Environmental Sustainability Ranking of Hydroprojects : How to Distinguish Better Hydros from Worse

ASTEN THE SECTORAL APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF HYDROPROJECTS WORKSHOP 12 OCTOBER 1995 Rough draft for comments please!!!!!!!!!!!!! ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY RANKING OF HYDROPROJECTS: How to distinguish better hydros from worse Robert Goodland S-5043 Environment Department The World Bank Washington DC 20433 USA E-mail: rgoodland@worldbank.org I 1. Introduction Even in the unlikely event that all nations adopt environmentally sustainable energy paths (Goodland 1993, 1994, 1995) as fast practicable, there is likely to be a 30% increase in global energy consumption by 2010 (Goldemberg 1995, WEC 1993). Unless this growth comes increasingly from environmentally sustainable sources, environmental and social damage- deracination, acid rain, air pollution, and climatic instability-will be bleak, especially on food supplies and human health. On the other hand, if this growth is denied, and developing countries are prevented from consuming more energy, the environmental impacts could well be worse-cultivation of marginal land, deforestation, accelerated biodiversity loss, and increased population growth. Therefore, the transition to sustainable energy must be vigorously promoted. 2. The transition to sustainable energy The urgent transition to sustainable energy can be achieved by adopting sustainability as a main goal. Encouragingly, this has started. Incentives for energy efficiency and conservation are widespread, although much more needs to be done. The electricity industry has recently revolutionized itself in several countries, now offering incentives for consumers to consume less-unthinkable one decade ago. More than 179 nations have signed the UN Climate Change Convention, and 119 have ratified it. This convention promotes environmental sustainability by seeking to roll back emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2000. The World Bank's Global Environmental Facility recently raised the price of disposal of CO2 from the prevailing default value of zero to a nominal, ultra-conservative US$20/ton used in cost-benefit selection of projects. Researchers (Fankhauser 1994) suggest the true external costs may be one order of magnitude greater. Denmark, Austria and Finland already have imposed carbon taxes, and the entire European Commission agreed in May 1995, that all member states should pass legislation to tax energy use by next year. Renewable sources will be exempt. In September 1995, Hong Kong started to sell cleaner transport fuels at I Oc/It. instead of over $5/It. for polluting fuels. This progress will accelerate the transition to renewable energy, and will decrease coal use. Only two sources of energy have the capacity to bridge the transition to fully sustainable and renewable energy, namely natural gas and hydro. Both must be promoted fast. Gas use can be accelerated rapidly and at low cost. The sources, including flared gas, are known and most have started to be developed. Pipeline technology is low cost and well known. The first priority is for natural gas from Central Asia, the Caspian Basin or the Middle East (where much is flared), to be made available wherever in the Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe there are Chernobyl-type catastrophes looming. It is in all of Europe's interest to invest in this insurance. As there are possibly 50 years of natural gas left, hydro needs to be reinvigorated simultaneously. Apart from using good economics-internalizing external costs of coal-the only way to reverse hydro's poor reputation is for hydro to become environmentally sustainable. Most hydroplanners do not know what sustainability is when applied to hydro. This note focuses on that crucial aspect. 2 Developing nations with excellent hydro sites can vastly accelerate their development, reduce their poverty and approach sustainability by exporting electricity and then hydrogen' to industrial countries. Industrial nations switching from fossil fuels to hydroelectricity and hydrogen move up the environmental ranking of Figure 1, thus alleviating global environmental risks. Hydroelectricity can be harnessed first for electricity exports and then to electrolyze water and export the hydrogen to OECD". Nations with good hydro sites would be front runners to earn much foreign exchange from such exports'. 