Archives

by Janaka Ratnasiri

The objections to the CEB proposal were raised not by the public not by environmentalists not by NGOs, but by competent senior civil engineers who have been closely associated with the building of the Mahaweli hydropower reservoirs

The Government on the 27th March, signed an agreement with the Japanese Ambassador to obtain a soft loan to build the proposed Upper Kotmale Hydropower Project. The very same day, the Institution of Engineers had a panel discussion on the same subject, which was open to the public. Several eminent engineers participated in the discussion, which turned out to be a very interesting one.

After the preliminary presentation by senior Engineer D. P. Chandrasinghe, a former Chairman of the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB), highlighting some adverse impacts of the project, Vidya Jyothi Dr. A. N. S. Kulasinghe opened the discussion. Dr. Kulasinghe was the Chairman of the Central Engineering Consultancy Board (CECB) when the feasibility studies on the project were initiated. He was in fact instrumental in forging ahead the accelerated Mahaweli scheme at the request of President J. R. Jayewardene.

He said that the CECB had developed an alternative proposal based on a site identified in a previous study carried out by UNDP/FAO, and that proposal was far better than the present proposal being pursued by CEB.

Elaborating on what Dr. Kulasinghe said, Eng. Sarath Piyadasa, who is the General Manager of CECB, said that the present project had many disadvantages in addition to the much-spoken loss of seven waterfalls, including the beautiful St. Clairs and Devon.

Among these are vulnerability of the tail race area of the underground power station to land slides, high flood level of Talawakele reservoir not being taken into account resettlement of people living within the 100 m buffer zone not planned out, low dependable peak power and energy in view of the small size of reservoir. He also said that failure or delay in opening of spillway gates would also pose a threat of flooding to Talawakele town and the project has not received the clearance from the Mahaweli Authority as required by law.

He further said that the alternative proposal, referred to as the Yoxford option, is far superior to the project being pursued by CEB. It does not affect the waterfalls, gives more firm energy, does not inundate any populated areas, involves less tunnelling and gives 2/3 power and 2/3 energy at less than 2/3 of the cost of the proposed project. He also said that a larger reservoir could be built below the St. Clairs and Devon waterfalls where there are no settlements to displace, thus increasing the firm energy that could be delivered.

Dr. Malik Ranasinghe, Dean, Faculty of Engineering, University of Moratuwa speaking on the economics of the CEB project said that it has a low internal rate of return and the cost-benefit was poor. He said that, on economic grounds alone, it was a project that should not be undertaken.

In response to a question raised by a member of the audience as to why the CECB did not defend the alternative proposal when it was rejected by the Japanese Consultants and CEB on the grounds that it was neither technically feasible nor economically viable. Dr. Kulasinghe said that he was no longer the CECB Chairman when this matter came up and that the new management had changed their policy towards the project. It may be recalled that when the Environment Impact Assessment report of the CEB proposal was taken for public hearing by the Ministry of Environment, the Secretary to the Ministry ordered that the alternative proposal submitted by CECB should also be considered in detail.

However, when the Japanese Consultants gave an adverse report on this proposal CECB remained silent, leaving room for the approval of the CEB proposal.

In response, a member from the audience who identified himself as the CECB Chairman at that time, said that when he took office, there was no project document on the alternative option available in the CECB files, and hence the CECB was not in a position to pursue this proposal. It seems strange for a former Chairman of CECB to say so, as the senior engineer who drew up the proposal was in the CECB staff, and he only had to ask him for the document if he was interested in pursuing the matter. This shows that there had been a serious breakdown of communication between the Chairman and his senior staff on such an important matter.

It was also pointed out that that the project document was a public document as it was even published in the Report of World Commission on Dams. It was also mentioned that CECB was not in a financial position to prepare a detailed project document on their own though CEB had spent several hundred millions of rupees for the proposal that is being pursued. It was also said that the problem of limestone outcrops being present on the surface referred to in the Japanese Consultants' report as one of the reasons for rejecting the proposal, could have been taken care of without difficulty.

At this stage another member from the audience spoke saying that the CECB proposal should be pursued because of the national interests, and urged the Institution of Engineers to take up this matter with the relevant authorities.

He said that the Government should first listen to the national experts before listening to foreign experts. However, a senior engineer objected to this suggestion saying that it was not the job for the Institution of Engineers to make such recommendations, and that view was allowed to prevail.

A senior electrical engineer from the CEB spoke in support of the CEB proposal saying that they were not prepared to take any risks with the presence of limestone outcrops at the proposed CECB dam site and that they did not want to see another Samanala Wewa at Upper Kotmale. It was pointed out, however that the problem of limestone is not acute as the outcrops being present are on the surface and not deep under the foundation.

It appears that even if they are present underneath, remedial measures could be taken. It was surprising that an electrical engineer has taken it upon himself to pass judgement on the stability of a dam-site, which should be a task for civil engineers and geologists.

This meeting has surfaced very important issues that have been hitherto pushed under the carpet. One is the inability of civil engineers and electrical engineers to work as a team on very important national projects with billions of rupees at stake. If all the civil engineers say that a particular hydropower project is no good the electrical engineers are not competent to say the project is good and push it merely because they are the decision makers. After all, the bulk of the work associated with any hydropower project is civil engineering. Yet the decisions appear to have been made by the electrical engineers.

The other is the lack of communication between the two major national engineering institutions which had led the country agreeing to a project having adverse impacts when there was a better option as claimed by competent senior Sri Lankan engineers. Could not the engineers at these two institutions have sat around a table and decided which option was the best for the country?

The Government too has a responsibility to see that the services of institutions such as CECB are obtained for national ventures without resorting to foreign consultants on every occasion. If they have any weaknesses they should be strengthened. Petty differences among individuals should not be allowed to prevail and destroy these national institutions.

In the case of the Upper Kotmale Project, as evident at this meeting, the objections to the CEB proposal were raised not by the public not by environmentalists not by NGOs, but by competent senior civil engineers who have been closely associated with the building of the Mahaweli hydropower reservoirs. I believe it is not too late even now to get the entire project including the alternative proposal reviewed by a competent and independent body and take a decision based on scientific facts and national interest rather than on individual likes and dislikes before the contracts are awarded for its detail designs and construction.

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager