GANGA ACTION PLAN IN INDIA AN OVERVIEW PRESENTATION BY BRIJESH SIKKA, DIRECTOR MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS, GOVT. OF INDIA SABESP INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR AT SAO PAULO, BRAZIL 7 TH TO 8 TH NOVEMBER, 2006
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION Background of the project Sources of pollution, present status of water quality of rivers in India and River Action Plan Model National River Conservation Plan Ganga Action Plan Appropriate technologies for sewage treatment Lessons learnt & strategies/initiatives adopted
INDIA AT A GLANCE Area 3.28 million sq. km. (2% of world s total ) Population(2001) 1027 million(16% of world s total) (2005) 1060 million Coordinates 8 0 4 and 37 0 6 North latitudes 68 0 7 and 97 0 25 East longitudes Climate Tropical (Tropic of Cancer divides India two halves) Land Frontier 15,200 km. Coastline 7,500 km. No.of States/UTs 28 States and 7 Union Territories, including the National Capital Region of Delhi.
BACKGROUND Rivers in India are life lines of the people closely linked with our culture and tradition closely bound with the health and well being of large population Ganga at Hardwar during Kumbh Restoring the health of rivers, which have become polluted, is very important (Cleaning of major rivers is a monitorable target in 10 th Five Year Plan)
Total riverine length under different levels of pollution in India Severely polluted Moderatly polluted Relatively clean Severely polluted 15% Moderatly polluted 19% Relatively clean 66%
WATER QUALITY STATUS Analysis of 11 years data with respect to BOD values as indicator of organic pollution S. No Level of Pollution Pollution Criteria Riverine length, Km. Riverine length, percentage 01. Severely polluted BOD > 6 mg/l 6086 15 02. Moderately polluted 03. Relatively clean BOD 3-63 6 mg/l 8691 19 BOD < 3 mg/l 30266 66
River Basin-wise riverine length(in kms.) under different levels of pollution Bio-Chemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) River Basin >6 mg/l 3-6 mg/l <3 mg/l Total Indus 70 132 3917 4119 Ganga 1760 3612 7318 12690 Bramaputra 0 0 5013 5013 Narmada 120 360 902 1382 Mahanadi 210 370 1393 1973 Godavari 960 856 2676 4492 Krishna 840 956 1988 3784 Cauvery 70 320 928 1318 Other river basins 2056 2085 6131 10272 Total 6086 8691 30266 45043
MAIN SOURCES OF POLLUTION MUNICIPAL SEWAGE 20% 80% RUNOFF FROM SOLID & MEDICAL WASTES & AGRICULTRAL FIELDS INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION POINT SOURCES DISPOSAL OF DEAD BODIES & ANIMAL CARCASSES NON POINT SOURCES OPEN DEFECATION & CATTLE WALLOWING
NON-POINT SOURCES OF POLLUTION Solid waste disposal Burning Ghat Disposal of dead body Animal bathing Pollution from squatter settlements
POLLUTANT LOADS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES IN GANGA BASIN Non-point (household in rural areas) 2.1% Non-point (livestock) 0.5% Non-point (agricultural runoff) 3.2% Point (industry) 16.0% Point (municipal sewage from urban areas) 78.2% Pollution contribution from in-river activities such as cattle wallowing, washing of clothes, throwing of half-burnt/unburnt bodies and flowers into the river is very minor but difficult to estimate. However, these need to be controlled in order to maintain the aesthetics & hygienic condition of the river.