3 Figure 1: Environmental Ranking of New Energy Sources THE LEAST IMPACT 1. EFFICIENCY, CONSERVATION, DEMAND MANAGEMENT 2. HYDROGEN 3. PHOTOVOLTAICS RENEWABLE & 4. WIND SUSTAINABLE 5. TIDAL & WAVES 6. BIOMASS (wood + alcohol) 7. HYDRO RENEWABLE & POTENTIALLY SUSTAINABLE 8. GEOTHERMAL 9. GAS NON-RENEWABLE & 10. OIL UNSUSTAINABLE 11. COAL 12. NUCLEAR THE MOST IMPACT The main means to improve the environmental and social aspects of all energy production is to phase gradually up this ranking, and to phase out of those forms lowest on the ranking. 1. As energy efficiency, conservation and demand management: are becoming recognized as supply options, they top this ranking. They free up existing energy to be used elsewhere, thus postponing the need for new capacity. They should be substantially squeezed out of the system before new capacity is contemplated. 2. Solar Power: Japan's Agency of Industrial Science and Technology of Tokyo, in collaboration with the International Atomic Energy Agency, is developing a solar hydrogen power system by electrolysis of water with sunlight expected to be commercial before 2030. This is 20/-30% more efficient even than today's best gas turbines, but without the CO2 pollutant and the depletion problem. PVs and batteries break down after a few years; in this narrow sense only are they unsustainable. 3. Hydropower: is or should be renewable as it bums no fuel and is powered by solar energy via the hydrological cycle. 4. Geothermal: impacts are generally easily managed (e.g.: reinjection of condensate), so it makes sense to exhaust this resource asap. 5. All fossil fuels: are unsustainable by definition, but exhaustion of the c.300 years of coal reserves is probably not the constraint The constraint is that so far we cannot use coal without excessive CO2 production. 179 nations have signed the UN Global Climate Convention because they feel global climate instability risks should be reduced. Sulfur, oxides of nitrogen and particulates all can (and should but generally are not today) be controlled; CO2 cannot. Climate risks can be reduced only by phasing out of coal well before coal supplies run out Gas, and to a lesser extent oil, are not as risky as coal because their supplies are more limited, and in any event emit much less CO2 than does coal. Acceleration of the historic trend of decarbonization (Ausubel 1991), falling ratios of carbon to hydrogen in fuels, as users switch from wood & dung to coal to oil to gas to hydrogen would greatly help to meet GHG reduction targets. If coal technology improves such that CO2 is not emitted or is adequately dispersed, prospects for coal would improve. 6. The nuclear industry: has spent about 75% of total R & D budgets over the last four decades, but even now only generates 3% of global commercial energy. Rather than earning a profit after all these subsidies, abandonment of nuclear plants in the US alone caused $10 billion losses for shareholders. As 10,000 to 20,000 new nuclear plants would be needed over the next 40 years to replace coal (i.e., opening a new plant every 3 or 4 days for decades), this is highly inadvisable. Nuclear power's main proponent, IAEA, forecasts 'only' about 770 plants for this period. Should the victims of the 1986 Chernobyl accident exceed 4 million, as seems likely, this will postpone any recrudescence of nuclear projects. If even the skilled and disciplined Japanese can be crippled by the "very serious" 9 February 1991 accident in Mihama, and the Mm's report of 20 "major problems and incidents" in 1992 alone, the possibilities in 10,000-20,000 new nuclear plants are not reassuring. If radioactive waste storage is solved, if in addition, "inherently" safe designs are achieved, uranium mining impacts are reduced, if nuclear weapons proliferation halts, and radioactive shipment becomes safe, then prospects would improve. [Source: Goodland 1993.] 4 Hydro has such a poor reputation (Goldsmith & Hildyard 1984-1991, Sklar & McCully 1994), merited or not, that it must become environmentally sustainable or the hydro industry will languish and the world will be worse off in the urgently needed transition to sustainable and renewable energy. Hydropower is the main bridge in the transition to a sustainable and renewable energy economy". The main need is to distinguish between sustainable hydro sites and unsustainable ones. This has not been adequately done in the past. In order to promote the hydrogen economy, this paper clarifies the distinction between environmentally sustainable and unsustainable hydroelectricity generation; between good dams and bad. 3. Distinguishing better dams from worse