Gulpur Hydropower Project. Assessment of Cumulative Impacts and Management. February, Vaqar Zakaria

Transcription

1 Gulpur Hydropower Project Assessment of Cumulative Impacts and Management February, 2016 Vaqar Zakaria

2 The Project

3 2/26/2016

4

5 2/26/2016

6

7

8

9

10 Diversion Tunnels Powerhouse Intake Cofferdam Weir and Spillway Stilling Basin Capacity: 102 MW RoR

11

12 Aquatic Study Area

13 The VECs Fish Fauna Sediment Load of the River Surface Water Quantity Flow Landscape

14 Fish Baseline Indicator Species Tor putitora Labeo dyocheilus Schizothorax plagiostomus Botia rostrata Clupisoma garua Glyptothorax kashmirensis

15

16

17

18

19

20

21 Ecological Zones in the Basin

22 The ESIA and CIA Challenge AJK Wildlife legislation requires betterment of the park to approve actions and activities normally prohibited in a national park. ADB and IFC as lenders require net gain in biodiversity in Critical Habitat, in this case triggered by national park, Endangered Mahaseer, and Critically Endangered Kashmir Catfish.

23 Approach for Cumulative Impact Assessment Cumulative Impact Assessment in the Study Area was carried out in two phases: Impact of the project and other activities on VECs at basin wide level was first studied using a holistic environmental flow model Impact of planned and foreseeable hydropower projects on the VECs in the basin was then examined in light of the first study

24 Impact of the Project at Basin Level

25 The DRIFT approach: Integrating Ecological, Social and Economic Knowledge Key features: approach; hydrology; indicators; DSS DRIFT = Downstream Response to Imposed Flow Transformation

26 DRIFT Downstream Response to Imposed Flow Transformations DRIFT is a tool for predicting the ecological and social consequences of flow/inundation changes DRIFT does not provide a recommended minimum flow, Eflow or Reserve: scenario-based not prescriptive. DRIFT incorporates a custom-built Decision Support System that holds all the relevant data, understanding and local wisdom about the river provided by the team of river and social specialists DRIFT has developed through a series of national and international applications: e.g. Lesotho, Mekong, Zambezi, Okavango, Kunene, Nile, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Peru, Pakistan

27 Study Team Name Organisation Position on team Mr Vaqar Zakaria Hagler Bailly Pakistan Project Director Dr Cate Brown Southern Waters EF Task Leader Dr Alison Joubert Southern Waters DRIFT DSS Dr Mehr Ali Shah NESPAK Hydrology Dr Andrew Birkhead Streamflow Solutions Hydraulic and scenario modeling Dr Mohammed Rafique Sub Hagler Bailly Pakistan Fish ecology Mr Mark Rountree Fluvius Consultants Geomorphology Bilal Khan Hagler Bailly Pakistan Hydrology and environmental flow management plan Ms Fareeha Irfan Ovais Sub Hagler Bailly Pakistan Manager Mishkatullah Sub Hagler Bailly Pakistan Macroinvertebrates Mr Hussain Ali Hagler Bailly Pakistan Field work and data collation Dr Jackie King Water Matters Quality control

28

29 Flows at EF Site 2 with no Dam in Place

30 EFlow Sites

31 Fish and Wildlife Indicators Pakistani labeo Mahaseer Fish Wildlife Twin-banded loach Kashmir catfish Garua bachwaa Snow trout Fish-eating wildlife (Otter, common leopard) Wildlife that drink from the main river (Barking deer) Riverine insectivores (White-capped redstart)

32 Protection Scenarios Business as usual (BAU) = Historic protection level, limited number of guards and logistic support, and superficial supervision. Fish populations decline to 10% of present day in 50 years Protection Level 1 (Pro 1 Moderate Protection) = Maintain 2013 protection levels assuming limited and sporadic NGO support; Fish populations remain at present day Protection Level 2 (Pro 2 Enhanced Protection) = Reduce 2013 levels of pressures by 50%, fish populations increase by about 50% over 50 years A Biodiversity Action Plan will be required for implementation of Enhanced Protection Scenario as it assumes a basin level protection.

