Site Search
:: Wedo Video Presentation ::        :: Mr.N.S.Kumar speech ::        :: Mr.K.V.Rupchand speech ::        :: Mr.R.Seshasayee speech ::
      Indian River Grid
  The Needs
  Concept and Structure
  Best Alternative
  Other Significant Benefits
  The 6 - IN - 1 Giga Project
  Expert Opinions
     Comparision of All Alternatives
  Histroy of the proposals
  Comparision Table of Alternatives
  IRG and NWDA - A balance sheet
    News and Events
  Milestones
  Photo Gallery
  Video Clips
  Press Reports
Comparision of All Alternatives
   
 
Histroy of the proposals
  • National Water Development Agency (NWDA) – Since 1982
          Himalayan Component – 14 links. Involves International collaboration (Nepal & Bangla Desh). Information is classified. Peninsular Component – 16 links. All links are ‘ONE-WAY’ DIVERSIONS. Feasibility Reports completed for 11 links. Consensus should be struck between Statesand then Detailed Project Reports prepared. Links are formed in ‘Series’. If one link fails, whole system collapses.
  • National Waterways Project (NWP) – Since 1999

          Himalayan Waterways, 4500 km long at 500 m level connecting the tributaries of Ganga and Brahmaputra. Central Waterways, 5750 km long at 300 m level connecting the tributaries of Ganga (South), Mahanadi, Narmada, Tapi etc., and Southern Waterways, 4650 km long at 300 m level connecting Godavari, Krishna, Cauvery and West-flowing rivers. The 3 Waterways form 3 loops and facilitate 2-way transfer of waters. The cross section of the loop consists of a navigable waterway 100 m wide, 10 m deep fed by a parallel, ‘balancing’ waterway 200 m wide, 25 m deep running upstream.

  • National Water Grid by Dr. K.L.Rao (1972)

          Main link is Ganga-Cauvery, 2640 km long drawing 1680 cumecs for 150 days/year pumping 2.59 M Ha over 549 m for irrigating 4 M Ha. Annual cost Rs. 30, 000/Ha compared with Rs. 15, 000 for NWDA. Proposals examined by CWC, found to be under-estimated and dropped. Other links were Brahmaputra-Ganga, Mahanadi to South, Narmada to Gujarat & Rajasthan and west-flowing rivers to east.

  • Garland Canal by Capt. Dastur (1977)

          (a) Himalayan Canal  4200 km long, 300 m wide at level 335-457 m with Integrated lakes
          (b) Central & Southern Canal 9300 km long  300 m  wide at level   244-305 m  with Integrated lakes 
          (c) the 2 canals interconnected at Delhi and Patna  by pipe lines. Proposals examined by 2 committees                of experts, found to be technically unsound and very costly (Rs. 12 million Crore).  Hence, given up.

Comparision Table of Alternatives

Sl. No

Parameter

IRG

NWDA

NWP

K.L.Rao

Dastur

1

Length (km)

16,500

30 links

14,900

2640

13,500

2

Pumping (m)

Nil

116

Nil

549

Nil

3

Do., Power
Reqd.(MW)

Nil

1650

Nil

5000-7000

Nil

4

Irrigation (m acres)

160

87.5

150

10

540

5

Project Cost (Rs. Cr.)

3,90,000
(includes Power)

5,60,000

5,35,000

3,00,000

700,00,000

6

Cost/acre (Rs.)

30,000

64,000 (2002)

35,700(2003)

3,00,000

12,96,000

7

Power Potential (MW)

65,000

32,350 (Net)

60,000

Not estimated

Not estimated

8

Navigation

Year round

5 months

Year round

Not  planned

Not  planned

9

Flood Control

Substantial

Moderate

Substantial

60,000 cusecs

Considerable

10

Project Duration
(Years)

5 - 8

12

10

Not estimated

3-4 yrs.

 

 

Comparison of IRG and IBWT(NWDA) proposals - a balance sheet

A Concise Comparison Table
to show that Indian River Grid is the Best Alternative

NWDA proposal
Inter basin Transfer Links
WEDO- Proposal
Indian River Grid

CONCEPT: Diversion ofSurplus from one basin to another

- Linking of Rivers

CONCEPT: Capturing the flood-flows into level Canals at higher elevation

- Inter Linking of Rivers and Reservoirs

STRUCTURE: A Serial arrangement – Links of river basins from North to South. The performance of a link in south depends on the performance of the prior link in the north. Being a series of links, failure of a northern link will have a cascading effect on all dependent links in south leading to a collapse of the System

STRUCTURE: A Parallel arrangement The Canals ‘Cut through’ nearly 1000 rivers(50 major) in the upper reaches where the rivers are small flowing at a low velocity; also, the reservoirs below and above the Canals will be linked. Acting as a backup storage for flood flows, capturing or release of water from/into River/ Reservoir by the Canal-Grid will have no effect on the next node and of course no Cascading effect.

