That the present West Bengal CM (& former Union Railway Minister) Mamata Banerjee wears flip-flop slippers and the controversy when a footwear company tried to use her photo is well known. But have we ever taken a moment to reflect how many people of the World in general, and Indians in particular wear flip-flops not (only) on their feet, but also on their mind and thinking?
By ‘flip-flop thinking’, I do not mean that people tend to change their views over time. Matter of fact, such modification or complete volte-face of the opinions and views are preferable when the original contention is shown to be in error.
What I mean by ‘flip-flop thinking’ is the seemingly contradictory opinion, views or contentions held by the people (or an individual) at a particular time, on one single subject, depending which side of the line they sit upon.
To give an idea of what I am talking about, let us take the famous ‘Hand of God’ goal by Diego Maradona in 1986 FIFA Q/Final match between England and Argentina. All said and done, the opinion, today, on whether the goal was foul or fair depends upon one’s nationality.
If you are English, it is a foul goal; If you are an Argentine, it is a fair goal. For the rest of us, it is just a footnote in the annals of FIFA.
BTP, just put yourself in the Argentinean mind. While they hugely enjoy(ed) the ‘Hand of God’ goal as fair, if something similar happens in a match against them, would they accept it in the same joyful manner? So if it happens ‘for’ you, it is alright; but when it happens against you, it is not-right.
Keeping the above example firmly in mind, let us see a few of such flip-flop thinking in the World, in India and in my home state of Tamil Nadu (TN) in particular.
BTW, before anyone gets angry and flames me here, or even worse, tries to sue me over this post, let me make some things very clear. This post is an academic and humorous look at the different views and opinions and how they may look awkward from another viewpoint. I am not trying to disparage anyone personally or their views/opinions. And my personal opinion is that Koodankulam should be commissioned, Mullai-Periyar is strong, 69% reservation is OK, the Supreme Court judgements in Cauvery and Mullai-Periyar (or on any issues) should be the final word.
Old Roman coin, image courtesy Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna
My Bemused half blurts, ‘What a coincidence. I start to write about Mullai-Periyar Dam which is about 120 years old and end up with an image from a Museum that is 120 years old!’
By ‘flip-flop thinking’, I do not mean that people tend to change their views over time. Matter of fact, such modification or complete volte-face of the opinions and views are preferable when the original contention is shown to be in error.
What I mean by ‘flip-flop thinking’ is the seemingly contradictory opinion, views or contentions held by the people (or an individual) at a particular time, on one single subject, depending which side of the line they sit upon.
To give an idea of what I am talking about, let us take the famous ‘Hand of God’ goal by Diego Maradona in 1986 FIFA Q/Final match between England and Argentina. All said and done, the opinion, today, on whether the goal was foul or fair depends upon one’s nationality.
If you are English, it is a foul goal; If you are an Argentine, it is a fair goal. For the rest of us, it is just a footnote in the annals of FIFA.
BTP, just put yourself in the Argentinean mind. While they hugely enjoy(ed) the ‘Hand of God’ goal as fair, if something similar happens in a match against them, would they accept it in the same joyful manner? So if it happens ‘for’ you, it is alright; but when it happens against you, it is not-right.
Keeping the above example firmly in mind, let us see a few of such flip-flop thinking in the World, in India and in my home state of Tamil Nadu (TN) in particular.
BTW, before anyone gets angry and flames me here, or even worse, tries to sue me over this post, let me make some things very clear. This post is an academic and humorous look at the different views and opinions and how they may look awkward from another viewpoint. I am not trying to disparage anyone personally or their views/opinions. And my personal opinion is that Koodankulam should be commissioned, Mullai-Periyar is strong, 69% reservation is OK, the Supreme Court judgements in Cauvery and Mullai-Periyar (or on any issues) should be the final word.
- Britain
- howled and growled at Iceland during the 2008 Icesave collapse, when British small savings seemed forfeit and Iceland moved to save its bank(s) and economy?;
- vetoes the German and French push for new Eurozone agreement in 2011, whinging it is doing so to protect its interests and economy!
- Anna Hazare
- doesn’t have any qualms about flogging tipplers or people slapping politicians;
- but whines about ‘blot on humanity’ when police crackdown on jet-setting Baba Ramdev and his gang of people.