33 Barrier to Fish Movement Upstream migration will be halted by the weir, but there will be some downstream movement through the spills. The bulk of the tributaries of the Poonch River that are used for breeding by Pakistani Labeo, Mahaseer are located upstream of Gulpur HPP. Fish restricted to the lower part of the Poonch River will breed in the main river to some extent Pakistani Labeo, Snow Trout and Mahaseer will most likely colonsie the reservoir, which may lead to a slight increase in their populations at EFlow Site 1. Bulk of the favoured breeding sites for Garua are located downstream of the Gulpur weir. Garua bachwaa is also unlikely to colonize the reservoir. Thus, it is expected that the population upstream of the dam will be compromised by the weir.

34

35 Response curve for fish that are resident in the river Moving toward an ecosystem model Duration of flood season (days) Once set up, the Decision Support System can produce any number of scenarios quite quickly

36

37 Peaking Operation Discarded A peaking operation can be detrimental to the ecology downstream of the dam. Low flows normally occur in the section of the river starting just below the dam, to the point where water is added back into the river at the outlet of the of the power house. With a peaking operation low flows are extended downstream of the power house as well during the period the power house is shut down to accumulate water in the reservoir upstream. The river ecology which is adapted to normal daily and seasonal variations in flows is severely impacted by the daily long dry spells. A peaking operation will result in deterioration starting from a Mid Category C river (Moderately Modified from Reference Condition) to a Mid-Category E river (Seriously Modified) under which the loss of ecosystem functions is extensive.

38 Conclusions: Without Dam in Place 52 Years Later With poor protection or Business as Usual (BAU) case, the ecosystem integrity of the river which is presently mid-category C will deteriorate to a low Category D With protection at current levels (Pro1), the river will still deteriorate to a mid-category D. A good level of protection (Pro2) will lead to an improvement of about 0.5 in ecological integrity of the river resulting in low Category B river.

39 Impacts Just Downstream of Dam Low Flow Zone EFlow Site 2 NDPro1: No dam in place; Protection Level 1 NDBAU: No dam in place; Protection Level BAU NDPro2: No dam in place; Protection Level 2 G4BAU A 4 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection level BAU. G4Pro2 A 4 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection Level 2. G8BAU An 8.0 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection level BAU. G8Pro2 An 8.0 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection Level 2. 16BAU A 16 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection level BAU. G16Pro2 A 16 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection Level 2.

40 Impacts Downstream of Tail Race Eflow Site 3 NDPro1: No dam in place; Protection Level 1 NDBAU: No dam in place; Protection Level BAU NDPro2: No dam in place; Protection Level 2 G4BAU: A 4 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection level BAU. G4Pro2: A 4 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection Level 2. G8BAU: An 8.0 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection level BAU. G8Pro2: An 8.0 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection Level 2. 16BAU: A 16 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection level BAU. G16Pro2: A 16 m3s-1 minimum release. Protection Level 2.

41 Tradeoffs: Economic Benefits vs Survival of Fish Populations

42 Environmental Flow and Eflow Management Plan Given the limited length of the low flow section for the Project (0.7 km) and commitment to a non peaking operation, there is limited advantage gained by increasing Eflow at the expense of power generation. After consultation with the stakeholders the EPA approved a minimum release of 4 cumec at dam subject to implementation of a BAP to achieve Enhanced Protection. An Eflow management plan was prepared to specify operating rules and monitoring mechanisms

43 Impact of Planned Projects in the Basin

44 The Concept of Development Space Acceptable change Unacceptable change Development space Development space Flow modification Ecosystem integrity Present day level of development Agreed trade-off point and its River Condition Level of basin wide waterresource development

