The reservoir-based West Seti, whose 195 m high dam affects four out of the nine districts in the far west, will also impact the Tharu-dominated Kailali district as well. Besides, issues of en-mass resettlement, downstream benefits and percentage of free energy have been major challenges in executing this project. Promoted by an Australian company, Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation, through West Seti Hydro, the US$ 1.6 billion West Seti becomes a debatable issue especially during the increased load-shedding hours in Nepal. Also, along with frequent changes in governments, issues related to the WSHP also take twists and turns.

Renewed hope

The government-ventured China National Machinery and Equipment Import and Export (CMEC) on December 28 signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with West Seti Hydro, expressing interest to invest 51 per cent in the WSHP. Out of the US$ 400 million share investment in the project based on the previous share composition, CMEC’s investment amounts to US$ 2004 million. Furthermore, Chinese banks are providing US$ 1200 million in loans to execute the project. For the project which was unable to make any financial closure to obtain the generation license, such commitment from Chinese investors is noteworthy considering the extra hours of power cuts in Nepal.

In addition to this, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) last month assured its readiness to invest in the WSHP. Minister for Energy Dr. Prakash Sharan Mahat discussed this issue with the bank’s vice president during his official visit to Nepal. Besides providing assurances for mega projects like the West Seti, the ADB also vowed to support Nepal with other infrastructural development projects, including highways.

Energy experts have seen these developments as milestones for installing mega power projects in Nepal. However, the reluctance shown by the ADB since the last three years in making a 15 per cent share investment in the West Seti is a serious matter in trusting such forged assurances.

Doubtlessly, exploitation of rivers for generating hydroelectricity from mega projects is challenging. Such executions require not only a huge budget but also an investment-friendly environment, support from the local communities and guarantee of public benefits. The development tools applied decades back are no more instrumental when issues of en-mass resettlement, international standard compensation packages and environmental impacts receive major concerns from the investors, affected locals or stakeholders.

With the primary ground works being undertaken for the Arun-III, Upper Karnali, West Seti and Upper Tamakoshi, we Nepalese are busy building castles in the air that we are definitely going to exploit thousands of megawatts of hydropower. Such feelings are deep-rooted among the locals in the FWDR that is eyeing multipurpose mega projects like the Pancheswor and Karnali, besides the West Seti and Chameliya. If we acknowledge our financial status sincerely, such multipurpose projects are nothing except mere dreams. But, starting the West Seti in the far west means preparing for the Pancheswor and Karnali.

According to the Environment Impact Assessment report of the Pancheswor Multipurpose Project, the revenue the government receives from the project in five years will suffice to meet the construction budget of the 10,000 MW Karnali Multipurpose Project. This is how we can materialise dreams of hydropower development.

People’s project

We have developed an unhealthy culture of judging things based on the statements of the political parties and their cadres. When they say ‘yes’, we don’t look for the option to say ‘no’ since we are more used to their hearsays, which are never persistent. It is an undeniable fact that mega projects are not free of concerns and controversies. However, it is a duty of a responsible citizen to make such mega schemes people-oriented, benefiting both the people and investors.

The World Bank, which abandoned Arun-III in 1995, is presently lamenting over acquiring similar projects in the Nepali hydropower sector, and our government is preparing to offer it the 350 MW Upper Arun. We did not act responsibly when we had to bid farewell to the 402 Arun-III 15 years ago. Still, we are convinced by some political forces that Arun-III, West Seti and Upper Karnali are being conceptualised against the sentiments of the affected locals, and that they are anti-national projects.

For the sake of intensifying feelings of nationalism, leaders of the United CPN-Maoist, who well accepted these projects for immediate construction when they were in power, are now trumpeting that the West Seti is an anti-national project. This hearsay is certain to take a positive lead as soon as they seize power.

Thus, responsible citizens must rise above such illusions, make a well-judged decision and help execute such power projects for creating a congenial environment for investors. Otherwise, we must clearly say ‘No’ to development and will be repeating the fate of Arun-III in West Seti, compelling all souls awaiting development in the FWDR to lament forever.

Note:
This article was published in The Rising Nepal on the same day when West Seti management decided to lay off its more than two-third of working staffs.

It is our common experience that this decade has witnessed an unprecedented oil price hike and simmering crisis of food commodities simultaneously. Diversion of massive quantities of staple food commodities from human consumption to biofuel production, increased cost of production, and adverse weather and climatic conditions in major cereal grain producing countries are the oft-cited reasons for the food price hike. Even though some people accuse biofuels of contributing to a rise in food prices, the food-fuel nexus is a complicated issue, hence the role of biofuel policies in food price hikes has become a contentious issue of the day.

Today, top biofuel producers like the United States and Brazil use food crops to make it. The rapid increase in ethanol production from food crops, especially corn and sugarcane, has posed a number of impacts on grain supply and demand systems. FAO data indicates that in 2007, about 23 percent of the coarse grain produced in the United States and 54 percent of sugarcane produced in Brazil was used as feedstock for ethanol production. Similarly, the EU nations diverted 47 percent of vegetable oil for biodiesel production, and in turn imported vegetable oil for human consumption (FAO, 2008).

Increased demand for corn from the ethanol industry has increased corn prices in the international market, and has encouraged farmers to bring more area under corn cultivation. On the other hand, rising corn prices have shifted consumer demands towards rice and wheat, whereas farmers are prompted to shift from rice and wheat to maize cultivation. These demand and supply side effects have thus increased the price of major food crops, not only of corn.

