South India River Water Issues/Disputes

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 21 Nov 2011 18:21

Documentary about that ticking time bomb that is Mullaperiyar.

Small tremors have opened up more cracks in the dam. If it happens in night, good bye. Aphice is at some elevation, so daytime may spare me.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 22 Nov 2011 19:34

dileep, thanks for the video.
this is straight forward. if 2.5 mil downstream are in mortal danger, is there any other argument even?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 22 Nov 2011 20:04

Dileep wrote:Documentary about that ticking time bomb that is Mullaperiyar.
...
Small tremors have opened up more cracks in the dam. If it happens in night, good bye. Aphice is at some elevation, so daytime may spare me.

Thank you Dileep sar.

Key points to note:
1. We cannot limit the access to and ownership of natural resources at state level. This documentary looks (even for a small part) the issue from Kerala and TN perspective. It doesn't help as all these states are part of India.

2. The end-of-life problems exist in such projects (I mentioned this in the nuclear thread too). A dam failure will cause equal/more destruction than a nuke event.

3. ~120 major dams in India are past their life times. The national construction is a cycle it is not linear. Local, state, and federal govts must develop a structure to address these rebuilding exercises.

4. unlike a nuclear power plan which can be turned off in case of a nuke-event elsewhere, Dams cannot be turned off, except for opening the dam gates - but how much will that help?

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 23 Nov 2011 08:09

TN parties seek ban on dam film

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 23 Nov 2011 12:07

abhishek_sharma wrote:TN parties seek ban on dam film

Can anyone educate as to what the TN objections are to a 2nd Dam being built behind the original old dam are, I am from and in TN but I don't understand why Politicians object to 2nd Dam behind the original one to protect Kerala in case the old dam collapses?

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 23 Nov 2011 12:17

There is no 'water dispute'. There was never one. We agreed to give water, and we will. All we want is a new dam, so that we can live without mortal fear.

The TN politicos are obfuscating the issue by making it appear that we are refusing water. "thaNNi kETTaa kodukkamaaTTaanka" (will not give even water) is a standard rhetoric by them. It seems to us that they behaves like Pakis. Kaafirs ain't humans, you see? Their life doesn't matter.

Our babus took bribes and deliberately lost out in court before the issue became public. Now the 'learned judges' and 'expert committees' are sitting on the issue, as if it is just a legal problem. Why should they care? They sit in Dilli, right?

My only solace is, along with some two and odd millions of us mallus, a few hundred thousands of migrant Tams also will die.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 23 Nov 2011 12:22

Aditya, I too am not too clear about it. I think they oppose because of the fear that the agreement maybe updated, making them pay more. Also, agreeing to the new dam will open a can of worms, calling their bluff on the blatant disregard of safety.

I think they would agree if:

1. WE Pay for the dam (Or, at least THEY DON'T)
2. WE continue the old agreement with same, or better (for TN) terms.
3. WE promise not to call their lies made earlier.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 23 Nov 2011 12:53

Dileep, thats why given the lifes at stake, I dont see any merit in these Polticos demands, as long as Kerala, states TN, still gets the water for irrigation via Vaigai and the amount to be paid of a second safety dam is reasoble why not, Why doesn't Kerala build anther dam downstream say a few KM down to protect people living near the coast? Are there any terrain issues here or does Kerala Govt. expect TN Govt to foot a major part of the bill for the new dam, and hence issues are being raised by TN politcos?

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 23 Nov 2011 13:12

The whole story is here http://mowr.gov.in/index3.asp?subsublin ... &sslid=733

22. Thereafter, Secretary (WR) convened a meeting on the Mulla Periyar Dam on 31.7.2009. The meeting was attended among others by Principal Secretary, PWD, Tamil Nadu and Additional Chief Secretary, WRD, Kerala. In the meeting the representative of Kerala informed that the Kerala Govt. visualizes construction of new dam as the only feasible solution and they have started survey and investigation for a new dam at an alternate site downstream of the existing dam and they may also consider the construction of a new dam at their own cost. Representative of Kerala stated in the meeting that the Govt. of Kerala also recognizes the established uses of water from the dam by Tamil Nadu as per the existing agreement between the two States and will continue the same after the construction of a new dam. In the said meeting the representative of Govt. of Tamil Nadu informed that the Govt. of Tamil Nadu would examine the proposal of the Govt. of Kerala for new Dam after the same is formally received from them. In view of this, Hon’ble Minister (WR) vide DO dated 26.08.2009 requested Hon’ble Chief Minister, Kerala to send the proposal in this regard to the Govt. of Tamil Nadu for their consideration.

23. Later, Govt. of Tamil Nadu vide letter dated 14.9.09 mentioned that as regards the decision that has emerged in the meeting, to examine the proposal of the Kerala Government for the construction of a new dam by Tamil Nadu Government, the Government of Tamil Nadu had already communicated to the Government of India as well as to the Government of Kerala that there is no need for construction of a new dam by the Kerala Government, as the existing dam after it is strengthened, functions like a new dam. They also mentioned that Hon’ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu in his letter dated 13.07.09 to Hon’ble Chief Minister of Kerala had mentioned that Kerala Govt. may not raise the issue of new dam any more.