LOCATION: Canals at low level in the highly populated areas and delta regions

LOCATION: Canals at elevations –less populated areas, plateau, or foot of the hills

FLOW: One way - The diversions are one-way and irreversible: Consequently there is no Accord on surplus quantities between the States(even Districts/Regions) till date

FLOW: Two-way – Being a level Canal,

the water can flow two ways: consequently

Water Credit is possible; and subsequently leading to better Social acceptance

POWER GENERATION: 34000 MW -_

- 1650 MW for Pumping – Net: 32350 MW

- 30000 MW (93% ) estimated from Himalayan component, mostly from North- East, power-lines having to cross the goose neck between China & Bangladesh , very sensitive and vulnerable area

- Even if implemented, there will be very high Transmission and Distribution loss besides Pilferage, high maintenance cost and un- reliable of Power due to Forests and Hilly region

- Claim of power production by ILR “is misleading. The ILR system will not produce power except insignificant power at the canal heads… the ILR will consumer power” :CWC Director in NWDA Doc. 2005-II p 74

 

POWER GENERATION : 65000 MW

-This is possible mainly due to Potential Energy of Water stored at a higher elevation

  • CARBON CREDIT: At least Rs. 10000 Crores per annum.

-POWER SAVING: 50,000 MW – After generating power, the water flows down by gravity for Irrigation and Drinking without pumping.

- The above two components together represent the nearly the current installed capacity in India

- DISTRIBUTED Power Generation: From any point of the Serpentine canal, water could be drawn to generate power

-Minimum Transmission Lines required: Due to Distributed generation minimum T-Lines required(low Capital cost) and consequently very Low T&D loss

PROJECT-DISPLACED-PEOPLE:

-Estimated SUBMERGENCE due to over 100 dams proposed :1675000 ha (Rainer Horig: 625 000 ha for canals and 1050 000 ha for reservoirs)

- Estimated DISPLACEMENT: 0.45 M (official doc), 3.47 M (Rainer Horig). Yet, NWDA has much smaller Command Area and therefore much less Irrigation Potential

 

 

PROJECT-DISPLACED-PEOPLE:

-SUBMERGENCE- ZERO due to dams and reservoirs. Space taken by the canal is not very significant as it will be at/near the foot of the Hills

-The DISPLACEMENT of people will be between 15 to 30% of NWDA figure as the population density is very low. It is not truly comparable as IRG covers more rivers and much larger part of India.

DISPLACEMENT OF EARTH

Construction of Inter-basin Link Canals will be mostly in the Plains. This requires Disposal of very large volume of Earth by transportation to distant destinations resulting in high Cost and Hugh Delays

 

DISPLACEMENT OF EARTH

As the canals often will be ON or AT the foot of the Hills, where the earth excavated from Slope can be used for Canal Bund at the lower side. Transportation of Displaced Earth will be minimum

IRRIGATION: 87.5 M acres (2 2Himalayan, 13Penninsular)

Food Grains production: 400 MT 2020 – Command area is very limited as the links are in the Plains(some closer to the Sea), Reducing the Irrigation Potential.

Assumption of 4.6 Tons / acre is high. Project completion by 2020 is remote.

 

IRRIGATION: 160 M acres – This is possible due to a very large command Area Of the Canal Heads as compared to NWDA links, resulting high Irrigation Potential.

Food Grain Production: 500 MT – required for 1.6 Billion population expected to stabilize around 2050

 

WATER AVAILABILITY- When in Need Very slow transfer of water: The bed slopes of some NWDA links are very flat, 1/15,000 and 1/20,000. It will take several weeks or even months for the designed quantum of water to reach the tail end areas especially if more than one link is involved. This deficiency will be further aggravated if the upstream reservoir of a link is at low levels. Therefore The quantum of Water will not be available when and where required

 

WATER AVAILABILITY- As the Canals absorb the Surplus Flood Flows, it gets distributed along its length, which is thousands of Kilometers. As the Water is already distributed, it will be closer to the Point of use. Further, as the water flows from an Elevation, its velocity will be higher to reach the point of use in a shorter period.

DURATION, COST-BENEFIT

Project Duration: 12Years(revised from 25Yrs)
COST: 5,600,000 Crores
Cost/Acre : 64000
Navigation: 5 Months, Small Vessels
Flood Control: Moderate

 

DURATION, COST-BENEFIT

Project Duration: Less than 10 years
COST: 3,900,000 Crores
Cost/Acre : 30000
Navigation: 12 Months, Medium Vessels
Flood Control: Substantial

SOURCE OF FINANCE: Union / States – Delays Budget Allocation , Disbursement;

 

SOURCE OF FINANCE: Public-Private Partnership – BOT / BOOT basis. Fast Execution