Environmentally preferable dams are those with high output from small reservoirs (e.g., in canyons), flooding out no people, no agriculture, and no habitat. These criteria can easily be quantified. Only two simple ratios are needed to distinguish environmentally better dams from worse dams. These are first, output of electricity (e.g., installed capacity.) per area of land flooded by the reservoir (MW/ha). The second ratio is the number of oustees" per output of electricity (oustees/MW). These two criteria alone capture much, if not most, of the difference between environmentally sustainable hydra, and unsustainable ones. Most large dams are tabulated on these two ratios in Figure 1 and are graphed in Figure 2. The crossed hairlines in Figure 3 mark the mid-points of the two scales used in this sample. The upper right hand quadrant shows the better dams on these criteria; the lower left hand quadrant shows the worse dams on these criteria. There is a reasonable separation of better, larger dams (over 2000 MW), from worse 'smaller' dams (less than 100 MW), which are mostly in the lower left quadrant. So, when faced with a new dam proposal, one can now readily ascertain how relatively good it is on these two criteria by plotting it on the graph of Figure 2. This is a reliable first approximation. Environmental sustainability will be promoted by selecting hydro sites-to the extent possible-mainly in the upper right quadrant, and postponing sites in the lower left quadrant. This first approximation can be refined by many more criteria, such as those outlined in Figure 3. The second approximation to distinguish better dams from worse ones can be as detailed as necessary. The quality of the land flooded can be divided into as many categories as needed, such as from the environmentally more valuable intact tropical moist forest, through seasonal forest, agricultural land, barren land, to the less environmentally valuable desert. Similarly, all oustees are not equal. Vulnerable ethnic minorities, such as forest dwellers, are greatly more difficult to resettle successfully than peasants (Goodland 1982). Rural oustees are more difficult to resettle than urban dwellers. The length of access road needed to construct the project and the length of transmission lines are important and easy to ascertain variables in this distinction. 5 World Reservoirs - Ranked by kW / ha Country Proect Namne Region" Purøose-* Type- FY " MW , na Oustees kW / ha kW / Oustee C h i n a J i n g p i n g S t a g e 2 - Y E A P P , 3 . 2 0 0 , 1 6 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 I N F Nepal :Årut Ill SA p P 4021 431 0 9,349 INF Nigeria KainjiAF P TE/PG 1968! 7601 125' 44 000 6080 17 India |Kraa SA P 1801 44 102 4,091 1,765 China 'Lubuge i EA M ER 450 145 5,000 3,103 90 Brazif u Paulo Afonso 1-IV LA P PG/ER 1979 3,9841 1,600 52,000 2,490 77 Nepal iKali Gandaki'A SA P P 144. 65 44,064 2,215 3 China Tontgzilm EA 1990s! 4401 2001 41 2,200 10,732 Chile lPehuenche LA P i 1990i 500 400' 10 1,2650 0,000 India iSrinagar (UP Power) SA P PG 3301 292: 360 1,130 917 Nepal Marsyangdi SA P PG 1989i 69' 62! 3.000 1,113 23 Colombia u Guavio LA P TE/ER 19891 1,i00i 1,4401 5,500 1,111 291 Turkey ~Bee - EU P VA 510 7801 144 654 3,642 Malawi IKapichira (Power V) AF P ITE 125 200l 50 625 2,500 Nonway lSysen (Kvilidal) EU P i 1981, 1,240i 20| 0 620 INF India iTehrh SA M TE/ER 1997 2,4001 4,200 100,000 671 24 Pakistan GGhazi Barotha SA 2000 1,4501 2.640i 899 648 1,613 Laos |Sayaburi EA P P 1260ý 3,000 1,720 420 73.3 Nepal Kulekhanii& Il SA P ER 1982! 921 220i 2,500 418 37 Yugoslavua IVisegrad EU i P i 315! 8901 1,125 354 280 Laos Nam Thun - Hinboun EA P i 19981 2101 630 0 333 INF China EErtn EA P !VA 19991 3,3001 10,1001 30,000 327 110 China lJingping Stage 1-Y EA * P PG P 3,000 9,500ý 5,769 315 520 Colombia iRiogrande LA i M TE 1993! 324 1,041! 1,195 311 271 Guatemala IPueblo Viejo (Chixoy) LA P ER 1 3001 1,3001 1,500 231 200 Sri Lanka Kothmale SA i P lER 1988 2001 9501 13,000 211 15 Romania/YugoslaviaiPortile de Før I(iron Gates I) EU M PG 19721 1,0501 5,2001 23,000 202 46 Colombia |Playas LA P ER 2001 1,0001 1,400 200 143 Laos ýBan Koum EA P P 2,330 13,0001 2,570 179 907 Laos ¡Pa Mog A EA P P 2,00_1,00_23260 16987 Swazila nd !Lupohlo (Power ii) AF P ER 19841 201 1201 300 167 67 China lThre e Gorges EA M IPG 2008 000 1,130,000 161 Brazil |Segado LA P PER 1993 1,260 8,200, 2,700 164 467 China SShuikou l & 11 EA P PG 1996 1,400 9,350 67,239 150 21 Pakistan |Tarbela SA M TE/ER 19761 3,478! 