Comments on Dr. Nargis Banu's Paper
and
Advantages and Disadvantages of Tipaimukh Dam
- Part 2 -

Bijon B. Sarma *

11. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) 'shortage of water in these few months would decrease the boost of groundwater. over the years this would lower the groundwater level, which in turn would affect all dugouts and shallow tube-wells. agriculture dependent on both surface as well as groundwater would also be affected. arable land will decrease and production of crops will fall, leading to an increase in poverty'.

MY SUBMISSION : After we know the report of the expert committee formed by BNP government during FAP (Flood Action Plan) project, we have to ignore her prophesies.

12. DR. NARGIS BANU IN HER PARAGRAPH ON 'BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY' SAYS : (quoted) 'construction of a high dam will obstruct the migratory path of fish and other aquatic fauna... (and silt, 'micronutrients')'.

MY SUBMISSION : This comment on "fish and other aquatic fauna" is correct, the claim of preventing of 'micronutrients' however, is not. What is true is, as soon as the flowing mountain-river water would come to a stand-still at the reservoir, there will be considerable changes in the micro-nutrients, fish and other aquatic animals.

The dam would not arrest the micronutrients, even though it would not be possible for larger fish to escape. However, nowadays it is made possible by using fish-pass.

13. DR. NARGIS BANU SAYS : (quoted) 'above impacts would destroy the natural integrity of the ecosystem, losing riverine habitat and species, and a lack of enrichment of land with the nutrient-full silt. this would lead to the ultimate decline in the natural productivity of the two most abundant resources of bangladesh 'land and water'.

MY SUBMISSION : From what I have explained above, the above statement is wrong. However, even though we do not know what type of changes would take place in the micro-nutrients, from the experience of Kaptai dam we may guess, it would not be anything hazardous.

14. DR. NARGIS BANU IN HER PARAGRAPH 'CLIMATE CHANGE' DAYS (quoted) : 'the tipaimukh dam will permanently submerge an area of 275.50 square kilometres in India'.

MY SUBMISSION : This one is India's problem and they would consider it in comparison with their gain from the project.

15. OTHERS : The author's claim on 'dam break and human catastrophes' has been answered earlier. In her paragraph on 'Water Quality' she said : (quoted)
'the erosion and sedimentation downstream of the tipaimukh dam would be excessively high and would continue as long as over 600 kilometres downstream in bangladesh. this excessive erosion downstream of the dam would increase the overall siltation and water turbidity in the surma-kushiara system. these will adversely affect the water quality of the entire surma-kushiara-meghna system in bangladesh'.

I have already mentioned why the author's conceptions of increased siltation and erosion are wrong. She also said, 'the dam will have warming impact due to methane degassing from the reservoir'.

Those who are aware of the quantity of degassing from
(i) Huge marshy lands throughout the world,
(ii) Water-dipped rice fields and domestic cattle in Asia and Africa,
(iii) Rotten leaves and algae deposited in the oceans would just laugh to hear about the 'additional methane gas generated in 275 Square Kilometre area'. I failed to understand the comment 'carbon emissions of large dam construction'.

The author has mentioned some information in the paragraph 'violation of laws and agreement' about which I have nothing to say.

ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES OF DAM FOR BANGLADESH :

DISADVANTAGES : (i) Due to the construction of the dam Bangladesh would lose silt, sand and fish coming through Barak river. By special arrangement and design, however, the movement of fish can be retained.

ADVANTAGES : (i) Due to its construction it will be possible to control flood due to Barak river and its tributaries in Sylhet region.

(ii) Considerable portion of land can be saved from inundation during the rainy season.

(iii) During winter irrigation may be easier due to higher level of water. (iv) There will be less silting in the tributaries of Barak river.

(iv) There will be less erosion in these rivers.

CONCLUSION :

I am least worried about the construction of Tipaimukh dam. It is a project by the Indian government, who would get cheap electricity from it. Due to its construction Bangladesh would lose silt, sand and fish coming through Barak river.

