"With an average annual rainfall of 1,170 mm, India is one of the wettest countries in the world. Still, even with its rich natural water resources, with more than 300,000 square meters of bodies of water, the country is plagued by environmental issues such as water pollution from raw sewage and runoff of agricultural pesticides (Sharma, 2005). Another major problem is that tap water is not potable throughout the country. This implies that people, especially those from the lower income bracket, cannot avail of clean drinking water, since these have to be bought. Repugnant as it may sound, it is a reality that millions of Indians queue up everyday at public taps for one of life's most precious commodity — water." -ADB

Monday 30 November 2009

The challenge in Copenhagen: reshaping the world

Next month's climate summit in Copenhagen seeks to transform the way we run the planet, from the generation of energy, to the building of homes and cities, to the shaping of the landscape. It would also shift wealth from rich to poor countries in the process.

No wonder a deal will be tough to cut.

In recent weeks, prospects brightened, then dimmed, then revived again.

U.S. President Barack Obama dampened expectations when he said during his Asian tour a final package could not be completed at the conference. He then lifted hopes by signaling the U.S. might go further in the talks in the Danish capital than had been expected because of lagging U.S. legislation.

Hoping to nudge negotiations off dead center, key governments have strengthened pledges to control their nations' greenhouse gases, the heat-trapping emissions blamed for global warming.

But everyone is still waiting to see what the U.S. will do.

The major economies "are coming to Copenhagen ready to fill in the blanks. They are all looking to see what happens in Congress, and what the U.S. is able to bring to the table," said climate analyst Jennifer Morgan of the World Resources Institute, a Washington think tank.

Facing mounting impatience, the U.S. delegation could bring a provisional number to the conference, promising at least a 17 percent cut in greenhouse gases over the next decade, measured against 2005 — a number drawn from bills awaiting congressional approval.

"It's a bit of a balancing act," said U.S. analyst Alden Meyer, of the Union of Concerned Scientists. The Obama administration wants to satisfy the international demand for clarity without seeming to pre-empt U.S. lawmakers, "providing ammunition for opponents in the Senate."

More than 65 heads of government will attend the final days of the Dec. 7-18 conference, investing their personal prestige in the outcome. They include the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Japan and Spain.

Success is a matter of definition. Two years ago, when negotiations began, delegates anticipated a full treaty would be signed in Copenhagen to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which set emissions limits on 37 industrial countries. The U.S. rejected Kyoto because it imposed no obligations for China, India and other rapidly emerging economies.

Now the Danish hosts and the United Nations say it will be enough to nail down all the political elements, leaving the details, technical issues and legal language to be filled in over the following six months to a year.

Many developing countries say that's not good enough, and insist Copenhagen aim for a full-fledged legal document.

The divide over Copenhagen's goals reflects an abiding distrust between manufacturing powerhouses that built vast riches over 200 years, while spewing carbon dioxide and other industrial gases into the atmosphere, and countries still struggling to end hunger within their borders.

A new militant African bloc could complicate the Copenhagen negotiations. The 50 or so nations briefly walked out of committee meetings at the last round of talks in Spain earlier this month, alleging Western countries were not negotiating in good faith.

Whatever agreements emerge on Copenhagen's numerous issues, they must be accepted by all 192 countries.

As in the Kyoto accord, whose emission reductions expire in 2012, these talks aim to negotiate 2020 reduction targets for industrial countries. Unlike Kyoto, developing countries will be asked to contribute by presenting detailed plans for shifting to low-carbon growth, although it is unclear how that would be written into the accord and whether they would be held to account for their promises.

The second crunch issue is money: how much wealthy countries will give poor countries to cope with climate change, whether major emerging economies should chip in to a global fund, and how it will be distributed and managed, giving developing countries an equal voice. Experts say $150 billion a year may be needed eventually.

Scientists say carbon emissions must level off by 2015 and then start to rapidly decline. Within 40 years, manmade emissions should be half what they were in 1990 — and 80-95 percent lower in the economically advanced countries — to avoid the worst scenarios of climate disasters.

"We are seeking nothing less than the transformation of our energy system," Jonathan Pershing, the chief U.S. delegate, told negotiators at the final pre-Copenhagen round of talks.

Activists say that transformation must be comparable in scale to the Internet revolution: more wind, solar and nuclear energy, electric or biofuel cars and public transportation, smart electricity grids that reduce waste, concentrated high-rise cities that eliminate long commutes, an end to deforestation and more efficient carbon-storing agriculture.

The U.N. says the targets announced by industrial countries for 2020 add up to reductions of 16 to 23 percent below 1990 levels, far less than the 25 to 40 percent scientists say is needed.

In recent weeks some governments had upped their bids, while some developing countries promised energy reforms. The new Japanese government pledged to cut emissions by 25 percent from 1990 levels. Norway committed to a 40 percent decrease, and South Korea, not obliged to accept a carbon cap, volunteered a target of 4 percent below 1990.

Among developing countries, Indonesia pledged to stem its carbon-producing deforestation and reduce emissions by 26 percent. Brazil said it would roll back Amazon deforestation by 80 percent by 2020. China, the world's largest emitter, says renewables such as solar and wind power will be 15 percent of its energy package by 2020, and it will reduce its energy consumption by 20 percent per unit of production.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ibkP5BIpTPENNHPGQfeXMjolqlEAD9C6BJPO2

Sunday 29 November 2009

IPCC SCOPING MEETING ON RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES


192 page pdf-dated jan 2008
===

Some highlights

  •  Renewable energy, which includes production from
    geothermal, wind, solar, biomass, hydroelectric and
    tide/wave/ocean sources, is gaining interest from
    politicians and developers due to global warming
    predictions and the high cost of oil.
  • Renewable power capacity of about 240 GW in 2007
    (ex. large hydro) represents almost 6% of total global
    power capacity (~4,300 GW) and the share is
    increasing.
  • The most important renewable energy source with
    respect to electricity generation is hydropower,
    which represents almost 89% of the total
    generation. This share is similar for all the
    continents except Europe, where wind energy plays
    a considerable role. Hydropower also has a
    significant share in the total electricity generation
    worldwide or 16.5%, with a growing rate of 2-5%.
    The largest markets are in the USA, Canada, Brazil,
    Norway and China.
  • Hydroelectricity generation will primarily
    grow in non-OECD countries such as China, India,
    and in Latin America. Biomass growth will be
    strong, especially in OECD countries.
  • Each of the respective renewables has certain
    limitations; some are better suited for electric
    energy production and others for direct heating.
    Solar panels and wind mills can be easily installed
    and in a short period of time, whereas hydro power and geothermal energy tend to be more time consuming, especially large projects. Solar energy
    obviously depends on daytime sun light and nighttime
    storage, wind can be intermittent and also
    depends on storage, hydropower is subject to
    drought and limited site, biomass depends on a
    supply of fuel and can contribute to greenhouses
    gases and particulate emission, tide and ocean
    energy is limited to areas where sufficient
    oscillations are available and where it does not
    interfere with navigation, and even though
    geothermal energy is base load for power and can
    supply the full load for heating, it is site specific.
    The development of the various renewable energy
    sources is not only dependent upon the technical
    aspects mentioned above, but are also influenced by
    the support (or lack of) from government policies
    and financial incentives. Thus, all renewables have
    limitations, but must be supported as they can
    complement each other. It is very important for the
    proponents of the various types of renewable
    energy to work together in order to find the optimal
    use of energy resources in the different regions of
    the world.
........................................

also peruse  page 81/97
"The possible role and contribution of hydropower to the mitigation of climate change" by Richard Taylor Executive Director, International Hydropower Association (IHA)

  • The capacity of individual hydropower units ranges
    from 0.1 kW to 700 MW; annual generation ranges
    from 1000 kWh from the smallest of units, to the
    world record of 93.4 billion kWh delivered by the
    Itaipu powerplant (Brazil/Paraguay) in 2000.
    The largest hydro powerplant in terms of capacity is
    the Three Gorges powerplant (China), nearing
    completion with 32 turbines totalling 22.4 million
    kW.
  • The world total of hydro generation in 2005 was 2,836
    TWh, with an installed capacity of 778 GW (WEC,
    2007). Some 30 GW of new capacity has been added
    in 2006/07 and this could be expected to bring the
    total up to around 3,000 TWh/year (Wilmington
    Media, 2007).
  • Hydropower, therefore, currently provides about 7%
    of global primary energy and 16% of total electricity


    supply. By capacity, hydro provides 87% of global
    renewable energy power generation.



  • Hydropower units can be switched from standstill to full supply in very short


    periods of time, so they can be used to meet sudden
    demand.



  • Hydro provides some level of power generation in 159
    countries. Five countries make up more than half of
    the world’s hydropower production: China, Canada,
    Brazil, USA and Russia.
  • A recent survey of hydropower developers confirmed
    that the costing of hydro development is quite sitespecific.
    Low-head schemes tended to have higher
    costs than high-head developments. Economies of
    scale and the availability of national contractors and
    equipment suppliers also influence costs considerably.
    Installation costs tend to be in the range of US$ 1
    million to >5 million per MW, with an average of <2
    million/MW.
  • Many economically feasible hydropower projects are
    financially challenged. High up-front costs are a
    deterrent for investment, despite zero fuel costs. The
    structural elements of a hydropower project tend to
    make up about 70% of the initial investment cost
    (UNWWAP, 2006). Also, hydro tends to have lengthy
    lead times for planning, permitting, and construction.
    The operating life of a reservoir is normally expected
    to be in excess of 100 years. Equipment
    modernization would be expected every 30 to 40
    years. In the evaluation of life-cycle costs, hydro often
    has the best performance by comparison with other
    generation technologies. This is due to annual
    operating costs being a fraction of the capital
    investment and the energy pay-back ratio being
    extremely favourable because of the longevity of the
    powerplant components.
Key Messages:
  • Currently, hydropower offsets the fossil-fuel
    equivalent of 13 million barrels of oil each day. It
    offsets several types of air pollution (not just GHG
    emissions). By working in unison, hydro can also
    directly reduce emissions from fossil-fuelled
    powerplants.
  • Hydro can be developed in synergy with the complete
    family of renewables, thereby greatly improving the
    aggregate quality and security of supply.
  • Despite high upfront costs, hydro offers low and
    predictable operational costs.
  • Hydropower does not consume the water it uses; by
    managing freshwater, it can make it available for
    multiple purposes. In this way it can contribute to
    adaptation to climate change (IPCC, 2007a).
  • Hydro also offers security against drought and
    protection against flood, thereby offering further
    climate change mitigation services.

    Thursday 26 November 2009

    World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change

    WDR 2010 - Full Text

    http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2010/Resources/5287678-1226014527953/Chapter-4.pdf

    Large Dams,appraisal,financing part- some good reports by ADB

    have a look at ADB site !
    some of the reports are assets!
    http://www.adb.org/Water/Topics/Dams/pdf/WWF-financinglargedams.pdf


    http://www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Consultant/reta-5828.pdf



    also look at
    http://www.adb.org/water/topics/dams/pdf/barragesgb.pdf

    The emission of Green House Gases(GHG) from its reservoir

    Will complete this issue on next few days..pls give yr inputs

    some thoughts

    1. HOW?--->Large hydroelectric dams release methane into the atmosphere because trees and other plants settle to the bottom when the reservoir is first flooded. This plant material decomposes without oxygen and dissolved methane builds up. When water passes through the dam's turbines, this methane is released.
    2. Dr. Ivan Lima and his colleagues(Brazil) used a theoretical model, bootstrap resampling and data provided by the International Commission On Large Dams World register of dams to demonstrate that global large dams annually release about 104 million metric tons of methane to the atmosphere through reservoir surfaces, turbines and spillways.
    3. The International Hydropower Association, IHA, says considering only total greenhouse gases measured at the surface of reservoirs can be misleading; these measurements should be considered as "gross" emissions. "Net" emissions for which dams are responsible must consider the emissions from ecosystems before the creation of a reservoir when the land was in its natural state.
    4. Interesting paper suggesting " the hydro-power plants studied generally posted lower emissions than their equivalent thermo-based counterparts.(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V2W-4F1J8N1-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1111131857&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=5e14d12ab4f0bf2b69ec81d74fa44dad)"
    5. http://www.adb.org/Water/topics/dams/dams0535.asp    suggests WCD recommends that GHG emissions from reservoirs need to be assessed and compared with emissions from other generations sources. The effect is highly location specific and may change significantly over time.
    6. In response, the industry coordinated by the International Hydropower Association (IHA) prepared a fact sheet Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Reservoirs that countered the claims of hydropower opponents, concluding that 'relative to typical values for hydro, coal fired generation emits about 100 times more GHG and natural gas combined cycle turbines about 40 times more'.
    7. The NGO, International Rivers Network (IRN), published a paper Flooding the Land, Warming the Earth; Greenhouse Gas Emissions from dams that documents the growing evidence for the global significance of greenhouse gas emissions from dams and reservoirs
    8. Recently I attended a symposium on Climate Change at NIH Roorkee. Some technical papers were presented. I will post the Gist. In short, More studies are needed in our tropical Zone before we arrive at any conclusion . Dams Located in  Boreal climate cant replicate our (India,Brazil's) cases.



    Canada's Arctic policy: Harper of the melting North | The Economist

    Canada's Arctic policy: Harper of the melting North | The Economist

    Mercury in fish: Hold the sushi | The Economist

    Mercury in fish: Hold the sushi | The Economist: "A pollution trail from the streams to the ocean

    HERBERT HOOVER once described fishing as a “discipline in equality—for all men are equal before fish”. The converse, unfortunately, is not true. After the release of a new government study that documents the prevalence of mercury in freshwater fish, American consumers are aware that all fish are not equal, or at least not equally good to consume."

    Saturday 21 November 2009

    IPCC,MoEF and The Himalayan Glaciers

    the final statement from the last report of IPCC (WGII Summary for Policymakers, 2007)  says that “Glacier melt in the Himalayas is projected to increase flooding, and rock avalanches from destabilized slopes, and to affect water resources within the next two to three decades. This will be followed by decreased river flows as the glaciers recede.”

    I will try to write more once I finish my reading of both the reports--IPCC and the MoEF one.

    Tuesday 17 November 2009

    climate change and water resources

    Just wanted to share as i was searching for "climate change and water resources"


    1. http://www.nih.ernet.in/incoh-web/JVS/2007/paper10.pdf (Water resources in India and impact of climate change)--2007
    2. http://wrmin.nic.in/writereaddata/linkimages/MissionDocument8395131900.pdf    (NATIONAL WATER MISSION under National Action Plan on Climate Change)-April 2009

    Saturday 14 November 2009

    India - Water

    India - Water: "Water

    A severe water crisis looms ahead for India unless the country changes the way it manages water – and changes it soon.

    The World Bank has undertaken a number of studies in this regard:

    Report: India’s Water Economy: Bracing for a Turbulent Future by John Briscoe, Senior Water Advisor, World Bank



    This draft World Bank report examines the challenges facing India’s water sector and suggests critical measures to address them. The report is based on 12 papers commissioned by the World Bank from prominent Indian practitioners and policy analysts.



    Summary Feature | Presentation & Text of Report



    Report: Bridging the Gap Between Water Supply Infrastructure and Services

    While India is making good progress in increasing infrastructure for Water Supply and Sanitation (WSS) in both urban and rural areas, it is lagging behind in expanding services that are reliable, sustainable and affordable. This report analyses the main reasons for this gap and presents a series of recommendations for gradually improving water and sanitation services across the country.

    Executive Summary ( 28.1kb.pdf ) | Full Report


    Project: Water Resources Management - Restoring Traditional Water Bodies



    World Bank projects are helping India's southern states to revive crumbling traditional tank systems. These projects also aim to increase farmer incomes through a participatory approach that encourages diversification into higher value and less water-intensive crops. More



    Slide Show on Karnataka Tank Project | Karnataka Watershed Project



    Project: Proposed Delhi Water Supply and Sewerage Project



    In October 2005, the Government of India requested the Bank to 'keep the project loan processing on hold until further communication.'


    Also see: Frequently Asked Questions | Project Documents | Correspondence on Proposed Project"

    Monday 9 November 2009

    SUSTAINABLE LAND USE & IMPACT ASSESSMENT--good blog

    SUSTAINABLE LAND USE & IMPACT ASSESSMENT

    Pollution board for studying Jaipur fire impact

    The Hindu : News / National : Pollution board for studying Jaipur fire impact: "The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has recommended environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the area affected by the raging fire in the Indian Oil depot at Sitapura in the outskirts of Jaipur.

    It also suggested regular monitoring of air, water and soil in Jaipur, Haryana and Delhi along with the State Pollution Control Boards.

    The CPCB is monitoring the impact of the fire in Delhi and the data observed so far does not indicate any adverse effect of the fire on air quality here.

    An assessment of the air quality was being carried out by the CPCB at Siri Fort, Delhi College of Engineering and ITO-Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg.

    A zonal team of the CPCB has already at the site, keeping a vigil on the situation. Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board is monitoring the ambient air quality at five locations: Pratap Nagar police station, Delawas, Mathurawala Gaon, Chowkidhani and Shivadaspura police station. The data received from these locations between October 30 and November 2 showed that suspended particulate matter (SPM) was more than the permissible limit while sulphur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen were within permissible levels.

    But, in the absence of regular monitoring in the rural areas of Jaipur city, the incremental values could not be calculated. Haryana has also been asked to monitor the quality of air. The Zonal office at Bhopal is also in touch with the CPCB head office here.

    The Rajasthan government has constituted a five member committee under the principal secretary (environment) to assess environmental impact and offer suggestions regarding corrective and precautionary measures. The committee will submit its report by November 15."

    Wednesday 4 November 2009

    MIGA || Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency - Policies - Environmental & Social Safeguards - Environmental and Social Impact Assessments

    MIGA || Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency - Policies - Environmental & Social Safeguards - Environmental and Social Impact Assessments

    IFC Sustainability - Environmental and Social Review Procedure

    IFC Sustainability - Environmental and Social Review Procedure: "The Environmental and Social Review Procedure gives direction to IFC officers in implementing the Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability and reviewing compliance and implementation by private sector projects. This procedure was updated on August 14, 2009.

    * Environmental and Social Review Procedure [PDF]"

    South Asia Environment Outlook-2009 by UNEP

    HIGHLIGHTS:
    -------------
    In collaboration with South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the South Asia Environment Outlook 2009 (SAEO-2009) is the result of a consultative process with governments and other partners from the nations of South Asia, sub-regional intergovernmental agencies and experts. This report provides an overview of the state of the natural environment in South Asia, including emerging trends, taking into account socio-economic factors.

    South Asia occupies about 5 per cent of the world’s land mass, but is home to about 20 per cent of the world’s population. This is expected to rise to about 25 per cent by 2025. Three-quarters of South Asia’s population lives in rural areas, with one-third living in extreme poverty (on less than a dollar a day). Their well-being is further compromised by indoor air pollution, which is a severe health hazard.
    The report concludes that South Asia is very vulnerable to climate change. Impacts of climate change have been observed in the form of glacier retreat in the Himalayan region, where the approximately 15,000 glaciers will likely shrink from the present total area of 500,000 km² to 100,000 km² by 2035. These glaciers form a unique reservoir,which supports perennial rivers such as the Indus, Ganges and Brahmaputra, which, in turn, are the lifeline of millions of people in South Asian countries (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, and Pakistan). This will exacerbate the
    challenges of poverty reduction and improving access to safe drinking water, two of the Millennium Development Goals.


    The SAEO-2009 report also highlights opportunities for action. These include focusing on a range of response options and instruments to address these challenges and emphasizing the need for increasing responsibilities and greater cooperative efforts by all stakeholders. Increased awareness of ecosystem services and new market-based management systems are recommended as important mechanisms to mainstream environment into social and economic development processes in the sub-region.
    ----------------------

    http://www.roap.unep.org/pub/Final%20Book_SAEO%202009_8%20Sept%202009.pdf

    Difference between Comprehensive EIA and Rapid EIA

    The difference between Comprehensive EIA and Rapid EIA is in the time-scale of the data supplied.

    Rapid EIA is for speedier appraisal process. While both types of EIA require inclusion/ coverage of all significant environmental impacts and their mitigation, Rapid EIA achieves this through the collection of ‘two seasons’ (other than monsoon) data only to reduce the time required.

    This is acceptable if it does not compromise on the quality of decision-making. The review of Rapid EIA submissions will show whether a comprehensive EIA is warranted or not.


    It is, therefore, clear that the submission of a professionally prepared Comprehensive EIA in the first instance would generally be the more efficient approach.

    Note:My long experience says, Rapid EIA is not being promoted these days.

    Tuesday 3 November 2009

    Climate Change, Environment, and Natural Resources Management - The Climate Change, Environment, and Natural Resources Management

    Climate Change, Environment, and Natural Resources Management - The Climate Change, Environment, and Natural Resources Management




    One-third of the world’s population face water scarcity; 70 percent of the world’s fisheries are depleted or overexploited; soil degradation affects 30 percent of the world’s irrigated lands, 40 percent of rain-fed agricultural lands, and 70 percent of rangelands and every year 1.0 million people die prematurely from respiratory illnesses associated with air pollution.

    Likewise, a delay in reducing green house gas (GHG) emissions is likely to significantly constrain opportunities to achieve lower stabilization levels and increase the risk of more severe and irreversible impacts.

    Numerous other examples exist of natural resource depletion and worsening environmental quality that disproportionately affects the poor and compromises sustained gains in well being for this and future generations.

    The environment, development and institutions are fundamentally interrelated, within a general context of sustainable development. Overuse, mismanagement, and contamination of natural resources are often the negative unforeseen consequences of development efforts characterized by unclear property rights, perverse economic incentives, poor governance, and badly designed production processes. A degraded environment stalls development, exacerbates social conflict, and undermines poverty reduction efforts and growth. These impacts are more acute where livelihoods directly rely on the services of natural assets

    Subscribe this Blog: Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    View Nityananda Mukherjee's profile on LinkedIn
    Disclaimer: This Blog is a small step towards building a knowledge-based platform for Professionals interested in "water resources management(WRM)". One of the objective is knowledge dissemination. Please note that VIEWs expressed here are purely personal.