24,2801 96,000 143 36 Norway IBlaasjo (Sima) EU P ER 19801 1,1201 821 0 137 INF Indonesia Saguling EA P ER 1984 700! 5,3401 60,000 131 12 Laos ýLuang Prabang EA p P 1,410 11,000 6,580 128. 21 Mexico !Zimapan LA p VA 1994 292 2,2901 2,500 128 117 Laos lPak Lay EA p l P 1,320 11.0001 11,780 120 112 Brazil lta LA p 19981 1620 13,80 11,50 117 141 China lLongtan EA P PG 2005 4,200 37,000 73,000 114 s8 Laos |Pak Beng EA P P 1,230 11,0001 1,670 112 737 BraziVParaguay Itaipu LA P TE/PG/ER 1982 12,600 135,000ý 59,000 93 214 Sri Lanka Vtctoria SA M VA 1984 210 2.2701 45,000 93 5 Brazil SSalto Santiago LA P TE/ER 1980 2,000 22,5001 1,500 89 1,333 Nepal IKarnali (Chisapani) SA P 3,000l 34,100 55,000 88 56 India !Sharavathi (Kamataka I & I1) SA P C | 510| 5,921 4,000 86 128 Indonesia Cirata A EA P ER 1987! 500ý 6,200! 56,000 81 9 Philippines Magat EA M ER 19931 3601 4,500 1,500 80 2401 Mexico Aguamnilpa LA P l 19931 9601 13,000i 1,000 74 960 China Wuqiantgxi l EA M IPG 19951 1,2001 17,000 84,800 71 14 Laos Nam Ngum 3 EA P 19941 4001 5,870 4,400 sa 91 China Xaolangdi EA M PTE i 20011 1.8001 27,200 181,600 66 10 Laos Chiang Khan [EA P Pi 570! 9,0001 12,950 63 44 Turkey Sir _EU P VA 19911 2841 4,750. 7.000 60 41 Turkey Karakaya EU p VA/PG 19871 1,800! 29,800ý 20,C00. " i 90 Kenya IKiambere AF p TE/ER 1988 140 2,500 6,000 561 23 Thailand L m Takhong l EA I M TE 20021 250 4,4501 225 56 1,111 Colombia Ua i LA P 340 6,2001 600 5 667 Lesotho l Katse (Highlands Water LA) AF M VA 19961 10 3600 1 8,500 0 21 Argentina l|Piedra del Aguila LA P p PG 199114001 29,2001 9,000 48 ¯1¯56 Korea Chungju EA M PG 1985 470 9,700! 37,000 48 Laos ,Low Pa Mong EA P PI 2,670 56,000. 52,000 48 51 Ghana IKpong AF M ER 1981 160 3,500 7,000 462 Pakistan ýKalabagh SA lP 2,4001 55,0001 83.000 4¯29 Pakistan Mangla SA M TE 1967! 1,000 25,3001 90,000 40 11 Brazil iSao Simao LA P ER/PG 19781 2,680 68,0001 14,000 39 191 India iSardar Sarovar SA m TIE 20011 1,450 37,590 127,446 39 11 Cambodia [Sambor EA p P 3,300 88,0001 5,120 38 Malysia IBakun EA p | 2,400 70,0001 7,000 34 343 Turkey JKaytepe i EU P ER 1996! 420 13300 6000 32 Brazil ITucurui r LA I P TE/R/PG 1983! 7,600 243,000i 30,000 31 253 Page 1 Hydropower Efficiency Distribution of ElectrIcal Generation Capacity & Involuntary Resettlement by Scale 10 * 2000MW< 9 A1000<2000MW - E500<1000MW 8100<500MW - <IOOMW -1- - - sarmago B dh g 8n 7 . K~oum S~ sano P B .n s.yat.6 bok. san 2000MW< 44100200MWnl nn. CON - l~ 2 Doen oS e 1 Kossou <100MW °"'° C s ~PbY.:RC ,l -~ - -.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 400414ft{ (@okWlha(LN) /2K: o 3 -0P.tmr Hydropower Efficiency CO2 Savings in Comparison with Coal Thennal Plant of the Same Capacity It 10 n Africa Latin America & Carib. 9 o East Asia & Pacific * South Asia A Latin America & Carib. -Europe & North America * A ,7 6 A -- e e A * -em~* I Il l-II I I- - A - - - - - 1t 4 AA ... . A ...... .... - 4 Africa 3 South Asia 2 0 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 C02 Savings from Hydropower (1000 tC-yr, LN) Figure 4: Environmental & Social Ranking of Hydrosites Second Approximation The reliable first approximation to distinguish between better dams and worse are: first, number of oustees/MW, and second, area of land lost/MW. These two ratios suffice to rank most sites. A second approximation disaggregates these two ratios, as outlined below, into five further criteria for ranking. (a) Social Ranking (i) 1. Number of oustees: Oustees per MW ranking: Disaggregate by proportion of affected people with land and dwelling lost. A family losing their dwelling but no land and with sufficient spare land on which to rebuild is clearly less affected than oustees losing all their land, but not their dwelling. Some disaggregations rank affected people by proportion of landholding lost. One rural oustee would weigh more than one urban oustee, as the latter usually retains the original job and can readily find another dwelling in the same neighborhood or city. Whether replacement land is readily or scarcely available for resettlement in the vicinity also in an important criterion. (ii) 2. Vulnerable Ethnic Minorities: Proportion of affected people in this category. This lowers the ranking of the number of oustees/MW. (iii) 3. Other Social Criteria: a) Impacts on the host population: the number of families affected by the absorption of outstees into the host community. b) Dependence on Fish: Socio-economic and nutritional surveys needed. c) Downstream Effects: Recessional agriculture; impact of changed water quality & regimes. (b) Environmental Rank (i) 4. Intact Habitat