Ganga-Yamuna Panchayat-Ganga For Moef Presentation By Sunita Narayan

1. Hydrocide
Why our rivers are dying and
the agenda for change
g g

2. Background: Cleaning Ganga
a national mission
1985: Ganga Action Plan launched
GAP I: Rs 433 crore spent
GAP II: Rs 615 crore sanctioned in 59 towns
(Till 2007: Rs 254 crore spent)
GAP II (tributaries): Rs 1120 crore sanctioned
(Till 2007: Rs 740 crore spent)
3 main components: i t
i t interception; di
ti diversion
i
and treatment of domestic sewage
Identification of industrial hotspots setting up
hotspots,
for effluent treatment plants

3. Cumulative result: Ganga is India’s
most holy but most polluted river

4. Faecal contamination leads to bad heath -- high
morbidity and mortality rates in people -- even
‘clean’ stretches have high levels of coliform

5. Re-formulated programme:
Recognises different stretches have
different problems

6. Upstream shocks: minimum water flows
being affected by hydroelectric projects
Less water
means less
assimilative
capacity in the
river to clean
A ‘living’ river
must have
water to flow

7. Rivers need water
No concept of environmental flow
Hydro take store/divert/tunnel water
Cities take water
Factories and farms take water
All take water, return waste to the river
,

8. Understand the
political economy of
defecation

9. Urban drinking water and
sanitation challenge
Cities are sourcing their water from further and further away – costs
them money to pump; high losses in water transportation (roughly
20-50%)
Cities are worried about water not about their waste
Waste not treated goes into water of others – cities have to invest in
cleaning water (Agra – chlorine) Can’t clean then they look for new
chlorine). Can t
source
Costs of water supply means cities can subsidise some and not all.
pp y
Subsidise the rich

10. Current system: bring water (from
distance); treat, pump, pipe to home,
take sewage, pump, pipe, treat and
sewage pump pipe
dispose…river will be clean
Should work. But:
It is capital i t
i it l intensive – creates divide
i t di id
between the rich and poor in a city. The
state can subsidise some but not allall.
Subsidises rich
It is resource intensive – uses water
water,
creates waste. Adds to stress.

11. Cities in search for water
Chennai: 235 km Chennai
(Veeranam lake) and now
planning to go farther 300 Km
(Veeranam extension project). Veeranam
lake
Bangalore: 95 km
(Cauvery) pumping 1000 m
elevation.
elevation
Map of Tamil Nadu
Delhi: 450 to 500 km
(from Tehri d )
(f T h i dam)

12. Manjira
dam
100 km
Osman Sagar
g Hyderabad
Himayat 105 km
Sagar
Nagurjuna

13. Vaitarna cum
Tansa
90 km
Bhatsa
105 km
Mumbai

14. INDORE
YASHWANT SAGAR
30 km
INDORE
70 km
Narmada river

15. Jodhpur
204 km
k
Rajivgandhi lift canal
JODHPUR

16. Need planning for city water-waste
and plans for all waste treatment
With increasing use of water in cities, there is increased
waste -- 80% of water l
t f t leaves our h homes as wastet
But cities do not plan for waste disposal
Almost all cities do not have underground drainage; only
part of the cities drainage is collected or conveyed in
underground drains
In this way sewage is not intercepted and cannot be treated
Cities do not charge for water or for waste that is
generated. They cannot pay for O&M charges. System
does not work
d t k
Cities treat partially; then this is mixed with untreated
waste. Result is pollution
p

17. Inefficiencies are high
g
Huge distribution losses in water supply –
between 20-50 per cent.
Losses add to costs, which recovery is
difficult;
Because cost is high cannot recover from
consumer;
Cannot invest in efficiencies and clean
water for all.

18. Transportation costs are high. Distribution
costs high. Cannot be recovered. Subsidy to
some. Water inequity in Delhi.
3% population

19. Add: waste to these sums
The more water we use = the more waste we generate.
The more waste we generate = more money to collect, to
g y ,
convey, to treat and to dispose
The more waste we do not treat = polluted water and
increased burden of health costs
costs.
Simple sums: but we can’t add up

20. If STP was the answer, pollution
in Yamuna not a problem
India has installed capacity to treat roughly 20% of
excreta it generates
Delhi has 40% of India’s installed capacity
17 STPs: can treat 2330 mld of waste
Delhi generates 2,500 mld (DJB) or 3,700 mld
(CPCB)
Can treat: 93% or 62%
But..