- Back home, the TN Government
- does not have any remorse in banning a disaster based movie saying it refers to Mullai-Periyar Dam controversy;
- seems indulgent when anti-Koodankulam protestors distribute pamphlets and booklets imagining/prophesying a nuke disaster at KKNPP.
- Fringe political parties and to an extent even the Government in the state of TN
- vehemently reinforce that an 118 year old construction of brick-and-mortar, designed in an age when earthquake-proof concept and design were unheard of - the Mullai-Periyar Dam - is solid and earthquake resistant;
- but doubt an ongoing construction of concrete, steel and titanium, designed especially with earthquakes and other natural disasters in mind - the Koodankulam Nuclear Project - will turn into an Atom bomb with the next trembler.
- Nearby egged on by its state government, Kerala
- apprehends that Mullai-Periyar Dam will collapse at the next good shake of the earth and its location itself is in earthquake prone zone;
- but swear their willingness to build a new reservoir nearby, in the same area which is earthquake prone by their own admission.
- Back home in TN, general opinion is
- that we should increase the water level in Mullai-Periyar to 146 feet, if not the full 152 feet, to protect TN farmers and not release the water to Kerala’s Idukki reservoir, just to enhance its hydro-electric production;
- but Karnataka should not try to maintain higher water levels at KRS reservoir during lean years to protect their farmers’ irrigation interest, but release water to TN in Cauvery
- Political parties in TN
- make a huge hue and cry against Kerala legislature’s motion to dismantle M-P Dam, and how that resolution against the Supreme Court order/judgement is inimical to the national interest and unity;
- but hail and defend our own legislature’s resolution mandating 69% reservation in TN, even though it is against the Supreme Court order/judgement restricting reservation to 50% maximum
- Many people in TN
- want Kerala and Karnataka to adhere to the letter and spirit of the Supreme Court ruling/order/ judgement on Cauvery and Mullai-Periyar issues
- but don’t want to carry out the Supreme Court judgement on Rajiv Gandhi Killers and feel it should be overthrown
Old Roman coin, image courtesy Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna
My Bemused half blurts, ‘What a coincidence. I start to write about Mullai-Periyar Dam which is about 120 years old and end up with an image from a Museum that is 120 years old!’
Have been lurking on your wonderful blog and couldnt resist putting a comment on this post..
ReplyDeleteHow long do you want this old dam to stand strong? Is there a magic figure somewhere?
and meanwhile, should Kerala and TN fight like KG students or sit and talk like adults?
as for the following:
but swear their willingness to build a new reservoir nearby, in the same area which is earthquake prone by their own admission...
A dam that can withstand 6-7 RS can be build... and at present this area is under such a seismic zone.. but then none has ever predicted an earth quake and hence is reluctant to go by the SC's judgement.
I believe, TN can do much more to store the excess water by way of reservoirs etc instead of insisting that the height of the dam be raised. One fears that the cause of the recent tremors could be the weight of such a body of water.
@ Happy Kitten - thanx.
ReplyDeletea) How long the dam should stand (or not) - I don't know. Answer is simple - it should be a technical (engineering) opinion & should not be based on 'feelings' of people - either in TN, or KL or elsewhere, including mine.
:-)
b) When 2 sides have taken immovable positions, what is the use of talking? Kerala is not willing for anything short of blowing up the damn Dam. TN will not accept it. How do you/we/they negotiate?
c) As a corollary, the matter is with the Supreme Court and S.C. has deputed a team of neutral (non TN non KL) civil engineers to assess and report. If KL (or TN) refuse to accept that report, what can anyone do?
d) A Dam that can withstand 7 Ritcher can be built - yes. But then an existing Dam can also be reinforced to same strength - can it not?
e) I'm sorry to say this and don't mean any offence. But I guess you aren't fully aware of rivers and water resources of TN. TN doesn't have any major rivers - by which I mean rivers which originate inside TN - except for Tamirabharani and Vaigai. And R. Vaigai is fed by waters of Periyar, tunneled through - believe it - Mullai Periyar Dam. Rest of all the rivers in TN are either just large/broad streams or are already dammed up. There are no rivers left in TN to build a reservoir on.