Lost: a) The MW/ha flooded ratio can be refined by disaggregating river bed ac some flood frequency lost; subtract number of islands etc. b) The type of ecosystem on the land to be flooded can be weighted too. Generally, moist forest contains more biodiversity than dry ecosystems. Intact ecosystems are more valuable than agriculturally modified agro-ecosystems. And these are more valuable than barren landscapes. Length of access road can be refined by adding the value of ecosystems it runs through. Similarly for the powerline alignment. (ii) 5. Water Quality a) Sedimentation: Number of years of operation before sediment build-up starts to curtail live storage. Need to know live vs dead storage ratios, and measures of sedimentation rates. b) Water Retention Time: (from volume/flow curves): sluggish (many months) turnover causes more problems than prompt (weeks) turnover. Shallow reservoir water quality usually is poorer than deep reservoirs. 10 a) 4. Strategic Environmental Assessment After the second approximation distinguishing better dams from worse, or even instead of the second approximation, an environmental assessment (World Bank 1991) is needed to ascertain how to make the proposed hydro site more sustainable. The most cost effective way to promote the environmentally, socially and economically least cost project is to do a sectoral EA (Goodland & Tillman 1995). A sectoral EA ranks all energy options on the basis of their social and environmental costs. This is then added to the conventional least economic cost to arrive at a true least cost sequence for the next project. Once the rapid environmental and social least cost has been derived, the selected project needs a detailed project-level EA. The assessment predicts impacts and designs measures to prevent or mitigate them. There are only a dozen classes of impacts (Figure 5) and most of these can be made acceptable, first by selection of the best sites (upper right quadrant of Figure 3). Second, by integrating specific and usually relatively low cost mitigatory measures into the design. Figure 6 outlines what environmental sustainability actually is when applied to specific hydroprojects. b) 5. Conclusion Hydro can be a major bridge to the urgently needed transition to sustainable energy. Today the hydro industry faces stagnation because it has not kept up with the need to become environmentally sustainable. Much of the hydro industry seems unaware of what environmental sustainability is when applied to hydro. This paper details what sustainability is, how to select better hydro and demote worse hydro, and when a new hydrosite has been selected, how to make it as sustainable as possible. This paper challenges to hydro industry to become sustainable promptly-or face its demise. 11 (1) Figure 5: The Main Environmental Impacts of Hydroprojects 1. INVOLUNTARY RESETTLEMENT of humans is difficult at best (World Bank 1994) and of vulnerable ethnic minorities even more so. Restoration of pre-move levels of livelihood is delayed by the social trauma of deracination (Goodland 1982). Even the prompt restoration of pre-move standards is rarely achieved, and is too lax in nay event. 2. LAND LOSSES: Large tracts of agricultural lands, forests or other wildlands may be inundated. Careful siting can minimize such losses (e.g., by selecting reservoirs with high kWh- generated/ha land area inundated). The value of lost timber and other resources, and foregone use of inundated land should be estimated in economic analyses. 3. HEALTH: Some water-related diseases (e.g., schistosomiasis, malaria, onchocerciasis and Japanese B encephalitis) may increase unless precautions or mitigatory measures are implemented. Vector control, environmental modifications, and education of residents may need to be incorporated into the project. 4. PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE: Biotic surveys normally are essential; plant and animal extinction can be prevented or minimized by careful project siting. Loss of wildlife may be mitigated by including elsewhere in the country a wildlands management area equivalent to the inundated tract. Animal rescue, replenishment; and relocation can sometimes be useful. Canal and other crossing facilities are often essential. 