Rosegrant (2008) found that during the period 2000 to 2007, increased biofuel demand contributed to a 30 percent rise in weighted average grain prices. Given the continued higher oil prices, he predicts that the global corn price will be pushed up by 20 percent by 2010 and 41 percent by 2020. The poorest parts of sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America will be hard hit because the price of their staple crop — cassava — is expected to increase by 33 percent by 2010 and 135 percent by 2020.

What if non-edible and secondary crops are used for biofuel production? Countries like Brazil, Indonesia and Malaysia are relying on soybean and palm for meeting the feedstock demand. Similarly, the government of India has recently embarked on an ambitious mission of Jatropha plantation for biodiesel production. Simply speaking, if growing biofuel crops doesn’t compete with the land currently allocated for the production of food grains, biofuel will have minimal impact on food security. Otherwise, the impact would be almost the same as using cereal grains for biofuel production.

During the period 1990 to 2002, the area under palm oil and soy cultivation increased by 43 and 26 percent respectively. This was brought about by massive tropical deforestation. Indonesia witnessed approximately 2 million hectares of tropical deforestation for palm oil plantation in 1999. Similarly, Brazil lost vast areas of forest for palm oil and soy plantation. In addition, oil palm and soy companies have been blamed for devastating forest fires. For example, in 1997-98, about 15 million hectares of forests were lost in Indonesia and Brazil by forest fire for soy and palm cultivation. Besides this, human suffering and displacement of people from forests and native title lands are other uncovered and hidden stories of palm oil plantation in Indonesia.

So, what appears from the scrutiny of the available literature is that biofuels could potentially threaten food security and the environment. In addition, biofuel could potentially compete with agriculture for water. The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) has stated that the ambitious biofuel production targets of India and China could worsen the water scarcity situation in the whole South Asian region and compete with food production.

The biofuel issue has been one of the less discussed and most attractive “projects” in Nepal today. Most NGOs, INGOs and donors have a biofuel component in their strategic and programme documents. At the same time, it is also true that most of them do not have any systematic analyses that form the justification for their intervention. So, what appears from the reality is that development agencies are trying to fantasise about the issue rather than being responsive to the needs of the people. It seems as if they are trying to “jump” into the biofuel pond without stripping off their clothes and without ascertaining the depth of the pond. Even though there are some (I must say very scant) media reports showing Jatropha oil being used in automotive propelling, no one would find any systematic and scientific study on the basis of which they can claim that biofuel will really be a worthy investment of the day. There hasn’t been any “scientific study” undertaken in Nepal so far pertaining to the costs and benefits associated with promoting biofuel.

The other important actor, the government, appears like a mute spectator. As far as I understand, there isn’t any official government view on whether or not biofuel is the needed intervention of the day. The Nepal government doesn’t even have any bio-diesel and ethanol blending targets. So it is quite surprising and strange to see biofuel projects operating in a policy and factual vacuum. It appears as if INGOs and NGOs are busy playing their own drums, and the government is performing a tuneless dance.

What is most important today is to have a coherent government policy on biofuel that defines the scale of intervention and the role of actors in the sector. By scale, I mean everyone should be clear on whether biofuel should be produced on a commercial basis (especially for the locomotive purpose) or simply to fulfil local-level energy demand (for example, crushing Jatropha seeds and using it to light lamps and run pump sets). Until and unless we have a precise policy instrument and analysis of the associated costs and benefits, the project efforts will remain largely futile, and it would be nothing more than building castles in the air.

The writer can be reached to comment at  dmkandel@yahoo.com

Source:  The Kathmandu Post

“The reality of suggestions and activities being extended by its staffs and consultants in its Kathmandu office against Nepal’s interest and development is clarified through its West Seti policy.”   Download his article from Kantipur

It has almost been one and half decade since we hear the talks on implementation of West Seti (reservoir-based 750 MW) which is hoped to change the fate of Far Western Development Region. Taking into consideration the huge investment in needs, around US$ 1.6 billion, delay in financial management was taken as normal. The hopes had heightened after the multilateral development partner Asian Development Bank (ADB) showed the interest to invest in West Seti. Besides its own investment, the ADB had instigated Government of Nepal (GoN) for investment in West Seti through commercial loan. The bank has already signed agreement for 15 percent investment in the project. 

The tenure of this agreement has expired. The bank has neither renewed it nor has it announced to withdraw. It has also extended US$ 45 million loan to GoN for 15 percent investment in the project. The bank has involved the government through loan with high interest. Investment by the government was expected to deliver positive thoughts among the investors and create a cleaner image in international market for investment in Nepal’s hydropower.

The ADB’s entry into West Seti has created additional confusions. The involvement of ADB has put the project in dilemma. In totality, the bank has not only stopped one project but influenced country’s economic growth. ABD has neither made investment nor has it said it will not. Rather it is busy making a new agreement. It was under ABD pressure that intolerable provisions such as ‘all compensation to be made for loss caused by construction of the project (WSH) has to be made by Nepal government’ are being incorporated into the new draft agreement. There won’t be any agreement under such provisions. Failing to sign the agreement means project’s construction will not continue. At this hour, ADB has remained silent saying agreement has not been signed. As a result, it has stopped probable international investors of West Seti. In this way, the project nation was awaiting for the last one and half decade is set nowhere due to ill intention and policies of development partner such as ADB.

It should have opened ways for other investors if it can’t invest. This has exposed the bureaucracy of the ADB. The reality of suggestions and activities being extended by its staffs and consultants in its Kathmandu office against Nepal’s interest and development is clarified through its West Seti policy. What development progress has ADB expected to make through such a group of staffs? For example, when Shallow Tube-wells project reached its final stage for implementation with government grants, it had put pressure on government to stop the grant. Agricultural Development Bank used to distribute 4000 such Tube-wells annually. ABD showed its character by hindering national policy when the grant stopped. The mission had aimed at minimizing poverty through irrigation facilities to the marginalized farmers. The ADB staffs have good role in building such a character.

West Seti is exactly facing the fate of Shallow Tube-wells. ABD has compelled the government to invest while it remained as an element of indecision. Other donors gave little attention when they saw ADB’s involvement. Whether ABD makes investments or not, it is a matter of reality that it has lingered a lot of Nepal’s time in West Seti. More delay in construction of the West Seti means greater loss for GoN and the people of the Far West. Not only that Nepal is losing royalty and free electricity, but thoughts of the general public for local development and economic prosperity by initiating West Seti have turned out to be just the dreams. The government has not been able to tell anything to ADB because it has provided US$ 45 million as loan. Debts always keep one dominated. ABD, which is leaving West Seti in chaos, is engaging for Upper Seti (127 MW). If ABD gives assurances of investment in Upper Seti for next four-five years without actually making, who will be responsible? What is the view of ABD headquarters regarding hydropower development in Nepal? ADB’s involvement in eighth rural electrification as well was controversial.  ABD has added poverty to poor people by hiring expensive consultants in road connectivity project.

It is to be seen how many hours of load shedding will ABD add when it moves from West Seti to Upper Seti. The results of government officials dreaming to be hired as consultants in ABD as assured by its junior staffs are gradually coming out. If not, why the government is not ready to put pressure on ADB to correct its faulty stand? The loan should be accepted in the interest of Nepal and Nepalese, not in the interest of ADB. Unless intention to compel to accept any conditions, even if they are not in nation’s interest, on pretext of giving money, changes, the loans provided by such multilateral development partners would not alleviate poverty but eradicate the poors.

(Unofficial translation from its Nepali version published in Kantipur daily , Monday, October 26, 2009)

राज्यको मूल चरित्र सामूहिकतामा हुन्छ। व्यक्तिगत र सार्वजनिक वा सामूहिक सम्पतिको विभेद र परिभाषा राज्य संचालनको प्रमुख आवश्यकता हो। प्रत्येक व्यक्ति र समुदायले राज्यका लागि अधिकार र कार्यक्षेत्र छोड्नुपर्छ र आफ्नो अधिकार सीमित गर्नुपर्छ्र। हामी संविधान बनाउन लागेका छौँ। यही दस्ताबेजमा नै त्यस्ता सबै अधिकारको व्याख्या गर्नुपर्छ। त्यसैले यस विषयलाई कॆलाउनु र बुझ्नु आवश्यक छ।

पूरा लेख /Nagariknews

लामो पर्खाइपछि जारी गर्न लागेको सेयरमा स्थानीय रसुवावासी र प्रत्यक्ष प्रभावित तीन गाविसका जनताको हक, अधिकारलाई कटौती गर्दै सेयर निष्कासन गर्न हालै नेपाल धितोपत्र बोर्डले स्वीकृति दिएकोले असार १ गतेदेखि सर्वसाधारणको लागि सेयर निष्कासन हुने कुरा विभिन्न पत्रपत्रिकामा प्रकाशित भएपछि स्थानीय रसुवावासीले आफूहरूलाई झुक्याइएको रहेछ भनेर बल्ल बुझ्न थालेका छन् । यसै विषयमा स्थानीय संस्था चिलिमे जलउपभोक्ता समितिले निर्णय बदरको लागि सर्वोच्चमा रिट दायर गरिसकेका छन् । यसैबीच सर्वोच्च अदालतले अन्तरिम आदेश जारी गरी हाललाई सेयर विक्रीमा रोक लगाएको समाचारसमेत प्रकाशमा आइसकेको छ । उता सदरमुकाम धुन्चेमा स्थानीयवासीहरू भेला भई चिलिमे कम्पनीको यातायातका साधनलाई रोकेर विद्युत उत्पादननै बन्द गर्न सङ्घर्ष समिति गठन भइसकेका छन् । नेपाल तामाङ घेदुङको अगुवाइमा आदिवासी जनजातिको अधिकार उपभोगको लागि सङ्घर्ष गर्ने तयारी बुझिएको छ । अब भने जिल्लावासीहरू सचेत हुँदै गएका देखिन्छन् ।

रसुवा जस्ता हिमाली तथा उच्च पहाडी जिल्लाका जनताको पहुँच कतै नभएको सबैले बुझेको कुरा हो । भौगोलिक विकटताले ठगिएका यी हिमाली भेकका जनताको जीवनपद्धतिमा परिवर्तन गर्ने विभिन्न अवसरबाट सधैं वञ्चित गराइन्छन् । राजनीति, आर्थिक, शैक्षिक सबै क्षेत्रमा पछि परेका हिमाली बासिन्दाको कहीं पनि सुनुवाइ हुँदैन । चिलिमेको सेयर सम्बन्धमा पनि त्यस्तै भयो । चिलिमेले सर्वसाधारणको नाममा जारी हुने सेयरको ३३ प्रतिशत सेयर जिल्लावासीको नाममा दिँदा के नै बिग्रन्छ त ? यो अवसरले गरिबी निवारणमा चिलिमेको ठूलो योगदान हुनसक्छ । चिलिमेको लागि अर्को नमुना बन्ने अवसर पनि हो यो । जिल्लावासीले प्रोमोटर सेयर मागेको छैन । झापाको रामप्रसादलाई बेच्ने सेयर रसुवाको रामप्रसादलाई बेच्न किन मिल्दैन ?

काठमाडौंको हरिकृष्ण श्रेष्ठलाई बेच्ने सेयर यार्साको छिरिङ तमाङ, गत्लाङको पेमालाई बेच्दा के फरक पर्छ ? धुन्चेका किप्पाले, भार्खुको पासाङले, टिमुरेको दावाले, बृद्धिमको तेन्जेनले सित्तैंमा सेयर मागेको होइन । न रसुवावासीले भीख नै मागेको हो । उनीहरूले अधिकार मागेका हुन् । जिल्लावासी भन्दैछन् हामी मूल्य तिरेर सेयर किन्छौं । आफ्नो घर, आँगनको पानीको उपयोग गरेर चिलिमे कम्पनीले दैनिक १८ लाख रुपियाँ कमाइरहेछ उता गरिब जनताको दिनचर्या जस्ताको तस्तै छन् । हाम्रो परम्परागत व्यवहार र चलनमा कसैले कसैको जमिन प्रयोग गरी अन्नबाली उब्जनी गरेबापत आधा बाली जमिनको मालिकलाई दिनुपर्छ । चिलिमेले रसुवाभूमिको पानीको उपयोग गरेकाले रसुवावासीले सेयर माग गरेको हो ।

अन्तराष्ट्रिय श्रम सङ्गठन

-आईएलओ) महासन्धिको दफा १६९ मा भएको व्यवस्था अनुसार कानुनतः स्थानीयवासीलाई यो अधिकार उपभोग गर्ने पूरा अधिकार प्राप्त छ । किनभने नेपालले उक्त महासन्धिको दफा १६९ को व्यवस्थालाई अनुमोदन गरी हस्ताक्षर गरिसकेको हुँदा नेपाल सन्धि ऐन २०४७ को दफा ९ अनुसार राष्ट्रिय कानुनसरह भई लागू हुन्छ ।

सेयरको सम्बन्धमा दुर्गम नेपाल नामक सामाजिक संस्थाले जिल्लावासीको हक, अधिकारको लागि विगत दुई वर्षदेखि चिलिमे र नेपाल धितोपत्र बोर्डसित छलफल गर्दै आएको थियो । अहिले दुर्गम नेपालले चलाएको अभियानले गर्दा जिल्लावासीहरू सचेत भएका कुरा अध्यक्ष महेन्द्रराज आचार्य बताउँछन् । संस्थाको पहल र अगुवाइमा जिल्लाका राजनीतिक दलका प्रतिनिधिहरूसहितको ऐक्यबद्धतामा ज्ञापनपत्र बुझाएर पटक पटक छलफल भएका थिए । पूर्व सहमति अनुसार पनि चिलिमेको सेयर नदिन नेपाल धितोपत्र बोर्डको हालैको निर्णय आएपछि जिल्लावासी आन्दोलित भएको संस्थाका सचिव सुवास आचार्यले बताए । सहमतिमा प्रत्यक्ष प्रभावित तीन गाविसहरू चिलिमे, गोल्जोङ र स्याप|mुका बासिन्दाको लागि एकलाख असी हजार कित्ता सेयर दिने उल्लेख छ ।

नेपाल जलसम्पदाको दृष्टिकोणले ब्राजिलपछि विश्वकै दोस्रो धनी राष्ट्र हो । जलसम्पदाको उचित विकास गरी त्यसबाट प्राप्त विकासको प्रतिफललाई इमानदारीपूर्वक वितरणमा समुचित, समानुपातिक र न्यायोचित हुनसके सेतो कोइलाको रूपमा चित्रित जलसम्पदाले विपन्न जनताको आर्थिक अवस्थामा सुधार गर्ने कुरामा दुईमत छैन । आर्थिक अवस्थामा आएको सुधारले व्यक्ति, समुदाय र त्यो क्षेत्रको अन्य कुरामा समेत सकारात्मक प्रभाव पर्नेछ । त्यसकारणले गर्दा नै रसुवावासी अहिले आफ्नो अधिकार प्राप्तिको लडाइँमा छन् । तर जिल्लाका नेता सम्बन्धित पदाधिकारीहरू भने जनतालाई सम्पन्न गराउने विषयमा गम्भीर छैनन् । यसखाले झुक्याउने खेलमा कतिन्जेल अभ्यस्त हुन्छौं हामी ?