21. Underutilised: where there is waste;
no STP; where there is STP; no
waste

22. Drainage exists; but does not work.
Drainage does not exist; does not
work
Cannot transport waste to the sewage plant. Sewage plant
cannot treat.
5,600 km of drains in city; 130 km of trunk sewers; in poor
, y; ; p
state.
Then:
Large parts of the city does not have official underground
official-underground
drainage system
Large parts of the city lives in unauthorised-illegal colonies

23. Unequal cities are p
q polluted
Half (or more) of the city is unconnected to the official underground
drainage system;
But “Illegal or unauthorised or unconnected” these will have excreta
This
Thi excreta flows into open (storm water) drains
t fl i t ( t t )d i
These same drains also carry treated effluents from sewage treatment
plants to the river
This ‘legal’ treated effluent is mixed with ‘illegal’ untreated effluent
legal illegal
Result: pollution

24. Take
East Delhi
Shahadra drain
Discharges 16%
flow
or 20% of BOD
load
into Yamuna
2 STPs
Yamuna Vihar:
45+45 mld
treated.
Kondli:
45+45+113 mld
treated

25. But
Treated effluents from Yamuna Vihar discharged
into drain
Drain carries effluents of un sewered colonies
un-sewered
Treated and untreated effluent then picked up at
Kondli
Treated again
Discharged into drain which carries effluents of
g
unsewered colonies – in Delhi and Noida.
Are we surprised: River stays polluted

26. But

27. Sewage treatment plants located far away
from sources. Treated water mixed in same
drain. Not reused.

28. Masani
STP
STP outfall
CIS-YAMUNA
TRANS-YAMUNA
Kulu ka Nagla NAME OF DRAINS
STP 1. MASANI NALA
2. SHAHGANJ NALA
How sewage flows
3. CHAKRA TEERATH NALA
4. OCTROI POST NALA
STP outfall
in Mathura?
5. KRISHAN GANGA NALA
6. GAUGHAT NALA
7. CHINTAHARAN NALA
8. DAULA MAULA NALA
9. RANIGHAT NALA
10. SWAMIGHAT NALA
11. ASKUNDAGHAT NALA
12. VISHRAMGHAT NALA
13. BENGALIGHAT NALA
14. DHRUVGHAT NALA
Intermediate Pumping Stations
Main Pumping Station
15. AMBA KHAR NALA
Sewage Treatment Plants 16.
16 SATRANGINALA
Sewer Drains
STP outfall
17. MAHADEOGHAT NALA
18. CANTT. NALA
19. DAIRY FARM NALA

29. Can we pay full cost? Can we
design system for all?
It costs Rs 5-6 per 1000 litres to supply treated
water to us
We pay Rs 2 20 per 1000 litres
2.20
Cost will increase if pollution increases. Upstream
cities will do the same as Delhi
Will cost Rs 30-40 per 1000 litres to take back our
sewage; treat it; dispose it. (Hardly pay)
Cost will increase as river gets more polluted. No
assimilative capacity.

30. Cost of system is high. Cannot pay.
Cannot subsidise all. O l rich
C t b idi ll Only i h
This is the political economy of defecation.
The rich use water. Are connected to sewage system.
Waste is collected. Even treated.
But the
B t they cannot pay for full costs..
pa f ll costs
The poor use little water. Not connected to sewage
system. Waste flows in open drains. Not treated.
But if system not designed for all. Not affordable by all.
Will not work.

31. Maths of national excreta
2009 CPCB estimated sewage from class I and II
cities =
Total sewage = 36,000 mld
36 000
Capacity to treat: 7,000 mld (20% of sewage)
Sewage actually treated: 5000 mld (72% of
capacity created)
Gap: 31,000 mld of sewage
p , g
= 14% of sewage generated actually treated

32. Excreta maths of Ganga
g
Ganga Basin
Total sewage generation: 12,000 mld
Capacity t treat: 3,750 mld – 4700 mld
C it to t t 3 750 ld ld
Ganga
Total sewage generation: 2900 mld
Capacity to treat: 995-1017 mld

33. Challenge: cities are growing; water
use is increasing; sewage load is
higher and growing
In 2003: CPCB
estimates 2500 mld
discharged in Ganga
g g
+ 5700 mld in
tributaries (of which
Delhi is roughly
3800 mld)
= 8200 mld of
sewage in river

34. Treatment capacity created: GAP I+2: 995
mld on Ganga river
+ 1300 mld on tributaries = 2300 mld
ld

35. + Yamuna (not under GAP/YAP
funding) = 2310 mld =4700 mld
Total STP capacity created on Ganga and trib taries
capacit tributaries

36. Chasing sewage targets: cities find that
sewage increases and capacity cannot keep
up…pollution increases
ll i i

37. More hardware being built..
g
..Not the simple answer to pollution
1.Cannot catch up with growing pollution
2.Do
2 Do not have the drainage in city to convey
waste
3.Do not have plan f treated waste
3 for
disposal
4.Cities cannot pay for waste disposal –
more the water used; more waste; more
under-recovery..