5. WATER WEEDS: Proliferation of floating weeds (e.g., water hyacinth [Eichhornia] and water lettuce [Pistia]) can impair water quality and increase disease vectors and water loss (through evapotranspiration). Clogging impairs navigation, recreation, fisheries and irrigation. The potential to use weeds for compost, biogas or fodder is usually low. 6. WATER QUALITY: Suitability of water quality for drinking, irrigation, fisheries or other uses, both within reservoirs and downstream, should be addressed. Issues include saline intrusions, water retention time (i.e., flow/volume), loss of flushing, increased nutrients in reservoir, pollution (e.g., agricultural leachates, pathogens, industrial effluents, mercury released from the soil), raising or contamination of water table, and salination. 8. ANAEROBIC DECOMPOSITION: Inundated vegetation rots, consuming much oxygen. If thermal stratification occurs, mixing of surface and bottom water is impeded, and the bottom water may become anaerobic. Anaerobic decomposition of organic material produces noxious gases toxic to aquatic life and harmful to machinery. If discharged by the dam, downstream fish could be killed. Multiple-level outlets in the dam can avoid the discharge of anaerobic water. Inexpensive models are available to predict thermal stratification. Conversion of forest to timber before reservoir filling reduces project contribution to greenhouse gases. GHG production should not exceed that from a gas-fired equivalent. 9. EROSION: Erosion upstream in the catchment area leads to sedimentation or land slips which can impair storage; catchment area management should be encouraged. Increased erosivity of the water (the "hungry waters" effect), on the riverbed and structures below the dam-including deltaic and coastal changes-should be integrated during design. Trap efficiency, the capacity of the reservoir to store sediments, should be estimated. The trap efficiency of all but the smallest reservoirs (in relation to inflow) is of the order of 70% to 90%, store much sediment, hence increase erosivity downstream. 10. DOWNSTREAM HYDROLOGY: Changes in downstream hydrology usually impairs ecosystems dependent on seasonal flooding, including areas that may be important for fisheries (e.g., floodplains, lagoons, marshes, mangroves) or for traditional flood-recession agriculture. 12 Sometimes management of downstream water releases can minimize such damage by partially replicating natural flooding regimes. 11. INTACT RIVERS: Hydroelectric and other developments should preferably be concentrated on the same rivers if hydrological risks and other circumstances permit, in order to preserve elsewhere a representative sample of rivers in the natural state. This should be considered part of the trade-offs. 12. MULTIPLE USE: Multiple use increases benefits; it should by addressed through tourism, irrigation, fisheries, bird and other biotic sanctuaries, and recreation. Water flow regulation can convert seasonal rivers into perennial waterways, reduce flooding and improve drinking and irrigation. Communal access should be perpetuated. 13. CULTURAL PROPERTY: Archaeological or historic patrimony should be sought, avoided, conserved or relocated (Goodland & Webb 1987). 13 Figure 6: What is Environmental Sustainability in Hydro Reservoirs? The starting point is the solar-powered hydrological cycle which is the quintessence of sustainability. Water flow can be a renewable resource. The cycle must be harnessed so that the project continues to generate benefits (e.g.: power, fish) for a long period, certainly decades, preferably a hundred years or more. In the narrow sense, sustainability means the hydro's lifetime should be as long as possible. In the broad sense, sustainability means environmental and social damage has been prevented or offset such that net residual impacts are insignificant. In addition, sustainability requires that the environmental and social costs are low and do not increase, such as climate change. Sustainability is NOT only a continuation of power output. A modest fraction of power sales allocated to social and environmental needs can help ensure their acceptability. Involuntary Resettlement (includes affected people): The number of oustees is zero or low; those relocated are promptly better off after their move. To be no worse off means stagnation, so cannot be called development. Of course, "no worse off' would be much better than historic achievements. China's and Brazil's policy is to ensure oustees are promptly better off, not "no worse off'. Impact on affected people should be made acceptable. Disease must decrease. Sedimentation: Reservoir generation capacity must not be curtailed, certainly for longer than the amortization of the loan. Opponents claim that 50 years of power is too brief a benefit to outweigh the