24. The Govt. of Kerala vide letter dated 26.9.2009 sent comments on the minutes of the meeting dated 31.7.2009 mentioning that the statement “The Govt. of Kerala also recognizes the established use of water from the dam by the Tamil Nadu as per the existing agreement between the two States and continue the same after the construction of new dam” is not acceptable. What was mentioned in the meeting was that Kerala is willing to give water to Tamil Nadu.

25. Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court heard the issues related to Mulla Periyar Dam on 10.11.2009 and passed the order that,

“As the case involves the resolution of said questions, the suit may be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for necessary directions for placing it before a constitution Bench.

The contesting parties shall maintain status quo in respect of Mulla Periyar Dam as existing today. However, order of status quo will not be an impediment for the plaintiff (State of Tamil Nadu) to carry out maintenance and repairs for proper upkeep of the said Dam.”

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 23 Nov 2011 15:47

shaardula wrote: if 2.5 mil downstream are in mortal danger, is there any other argument even?

I dont hold a candle for the GoTN and they could well be off by a mile here. They often are esp on water issues with water-driven insecurity as seen under Veeranam, Telugu Ganga, Cauvery, being the forerunners to this problem too. At the end of the day, TN is water-scarce to the bottom pit and local politics drives demands, positions and the whole caboodle of moralities or perceived moralities.

But in any case, here is the argumentativeness as seen with the Supreme Court verdict in 2006: http://www.ielrc.org/content/e0609.pdf
There are various legalities raised by the Kerala side on whether the Raja of Travancore was forced to sign the lease under duress (why sign for 999 years, why not 99 years -- makes no sense here, Singapore was leased for 99 years by the British, why did the Raja cede a piece of land for 999 years?) and whether an act signed between two erstwhile parties: the Princely State of Travancore and Government of India in the pre-1947 era is Constitutionally valid when both fail to exist today. These are bs-legalese argumentating for the sake of argumentating. Best left to lawyers and people with zero hair to tear themselves apart.

If you strip away these inanities, from what I can see from this document, the question as seen from the two sides is: are they really in mortal danger or is the case of danger put forth to make a case for objecting. TN side claims that this lime and mortal type dam construction of that era is so passe (as claimed by the Kerala side) does not hold forth under tensile strength calculation done by the CWC Expert Committee. Kerala refuses to accept that this expert committee is even an expert committee.

Regarding earthquakes, things have survived for so long. You can see the Richter magnitude of earthquakes in Kerala on p. 7 http://www.kerenvis.nic.in/files/pubs/s ... er%203.pdf Then there are recent claims that midland is becoming more tremor-prone. I am no expert on earthquake matters, but on p. 11 of the Supreme Court verdict it is claimed that:

Regarding the issue as to the safety of the dam on water level being raised to 142 ft. from the present level of 136 ft, the various reports have examined the safety angle in depth including the viewpoint of earthquake resistance. The apprehensions have been found to be baseless. In fact, the reports suggest an obstructionist attitude on the part of State of Kerala. The Expert Committee was comprised of independent officers. Seismic forces as per the provisions were taken into account and structural designs made accordingly while carrying out strengthening measures.
...
The final report of the Committee, set up by Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India to study the water safety aspect of the dam and raising the water level has examined the matter in detail. The Chairman of the Committee was a Member (D&R) of Central Water Commission, two Chief Engineers of Central Water Commission, Director, dam safety, Government of Madhya Pradesh and retired Engineer-in-Chief, UP besides two representatives of Governments of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, were members of the Committee. All appended their signatures except the representative of the Kerala Government. The summary of results of stability analysis of Mullaperiyar Baby Dam contains note which shows that the permissible tensile strength was masonry as per the specifications mentioned therein based on test conducted by CSMRS, Delhi on the time and agreed by all Committee members including the Kerala representative in the meeting of the Committee held on 9-10th February, 2001. It also shows the various strengthening measures suggested by CWC having been completed by Tamil Nadu PWD on the dam including providing of RCC backing to the dam. The report also suggests that the parapet wall of the baby dam and main dam have been raised to 160 ft. (48.77 mt.) except for a 20 mt. stretch on the main dam due to denial of permission by the Government of Kerala. Some other works as stated therein were not allowed to be carried on by the State of Kerala. The report of CWC after inspection of main dam, the galleries, baby dam, earthen bund and spillway, concludes that the dam is safe and no excessive seepage is seen and that Mullaperiyar dam has been recently strengthened. There are no visible cracks that have occurred in the body of the dam and seepage measurements indicate no cracks in the upstream side of the dam. Our attention has also been drawn to various documents and drawings including cross-sections of the Periyar dam to demonstrate the strengthening measures. Further, it is pertinent to note that the dam immediately in line after Mullaperiyar dam is Idukki dam. It is the case of State of Kerala that despite the 'copious rain', the Idukki reservoir is not filled to its capacity, while the capacity of reservoir is 70.500 TMC, it was filled only to the extent of 57.365 TMC. This also shows that assuming the worst happens, more than 11 TMC water would be taken by Idukki dam. The Deputy Director, Dam Safety, Monitoring Directorate, Central Water Commission, Ministry of Water Resources in affidavit of April 2004 has, inter alia, sated that during the recent earthquake mentioned by Kerala Government in its affidavit, no damage to the dam was reported by CWC officers who inspected the dam. The experts having reported about the safety of the dam and the Kerala Government having adopted an obstructionist approach, cannot now be permitted to take shelter under the plea that these are disputed questions of fact. There is no report to suggest that the safety of the dam would be jeopardized if the water level is raised for the present to 142 ft. The report is to the contrary.