45 How Scenarios help define the Development Space Acceptable change Development space Development space Unacceptable change???????? Flow modification Ecosystem integrity Present day level of development Level of basin development Agreed trade off point and its River Condition

46 Planned Hydropower Projects

47

48 From IFC Conclusions

49 Cumulative Impact on Ecological Integrity of Poonch River B = blue, B/C and C = green, C/D = white, D = orange, No river remaining = red Poonch River upstream of LoC River Reach 2013 Sequential implementation of: Gulpur HPP Parnai HPP Sehra HPP Kotli HPP Rajdhani HPP Parnai weir to LoC B B C/D C/D C/D C/D Poonch River LoC 5 km B/C B/C C/D D D D downstream of LoC 10 B/C B/C C No river remaining No river remaining No river remaining 15 B/C B/C C D D D 20 B/C B/C C D D D 25 B/C B/C C D D D 30 B/C B/C C C No river remaining No river remaining 35 B/C B/C C C D D 40 B/C B/C C C D D 45 B/C No river remaining No river remaining No river remaining No river remaining No river remaining 50 B/C No river remaining No river remaining No river remaining No river remaining No river remaining 55 B/C D D D D No river remaining 60 B/C B/C B/C C C/D No river remaining 65 B/C B/C B/C C C/D No river remaining 70 B/C B/C B/C C C/D No river remaining 75 B/C B/C B/C C C/D D 80 B/C B/C B/C C C/D D 85 B/C B/C B/C C C/D D 90 B/C B/C B/C C C/D D Mendhar Nullah B B D D D D

50 Decision of the EPA and Wildlife Department Irrespective of the environmental design of the individual projects, in combination the projects planned in AJK and IAK will have a detrimental and irreversible impact on the ecology of Poonch River. The Wildlife Department and the EPA approved the project with the condition that all future projects will submit EIAs and will have to prove net gain in biodiversity in the national park.

51 Biodiversity Action Plan Given the state of protection in the Poonch River, there will not be much of environmental resource left to protect if the present trends continue. The BAP will address basin level protection of wildlife which is in jurisdiction of AJK Fisheries and Wildlife Department. Implementation of the BAP therefore requires commitment from the government. Additional resources for the BAP will be provided by the Project. The government and Project owner signed an agreement to implement the BAP

52 Strategy for the BAP Putting in place a protection system for Poonch River Mahaseer National Park partly financed by the Project and implemented by an Independent Organization Active support from the AJKFWD by making available existing staff for protection and assistance in coordination with other government line departments such as police and district administration Commitment by AJKFWD to provide legal authority to the staff of the Independent Organization for exercising powers under wildlife legislation Oversight and monitoring by the Wildlife Management Board of AJK Revamping and commissioning of a Mahaseer fish hatchery for stocking of fish downstream of the powerhouse Monitoring by an Independent Third Party on a long term basis

53 Institutional Arrangement for Implementation of the BAP

54

55 Sustainable Mining Plan Sediment flow from the catchment of the Gulpur dam is estimated at 7 million m 3. Sediment being extracted is a small fraction of the sediment flow. A special study was conducted to develop an understanding of change in sediment deposition patterns following dam construction, and to devise a strategy for mining that minimizes impact on the river habitat. A Sediment Mining Plan will be prepared and implemented. The plan will ensure that a balance is achieved between meeting community needs for sand and gravel and integrity of aquatic habitat in River Poonch such that the habitat is not excessively damaged due to uncontrolled mining activities on the river bed. 55

56 M&E Plan A comprehensive monitoring and evaluation plan was prepared and monitoring has been initiated. The plan covers: Pressure Indicators: Incidences of illegal fishing, extent and location of sand mining, population in basin, land use patterns State Indicators: Hydrology, water quality, aquatic ecology, terrestrial ecology Response Indicators: Policies, institutional capacity, awareness, conservation financing