|
Answers to
some very commonly and frequently asked questions related to the
Sardar Sarovar Project are briefly
presented here.
Q. Whether
the assessment that at least of 28 Million Acre Feet (MAF) of water
flow down the river was correct, whereas measurements of the actual
flow between 1948 and 1993 showed that this has been only 22.75 MAF
?
The availability of
water in Narmada river has been assessed in the most sophisticated
and systematic manner in consultation with the Central Water
Commission (CWC) - the highest expert technical body of the nation -
by
utilizing rainfall series from 1891 to 1992 and actual river flow
series from 1948 to 1992. The actual rainfall series for 45 years is
not adequate for planning mega project with a life of more than 100
years and a large catchment with co-efficient of annual flow
variations of 0.35 which may need minimum 130 years data of both
rainfall and river flows. Therefore combined actual and hind cast data
available of about 100 years is used as per international
standard practice. Based on this method, 75% dependable availability
is 27.22 MAFT.
The Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal (NWDT) has adopted value of 28
(27.22 ) MAF based on an agreement reached between the Chief
Ministers of the four party States in 1974. which formed the basis
for apportioning of Narmada waters between the party States.
The water availability in the Narmada
river at Garudeshwar was first estimated by Khosla Committee in 1965
by using the observed data from 1948-49 to 1962 along with hind cast
data of run-off based on rainfall values from 1915 to 1947, as 28.72
Million Acre Feet (MAF) at 75% dependability. This figure of
available run-off was accepted by Govt. of Gujarat. The Govt. of
Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra used longer series of hind cast data
from 1891-1946-47 along with observed data from 1948-1962 and
arrived at 75% dependable value of run-off as 27.14 and 27.17 MAF
respectively. The method of hind-casting flow series employed in
above analysis is as per the international practice. In Narmada
river a minimum of 130 years of data of both rainfall and river
flows are required considering coefficient of annual variation to be
at
0.35. The Central Water Commission in 1993 had also endorsed the
Tribunal’s determination of 28 MAF using the above method of
hind-casting the flow series. Therefore the availability of 28 MAF
water arrived by standard scientific methods and practices was
adopted.
Q.
When
the power actually produced by the SSP will be much less than the
installed capacity, mainly because irrigation in the long run will
be preferred over power generation. What are the safety measures to
be adopted to avoid such scenario ?
Power generation from Sardar Sarovar Project
is envisaged in two Power Houses - the River Bed Power House (RBPH) with an
installation of six units of 200 MW each operating under a head range of 116.6
mtr. to 75 mtrs located in an Underground Power House, and, the Canal Head Power
House (CHPH) with an installation of five units of 50 MW each operating under
head range of 46.13 mtr. to 18.12 m located in a surface Power House at the
off-take of the Narmada Main Canal.
The power generation at CHPH would depend upon
the releases for irrigation for Gujarat and Rajasthan as per the directions of
the Tribunal and power generation at RBPH would depend upon the water
surplus arising after the irrigation requirement. The NWDT in its report considered the
likely pace of irrigation development by the party states for utilisation of
their allocated shares and indicated three stages of irrigation development in
the basin, reckoned from the date of Gazette notification of the report.
Power benefits at SSP would depend upon the
irrigation abstractions by the party States and is a complex exercise involving
multipurpose river system of dynamic characteristics. The Central Electricity
Authority together with the power beneficiary states of Madhya Pradesh,
Maharashtra, Gujarat carried out different studies for evaluation of power
benefits from SSP complex using multi reservoir simulation system. All the
studies were taken into account while arriving at the power benefits. The power
benefits effect of the three stages of irrigation development are given below.
|
Stage
of Irrigation Development |
Years |
RBPH |
CHPH |
|
|
|
Firm
GWH |
Seasonal
GWH |
Total
GWH |
Firm
GWH |
Seasonal
GWH |
Total
GWH |
|
Stage-I
# |
00 -
10 |
3635 |
1431 |
5066 |
213 |
190 |
403 |
|
Stage-II
@ |
10 -
30 |
517 |
1334 |
1851 |
676 |
111 |
787 |
|
Stage-III
$ |
30 -
45 |
0 |
520 |
520 |
440 |
345 |
785 |
|
|
#) Partial development of irrigation in Gujarat
and full in Rajasthan to utilise 3.05 MAF out of 9.5 MAF share of two
States.
(@) Irrigation development in Gujarat to increase
from 3.05 to 9 MAF. However, use in M.P. to be only 13 MAF against 18
MAF allotted.
($) Full irrigation development in
M.P. also.
Thus, it would be observed from the above that the firm
energy from the River Bed Power House would vary from 3635 GWH (415 MW
continuous) in the initial years to NIL in the final stages of irrigation
development. To preserve the capacity value of this station and its
continued utility as a peaking station throughout its life, pump turbine and
generator motor sets are provided at this station. The machines at RBPH
would thus run for about 6 hours daily during the period of peak demands,
discharging water into the lower reservoir, created by constructing a tail
pool dam at Garudeshwar 12 Km downstream of Sardar Sarovar Dam. During the
off-peak periods the water from this lower reservoir would be pumped back
into the main reservoir by drawing power from the grid thus making the water
available in the upper reservoir for peaking operation of the next day. The
power benefits from CHPH would increase from 213 GWH (24.3 MW continuos) to
440 GWH (50.2 MW continuous) in the initial stages of irrigation
development. This project would also afford substantial secondary energy
benefits. The above assessment of power benefits was based on the assumption
that ISP would be completed and become operational concurrently or earlier
than SSP.
|