30. Regarding raising the water level to 152 ft., the stage has still not reached. At present, that is not the prayer of the State of Tamil Nadu. In this regard, at this stage, the only prayer of the State of Tamil Nadu is that State of Kerala be directed not to obstruct it in carrying out strengthening measures, as suggested by CWC. We see no reason for the State of Kerala to cause any obstruction.

Dileep has posted what happened after the 2006 verdict. One hydrological study that the Kerala government used to show that the structure is unsafe is the study by AK Gosain and Subash Chander (of IIT Delhi) was the statement that

... if the catchment area received 65.43 cm of rain in two days, the maximum probable rainfall there, the water that rushed to the dam would shoot up to a height of 158.67 feet. This would happen even if all the 13 shutters of the reservoir were kept open and the water column maintained at the current level of 136 feet.

Naturally, the GoTN objected to this report as the committee of Prof. Gosain and Prof. Chander (both retired professors then) was appointed at the behest of the Irrigation Department, GoK (http://www.fitt-iitd.org/pub/Annual_Report_2007-08.pdf , p. 26). Much of TN's objection is on the Constitutional validity and possibility of bias given the source of funding of the Professors, rather than on technical assumptions used or the conclusions itself. But the CWC also objected saying that:

... the difference in the adopted values of Design Rainfall (Storm) depth, Time distribution of rainfall, Unit hydrograph & Infiltration rate have resulted in estimation of higher flood peak (PMF) and the said studies by the IIT Professor does not appear to be well founded.

Consequent to this study, Kerala changed tune from tremor-prone to flood-issue and claimed before the Supreme Court that

“the Expert Committee Review of 2001 did not check the stability of the dam by applying combinations ‘C’ and ‘F’ of the Indian Standards. These combinations concern testing of the dam in flood conditions.’’

Further, Kerala again funded Prof. DK Paul and ML Sharma from IIT Roorkee who claimed via a dynamical stability analysis that (http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/ker ... e39592.ece)

... damage is predicted in the event of an earthquake of a magnitude of 6.5 on the Richter scale in the vicinity of dam (within 16 km) when the reservoir level is at 136 feet. The baby dam is found to be safe for a reservoir level of 155 feet. However, it would also be unsafe under probable maximum flood condition when the reservoir level would rise up to 160.22 feet.
...
The report said that at the reservoir level of 136 feet, the tensile stresses induced by the earthquake at the dam heel would be more than double the permissible value. The value was evaluated on the basis of data supplied by the Kerala Irrigation Department on average ultimate tensile strength of random rubble masonry employed in the construction of the dam. Most of the values adopted for material properties were based on the test conducted some 20 to 25 years back.

The bottomline is:

Kerala’s argument is that the dam may burst any time ravaging Idukki, Ernakulam and Kottayam districts in the state. But Tamil Nadu points out that even if the dam bursts, the entire water will flow to the Idukki reservoir downstream which has a storage capacity of 72 tmcft.
...
Though Kerala has been expressing its fear over the safety of the Mullaperiyar Dam since 1979, no untoward incident has happened till date necessitating the construction of a new dam in the ecologically fragile forest area which houses hundreds of hectares of rain forests and the Project Tiger Reserve. But that does not mean that an untoward incident is an impossibility.

What is not mentioned is that (http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_is ... am_1572036):

Tamil Nadu’s contention is that when the Mullaperiyar dam issue came up for review in 1972, the Kerala government, instead of asking for the abrogation of the agreement, demanded a six-fold hike in the lease rental which was readily accepted by the then Tamil Nadu government.

The case is now sub-judice and is fraught with complications on any matter. In the light of all this, I find the post-facto claims of

Our babus took bribes and deliberately lost out in court before the issue became public.

funny at best. Sure, Dileep and Keralites may be in the line of fire and I can easily pass the charitable dose of salt and upma, but paki accusation is a bit too much. I thought that was the vestige of RamaY

.