38. Indian rivers: same tales

39. Infrastructure will cost; cannot pay;
cannot provide for all; will pollute

40. Water-waste connections: more
water; more cost of treatment

41. Agenda 1: mandate minimum
environmental flow in all stretches
Rivers need water to assimilate the waste
Even if we treat to existing standards -- 30 BOD, it
is much higher than 3 BOD -- the standard for
bathing quality water
But increasingly we take water from rivers, return
waste to it
We trap the river between the barrages (Delhi,
Kanpur) and then want it to flow
Need a plan for what is minimum flow and how
it will be ensured

42. Agenda: Cumulative impact
assessment
No overall planning for hydro-projects –
Central projects/state projects
No assessment of water availability and
p
power g
generation p potential
Need to stop all projects till cumulative
impacts/water availability is studied

43. Action agenda 2: Monitoring
g g
1. Quality of water in many places ‘tootoo
clean’ to be true
2. Need to review our monitoring across
the river; check how representative is
station; check quality of sampling;
q y p g
analysis;
3. Need to review indicators -- BOD --
difficult to check with electricity
4. Set up community water monitors across
p y
the river

44. Take monitoring at Hardwar
g
• Monitoring stations at Haridwar under the Ganga
Action Plan
• Done by Pollution Control Research Institute (PCRI)
of BHEL
• Two locations
• Haridwar Upstream (S t i hi Ashram) on the main river
H id U t (Saptrishi A h ) th i i
• Haridwar downstream (Mayapur regulator) on the Ganga
canal
• Sampling on a monthly basis for pH, DO, BOD, total
S li thl b i f H DO BOD t t l
coliform and faecal coliform, nitrite, nitrate, colour,
odour, temperature

45. Ganga at Haridwar
Ganga at Haridwar
g
Bifurcates into the Upper
Ganga Canal
After the Bhimgoda
regulator, flow in the river
is lean
Upper Ganga canal
Ganga river

46. No monitoring after the disposal of
untreated waste
Under GAP, the wastewater drains falling into the Upper Ganga Canal are
intercepted, sewage conveyed to the 18 mld STP at Jagjeetpur. STP receives
about 40-50 mld most of which bypassed into the Ganga

47. MoEF s
MoEF’s monitoring station
MoEF’s monitoring point
station
No monitoring after STP outfall into the main river
About 30 mld sewage is bypassed by the STP

48. Existing national water quality
monitoring network
Water pollution monitoring
stations increased from 480 in
1995 to 1245 in 2007.
Groundwater Correspondingly,
C di l
31%
number of river
Major rivers
45% monitoring stations also increased
to 557 in 2007 from 400 during
Creek,
canals, drains
2001.
4%
Lakes
9% Medium rivers 56 per cent of the monitoring
11% stations are on rivers
t ti i

49. How adequate?
Currently th main stem of th river G
C tl the i t f the i Ganga (2,550
(2 550
km) is monitored at 34 locations This accounts
for 6 per cent of the river monitoring stations.
p g
There are 141 stations in the Ganga and its
tributaries constitute almost one fourth of the
one-fourth
river monitoring stations.
In 2001, Ganga was monitored at 27 locations
along the main river

50. Agenda 3: Design to treat all
sewage
1. We need strategy for affordable sewage
treatment;
2.
2 As building conveyance drainage always a
problem should use open drains as treatment
areas – plan for drains, not j
p just wish them
away
3. We need to plan for water treatment and also
treated
t t d water discharge
t di h

51. Agenda 4: Plan for treated effluent
1. Once sewage is treated; reuse-recycle so that
not added to the untreated sewage in drain
2.
2 Or put treated effluent into river for dilution –
treat close to the river as possible -- need to
check the assimilative capacity of
p y
river/waterway
3. Promote reuse so treat close to the source as
possible. B ild where th
ibl Build h there i waste. Wh
is t Where you
build plan for disposal or reuse. Will reduce
costs of pumping; interception; treatment
p p g; p ;

52. Next steps: Agenda for action
p g
1. Review of monitoring stations; indicators;
putting data in public domain
2. Review of city plans for different
stretches of river (water-waste and
affordable solutions). No clearance to
sol tions)
single hardware projects
3.
3 Mandate minim m flo in ri er
minimum flow river
No ‘soft solutions’ will work