to claim Pakistan's rights on the Jhelum water. This project is completely unviable and the lenders must have some other motive in lending. Compare the cost (even after cost escalation caused by the partial stoppage of work by CoA) of Kishenganga's 330 MW at Rs 5500 Crore vs PNR 41800 Crores for 969 MW. It is almost twice the cost of the Indian project. In fact, our Kishenganga project involves much more project engineering work than their one. So, what tariff would NJHEP charge its customers to recover the huge investment and pay back the creditors? It is another matter that the creditors would have to be paid back in dollars which the terrorist state is always in short supply of unless the IMF lends. This is the perennial circular debt in Pakistan

So, what did Pakistan achieve in the end? It delayed the Indian project by some time. It gained a victory that low-level sedimentation discharge gates cannot be used in Indian projects in the future and India must find some other mechanism for the same. Some minimum flow was ensured in October through March which would slightly reduce the power generation in Kishenganga. What did it lose? It lost its most important argument that India cannot build run-of-the-river projects on the western rivers (something which was never in doubt). In the Kishenganga project itself, India's right to divert river waters was established (again, something which was never in doubt).

Pakistanis do not realize that the single source of all their woes is their obsession with India, not India itself or the billion-odd kuffar who reside there etc. Let Pakistan be washed away in the minimal flow on Jhelum.

sooraj · Post by **sooraj** » 12 Jul 2015 10:23

US gives aid to Pak and China squeezes that aid from Pak

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 12 Jul 2015 21:40

Am I understanding this correct, that if the Kishenganga dam is built first, the Neelum-Jhelum pakisatan project will be downstream of it. Also What gets to Jhelum is thro Wular lake ? What is the importance of building the Kishenganga first ?...since we are not supposed to divert the waters, except perhaps take 20% ?.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 16 Jul 2015 01:36

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erUN9kpVOt4

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 16 Jul 2015 01:42

Jhujar wrote:Libya Under Gaddafi build huge pipeline/s to transport water thousands of KM from coast to the interior of country. Russians are thinking and planning to bring the Siberian water into CAR. Instead of Digging Canal and relying on political shenanigans , India can use pipelines, preferably underground to bring spare water from Himalayas to different parts of country. These pipelines will also work as storage . Is it possible GOI?
Lets spread this good news on Twitter for Paki to Pick this up. IWT do not mention anything about use of Pipelines or siphoning water from underground of the India's rivers flowing free of cost to pakistan.

Not a bad thought. And actually more feasible (and less costly) than river interlinking on the face of it. Any thoughts from resident experts?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 16 Jul 2015 01:53

Guddu,
This is the actual picture.
Pakistan wants to make the Neelum Jhelum Project by building a dam at Nasri on the Neelum (Partially completed), a tunnel from the Neelum (kishenganga) upto the Jhelum, joining the tunnel with water from the Jhelum. Then another tunnel will take the water downstream via a powerhouse and then into the Jhelum.
There has to be enough water in the Neelum for this project to generate 969 MW, there has to be enough height of the water at the Nasri Dam to be able to run those turbines downstream.

India wants to fill the wular lake and make it and the Jhelum upstream navigable. On the Indian side, the Wular Barrage, Uri1 and Uri2 are already complete. The Kishenganga tunnel is complete. The Kishenganga dam is building after being cleared of arbitration

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 16 Jul 2015 03:15

Electricity production on the Indian side:

Kishenganga Dam: 330 MW
Wular - Lower Jhelum Hydropower Project: 105 MW
Uri 1: 480 MW
Uri 2: 240 MW
----------------------------
Total : 1155 MW on the Indian side

compare that with the Pakistani planned 969 MW - now doubtful.
Musharraf I think was the one who initiated the sinking of billions of dollars from a poor pakistan's exchequer into the NJ Project, knowing fully well that once the Kishanganga was built, the NJ project was a goner. Now Pakistan has debt, interest payments and the project stands near abandoned because no one will fund it.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 16 Jul 2015 07:25

For India it is Tulbul Navigation Project. Pakis call it wullar barrage. Pending since 1984. KHEP water diversion through wullar lake would prove to be lifeline for this Navigation Lock and control structure by augmenting water quantity. It will also control water release to Mangla Dam during flood season thereby benefiting Pakis. Incidentally Mangla Dam was the site where 26/11 terrorists were trained.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 16 Jul 2015 08:41

Thank you both for the gyan.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 16 Jul 2015 09:49

During the initial discussions of the Indian Kishenganga project between the PICs, the benefits to Pakistan were explained. But, Pakistan was adamant.

The Tulbul Navigation project characterizes the Pakistani approach.

India’s argument against Pakistani objections to the project is that such a barrage would not reduce the quantum of water flow and it would also be beneficial to Pakistan by regulating water flow to Mangla Dam by controlling floods and also improving the Pakistani Triple-canal irrigation system (which links Jhelum and Chenab with the Upper Bari Doab Canal). The water flow would indeed increase to 4000 cusecs during the lean October-February period from the current 2000 cusecs. Also, the project does not envisage building any new storage capacity as the Wullar lake already existed and the water is only for non-consumptive use (this term includes such usage as navigation, floating of timber, flood protection or control, and fishing with no diminution in volume of water returned to the river/tributaries after use) which is allowed by the IWT. The Wullar barrage is not a storage project but a control project permissible under the treaty. The two countries had indeed reached an agreement in October, 1991 but then Pakistan suddenly introduced an irrelevant element in February, 1992 by linking the termination of Kishenganga Hydroelectric project with further movements in the Tulbul Navigation Lock project and India’s refusal stalled further work. The 1991 draft agreement stipulated that India would build a 40-feet wide lock but leave ungated 6.2 Metres of the lake at a crest level of 1574.9 Metres and would also forego 0.30MAF storage while Pakistan would allow the lake to fill to its full capacity at 1578 metres. When the agreement was reached in 1991, the only contention that remained was the timing of the filling up of the lake. The crucial period was between June 21 and August 20 every year. Between October, 1987, and August, 1992, experts from the two countries met eight times to settle the issue. The matter was taken up during the Foreign Secretary-level talks between 1990 and 1994 also.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 16 Jul 2015 15:42

What is the Status of Salal Dam? Will our other dams end up like Salal after the recent Arbitral Award?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 16 Jul 2015 17:20

Salal was the first successfully negotiated project under IWT. We agreed to remove the six sedimentation control sluice gates and also agreed to reduce the height. Sedimentation control can be done by other then these sluice gates. However, the low-level gates are an easy, traditional and effective mechanism. In future projects, India has to build-in these techniques right at the design stage itself.

In the case of Salal, sedimentation led to two problems as it always does. Loss of storage capacity and the damage to the turbines. As I know, Salal was losing ~2% of generation capacity every year due to damage to turbines. This was fixed by our engineers significantly using some sealing techniques to the turbines. Loss of capacity is another issue. In Salal, reservoir capacity fell from 285 MCM to 25 MCM within five years. Many techniques have been developed to 'manage' sedimentation at Salal.