environmental costs. Early designs need to calculate the ratio of live to dead storage to aid in dam selection. Catchment protection should be an integral component of all relevant hydroprojects. If the plant degenerates into run-of-river, what are the implications? Potential (e.g.: by bottom gates) for de-silting; downstream effects of de-silting. Calculate and monitor erosion processes upstream. Eih: Fish contribution to nutrition and especially protein must not decline. Unless fish catch increases substantially and permanently, the big new opportunity of the new reservoir will have been wasted. Need to ascertain how many people currently depend for what part of their livelihoods on fish (self-consumption, barter, commerce). Non-marketed fish value usually exceeds marketed fish value. Much so-called weekend or recreational fishing forms part of poor household budgets, so must be included. The potential for fish cultivation in the new reservoir or elsewhere should be realized, including the high initial offtake, but then to decrease harvests as productivity stabilizes. Dam operating rules for optimizing fisheries need to be implemented, and costs internalized. Reduction in all fishing, especially subsistence, in downstream areas must be prevented or permanently compensated. iodiversiwty Species or genetic diversity should not decline due to the projecZ. Susinability means the project does not cause the extinction of any species. Moreover, migrations (e.g.: seasonal, anadromy, catadromy, potadromy) should not be so impeded as to harm populations. For example, fish breeding or fish passage facilities should be proven in advance. Will wildlife habitat be lost? Are equivalent (or better) compensatory tracts purchasable nearby? Improvements in net biodiversity are not difficult, but must be achieved. Land Preempted: Agricultural production lost; clarify that the net power benefits clearly exceed the net value of lost agricultural production by reservoir, access roads, powerline ROW etc; equivalent areas need to be made available for involuntary resettlement. Water Ouality: Can acceptable water quality be maintained? Ensure that the reservoir does not impair quality. It does not mean cleaning up dirty water filling the reservoir (e.g.: Zimapan fills 14 from Mexico City effluent). Can water weeds, decaying vegetation etc. be controlled so that water of acceptable quality will occur downstream? Organic mercury releases from rotting biomass, and phosphorus are important. Downstream Hydrology: Harm must be prevented to downstream uses by people (e.g.: irrigation, soil fertility restoration, recession agriculture, washing, cattle watering) and ecosystems (e.g.: mangroves, deltaic fish, wetlands, floodplains). The benefits of water regulation downstream: flood control, urban and industrial water supply, multiple use, can be substantial. Temperature control of releases needs to be controlled. Regional Integration: The project is more sustainable if well integrated into the activities and future of the region. Greenhouse Gas Production: Total GHG production (from biomass, cement, steel etc.) should not exceed that from a gas-fired equivalent. Rotting biomass remaining in the reservoir after filling produces estimatable amounts of CO2 and CH4. 15 c) References Cited and Guide to the Literature Fankhauser, S. 1994. Evaluating the social costs of greenhouse emissions. London, University College, CSERGE: ISSN 0967-8875: 48 p. Goldemberg, J. 1995. Energy needs in developing countries and sustainability. Science 269 (25 Aug.): 1058-1059. Goldsmith, E. and Hildyard, N. 1984-1991. The social and environmental effects of large dams. Wadebridge, Cornwall, Camelford Ecological Centre, 3 vols. Goodland, R. 1982. Tribal peoples and economic development. Washington DC., The World Bank, 102 p. Goodland, R. 1986. Hydro and the environment: evaluating the tradeoffs. Water Power and Dam Construction (Nov.): 25-34. Goodland, R. 1993. Environmental sustainability in energy systems. International J. Sustainable Development 1(4): 3-14. Goodland, R. 1994a. Ethical priorities in environmentally sustainable energy systems: the case of tropical hydropower. Washington DC., The World Bank, Environment Working Paper 67:26 p. Goodland, R. 1994c. Environmental sustainability and the power sector. Impact Assessment 12(4): 409-470. Goodland, R. 1995a. The big dam controversy: killing hydro promotes coal and nukes: is that better for environmental sustainability? Houghton, MI., Michigan Technological University, Department in Social