I believe much of these semantics lie with who is gonna bear the cost for any new construction. If a simple solution could be found to that, may be a deal can be struck. Kerala did propose something of this sort, but it was rejected by TN after being considered.

Shaardula, best of luck in trying to figure out truth from banalities and utter nonsense on this matter. There is way too much nonsense and positions have come to the point of a zero-sum game. For example, people such as Sohan Roy of Aries Marine Corporation ably funded by gelf emirs (http://www.ariesmar.com/keypersonnel.php) are out there to make a big buck by consulting for strengthening the dam structure, sub-contracting, etc perhaps. Sohan Roy is the producer of Dam 999, the controversial 3D film on Mullaiperiyar. Ask for advocacy and ye shall get it.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 23 Nov 2011 18:11

Stan, tell me this please. Today, CM Oommen Chandy made the following statement on live TV

1. Dam will be built by us at own expense
2. Water will be provided as per the current agreement.

So, what is the problem of the TN people here? Why do they oppose to that?

I fart in the general direction of the claim that "The dam is safe onlee". Too bad GoK didn't do it in 1972.

Here is the deal. Are the members of the expert committee, Dr. Artiste, his kids, the Fat Lady and her partner, Mr. Vaikol, and every one of those bleeding Tam hearts ready to voluntarily jump into the flood with limbs tied up and make the ultimate penance?

Will YOU Stan? Not that I will be around to collect the wager, but will you?

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 23 Nov 2011 18:42

Will I jump if the Periyar floods? No, I wont. But will it? Will it flood like the way people make it? Sure, I know about engg disasters etc. and more so the ululation on Fukushima as witnessed in Kudankulam, but what are the engg grounds for the unsafeness of the dam with the heightened seismic alert? You have the right to feel worried since it is your life, but I also have the right to put Kudankulam in the same bracket as Mullaiperiyar, no?!

But modulo all that emotional stuff, may be the best course is to figure why GoTN opposes the own cost stand? I believe that if one digs a bit more, positions can be better understood, but that is just me, since I am not too tied to emotions on this matter and more keen on understanding what the real issue is. From my limited understanding, there is a big trust deficit between the two governments and each is playing to its own gallery. If GoTN believes that all this emotion of "three districts washed away" is just drama, how do you make them believe that it is real? Has the unilateral action of GoK helped? I dont buy the argument that GoK is pristine and agmark white on this matter. Since I have watched the fatasses and the slobs of GoTN, I know their bs parades better.

Rebuilding a dam structure was an idea that was thrown around only in 2001 (not so seriously) and from 2006 (more seriously). What would you do if GoTN believes that GoK is more interested in changing goalposts especially after the 2006 verdict? When the SC had delivered one verdict, GoK came up with an Act. They could have filed a review petition with the studies they financed claiming more info is now available since a part of the Ashvani Ku. Gosain study was available in ~2000, but they did nt do that till GoTN pulled GoK to Court for the violation of the SC order. What do you make of gelf emirs and their enterprises funding Dam 999? What do you make out about polarization of opinion by such acts not like TN is too far away from these idiotic acts (on Cauvery, etc)?

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 23 Nov 2011 18:59

Here is an explanation:

What remains unarticulated in the discussions on a new dam is whether the old deed steeped in controversy would remain in force for the new one also. When this question was
raised by the Supreme Court during the hearing in 2009 both the states remained silent on the issue. Kerala aims for a new contractual agreement which would ensure it too benefits from the interstate river water diversion, whereas Tamil Nadu for whom the present arrangement under the 1886 deed is the best possible scenario fears a new deed that would inevitably follow a new dam.

http://www.nias.res.in/docs/B4-2010-%20Mullaperiyar.pdf

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 23 Nov 2011 19:19

The old lease agreement signed by State of Travancore for 999 years is still valid as per SC ruling. So inter state water dispute act is not applicable in this case as this is ruled by a lease agreement.
So Kerala:
Cannot challege validity of the contract though it was done before formation of Union of India

Cannot say this is an interstate water dispute, since it is governed by a lease agreement

Cannot make a State law all by ourselves to protect/ decommission/ rebuild this dam.

Cannot refer the case to arbitration and settle the dispute, since the lease agreement's provision doesnt include this.

Cannot issue any state order or government directive to do something about the dam.

Only option left is to seek court help again, which will be a time consuming process
Or to ask Central Government to intervene urgently, if required amend the provisions of Inter State Water Disputes Act to include those under leases also

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 23 Nov 2011 19:28

The issue is about millions of human lives at risk not money or water. What if
a) Kerala agrees to build the new dam at our own expense.
b) The lease remains valid for the new dam also.
c) TN will get the same amount of water as of now.

Will TN agree to this?