देशको भौगोलिक विकट वास्तविकताले धेरै नेपालीको जीवनस्तरमा आजको २१ औं शताब्दीको छनक देख्न नपाउनु दुःखद पक्ष हो । एउटै देशका एक स्थानको मानिसको जीवनस्तर युरोप, अमेरिका, जापान र विकसित देशका झैं देखिने र अर्को कुनाका मानिसको दिनचर्या जङ्गली युगको सम्झना गराउने खालको हुनुमा हामीबीच भएको इमानदारीको कमी, समानुपातिक र न्यायोचित वितरण हुन नसक्नुले हो । एकले अर्कालाई गरिने धोकेबाजले हो । देशका कानुन विपन्न जनताको हित गर्ने भन्दा पनि सम्पन्नवर्गको हितको खातिर बनाएको हुन्छ । एकजना प्रसिद्ध अन्तराष्ट्रिय कानुनविद्ले भनेको कुरा यतिखेर सान्दर्भिक लाग्छ । कानुन भनेको माकुराको जालो हो जहाँ ठूला चराहरू प्वाल पारेर छिर्छन् साना कीराहरू मात्र जालमा फस्छन् । धितोपत्र बोर्ड सम्बन्धी नियमावली यस्तै छन् । चिलिमेका कम्पनी र धितोपत्र बोर्डका पदाधिकारीहरूले जिल्लाका जनप्रतिनिधि, राजनीतिक दलका नेताहरूलाई पुरानो धितोपत्र नियमावली र नयाँ नियमावलीको कुरा झिकेर दिमाग जोखिरहेका छन् । पुरानो धितोपत्र नियमावली अनुसार सर्वसाधारणका लागि यति उति भनेर कतै छुट्याइएको छैन । सो बखत कुल लगानीको २४ प्रतिशत सेयर सर्वसाधारणमा जाने र सोहीबाट प्रत्यक्ष प्रभावित तीन गाविसलाई आठ प्रतिशत अर्थात् एकलाख असीहजार कित्ता सेयर दिने सहमति मिति २०६३।९। २९ र ३० गते भएको देखिन्छ ।

नयाँ नियमावली २०६५ को नियम ७ -१) अनुसार सर्वसाधारणका लागि कुल लगानीको कम्तीमा ३० प्रतिशत सेयर जारी गर्नुपर्छ । नियमकै नियम ७-५) अनुसार प्रभावित क्षेत्रका जनताका लागि पाँच प्रतिशत सेयर दिनुपर्ने व्यवस्था अनुसार जम्मा पाँच प्रतिशत मात्र दिने हो भने किन कुल लगानीको ३० प्रतिशत सर्वसाधारणका लागि सेयर छुट्याइएन ? यो नै धितोपत्र बोर्डको विरोधाभाषपूर्ण निर्णय हो । तीन गाविससितको सम्झौता नयाँ नियमावली आउनु पूर्वको भएको हुँदा सम्झौता विपरीत जान मिल्ने कुरै होइन ।

यो रसुवावासीको सोझोपनमाथिको खेलवाड भन्दा अरु हुनै सक्तैन । यसैगरी समानताको हक अनुसार एउटै सामान/वस्तुको मूल्यमा फरक हुनेगरी कसैलाई अङ्कति मूल्य र कसैलाई पि्रमियम -बढी दरमा) बिक्री गर्ने अधिकार पनि हुनसक्तैन । विभिन्न मितिमा दुर्गम नेपालको अगुवाइमा जिल्लाका राजनीतिक दलहरू, चिलिमे कम्पनी र नेपाल धितोपत्र बोर्डसितको छलफलमा सामुदायिक संरचनाका लागि भनेर दुई प्रतिशत सेयर दिइने भनी भनिएकोमा बृहत् छलफल विना नै केही संस्थाको नाम तोकिएर आउनुले दुर्गम नेपालको असहमति भएको संस्थाका सचिव सुवास आचार्य बताउँछन् ।

आज कणर्ाली क्षेत्र किन पछि छ ? बाग्मतीकै रसुवा जिल्लाका ५० हजार जनताको जीवनस्तर किन हुम्ला, जुम्ला र डोल्पाको भन्दा फरक हुनसकेन ? नेपाल धितोपत्र बोर्डको नियमावली पनि गरिब जनताको पक्षमा नभएको प्रष्ट छ । एक अध्ययनले रसुवा जिल्लाको जलस्रोतबाट करिब ७०० मेगावाट क्षमताको विद्युत उत्पादन हुने देखाएको छ । चिलिमे लगायत अब निर्माण हुने सबै आयोजनामा इमानदारीपूर्वक सम्पूर्ण जिल्लावासीले सेयरमा लगानी गर्न अवसर पाउने वातावरण बन्ने हो भने हाम्रा रसुवावासी दाजुभाइ तथा दिदीबहिनीहरूले खाडीमुलुकमा गएर निम्नस्तरको काम गर्नुपर्ने छैन । छोराछोरीले गुणस्तरीय शिक्षा पाउनेछन् । सामान्य रुघाखोकी, झाडाबान्ता र ग्याष्टिकले कोही पनि अकालमा मर्ने छैनन् । यो कुरा चिलिमेका पदाधिकारीहरू, धितोपत्र बोर्डका अध्यक्ष र हाम्रा नेताहरूले बुझ्नुपर्दछ ?

Original Link at Gorkhapatra

Tamor-Mewa
The interesting aspect regarding this project is that water from Tamor River and Mewa River will be technically merged to generate 11 MW additional power than the individual potentiality of the river. The preliminary studies have shown that 18 MW of electricity can be feasibly exploited from Mewa River while 72 MW from Tamor River is technically feasible. The water combination from both the rivers will add 11 MW to generation capacity of Tamor River.

Unlike in other projects, TMHP will have two powerhouses, one having a net capacity of 18 MW and another with 83 MW capacity. Water from 18 MW powerhouse will be diverted through a 5.5 kilometre long diversion tunnel into Tamor River.

The chairperson and director of SHCL, Bhanendra Kumar Limbu, said the company has so far spent around Rs. 80 million on the project, of the total investment of Rs. 15 billion. SHCL is working for 55 percent foreign direct investment and 45 percent domestic investment. The project has also promised to extend 10 percent share to the affected locals.

License issue
The MoWR issued the survey license to Spark Hydroelectric Company Limited on March 20, 2006 for a period of one and a half year. According SHCL, of the 540 days granted for the survey, 333 days remained as Nepal Bandh due to various uncertainties and the company could not work as expected. Thus, the company could work only for 207 days, which is not even seven months. Even during such harsh timings, the company updated its progress to Department of Electricity Development (DoED) as required by the terms and conditions in the survey license.

However, on January 22, 2008, the MoWR refused to renew the survey license despite the deposition of Rs. 1 million renewal charge and the required documents. According to the company’s statement which appeared after the rejection from the ministry, Imex International applied for a license for the same project on September 7, 2007.

The company claims that the progress on the project could not be achieved due to the continuous bandh in the eastern region of Nepal. One of the provisions, 7(d), in the survey license requires the company to furnish the appropriate reasons in case of seeking extension of the license period. The company has been trying a lot to convince the ministry for license renewal. On September 29 last year it even submitted an application along with 3,620 signatures of the affected locals, law makers and civil society representatives from the district to the MoWR and officially met Minister for Water Resources.

Such a public pressure in allowing the hydropower project goes ahead must be a lesson to project-affected locals of power projects like 750 MW West Seti in the Far Western Development Region,  402 MW Arun-III in Sankhuwasabha district and GMR promoted 300 MW Upper Karnali. Several groups are quite active in these areas and do not want the hydel projects to kick-start.

Conclusion
The Electricity Act 2049 has set enough provisions for granting renewal of project’s license for power projects like Tamor-Mewa, viewing its inescapable situations which crippled Nepal, especially the Eastern Development Region and the Terai districts, parlaying everything for months.

The project having construction period of five years, will provide employment to around 1500 individuals. Besides the tax, annual royalty and share dividends, the region will have 19 kilometre long black-topped road and a concrete motorable bridge, which will join other villages beyond the Tamor River. The project, which has received the support and solidarity from the locals and other regional stakeholders, will be one of the development assets for the eastern region in the coming days when it starts commissioning.

Certainly, it is not a wise decision to make the investors suffer. The government must create congenial atmosphere to those who have come forward for developing hydroelectric projects, costlier among other development projects. It is the government, but not the investor, responsible to check bandh and other probable public obstacles. Also, the investors must work seriously towards accomplishing the project’s gaol. Renewing license a number of times citing inability to make financial closure is not a logical deal at all and such practices require immediate correction.

Therefore, both the MoWR and DoED must rethink of renewing the license of Tamor-Mewa including others viewing the legal provisions. It is not wise to paralyse the projects when the government is working with a vision to generate 10,000 MW of electricity by 2020.

The Rising Nepal/May 15, 2009

The most important international economic and development gathering in Indonesia in 2009, the ADB Annual Meeting will bring together more than 3,000 people from across the globe. As per the information posted on the official site of ADB, the annual meetings are statutory occasions for governors of ADB members to provide guidance on administrative, financial, and operational directions. Additionally, the meetings provide opportunities for member governments to interact with ADB staff, non-government organizations (NGOs), media, and representatives of observer countries, international organizations, academe and the private sector.

Delegation

WAFED’s campaign coordinator Ratan Bhandari is leading the Nepali delegation that includes Deependra Bista from Dadeldhura, Bheem Bhandari from Bajhang and Raj Kumar Lekhi from Terai. As per the coverage from the Far West dallies last month, Ratan Bhandari and Bheem Bhandari played a crucial role in organizing a demonstration at Deura of Bajhang district when a special ADB mission was in the site for fact finding on West Seti. Those dailies reported that Bheem, who is a Maoist district level leader and said to be under special observation from his own party, was seen in the demonstration where the mob chanted slogans against ADB and West Seti. While Bista, a permanent resident of Dadeldhura, who claims he to be a journalist, is in close allies with the Maoists but he is not involved in any media organization so far.

The next high-profiled delegate Lekhi is a Tharu leader from Terai. Since a few years, Tharu have been opposing the group relocation of people from the West Seti affected areas to Kailali and Kanchapur. The Lekhi’s involvement in the Ratan’s campaign will disrespect the sentiments of whole Tharu populace. In the past, several Tharu leaders spoke formally that their community is just against group relocation from the Hills to Terai but they want West Seti for the development of Far Western Nepal.

So, this is a sad story of misusing the dignified personality for the sake of opposing ADB’s involvement in Nepal and for the sake of money to run WAFED to ruin the national development. Not only Lekhi, other potential leaders from Far West like Shankar Khadka, LB Rawal and Dharmendra Bastola have been misused for making propaganda by the Kathmandu-based NGO.

The WAFED source said that the event is of great importance for several organization to which the former is affiliated. WAFED is either a member of or funded by several organizations like Himalayan & Peninsular Hydro-Ecological Network, World Commission on Dams, Narmada Bachao Andolan, International Rivers Network, NGO Forum on ADB, Both Ends of The Netherland and Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society.

 The NGO Forum on ADB stated that Forum has been active during the Annual Governors’ Meeting (AGM) of the ADB. “During the AGM, the Board of Governors, who are representing ADB’s member countries, make important decisions that set the direction of the Bank in terms of its policies and programmes”, reads the forum’s website. According to the website, the NGO Forum on ADB is a network of civil society organizations that has been monitoring the projects, programs and policies of the ADB since 1992.

The interesting fact regarding this forum is that it neither accepts money from the ADB nor is it in any way part of it. More precisely, it’s a group of civil society organizations that are active enough to oppose the ADB’s investments in major energy projects.

Visa

Launching the official host country-site of the AGM, Sri Mulyani Indrawati, Minister of Finance Republic of Indonesia said, “The 2009 Annual Meeting will provide an important opportunity to ADB’s 67 members and representatives of the business, academic, non-government and private sectors to discuss far-reaching global issues.”  She said that together with ADB’s management, all Indonesians are determined to ensure the gathering delivers meaningful conclusions. For fulfilling the goal of ADB- reduction of poverty in Asia and the Pacific-the AGM will certainly be a pioneer for making important decisions regarding the development of several member states.

When the Maoists-headed government is vowing generation of 10,000 MW of hydropower power in the next 10 years, certainly opposing West Seti is not a logical step in terms of developing Nepal. It is another laughter that few Maoists, including Bhandari brothers, would be standing outside the AGM venue opposing the power project with direct foreign investment, while Maoist ideologue Finance Minister Dr. Baburam Bhattarai would be yelling for the support from the global financial community. Is not a shame for the nation? People in the venue must pay mercy for the stupidity to those people who are making hue and cry against the national development.

If this project is not as per the interest of Nepal and the Nepali citizens, the government should come forward to say strong ‘No’ to West Seti. But, sending such a negative-mission-delegation to Bali for the sake of opposing West Seti can never be a good deal between the Government of Nepal (GoN) and ADB. If not in high dam hydropower projects, ADB can support development of Nepal in various sectors like health, water, education and poverty reduction. So, the responsible ministry of GoN, as well as, Indonesian Embassy in Kathmandu should check visa permit to this delegation, which will bring back the negative impression in Nepal.

(The writer is the Editor of Hydronepal.org, and can be commented at editor@hydronepal.org)

 Note: The article is reproduced from The Rising Nepal, April 30, Thursday

It may be recalled here that the Alternate Energy Promotion Centre (AEPC) had also declared the ongoing fiscal year 2065/66 as the year of alternate energy. So far as the sources of alternate energy are concerned, solar energy, wind energy, green energy, biomass, biogas and briquetting can be some of the primary and reliable sources of alternative energy.

Deforestation

It is estimated that over 80 per cent of the total population of Nepal is still using firewood as a primary source of energy. Besides that, feeding grass for domestic animals, setting fires in forestry and above all non-scientific as well as unsystematic farming are considered to be the major contributing factors to the process of rapid deforestation. As such, if we fail to give due priority for the promotion and development of green energy, not only would it worsen the deforestation but also lead to collapse of the industries.

Nepal is a mountainous country embedded with different climatatic characteristics. Nepal is also considered to be a home of endangered plants and vegetation. According to a recent study conducted by Green Energy Mission, an NGO, Nepal consists of more than 200 green energy plants and vegetation. The NGO claims that the energy ranging from 12 to 77 per cent can be obtained from such plants and vegetation. However, adequate studies are yet to be undertaken for potential green energy sources of such plants and vegetation available in the country. It is high time we initiate necessary scientific research and studies of these green energy plants as the alternative energy of fossil fuel like kerosene, diesel and gas. One of such green plants is Sajeevan that can produce billion litres of bio-diesel annually. The plant can be found at an altitude from 300 to 1400 metres.

The scientific name of Sajeevan is Jatropha carcus. The Sajeevan plant is easily available in Nepal. Studies have also shown that Sajeevan can easily be cultivated in several districts like Jhapa, Rautahat, Chitwan, Dang, Khotang, Taplejung, Tehrathum, Panchthar, Dhading, Gorkha, Tanahu, Kaski, Syangja, Gulmi, Ardhakhanchi, Pyuthan, Doti and Dailekh. It is estimated that Sajeevan can be cultivated in almost 30 per cent areas of the total land in Nepal.

Names of Sajeevan plant vary from place to place. For instance, the plant can be named as Kadam, Saruwa, Bakhundi and so on. The Sajeevan plant is grown and ripped in the month of Baisakh. However, Sajeevan that is grown and ripped based on climatic and topographical situation, can be collected until the month of Mangsir. Recent scientific studies have shown that the Sajeevan oil can explicitly be used to operate the diesel engine. It is estimated that present diesel consumption ratio is 30 billion annually in the country. But if we harvest Sajeevan in the area of 50 thousand hectares of land, we can significantly become self-reliance in the substitution of diesel oil. It is learnt that Sajeevan oil can be used to operate tractor, mill, cooking stove etc.