With due cooperation of the authorities however, Bangladesh
(i) can achieve control over flood by ensuring less flow of water during monsoon,
(ii) may have easy irrigation in the winter due to higher level of water etc.

This plain truth has been expressed by the expert committee employed by the BNP government long ago. When motivated politicians (like those from the opposition) shout against this project with all sorts of unscientific, imaginary, biased and non-intelligent remarks, I understand the reason.

And I endeavour to expose the secret reason, where possible. But when men of science express non-intelligent remarks, I fail to understand the reason and feel the need for protest. I however, did not protest against Mr. Meer Hosain's writings. When he expressed his response to one of my writing I just replied. In his response he requested me to acquire knowledge on certain issues from one of his writing. I went through that and was shocked to know that he used the 'answers' from computer-crazy school boys.

Had I known it earlier, I definitely would not have wasted my time. In course of reading that I came across the article of Dr Nargis A Banu, an environmental scientist working with Sydney Water Corporation, Australia.

I became specially interested because it was Posted by Bangladesh expatriate council and earlier presented in a seminar at the Australian National University. I got interested in it due to my experiences of similar presentations abroad including Australia.

But after reading it, I came confused to differentiate between a scientific paper and an essay written by the column writer. I know how a column writer writes his essay. He picks up a running or important issue, decides in which way he wants to motivate his readers inclusive of common people, bureaucrats and political leaders and then starts writing.

In doing so he picks up those data, information and comments that would help him to reach the targeted destination and at the same time avoids all those might go against. He cares least for honesty and most for fulfilling his objective. Such an endeavour is completely quite different from a scientific paper to be presented in international seminars/conferences.

After such a paper is presented it comes in the discussion of the community of wise-people. And when published in the website (as happened this time due to the courtesy of the Bangladesh expatriate council) it comes within the domain of discussion of the common people. Instantly the people know what type of papers are presented in such seminars.

As I mentioned, scientific papers are different from the column writer's essays. Such papers are revelations of facts. Here the scientist does not keep any preconceived idea like 'I will prove it, or disprove that'. The approach of the scientist will be, 'I believe this is the truth.

So I shall try to prove it with the knowledge and revelations so far made by science. In case I do not get defence from these sources, it will be my hypothesis'. A scientists' deliberations or course of thought will be different even from that of a university teacher. The teacher of a university is supposed to teach generalized principles, applicable in general throughout the world.

In doing so, most of the time he needs to simplify things. The teacher does not have the time or scope to show how those principles apply in various conditions. The duty of the researcher/scientist is to make threadbare analysis of the situation in which those principles would apply and observe how the results differ from the preconceived ones and why.

Only such findings are expected to be presented in scientific papers for international seminars. From Dr Nargis A Banu's paper it seemed to me as if she first made up her mind to show that 'Tipaimukh dam would cause serious damage for Bangladesh' (alike what the column writers do).

And then she started presenting information and analysis in favour of her conviction, many of which were self contradictory. I find weakness in her analysis also. For example, when someone visits the site of a dam, he usually finds water falling down from a great height, resulting in turbulence in muddy water below and then, water to rush away. That might initiate the general concept of 'erosion and sedimentation' in the river.

I have endeavoured to show in details,
(i) why the river starting after a dam loses flow of water,
(ii) why the water loses velocity and
(iii) why this water carries less silt etc.

Once again I beg to state that I have little interest regarding the construction of Tipaimukh. I know many important and essential projects are not taken up because 'those do not fulfil the personal interests of the dishonest group among the concerned authorities'.

On the other hand, a project that in no way is justified in the overall condition of the country is taken, because it satisfies the above condition. 'Underground rail line in Dhaka city' is one such project. Probably this project is going to be materialized because it is capable of ensuring financial benefit for some.

For the above reason, when I write about Tipaimukh, I only endeavour to show the science-based truth to the best of my knowledge and experience. I believe, the scientists and experts should continue in their predestined track, which is so pure and true, and which is so different from those of the politicians and column writers. Seeing 'column writers' essays' as scientific papers is really painful.

Lastly I express my sorrow to those who may be hurt due to my writing.