Sciences: GTE Technology and Ethics Series, 79 p. Goodland, R. 1995b.The concept of environmental sustainability. Ann. Rev. Ecology & Systematics 26: 1-24. Goodland, R., Juras, A.A. & Pachauri, R. 1992. Can hydro reservoirs in tropical moist forest be made environmentally sustainable? Energy Policy (June): 507-516. Goodland, R. and Webb, M. 1989. The management of cultural property in World Bank-assisted projects: archaeological, historical, religious and natural unique sites. Washington DC., The World Bank Technical paper 62: 102 p. Goodland, R. & Tillman, R. E. 1995. Strategic environmental assessment. Washington DC., The World Bank, Environmental Department (draft): 45 p. Sklar, L. and McCully, P. 1994. Damming the rivers. Berkeley CA., International Rivers Network, Working Paper 5: 89 p. World Bank, 1991. Environmental assessment sourcebook. Washington DC., The World Bank 3 vols. 16 World Bank, 1994. Resettlement & Development. Washington DC., The World Bank, Environment Department WEC, 1993. Energy for tomorrow's world: the realities, the real options and the agenda for achievement. New York, St. Martin's Press, World Energy Council. 17 ENDNOTES Direct export of electricity should come first (e.g., Laos-Thailand, Nepal-India), but this will not solve urban pollution from fossil-fueled vehicles. For this, hydrogen seems to be the most promising (MacKenzie 1994). U One gigajoule of PV hydrogen needs 63 liters of water which is about 2.7 cms of rain over the area occupied by the PV plant. By comparison, biomass plantations are restricted to areas with 75-159 cms of rainfall. Water for electrolytic hydrogen can also be obtained from the ocean. Less than 2% of the hydrogen energy would be needed for desalination. ii Acceleration of natural gas consumption would reap major benefits in reducing pollution and GHGs compared with coal. Gas consumption should be strongly promoted, in parallel with hydro, as a non-renewable bridge to sustainable energy. As there are many decades of natural gas available it should be used urgently and first to decrease Chernobyl-type catastrophes, and second to speed the phase-out of coal. It seems highly unlikely that the global environmental can stand the burning of the 300 years of coal still available. This means much of global coal reserves cannot be used even with the cleanest of coal technology, which also should be vigorously promoted. iv Instead of installed capacity, the more reliable ratio would be "kWh/ha" but this varies from year to year, and is difficult to find. The area of reservoirs is unacceptably difficult to find. Reservoir area rarely figures in information supplied by reservoir designers or proponents. The main hydro trade journal rarely publishes reservoir areas in their detailed information on hydroprojects. This suggests that this critical environmental variable is not yet taken seriously. V As reservoir area is so difficult to find in the literature, any corrections or additions to Figure 2 would be most welcome. The ranking would be improved, but little altered, if river bed or normal annual flood areas were subtracted. Islands in the reservoir also could be subtracted in certain cases. Some of these figures are for non-forest reservoirs and most are hydropower, rather than irrigation or flood control reservoirs. Area inundated is the key issue. Optimizing the tradeoffs at the margin of reservoir capacity, is more influential than between having or not having a reservoir. The other inadequacy of this ranking is that it downplays the value of upstream storage which enables downstream developments. An example of project selection to reduce oustees is PRC's Xiluodo near Leibo in Sichuan in the Jinsha river canyon, before it becomes called the Yangtze downstream of Yibin. This 12,000 MW project would be almost as powerful as the 13,000 MW Three Gorges, with 20,000 oustees instead of over one million, but with little flood control which is the main benefit of Three Gorges. 'Guri complex' in the ranking includes the 9508MW Tacoma, 2260MW Caruaxi & 2592MW Macaquara. Oustee is a term meaning ousted people, such as people ousted by a reservoir. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) lists the first use of oustee as 9/'92 in New Delhi's Sunday Observer, which is clearly wrong. Oustee is used here because OED lists it, it is readily understood and widely used, and there seems to be no better choice. The synonyms displaced person, resettler, and relocatee seem less felicitous. Affected person is a non-synonymous euphemism. 18