Besides, the Sajeevan oil also contains several medicinal values. Expert claim that Sajeevan plants can be used for the treatment of different kind of diseases. It is learnt that the Sajeevan plant is being used for the production and preparation of traditional medicines in the countries like India, Nigeria, Malaya, Philippines, Cambodia and Cameroon. Barks of the plant can also be used as organic compost to increase the production of agriculture foods and inputs.

Ethanol

After the Sajeevan plant, another potential source of bio-energy is ethanol. Particularly, ethanol is the refining bio-product of sugarcane factory. In other words, ethanol is the bi-product of sugarcane that is also known as molasses

Experts claim that mixing of 10 percent ethanol in petroleum products can support to lower the price of petrol by five rupees in a litre. Hence, ethanol itself can be used as a bio-diesel for the vehicles. But such vehicles need to have separate type of engine.

Last but not the least, it may be appropriate to mention here that research is being undertaken at Nepal Academy of Science and Technology (NAST) for the potential use of ethanol as the reliable source of alternate energy. It is expected that Nepal can save millions of dollars that is being spent for the import of petrol and diesel fuels from India and abroad. Such saving amount can definitely be utilized in other development projects that can help to reduce the existing problem of poverty and unemployment situation in the country.

Taking all these things into consideration, the green vegetation should and must be promoted as a reliable source of alternate energy for sustainable development of Nepal.

 The Rising Nepal

An ethnic group from the border region of India and Burma, known as Kukis, marches to protest construction of the Tamanthi Dam in Burma.

Activists of the Anti-Tamanthi Dam Campaign Committee raise slogans at a protest in New Delhi, India (File)

By Indian standards their protest is small and quiet. Most passersby near the parliament in New Delhi ignore the 50 tribal demonstrators, including women and young children.

They oppose the plan by Indian state-owned companies to harness Burma’s Chindwin River and export 2,400 megawatts of electricity to India. The dam is also touted for controlling flooding and irrigating farms.

Patrick McCully is executive director of Rivers International, an environmental advocacy group in the U.S. state of California. He argues that these projects do more harm than good.

“They destroy rivers. They eradicate whole ecosystems,” he said. “This may come as a surprise to a lot of people but big reservoirs in tropical areas have very high emissions of greenhouse gases because of all of the rotting vegetation in the reservoirs. The global warming impact of big reservoirs in the tropics can be even higher than coal-fired plants.”

Such projects frequently displace communities.

“Very few of those people are able to regain their previous living standards. People are impoverished, pushed off into slums, indebted,” he added. “They lose their land. They lose jobs. They lose the social cohesion of their communities. The record of the authorities, in terms of being able to enable people to regain or improve their living standards, is abysmal.”

Lulun, who uses one name, the president of the Kuki Student Democratic Front, says this is already happening to his people in Burma (also known as Myanmar) where their ancestral land is being cleared to build the Tamanthi Dam.

“There is forced labor. Land confiscation is there. Two, three villages are already relocated without any compensation. They lost their paddy fields. They lost their houses and they have many hardships,” said Lulun. “Apart from that we are concerned with environmental degradation. There are tigers, lions, even elephants there.”

The World Bank, which is not funding the Tamanthi Dam project, estimates Burma, which is under military control, has the potential to generate annually 100,000 megawatts of electricity from its rivers.

The World Bank itself, in recent years, however, has backed away from supporting large-scale, hydropower projects in Asia.

“The institutions didn’t appear to be as sensitive to some of the environmental and social concern of this development than we felt comfortable with. So it was really more of a reputational risk issue,” said Salman Zaheer, the bank’s South Asia energy sector manager.

The bank is now cautiously re-engaging, as Zaheer terms it, with the controversial energy sector. It is involved in one project in the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh and appraising another in neighboring Uttaranchal. The World Bank is also helping fund a 1,000 megawatt hydropower plant on a tributary of the Mekong in Laos.

Rivers International estimates that, in India alone, somewhere between 20 million and 50 million people have been evicted from their homes by hydroelectric projects.

China, as well as India, is looking beyond its borders for new sources of hydro-electricity. The Chinese are planning or implementing such projects in Burma, Nepal and Thailand.

Environmentalists acknowledge the huge unmet power needs in the developing world. But Patrick McCully at Rivers International contends many of the dams would not need to be built if the existing infrastructure was more efficient. 

“There’s a huge amount of energy wasted in the existing systems, in terms of how electricity is generated and transmitted and used by the end-user,” said McCully. “The first priority should always be to make the system as efficient as possible before adding all the expense and the environmental impacts and the social impacts you get with most of the new types of supply.”
 
A study, partly funded by the World Bank, has shown that many of the more ambitious hydroelectric schemes have not lived up to expectations - generating less power and irrigating far fewer hectares than forecast.

World Bank regional energy expert Salman Zaheer says backers of these projects need to learn from the past and be aware of emerging challenges.

“I think we have to approach hydropower development, particularly in the Himalayas, with the utmost humility,” added Zaheer. “These are young mountains. As we face climate change it is causing glaciers to melt faster and more unpredictably. So it is bringing down a lot more silt, boulders and other things than before.”

Such events diminish the capacity of the dams and disrupt the function of power generation stations. It also adds another layer of concern for those funding and building such projects. 

Source: VOA