CLASSIFICATION OF WATER QUALITY OF INDIAN RIVERS A.DRINKING WATER SOURCE WITHOUT CONVENTIONAL TREATMENT BUT AFTER DISINFECTION B.OUTDOOR BATHING C.DRINKING WATER SOURCE WITH CONVENTIONAL TREATMENT FOLLOWED BY DISINFECTION D. PROPOGATION OF WILD LIFE E. IRRIGATION, INDUSTRIAL COOLING AND WATER DISPOSAL
BATHING QUALITY (B CLASS) STANDARD FOR INDIAN RIVERS PARAMETERS BOD DO COLIFORM (FAECAL) PERMISSIBLE LIMIT 3 mg/l (MAXIMUM) 5 mg/l (MINIMUM) 500 (DESIRABLE) 2500 (MAX. PERMISSIBLE) MPN 100 ml BOD - BIO DO - DISSOLVED OXYGEN MPN - MOST PROBABLE NUMBER BIO-CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
NATIONAL RIVER CONSERVATION PLAN (NRCP) Pollution abatement works in major rivers in the country commenced with the launching of Ganga Action Plan (GAP) Phase-I I in 1985 GAP-I I was extended as GAP-II from 1993 onwards to cover Gomti, Yamuna and Damodar,, three main tributaries of Ganga The programme was further broad based in 1995 to include other major rivers and re-named as National River Conservation Plan (NRCP) Maha Kumbh at Allahabad
NATIONAL RIVER CONSERVATION PLAN A National River Conservation Authority (NRCA) chaired by the Hon ble Prime Minister of India is in place to provide the policy framework and oversee implementation of NRCP Chief Ministers of the concerned States, Union Ministers and various experts are its members The National River Conservation Directorate (NRCD) coordinates implementation of pollution abatement schemes under the NRCP NRCP presently covers 160 towns along 34 stretches of polluted rivers in 20 States Present approved cost of NRCP is Rs. 4735 crore ( around US $ 1 billion)
NATIONAL RIVER CONSERVATION PLAN FUNDING PATTERN Projects approved before March, 2001 are 100% funded by the Central Government with land cost to be borne by the concerned State Government Projects approved after March, 2001 are being funded on 70:30 cost sharing basis between Centre and the State Out of the State share of 30%, local bodies to contribute 10% of o f the cost Operation and maintenance (O&M) of assets created is the full responsibility of the State Government/local body
MONITORING MECHANISM NRCA (HON BLE PRIME MINISTER) IN STATES CHIEF SECRETARY STATE NODAL DEPT. PROJECT MONITORING CELL UNDER DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER MINISTRY OF ENV. & FORESTS STANDING COMMITTEE (MEF) STEERING COMMITTEE (SECY. ENV & FORESTS) NRCD SECRETARIAT MONITORING COMMITTEE (MEMBER, PLANNING COMMISSION) PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
RIVER ACTION PLAN MODEL T O W N INDUSTRY FOR IRRIGATION STP PUMPING TREATED STATION EFFLUENT NALLAS CREMATORIA RFD SEWER LCS RFD ETP R I V E R
NATIONAL RIVER CONSERVATION PLAN Major type of works covered under NRCP and their capital cost in percentage terms vis-à-vis the total project cost: Interception & diversion of sewage 52% Sewage treatment plants 37% Low cost sanitation 7% Crematoria 0.6% Ghat/river front development 1.2% Public awareness & participation 0.3% 78 mld UASB STP at Agra The component of Institutional strengthening and capacity building of local bodies is now also being taken up for ensuring greater sustainability of the sanctioned projects
RIVER GANGA
GANGA BASIN MAP
GANGA BASIN River Ganga originates from Himalayas and traverses approximately 2500 kms.. before discharging into Bay of Bengal. Catchment area of Ganga Basin is about 840,000 km 2 (25% of India s landmass) Nearly 400 million people (40% of the country population) live in the Basin Ganga is regarded as a sacred river and extensively used for bathing, apart from serving as source of water supply and irrigation
GANGA ACTION PLAN (GAP) PHASE-I The Ganga Action Plan Phase-I I (GAP-I) was launched in 1985 GAP-I I covered 25 Class-I I towns (having population above 100,000) in 3 states GAP-I I has been completed at a cost of Rs. 452 crore (US $ 100 million) Sewage treatment plants having capacity of 865 mld have been created
GANGA ACTION PLAN PHASE-II Under GAP-I, 865 mld i.e. only 65% of the original pollution load of 1340 mld could be tackled. This percentage as per the present pollution load of 2900 mld has been reduced to around 30% Due to financial constraints, the balance pollution load is being tackled in phases under the 2 nd nd phase of GAP Pollution abatement works in 59 towns in 5 States costing Rs.. 653 Crore (around US $ 150 million) are presently under implementation under GAP Phase-II Additional sewage treatment capacity of 780 mld is envisaged under GAP Phase-II STP at Kolkata
IMPROVEMENT IN WATER QUALITY OF GANGA Despite rapid increase in population, urbanization & industrial growth, the water quality of Ganga has shown discernible improvement over the pre-gap period Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand(Summer Average) 16 14 15,5 1986 2005 BOD(mg/l) 12 10 8 6 5,1 8,6 4.5 5,4 10,6 4 2 0 1987 3,1 2.3 2,2 2,2 KANNAUJ KANPUR ALLAHABAD VARANASI PATNA TOWNS STANDARD ( 3 mg/l or less)
IMPROVEMENT IN WATER QUALITY OF GANGA Dissolved Oxygen (Summer Average) DO(mg/l) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 7.6 6,5 6,7 1987 4,7 6,6 8,4 5,9 8.3 1986 2005 8,1 8.0 KANNAUJ KANPUR ALLAHABAD VARANASI PATNA TOWNS STANDARD ( 5 mg/l or more)
EVALUATION OF GAP PHASE-I Mid-term Evaluation of GAP-I I carried out by experts from universities and R&D institutions in 1995 concluded that Reduction of discharge of organic matter, a necessary first step in restoring the water quality has been achieved to a fair level GAP as conceived and implemented is an appropriate programme for application to other river basins also A Cost Benefit Analysis of GAP-I I carried out by Harvard Institute of International Development from 1996-98 98 concluded that River cleanup programmes involve a long time period and large resources for effective action In terms of both the time taken and cost involved, GAP compares favourably with those of other major rivers of the world like Thames, Rhine and Danube
PRESENT FOCUS OF GANGA ACTION PLAN PHASE-II Need for prioritization of works due to financial constraints Pollution level of river Ganga and its tributaries in the middle e stretch is comparatively higher due to: - low river flow resulting in lower dilution effect - higher pollutant contribution from towns located in this densely populated zone Therefore, 4 large, important and rapidly expanding towns (2-3% per annum population growth rate) in the critical middle stretch of the river, which are major sources of pollution, are the main focus for taking up pollution abatement works under GAP-II in future
PRESENT FOCUS OF GANGA ACTION PLAN PHASE-II Project proposals for the towns of Kanpur,, Allahabad and Varanasi on main river Ganga and Lucknow on river Gomti prepared under the JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) aided Development Study on Water Quality Management Plan for Ganga river These project proposals had been posed to JBIC (Japan Bank for International Cooperation) for assistance Project proposal for Varanasi has already been approved by JBIC for funding Project proposals for the other three towns are under consideration ion of JBIC for funding in future as a part of their ODA Rolling Plan package
GANGA ACTION PLAN PROJECT AT VARANASI Project cost estimated at around Rs.. 500 crore (US $ 110 million) Assistance being received from JBIC for 85% of the project cost. Project consists of the following components: Sewerage system (laying of new as well as rehabilitating the existing sewerage system) 200 mld sewage treatment plant Community toilet complexes in slum areas Construction of dhobi/washermen ghats and bathing ghats Public awareness & participation programme Institutional development programme for the local body Ghat at Varanasi
SEWAGE GENERATION & TREATMENT CAPACITY IN INDIA Total population of India (2001) - 1027 million Population in urban areas - 285 million Class I Cities (population > 100,000) - 414 Class II Cities (population 50,000-100,000) - 489 Total sewage generation (2001) - 29129 mld Installed STP capacity - 6190 mld (21.3 %) Treatment capacity gap - 22939 mld (78.7%) Planned treatment capacity - 1742.6 mld (6.0%)
STANDARDS FOR TREATED SEWAGE UNDER NRCP FOR DISCHARGE BOD (mg/l) T S S (mg/l) INTO WATER BODY 30 50 ON LAND 100 200 FAECAL (MPN/100 ml) COLIFORMS 1000 10000 (Desirable) (Maximum)
SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE SEWAGE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY Large number of STPs constructed under GAP Phase-I I were based on activated sludge process (ASP) and trickling filter technology Problems encountered in their proper O&M due to Large power requirement High O&M cost Frequent power breakdowns Financial constraints of the maintaining agency/local body Non-availability of adequate skilled manpower to run these STPs This led to the need for selection of appropriate sewage treatment technologies more suited to local conditions under NRCP
SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE SEWAGE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING CHOICE OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY Wastewater flow and characteristics Degree of treatment required Availability, cost and requirement of land Power requirement for the technology Ability of a technology to withstand power failures Capital cost Ease in maintenance, availability of skilled staff Extent of sludge production and its disposal requirements (sludge disposal is often difficult and may involve substantial part of the STP cost)
SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE SEWAGE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY Treatment technologies considered Conventional Activated Sludge Process (ASP) Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) + Polishing Pond (+aeration?) Fluidized Aerobic Bio-Reactor (FAB)/Moving Bed Bio-Reactor (MMBR) Aerated Lagoon Waste Stabilization Pond (WSP) Karnal Technology/ Sewage fed agro-forestry Life cycle cost comparison of the various treatment options O & M aspects Cost (Construction and O&M) Land Requirement Resource recovery and reuse (gas, sludge and treated water)
UPFLOW ANAEROBIC SLUDGE BLANKET (UASB) PROCESS Process based on upward flow of wastewater through a sludge layer r of micro-organisms. organisms. Organic matter digested by micro-organisms organisms in the digestion compartment. Mixture of bio-gas, sludge and water enter a three phase separator. Bio-gas is separated in a gas collector, sludge particles settle in the settling chamber and a flow back to the digestion compartment, while the treated effluent is discharged via an overflow weir. Advantages Low energy requirement / minimal electro mechanical devices Lower HRT and hence more compact installation Lower production of stabilized excess sludge Production and recovery of bio-gas (with higher calorific value), which can be used as an energy source System is resilient to peak loading and power cuts Relatively simple routine O&M