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 23 Nov 2011 19:30

Old lease agreement will be applicable to old structure, not new structure unless it is written down expressly so. The very fact that Kerala made this a point of dispute when the 2006 verdict came raises suspicion that a new structure if acceded to wont be delivered with the same conditionalities as existed inter alia. Comes down to how the two govts trust each other... How can trust flower overnight when a Shah Bano equal is made in the Kerala assembly?

There is a not often mentioned power generation capacity of the Periyar HEP also. TN gains significantly in terms of power generation if the height is raised to 152 feet.

Millions of farm-based livelihoods is also at stake in the Southern districts of TN, so thats causing the life or livelihood question. Hard to resolve. And a good fraction of that grain is sold in Kerala. SC can deliver what it sees best. GoI has nt been able to arbitrate at all, so where is the scope here?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 23 Nov 2011 20:22

1. ~~So Stanji want to~~go by the expert advise w.r.t Mullaperiyar Dam but doesn't want to do the same w.r.t Kudankulam.

2. Even if Kerala rebuilds the dam with THEIR OWN money, he sees TN gains in power generation that comes with the increased height of the dam. Why should TN get the additional power?

3. Millions of lives in Kerala are sad, but millions of farm-based livelyhoods are more important.

4. He wants Kerala to build trust. But when the same question is asked of RoL followers he gets stinged. Yet he found the same feeling objectionable when it was expressed in Telangana thread.

Why can't he see this/any issue beyond TN perspective and had to be you Vs us? Where does the deep rooted prejudice come from?

Oh dear (sic) secularism, what have you done to us Bharatiyas...

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 23 Nov 2011 21:25

New dam should be built. There is simply no question on this.

As engineers we know so much more on failure mode of structures now to know that un-reinforced masonry ALWAYS fails with little to no warning. Re-inforced structures are very very forgiving by comparison. The key question is how one goes about this. I have read enough to know that the...

- foundations were not properly prepared and pressure grouted
- no hydraulic barrier, typically water resistant clay curtains, were installed to prevent hydraulic piping.

These two failures alone are enough to cause any modern dam to be condemned and rebuilt. In massaland there is a large dam in Kansas that was almost condemned when it was learned that a grout curtain had not been installed under the foundation. This despite no signs of distress from the structure. Its fate is still being debated.

Engineers are BS ing when they say structure is safe. How can you say that when you can't see the foundations. We should not fool around with this. The first dam failure will destroy the public confidence in dams and all dam construction will screech to a halt. We don't want this.

- TN govt. should pay.
- TN should design, engineer and build with Kerala input.
- TN should thus earn the right to operate the dam in future.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 23 Nov 2011 22:51

I like to follow Sri Satya Sai Baba on this issue.

* Nationalize Water Resources, Forests etc.,

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 24 Nov 2011 00:58

Duh, my dear super comprehension man part-2. Show me one post of mine from any of the nukular dhaagas or elsewhere where I support the kudankulam idiots. Show or accept that you are scm part-2 with a mouth bigger than your ass

.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 24 Nov 2011 01:24

Stan_Savljevic wrote:Duh, my dear super comprehension man part-2. Show me one post of mine from any of the nukular dhaagas or elsewhere where I support the kudankulam idiots. Show or accept that you are scm part-2 with a mouth bigger than your ass .

My sincere apologies. I mistook you for JJ.

Editing my post...

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 24 Nov 2011 02:47

Kerala should demand that if TN doesn't construct new dam and if the existing dam breaks, TN will have to pay for all the liabalities that come with that, as decided by GoK. Without that it won't allow reconstruction of the new dam. They are the ones who use the water from that dam.

Personally, I don't think Kerala really needs that water. What GoK has to do is to manage the water it receive from rains and make sure that most of them do not end up in Arabian sea.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 24 Nov 2011 07:52

OK, Stan, you won't die with me. If you are so sure that the dam won't break, why would you say no?

Here exactly is the Pakiness I accused earlier.

And Stan, you would let me die, so I have nothing more to talk to you.

Another deal I would offer is for TN to underwrite the dam, with Rs 1Crore for every life lost, and Rs 1 Crore for every acre of land wasted, and for collateral damage as assessed by a reputed international assessor.

Deal?

A judge once told Britannia's Rajan Pillai that he doesn't need treatment, even as he was hemorrhaging from his liver. Poor guy died a few days later. Tomorrow another judge may say the dam is safe. No, we are NOT prepared to die trusting any judge.

No. We are NOT going to accept that the Darned Dam is safe, even if Dr. M. Visvesvaraiah arises from death and declares. That promise would be as good as the promise that the fat lady is a virgin.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 24 Nov 2011 10:11

My question is why are we having a dispute in the first place. If Kerala does not want the water or money then why can't GOK reassure TN that there will be no change in status quo regarding the benefits to TN even after building the new dam? Currently TN is paying Rs. 3 crores for 1 TMC water from Karnataka (I guess) where as they are getting 70 TMC water from Mullapperiyar for Rs.40,000. Why cant Kerala operate the new dam under these very same lease agreement and more importantly why can't TN be reassured of this ?

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 24 Nov 2011 11:10

Dilbu, it is an issue of sovirginity. See, I didn't call Pakiness for nothing.

TN's problem is not water. It is ownership of the dam. They (baselessly) fear that if Kerala builds a dam and makes a new agreement, they lose the current status of 'ownership' of the dam. The new dam, paid by us, will be owned and maintained by us. They fear that it will prevent their practice of "doing whatever they please". They, including our friend Stan here, wouldn't mind a few kaafirs dying in the process of retaining their ownership. No way in HELL I would let them own the new dam either. I don't want the same thing to repeat 100 years later.

The centre says it is helpless and can only 'facilitate' a solution. I am willing to say this. IF the simple fact that the king acceded the kingdom to the union of India is threatening my life, limbs and livelihood, I show my middle finger to that instrument of accession. I don't want no part of a nation that doesn't protect my life.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 24 Nov 2011 11:22

Kerala, Tamil Nadu face off over Mullaperiyar dam

Disputing Tamil Nadu's argument that the dam is not weak, Joseph said as far back as in 1979, the Central Water Commission had found that the dam had outlived its life and recommended its decommissioning.

Chandy, who was in Delhi on Tuesday, also took up the matter with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and urged him to mediate with Tamil Nadu. He also appealed to the national parties to discuss the issue in Parliament and evolve a formula which would amicably resolve the issue.

The experts from IIT Roorkee, who conducted a study on the safety of the dam, are of the view that the area may get a quake of 6.5 intensity. In that event, the dam will collapse. The water in the dam would reach the Idukki dam on the downstream. It is not known whether the arch dam would be able to hold the additional quantity of water reaching from Mullaperiyar.

Though the dam, which was built with lime and surky (jaggery) is in the Kerala territory, the water and the dam is controlled by Tamil Nadu under an agreement between the British government and the princely state of Travancore nearly 120 years ago.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 24 Nov 2011 11:24

Due to Geology, there will be a down period when water won't flow and the lake will be drained. No way to avoid this even if new dam is down stream. BTW down stream areas are horrible for dam building and might even end up being more unsafe and not getting similar water levels. atleast 5 years IMO. Considering India, more like 10 years. Kumban valley and Ramanathapuram agriculture is a Rs 3,000 crore business now, all built on Periyar water. Not only that Madurai is completely dependent on this water for drinking. Along the Vaigai's stretch about 10 million people drink Periyar water.

You can do the math on any compensation amount. Likely to be astronomical and bankrupt both TN & Kerala. This is the reality of the unreal political pressure TN politicians face.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 24 Nov 2011 12:41

Dileep, clearly there is not much to talk since this is a life and death issue for you. Not for me.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 24 Nov 2011 12:51

Theo_Fidel wrote:Due to Geology, there will be a down period when water won't flow and the lake will be drained. No way to avoid this even if new dam is down stream. BTW down stream areas are horrible for dam building and might even end up being more unsafe and not getting similar water levels. atleast 5 years IMO. Considering India, more like 10 years. Kumban valley and Ramanathapuram agriculture is a Rs 3,000 crore business now, all built on Periyar water. Not only that Madurai is completely dependent on this water for drinking. Along the Vaigai's stretch about 10 million people drink Periyar water.

You can do the math on any compensation amount. Likely to be astronomical and bankrupt both TN & Kerala. This is the reality of the unreal political pressure TN politicians face.

But if a protective Dam is built downstream in addition to existing dam, wont the exiting dam ensure no water flows during construction period. This dam will be just an additional wall with gates in case the original dam collapses. That way the original arrangement continues

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 24 Nov 2011 13:32

Why no one is bothered? People's lives are at risk here. Jai ho is the only thing I can say.

And I happened to see a video of Vaiko's speech. He is telling the people of TN that Kerala wants to steal water to generate more power in Idukki dam. What to say onlee saar.

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 24 Nov 2011 13:42

Let Kerala build a dam down the line and declare that if the existing dam breaks, TN will have NO right to build another dam or to claim water from the dam GoK constructed. Kerala will have the choice of letting water from the dam go to the Arabian sea or sell that to TN @ present Rs 100/litre.

The previous agreement must have been made between Raja of Travancore and the British administered Madras state. Obviously, British would have done all the arm twisting to make the King sign on the dotted lines without even reading the agreement. Travancore Kingdom itself was not 300 years old then, and how could the King sign the agrement for 999 years.

At a practical level, both TN and Kerala can put money to build the new dam. TN can take water for free, what they desparately need, and Kerala will take the hydel power for free, what they need desparately. What is there really to fight about? If TN wants the own the dam, they can own it, as long as the power is given to Kerala for free.

