Advantages and Disadvantages of Tipaimukh Dam (A Critical Analysis of Dr.

Banu’s
Paper)
By Prof. Bijon B. Sarma

First Published on Jul 31, 2009 in

Source : http://www.persecutionbd.org/news/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-
tipaimukh-dam-a-critical-analysis-of-dr-banus-paper/

This piece is written by Prof. Bijon B. Sarma of Khulna University. Bangladesh.

The professor has given us personal permission to republish this article. Here he
takes a critical look at the so-called research paper of Dr. Banu

PREAMBLE : When we write in websites normally we do not write with utmost

seriousness, and we know the reason. Even though lapses/problems in languages are
acceptable, in the articles on serious science-based subjects, ideas and thoughts
by all means should be specific and expression of intelligence. I did not have any
intention to review Environmental Geologist (Kansas, USA) Mr. Meer Husain’s
article “CONSTRUCTION OF TIPAIMUKH DAM – A THREAT TO THE NATIONAL INTEREST OF
BANGLADESH”. I did it because he requested me to go through that. Accordingly I
did and published my submission. However, the time I went through his paper I was
really shocked to see that a person with such expertise uses “a high-school
student’s essay” collected from source like ‘wikianswer.com’ in his paper. Then I
felt tempted to review Dr Nargis Banu’s article “PROTECT PEOPLE AND NATURE FROM
TIPAIMUKH DAM”, posted by the Bangladesh Expatriate Council. Dr. Hasina Banu is an
environmental scientist working with Sydney Water Corporation, Australia. It was
mentioned that the paper was presented at a seminar at the Australian National
University on July 3, 2009. By disclosing this information the writer has given us
a scope to know what type of papers are presented in such seminars. This author
has experiences of such presentations at home and abroad, including Australia.

COMMENTS OF PAPER BY DR. NARGIS BANU

01. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : At the beginning (probably Introduction, where Abstract
is missing) Dr. Nargis Banu narrated the background story of Tipaimukh project.
Here she mentioned two notable issues: (Quoted).

(a) WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF TIPAIMUKH DAM, INDIA WOULD BE DIVERTING THE BARAK’S
WATER FLOW FROM ITS NORTH TO ITS SOUTH AND EAST. IT WILL HAVE ADVERSE IMPACTS ON
NATURE AND LIVELIHOOD IN THE NORTH-EASTERN DISTRICTS IN BANGLADESH.

(b) NOW INDIA HAS STARTED ANOTHER INTERVENTION ON THE INTERNATIONAL RIVER BARAK AT
TIPAIMUKH AND WILL CONSTRUCT A DAM AT FULERTAL (100 KILOMETRES DOWNSTREAM FROM
TIPAIMUKH) BY 2012.

MY SUBMISSION : The truth is, India initiated construction of a barrage at

Fulertal (adjacent to Bangladesh border) long ago and the same has now been
abandoned. Now India has proposed for the construction of a dam for the production
of hydroelectricity at Tipaimukh, a place located at a distance of over 150
kilometres. Dam and Barrage are two different things. Where as withdrawal of water
is the essential objective of barrage, a dam may or may not have such provision.
India has already assured that there will be no withdrawal of water. In such a
situation a comment like “WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF TIPAIMUKH DAM, INDIA WOULD BE
DIVERTING THE BARAK’S WATER FLOW FROM ITS NORTH TO ITS SOUTH AND EAST” is
misleading. And if this statement is wrong, the comment based on it and expressed
in the following line i.e. (quoted) “IT WILL HAVE ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NATURE AND
LIVELIHOOD IN THE NORTH-EASTERN DISTRICTS IN BANGLADESH” is also wrong.
Those who are aware of the topography, soil condition and climate of Monipur
region might know that this region does not really need such diversion of water
for irrigation. Let me briefly explain the reason. There may be two prominent
reasons of depositing water in the mountains or hills.

(a) In the high rocky mountains water is deposited in cavities and on the picks as
ice during the winter. In the summer season those melt and flow down.

(b) The earth-made hills and mounds get wet during rains and release that water as
spring or fall, resulting in small canals (local name “Chhara”). Depending of the
size of the mounds, this water may flow throughout the year.