UPFLOW ANAEROBIC SLUDGE BLANKET (UASB) PROCESS Disadvantages Adequate post treatment (polishing pond or aerated lagoon) of UASB effluent is required to meet the discharge standards Anaerobic bacteria (particularly methanogens) are susceptible to inhibition by a large number of toxic compounds Start-up of the process is relatively slow if seed sludge is not available Fecal coliform removal in the process is poor Due to anaerobic activity the structures of the STP are likely to corrode faster. Anti-corrosive treatment is required for various parts of the STP Yamuna Nagar STP
FLUIDIZED AEROBIC BIO-REACTOR (FAB) A submerged attached growth aerobic process having fluidized bed of plastic media as a base for bio-film in deep reactors Bacterial reaction carried out in two stages for maximizing the BOD removal efficiency Advantages Very low space requirement (nearly 1/5 th to 1/8 th of ASP process). Thus very compact installation Low temperature sustaining capability Does not require sludge recycling Sludge handling is easy as it is fully digested and is lower than other aerobic technologies Very high coliform removal. A chlorine dose of around 3 mg/l is sufficient to meet the standards Existing treatment facilities can be upgraded by conversion of existing tanks to FAB reactors with small modifications 42 mld STP at Lucknow
WASTE STABILIZATION PONDS Process based on solar energy and, therefore, appropriate for Indian climatic conditions Treatment system comprises of three types of ponds in series (anaerobic pond 1 day HRT, facultative pond 5 days HRT and maturation pond 3 to 4 days HRT) Anaerobic and facultative ponds enable BOD reduction while maturation ponds enable pathogen removal Multiple number of facultative and maturation ponds can be provided to suit the treated effluent quality, including fecal coliform standards The system has very low O&M costs Requires minimal trained manpower The system is extremely robust and can withstand hydraulic and organic shock loads Requires large land area (1.0 2.0 Ha./mld depending upon temperature and sewage characteristics)
KARNAL TECHNOLOGY (Sewage fed Agro-forestry) Methodology consists of growing trees on ridges (1 m wide, 50 cm high) and disposing untreated sewage in furrows or shallow trenches (2 m wide) The total discharge of untreated sewage is regulated (5-15 cm in depth) so that it is consumed within 12 18 hours and there is no standing water left in the trenches Each tree acts as a bio- pump, absorbing water and nutrients from the sewage and releasing water into the environment through transpiration Amount of untreated sewage to be applied depends upon the age & type of plants, climatic conditions, soil texture and the quality of sewage
KARNAL TECHNOLOGY (Sewage fed Agro-forestry) Application of sewage should be controlled in order to ensure that water is either evaporated or consumed within 12 18 hours and there is no water stagnation. This will lower production of foul smell, eliminate mosquito breeding and ensure that wastewater does not percolate down to contaminate groundwater Species of trees used are Eaucalyptus, Poplar and Leucaena Trees are fully grown within 7-8 yrs and are used as fuel-wood, timber or pulp, leading to revenue generation Land requirement is very high (1.5 2.0 ha./mld)
TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR DISINFECTION OF TREATED SEWAGE Fecal coliform standards for treated effluent of STPs being constructed under NRCP introduced in the year 2000 Except for waste stabilization ponds and Karnal technology, other treatment processes require disinfection of treated sewage in order to meet t these standards Various technology options for disinfection tried out on pilot scale s under NRCP are Chlorination - most commonly used, cheap, but likely to lead to formulation of o trihalo- methanes if if the dosage is high UV radiation - both capital and O&M costs are very expensive, treated effluent quality needs to be further improved for lowering the SS and BOD levels DHS (down hanging sponge) system technology tried out for first time in Karnal UASB STP and appears very promising
COMPARISON OF VARIOUS TECHNOLOGIES Technology Land required (Ha./mld) Capital costs (Rs. lakhs/mld) O&M costs (Rs. lakhs/mld/year) Activated Sludge Process 0.2-0.25 40-45 3.5 Trickling Filter 0.2-0.25 35-40 3.0-3.5 Aerated Lagoons 0.6 20-25 2.25-2.75 UASB + Polishing Unit 0.2 30-35 1.5-2.0 Waste Stabilization Ponds 1.0-2.0 10-15 0.5 Karnal Technology 1.5-2.0 2-5 0.25-0.30 FAB 0.03 35-40 2.5-3.0 Selection of treatment technology for a particular location should be based on life cycle cost comparison of various feasible options
C-TECH (C C-TECH (CYCLIC ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS) Fully aerobic process based on Activated Sludge principles where organic matter is digested by micro- organisms developed and maintained in the reactor in presence of oxygen Operates in a cyclic mode of Fill, Aeration, Settle and Decant cycle. The reactor is first filled and aerated. After completion of aeration process, contents are allowed to settle in the same basin which is followed by decanting of clear water from the top using moving weir decanters. Unique system design incorporating Oxygen Uptake Rate (OUR) determination and precise treatment for each batch under treatment, achieves optimum efficiency with minimal power consumption. PLC and computer based fully automatic process. Plant performance is independent of operator s attention and skills.
