Whenever there are floods, we blame the government for not building enough dams and hear the same story of how dams could have prevented the destruction and helped us store water for the future. If dams could save countries from floods on their own, India, with a large number of dams, would not have suffered from the devastation of floods, that too repeatedly.
Furthermore, the current flow of the floodwater is away from the proposed dam sites. Thus, the logic seems flawed. Dams can actually increase the intensity of floods. If there are a few or no dams, unhindered medium-level floodwater flows downstream to the sea, which is a vital phenomenon for delta stability and for keeping sea intrusion in check. Besides, the floodwater spreads to a wider area and loses its force.
In contrast, accumulated floodwater in the dams, when released, has a devastating impact. The high outflow of water from Indian dams is a recent case in point. If India had constructed no or fewer dams, the floodwater would have flowed down slowly without causing massive damage in both Pakistan and India.
As for water storage, experts believe that instead of dams, 500MAF of water beneath the Indus sand should be utilised. Called as geohydrological miracle, this source is spread over 3,500km. It can be tapped through pipeline with a fraction of the cost and time compared to the dams, and it can be used for drinking, agricultural and industrial purposes.
Tarbela, Pakistan’s largest dam, has a water storage capacity of around 600MAF which has a time limit of 30 days. The groundwater, on the other hand, can last for years. Besides, dams need frequent desliting and other maintenance costs, whereas Indus groundwater is a natural phenomenon that would get automatically recharged from river flow. The government should explore this option. If found feasible, the government would be able to finally bury the dam controversy once and for all.
GULSHER PANHWER
JOHI