While the main source of water in Barak river is the first type, that locally used
in Monipur region belongs to the second type.

02. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : The author has given some information to prove that
there is probability of severe earthquakes in this region. MY SUBMISSION : It is
an established fact that

(a) Monipur-Assam-Sylhet zone is highly earthquake prone,

(b) Large deposit of water at heights intensifies vibration during earth-quake and

(c) Breaking of dam during such hazard would cause havoc. It is obvious that when
such a site is found economically feasible and ecologically superior (in
comparison with other means of generation of electricity) for a hydro-electric
project, the engineers would go for the construction of a safe dam, even if it is
costly. In case of breakage of this dam the most affected country will be India
due to the following two major reasons :

(a) Failure of an extremely expensive project and

(b) Catastrophic flooding in the 150 kilometre-stretched land within India.

03. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : The author mentioned (quoted) “THE EXPERT APPRAISAL
COMMITTEE OF INDIA REVEALED THAT THE DESIGN OF THE DAM CONTAINS MANY ERRORS, AND
OMISSIONS, AND FALLS SHORT OF COMPLIANCE OF STANDARDS SET BY THE SCIENTIFIC AND
ACADEMIC COMMUNITY IN INDIA AND THE WORLD”.

MY SUBMISSION : The fact is, the design of Tipaimukh dam has not been finalized.
No one should wonder about such comments by various corners (like, expert
appraisal committee) during the preliminary stage of its preparation.

04. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “INDIA CONDUCTED DETAILED STUDIES, COMPLETED
THE FINAL DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT WITHOUT CONSULTATION WITH
BANGLADESH AS A DOWNSTREAM STAKEHOLDER”.

MY SUBMISSION : The statement like “COMPLETED THE FINAL DESIGN” is definitely

untrue.

05. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “INDIAN GOVERNMENT HAS NOT CLEARLY STATED THE
AMOUNTS OF WATER THAT WILL BE STOPPED OR DIVERTED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
TIPAIMUKH DAM”.

MY SUBMISSION : The author’s statement is not only untrue, but also misleading
because the Indian government has stated that it would not divert any water.

06. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “THE EROSION JUST DOWNSTREAM OF THE TIPAIMUKH
DAM WOULD BE EXCESSIVELY HIGH AND THIS EROSION WOULD CONTINUE AS LONG AS HUNDRED
KILOMETRES DOWNSTREAM OR MORE IN THE SURMA-KUSHIARA SYSTEM”.

MY SUBMISSION : This statement is wrong. As a matter of fact, after a dam is

constructed, the erosion in the down stream is reduced. Let me explain the reason
in brief. Soil erosion among other factors depends upon on the velocity of water.
The velocity depends among others on two principal factors : (a) Quantity of water
and (b) Inclination (also known as gradient) of flow-path. After the construction
of the dam, the flow of water will be less in the lower region during monsoon
months (because the dam would reserve additional water) and the same would
increase a little during lean period. In fact the flow would never attain the
highest level that it had before the construction of the dam.

As we mentioned, the flow also depends upon inclination of flow-path. A dam

constructed on a river considerably reduces this inclination. The dam in fact
utilizes the potential energy (in this case energy stored in water due to
gravitational force) of the water in the reservoir. After the water starts its
fresh journey from a considerably lower level, it loses degree of inclination.
Naturally it loses velocity and eroding capability.

07. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “THE … DEPOSITION …. WILL RAISE THE OVERALL
BED LEVEL OF THE RIVERS”. About the affects of silting she commented (01) “… AN
EXTREME CASE IT WOULD BLOCK THE MOUTH OF CERTAIN TRIBUTARIES, and (02) “WILL
INDUCE THE AVERAGE MONSOON FLOOD TO BECOME MODERATE TO SEVERE FLOOD IN THE SURMA-
KUSHIARA FLOODPLAIN”.

MY SUBMISSION : All these are against the natural rule of science. The fact is,
the water carried by the river after the dam would create less siltation because
(i) It would erode less due to the reduced velocity of water and (ii) The dam
would arrest the entire sedimentation particles coming from above.

08. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “ABOUT 71 PER CENT OF THE UPPER SURMA-KUSHIARA
BASIN AREA WOULD NO LONGER BE FLOODED. … THE KUSHIARA-BARDAL HAOR …. WOULD BECOME
COMPLETELY DRY. THE KAWARDIGHI HAOR …. LOSE AROUND 2,979 HA (26 PER CENT).”.

MY SUBMISSION : If it really happens like it, then the people of this area would
think them fortunate to become free from flood hazard and to get new land.

09. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “ … KUSHIARA WOULD CUT ITS CONNECTION WITH ITS
RIGHT BANK FLOODPLAIN …… AND THIS PART WILL BECOME ‘RESERVOIR RIVER’ RATHER THAN A
MOST VALUABLE ‘FLOODPLAIN RIVER” (prophesy).

MY SUBMISSION : If this prophesy is based on the author’s hypothesis of “increased

siltation”, then I have explained why it would not take place. However, those who
have knowledge of soil structure, inconsistency of river flow etc. of Bangladesh
can guess that the new situation might help in straightening the snaking and
winding courses of some rivers, thus generating a number of ox-bow lakes. This
should be taken as a positive contribution because the more land the rivers would
release the better it would be for the country.

10. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ARE DEPENDENT ON … BARAK
FOR AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES. THE DAM WOULD CAUSE THE SURMA AND KUSHIARA TO RUN DRY
FROM NOVEMBER TO MAY”.

MY SUBMISSION : This is a wrong statement. The fact is, release of submerged land
due to lower level of water in the rainy season and straightening of rivers may
release more land, such that more people may be engaged in agriculture. Before
making such a statement the author should have studied the basic principle on
which a dam for hydraulic project works. Let me explain briefly.

In hydro-electric project the available height of water in the reservoir above the
exit-hole is of extreme importance. For the running of the generators water has to
be constantly released from the reservoir. The quantity of power generated is
proportional to the height of water in the reservoir. With normal discharge let
the height of water during the rainy season is (all arbitrary numbers) say, 100
Feet and that in the lean period (i.e. winter) say, 50 Feet. For optimum
production and economic feasibility the designers would have to arrange generators
to run by a height in between these two figures (not necessarily the average). Let
us say this number is 60 Feet. In this case the generators would not be able to
run at full swing unless during winter nonths unless there is arrangement for
storing additional water in the reservoir. This indicates, what the Tipai-
authority would do for the smooth-running of their plant throughout the year is,
storing extra water during the peak period and releasing the same during lean
period. This is exactly what the experts employed by Khaleda Zia’s BNP government
opined, and to which any scientist or expert would have to agree.

N.B. STRAIGHTENING OF RIVER : It should be noted here that human interference is

essential for initial straightening of river. In the country with soft soil,
intermittent flow acts against straightening. Once the rivers are cut straight and
constant flow is ensured, river may continue to flow in straight line. Such a
program can release huge land on both sides.

11. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “SHORTAGE OF WATER IN THESE FEW MONTHS WOULD
DECREASE THE BOOST OF GROUNDWATER. OVER THE YEARS THIS WOULD LOWER THE GROUNDWATER
LEVEL, WHICH IN TURN WOULD AFFECT ALL DUGOUTS AND SHALLOW TUBE-WELLS. AGRICULTURE
DEPENDENT ON BOTH SURFACE AS WELL AS GROUNDWATER WOULD ALSO BE AFFECTED. ARABLE
LAND WILL DECREASE AND PRODUCTION OF CROPS WILL FALL, LEADING TO AN INCREASE IN
POVERTY”.

MY SUBMISSION : After we know the report of the expert committee formed by BNP
government during FAP (Flood Action Plan) project, we have to ignore her
prophesies.

12. DR. NARGIS BANU IN HER PARAGRAPH ON “BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY” SAYS : (quoted)
“CONSTRUCTION OF A HIGH DAM WILL OBSTRUCT THE MIGRATORY PATH OF FISH AND OTHER
AQUATIC FAUNA… (AND SILT, “MICRONUTRIENTS”)”.