C-TECH Advantages Gives very good effluent quality BOD < 5 mg/l, SS < 10 mg/l, NH4-N < 2 mg/l, TP < 1 mg/l. Treated water can be reused for industrial/agricultural purposes Very compact process. Offers 50% area savings as compared to conventional schemes Capable of handling wide variation of incoming loads Power consumption directly proportional to incoming load. Offers 50% power savings against conventional schemes When offered with gas recovery and power generation features, no external power is required for the plant and the plant generates surplus power which can be sold Fully Automatic negligible manpower is required for plant operation All submerged metal parts in Stainless Steel Lower maintenance costs as compared to ASP. No chemicals required. No sludge bulking, pin flocs and rising sludge problems 12.5 mld STP at Panaji, Goa
SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE SEWAGE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY FOR SUSTAINABLE SEWAGE TREATMENT, NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THE FOLLOWING Try to use use as little mechanization and electric power as possible Adopt waste stabilization pond and Karnal technology wherever adequate & cheap land is available Decentralize, wherever feasible (save on transportation costs) Carry out life cycle cost comparison of various feasible options Benefit from warmer temperatures in India Re-use treated effluent for irrigation to the extent possible Practice resource recovery and try to generate some income to offset fset part of the O&M cost ((pisci-culture, culture, sale of sludge & treated effluent, bio-gas reuse)
LESSONS LEARNT AND STRATEGIES/ INITIATIVES ADOPTED Bottlenecks in Project Implementation & Maintenance Delays in land acquisition/encroachments Inadequate capacity of local bodies/agencies Contractual problems Court cases Financial constraints of the local bodies, leading to improper O&M of assets created Low level of public awareness & participation Erratic Power supply
LESSONS LEARNT AND STRATEGIES/ INITIATIVES ADOPTED Strategies/Initiatives Adopted Due to fund constraints, treatment of full pollution load of even n major rivers like Ganga has not yet been addressed. Focus under NRCP to be on large towns, which are gross polluters, so that resources are not spread thinly Creation of sewerage infrastructure is the primary responsibility y of the State Government & the concerned local bodies. Centre can at best supplement the State s efforts. Government of India will continue to fund only the down-steam component of the sewerage system ( trunk/intercepting sewers, sewage treatment plants, effluent disposal system) under NRCP
LESSONS LEARNT AND STRATEGIES/ INITIATIVES ADOPTED Strategies/Initiatives Adopted All the other upsteam components of sewerage infrastructure in the city (house connections, branch & lateral sewers, etc.) to be funded by State Governments/local bodies from their own resources on priority ity State Governments to delegate necessary powers to local bodies under 74th Constitutional Amendment for generation of revenue through levy of user charges, property tax, etc. Institutional capacities of the local bodies to be strengthened to ensure greater sustainability of the programme A detailed plan for recovering operation & maintenance costs to become an integral part of the project proposal
LESSONS LEARNT AND STRATEGIES/ INITIATIVES ADOPTED Strategies/Initiatives Adopted Citizens Monitoring Committees to be created and activated for public awareness and education in each town Greater initiatives to be taken at State/local body level for more involvement & participation of the public in the programme Uninterrupted power supply through dedicated feeder lines to be provided to the assets created under the programme
LESSONS LEARNT AND STRATEGIES/ INITIATIVES ADOPTED Strategies/Initiatives Adopted State Government/local body to concurrently undertake programmes from their own resources to tackle the other nonpoint pollution sources Release of funds to state implementing agencies to be linked with performance A Tripartite MoU between the Central Government, State Government & local body to be entered into outlining the roles and responsibilities of each party before sanction of the project (under consideration)