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 24 Nov 2011 13:51

Do people remember the Wikileaks report about Mallu mafia controlling Delhi? I remember reading something like Sri Lankan Tamil groups talking about Mallu mafia ignoring them and they also said that the mafia wants Mullaperiar water for Kerala and hence doesn't like Tamils. At that time I just laughed off at the article. Now the Dravidian politicians are the ones going "Paki" about the dam, and a Hollywood funded movie about dam at the right time raises my CT antenna. Is this an attempt to create a wedge between two South Indian states? Or is it an attempt to revive the sagging morale of Dravidian politics in TN?

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 24 Nov 2011 14:44

Theo, I don't agree with you.

Building a dam below the current one does not involve draining the current dam. Where did you get that idea? After the new dam is built, it will be allowed to fill upto the water level of the current dam. This can be achieved by seepage alone. Even if we use water from the current dam, the drop in level will be practically zero.

After the water level equalizes, the old dam will be demolished. It can be done safely now, because there is no water pressure. The plan for that is already submitted to the expert committee.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 24 Nov 2011 15:52

Shyam, the concern on the dam's safety is real and is seen by both Nairs and Christian groups (all types) in Kerala. For example, the Mullaipperiyar Samara Samithi is led by Fr Joy Nirappel and Prof. CP Roy (dont know if he is related to Sohan Roy of the Dam 999 fame). The Syro-Malabar Church has extended support to decommissioning the dam long back (in 2003-04). As with various issues in India (e.g., Kudankulam), there are a large number of interest groups that converge here too. I have seen a conspiracy angle linking this issue with the frequency of reportage on Mullaipperiyar matters and the Sabarimalai pilgrimage (you can dig up the blog on ggl). The issue of the "mysterious" Sabarimalai fires in the 50s is a separate issue, but despite all that much of the CT is like hot-air and is like taking a dart at everything with one shot. Noone can deny that there are vested interest groups, but noone can deny the reason for worry in a majority of the people. The same fears exist in Kudankulam, yet when people take a very simplistic Hindu vs. Christian, religious take, it gets too noisy to make much sense (that is just my opinion with no backing up).

This is what I glean from how TN views this issue. TN thinks that Kerala believes that a 999 year lease on a river that begins and drains off its territory is morally illegal. Some claim that the Raja of Travancore was coerced into signing a lease for 999 years, as if the Brits had a belief that they will be in India for 999 years. Why the Raja signed for 999 years, noone answers. Despite all this, Govt of Kerala signed an amendment to this lease in 1970. I can happily hypothesize that the Govt of Kerala did nt correctly estimate the demand on water due to its population/economic growth.

The first issue raised by Govt of Kerala whenever this issue has come up is the legality of the lease agreement till it was disposed off by the SC in 2006. Seen from TN's side, it is in a geographically disadvantageous position of being a rain-shadow area of the SW monsoon. Much of the TN's Southern districts are pit-dry and without this water, there is going to be no farming. The fact that this grain is actually sold back in Kerala makes it even more ridiculously complicated. Cauvery, Siruvaani, Krishna, Paalar, Veeranam, the series of unending water shortages only makes people in TN crowd around to easy political positions of "Center cheating us, our neighbors envy us, etc." TN has long had a history of insecurity driven by contested identities, and this insecurity leads to an aggressive macho exclusivist positioning as commonly witnessed by the DK politics and its aftermath. Obviously, such identity based positioning leads to complicated responses as you can very much see on this forum on how people respond to even my own positions on idiotic matters such as national language, LTTE vs. Tamil identity, etc. The fact that every state puts itself into some form of exclusivist identity is ignored (much to my amusement of course) because somehow the issue is with the form of the exclusivist positioning that defined the course of Dravidian politics.

Back again, at the same time, growing water demands in Kerala, AP, KA etc. make this essentially free ride of TN unsustainable into the long future. Therefore, any move seen as rewriting agreements that have made TN's position very dependent on water such as Mullaipperiyar lease make it a grave insecurity in TN. Its political suicide to be seen as less aggressive, less macho, and that position wont change whether it is the fatass or the artiste or the vitriolic loser. The problem on the other side is that Kerala even now does nt talk about ownership issues of the newly reconstructed dam, lets say if that hypothetically comes up.

You can see Dileep's post on how he wants Kerala to own it lest there be any problem 100 years thence. That is pretty much the Govt of Kerala position too. First, there is a claim of earthquake causing a breach in a dam, a need for a new dam, and new technologies as defined in 2011 brought to build a new structure to handle a 6.5 of a 7.0 earthquake (which of course has not happened in Kerala -- let alone the midlands -- in the last 200 years to the best of my knowledge), and yet ownership not want to be given despite that because Kerala feels opaque about what TN could do there. Well, TN is going to do mahanirvaan there and invoke the spirits of the ancestors to cause havoc in Kerala, of course. Why should TN not feel insecure, you answer me. As seen from TN's side, rebuilding a dam became an issue only after the SC disposed of the legality clause. The blame on corrupt babus/netas is just the standard hiding behind the legal black and white on the legality clause as disposed thereof. Now you can see the genesis for the trust deficit. You can hide behind paki claims of Tamils ityaadi, but a trust deficit if one exists cant be hidden by covering it with your palm. I agree that TN is no saint, but Kerala does nt come across as a saint in this matter either notwithstanding the claims of safety of 2.5 million or 4 million or whatever number is put out. There is an Idukki dam to get the excess water if Mullaipperiyar breaches (if it does), yet people talk of 3 districts washing away. Much of the histrionics is emotionally bound and unarguable with. If Kudankulam protesters make it such a noise, they are anti-Indic adharmic Christians funded by Vatican and what not, yet if the same stuff is seen elsewhere in Jaitapur or Mullaipperiyar or Singur, somehow they become kosher? Certainly amusing for people who can see trends

. Fact is in India, when perceptions become associated with the personal pronoun, no amount of "logic"/convincing can work.

There is no solution to this question unless Govt of Kerala signs away the lease to the new construction and as a consequence TN allows a new construction. You can choose to scream and maintain moral illegality etc. as seen from either angle, but this is how this issue will be resolved whenever it gets resolved (if it does get resolved).

PS: I will also claim that the fatass may be corrupt, but she is one smartass. And she has a history of doing the needful on water matters. TN's position of water insecurity makes it a perfect case for exploring desalination on a mega scale. If someone can do it, the fatass is the forerunner. India's impending water wars (both internal and external with the near abroad) need a game-changer and a short circuit to hell.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 24 Nov 2011 16:12

Well if the dam bursts then the 999 year lease will also flow into arabian sea along with its water. Will TN have water then? It doesnt make sense to me.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 24 Nov 2011 16:48

So, the villages and towns between Mullapperiyar and Idukki can all wash away, right? Sure!! Just Kaafirs you see?

Google earth is available. USE IT!!

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 24 Nov 2011 16:54

The live storage at 152 ft height is 10 600 mcft as the dead storage at 104 ft is 5100 mcft. After power generation, water let out into a small river called Vairavanar near Bodi in Theni district, which joins the Vaigai river to irrigate 1.5 lakh acres of first crop and 60 000 acres of second crop in the Cumbum valley and Periyar-Vaigai region. A decision was taken in 1979 to reduce the water storage behind the dam (managed by TN) to 136 ft following concerns of safety of the dam. At 136 ft, the irrigation potential is 70 000 acres.

The problem with Mullapperiyar is that there is no alternate site for construction of a new dam (unless Tamil Nadu/Kerala is prepared to construct a wider dam downstream at a high cost). So, disruption of water supply is bound to occur if the existing dam is demolished and reconstructed. The leaders should prepare the people to go without water for irrigation for some years, if no other alternatives could be found.

The terms of the new agreement could be discussed with Tamil Nadu in the presence of a mediator, if required. But the Minister also said it was no longer possible to have an agreement with a validity of for 999 years as was the case with colonial years. Instead, current practices in agreements between States could be adopted.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ind ... 652993.ece
http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/ker ... 653126.ece
There you go, its not a lack of concern for the kaafirs from the kaafirs, but a clear perception that goalposts are being changed.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Nov 2011 18:04

what is GoI's role in all this ? since there is a problem of trust on both sides won't a more proactive approach by the neutral party (mallu mafia notwithstanding) help resolve the issue ? or is GoI happy to play the fiddle while relations between kerala and TN deteriorate to enmity levels.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 24 Nov 2011 18:19

Actually, GoI will end up being accused either way. If it mediates and the mediation results in a compromise, that is anathema to the Sarkaria commission lovers on how the Center is intruding into what is clearly an inter-state problem notwithstanding all that Concurrent list jazz. If it does nt, it plays Nero's role.

If it mediates and Kerala appears to end up winning, people will diss it as Congress politics. If TN appears to end up winning, it will be blamed as UPA politics

. Rightfully, the GoI is playing back-channel and letting the process continue with the SC. (Tell me, who wants to sit in this seething cauldron and mediate between two rhetoricians.) Kerala has submitted a DPR, TN has objected, Kerala is to respond with clarifications to the objections, and hopefully soon there will be some decision.

The timing of all this is what makes me spooky. TN was supposed to have supplied Kerala 10 000 MW from the Kudankulam project in return for some "low" rates per MW. That number is pretty much all of Kerala's demand. This was in response to Kerala's claim that TN generates 300 MW from Mullaipperiyar and pays a pittance. TN's belief is that the power generation will go to Idukki if the height is maintained at 136 ft. Etc etc. Now with Kudankulam stalemated by similar popular protests, its retarded. Actually Kerala will be rightful to have doubts about how much they can trust Kudankulam as a power source. Why should anyone blame Kerala govt for this admirable mess?

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 24 Nov 2011 18:24

And why should one party win in this? Why cant there be a settlement? Kerala should get a safe dam and TN should get the water. Too much H&D issue from both sides.