MY SUBMISSION : This comment on FISH AND OTHER AQUATIC FAUNA is correct, the claim
of preventing of “MICRONUTRIENTS” however, is not. What is true is, as soon as the
flowing mountain-river water would come to a stand-still at the reservoir, there
will be considerable changes in the micro-nutrients, fish and other aquatic
animals. The dam would not arrest the micronutrients, even though it would not be
possible for larger fish to escape. However, nowadays it is made possible by using
fish-pass.

13. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) “ABOVE IMPACTS WOULD DESTROY THE NATURAL
INTEGRITY OF THE ECOSYSTEM, LOSING RIVERINE HABITAT AND SPECIES, AND A LACK OF
ENRICHMENT OF LAND WITH THE NUTRIENT-FULL SILT. THIS WOULD LEAD TO THE ULTIMATE
DECLINE IN THE NATURAL PRODUCTIVITY OF THE TWO MOST ABUNDANT RESOURCES OF
BANGLADESH – LAND AND WATER”.

MY SUBMISSION : From what I have explained above, the above statement is wrong.
However, even though we do not know what type of changes would take place in the
micro-nutrients, from the experience of Kaptai dam we may guess, it would not be
anything hazardous.
14. DR. NARGIS BANU IN HER PARAGRAPH “CLIMATE CHANGE” DAYS (quoted) : “THE
TIPAIMUKH DAM WILL PERMANENTLY SUBMERGE AN AREA OF 275.50 SQUARE KILOMETRES IN
INDIA”.

MY SUBMISSION : This one is India’s problem and they would consider it in

comparison with their gain from the project.

15. OTHERS : The author’s claim on “DAM BREAK AND HUMAN CATASTROPHES” has been
answered earlier. In her paragraph on “WATER QUALITY” she said : (quoted) “THE
EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION DOWNSTREAM OF THE TIPAIMUKH DAM WOULD BE EXCESSIVELY
HIGH AND WOULD CONTINUE AS LONG AS OVER 600 KILOMETRES DOWNSTREAM IN BANGLADESH.
THIS EXCESSIVE EROSION DOWNSTREAM OF THE DAM WOULD INCREASE THE OVERALL SILTATION
AND WATER TURBIDITY IN THE SURMA-KUSHIARA SYSTEM. THESE WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE
WATER QUALITY OF THE ENTIRE SURMA-KUSHIARA-MEGHNA SYSTEM IN BANGLADESH”. I have
already mentioned why the author’s conceptions of increased siltation and erosion
are wrong.

She also said, “THE DAM WILL HAVE WARMING IMPACT DUE TO METHANE DEGASSING FROM THE
RESERVOIR”. Those who are aware of the quantity of degassing from (i) Huge marshy
lands throughout the world, (ii) Water-dipped rice fields and domestic cattle in
Asia and Africa, (iii) Rotten leaves and algae deposited in the oceans would just
laugh to hear about the “additional methane gas generated in 275 Square Kilometre
area”. I failed to understand the comment “CARBON EMISSIONS OF LARGE DAM
CONSTRUCTION”.

The author has mentioned some information in the paragraph “VIOLATION OF LAWS AND
AGREEMENT” about which I have nothing to say.

ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES OF DAM FOR BANGLADESH : DISADVANTAGES : (i) Due to the
construction of the dam Bangladesh would lose silt, sand and fish coming through
Barak river. By special arrangement and design, however, the movement of fish can
be retained.

ADVANTAGES :

(i) Due to its construction it will be possible to control flood due to Barak
river and its tributaries in Sylhet region.

(ii) Considerable portion of land can be saved from inundation during the rainy
season.

(iii) During winter irrigation may be easier due to higher level of water.

(iv) There will be less silting in the tributaries of Barak river. (iv) There will
be less erosion in these rivers.

CONCLUSION : I am least worried about the construction of Tipaimukh dam. It is a

project by the Indian government, who would get cheap electricity from it. Due to
its construction Bangladesh would lose silt, sand and fish coming through Barak
river. With due cooperation of the authorities however, Bangladesh (i) can achieve
control over flood by ensuring less flow of water during monsoon, (ii) may have
easy irrigation in the winter due to higher level of water etc. This plain truth
has been expressed by the expert committee employed by the BNP government long
ago. When motivated politicians (like those from the opposition) shout against
this project with all sorts of unscientific, imaginary, biased and non-intelligent
remarks, I understand the reason. And I endeavour to expose the secret reason,
where possible. But when men of science express non-intelligent remarks, I fail to
understand the reason and feel the need for protest.
I however, did not protest against Mr. Meer Hosain’s writings. When he expressed
his response to one of my writing I just replied. In his response he requested me
to acquire knowledge on certain issues from one of his writing. I went through
that and was shocked to know that he used the “answers” from computer-crazy school
boys. Had I known it earlier, I definitely would not have wasted my time. In
course of reading that I came across the article of Dr Nargis A Banu, an
environmental scientist working with Sydney Water Corporation, Australia. I became
specially interested because it was Posted by Bangladesh expatriate council and
earlier presented in a seminar at the Australian National University.

I got interested in it due to my experiences of similar presentations abroad

including Australia. But after reading it, I came confused to differentiate
between a scientific paper and an essay written by the column writer. I know how a
column writer writes his essay. He picks up a running or important issue, decides
in which way he wants to motivate his readers inclusive of common people,
bureaucrats and political leaders and then starts writing. In doing so he picks up
those data, information and comments that would help him to reach the targeted
destination and at the same time avoids all those might go against. He cares least
for honesty and most for fulfilling his objective. Such an endeavour is completely
quite different from a scientific paper to be presented in international
seminars/conferences. After such a paper is presented it comes in the discussion
of the community of wise-people. And when published in the website (as happened
this time due to the courtesy of the Bangladesh expatriate council) it comes
within the domain of discussion of the common people. Instantly the people know
what type of papers are presented in such seminars.

As I mentioned, scientific papers are different from the column writer’s essays.
Such papers are revelations of facts. Here the scientist does not keep any
preconceived idea like “I will prove it, or disprove that”. The approach of the
scientist will be, “I believe this is the truth. So I shall try to prove it with
the knowledge and revelations so far made by science. In case I do not get defence
from these sources, it will be my hypothesis”.

A scientists’ deliberations or course of thought will be different even from that

of a university teacher. The teacher of a university is supposed to teach
generalized principles, applicable in general throughout the world. In doing so,
most of the time he needs to simplify things. The teacher does not have the time
or scope to show how those principles apply in various conditions. The duty of the
researcher/scientist is to make threadbare analysis of the situation in which
those principles would apply and observe how the results differ from the
preconceived ones and why. Only such findings are expected to be presented in
scientific papers for international seminars. From Dr Nargis A Banu’s paper it
seemed to me as if she first made up her mind to show that “Tipaimukh dam would
cause serious damage for Bangladesh” (alike what the column writers do). And then
she started presenting information and analysis in favour of her conviction, many
of which were self contradictory. I find weakness in her analysis also. For
example, when someone visits the site of a dam, he usually finds water falling
down from a great height, resulting in turbulence in muddy water below and then,
water to rush away. That might initiate the general concept of “erosion and
sedimentation” in the river. I have endeavoured to show in details, (i) why the
river starting after a dam loses flow of water, (ii) why the water loses velocity
and (iii) why this water carries less silt etc.

Once again I beg to state that I have little interest regarding the construction
of Tipaimukh. I know many important and essential projects are not taken up
because “those do not fulfil the personal interests of the dishonest group among
the concerned authorities”. On the other hand, a project that in no way is
justified in the overall condition of the country is taken, because it satisfies
the above condition. “Underground rail line in Dhaka city” is one such project.
Probably this project is going to be materialized because it is capable of
ensuring financial benefit for some.

For the above reason, when I write about Tipaimukh, I only endeavour to show the
science-based truth to the best of my knowledge and experience. I believe, the
scientists and experts should continue in their predestined track, which is so
pure and true, and which is so different from those of the politicians and column
writers. Seeing “column writers’ essays” as scientific papers is really painful.
Lastly I express my sorrow to those who may be hurt due to my writing.