Here is a TN river map:
http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/tamilnadu/river-map.html
Here is a write up on TN rivers:
http://www.whereincity.com/india/tamilnadu/rivers.php
f) There is no 'excess' water in TN. Matter of fact, even the groundwater resources of TN are heavily exploited. Here is a GoI study on GW potential of TN:
http://www.doccentre.net/docsweb/rainwater-harvesting/groundwaterpotential-aboutrainwater.jpg
g) OOH, Kerala has 47 rivers, about 42 of which don't have any dam on them - only 5 rivers of KL have been dammed with reservoirs; of which Periyar river is one.
h) that mere point (in (g) above) doesn't justify the existence or non-existence of M-P dam. If it is good enough, or can be made good enough, let it stand. If it is no good or can't be made good, blow it up.
i) Last, TN doesn't want the height of dam to be raised; but only to raise the water level in the dam. The full capacity of M-P reservoir is 152 feet. Supreme Court initially (in 1979?) restrained TN from storing more than 136 ft of water, pending repairs to strengthen the dam. SC also ruled that once such reinforcements have been done water can be raised to full capacity; the first stage of which is to store water upto 142 feet.
Now KL disputes that - storing water upto 142 feet; instead wants the storage level to be brought down to 120 feet. Because of the geography (keep in mind that a tunnel through mountain brings/fills the Periyar water into the r. Vaigai) if water level falls to 120 ft or less, the water in the dam cannot be released into r. Vaigai, effectively it will run dry.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2711908.ece
j) PS: There is a view that earthquakes started in the area only after KL built the Idukki reservoir and started storing water there. If true, then it is the Idukki dam which should be blown up! LOL. Infact after earthquakes, Idukki dam has also had pieces falling off from/nearby.
http://hindu.com/2004/02/07/stories/2004020709440500.htm
Whew! my response should have been a post on its own!
:-D
Thank you very much for your response.
ReplyDeleteI think I was not clear when I talked about excess water. The excess water that I mentioned is the one that TN wants to be stored at Mullaperiyar. Why cannot TN store this excess water by creating reservoirs? If Kerala has more rain and rivers, TN has more land. Let the dam stay at a safe level of 120 while the excess water runs down to these reservoirs. Since TN insists that water is the only issue, wont this solve the problem?
No dam in this world has been constructed to last forever and hence we have something called dam decommissioning. Since the dam in dispute is made of lime and sukhri, how long can one "stregthen" it?
If as you say Idukki dam is the cause of tremors, then dont Kerala have a right to use Mullaperiyar in a way that is beneficial to Kerala while keeping the safety of the people in mind, specially since a broken dam will take away the lives&property of only those living in it's vicinity and inside Kerala? Drought in Kerala and TN will come only after this event.
But so far, Kerala has not even raised this issue but continues to state that water will be given to TN, hence is it fair on TN's part to brush every fear of the Keralite by way of "feeliings"?
@ HK - its nice to have a discussion. Provided we (you/me) don't get caught up in the issue(s) concerned.
ReplyDelete:-)
Before we go into this further, just take a look at the google earth/map of the location - pls turn on terrain to see the elevation - which will give an idea of the issues involved.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=10.054051,77.426491&spn=0.091274,0.388641&t=u&z=12&key=ABQIAAAAQqSIovB9EfXh72TB8kDpjxR_wena9kPy_A6wCQ67N-sVGkOLHRRWEgZunwUbUj2wOG1kBKufYRE55Q&mapclient=jsapi&oi=map_misc&ct=api_logo
a) excess water from M-P reservoir: Because of the geography, water less than 120ft cannot be drained; at present water (that is above 120ft till 136ft) is regulated such that water is siphoned out of the reservoir through the canal/tunnel to Vaigai Dam - which was built in 1956(?) to store the 'excess' water. Let's be clear, if M-P stores full capacity - 152 ft (or anywhere above 120 ft), the water is drained to Vaigai dam - is this not what you are talking about?
b) Corollary - A Dam/reservoir cannot be built upstream; an subsequent storage facility can only be built downstream - simple - water flows down, not up!
c) Corollary 1 - so any 'new' dam by Kerala has to be downstream of M-P on the R. Periyar. Wait a minute! There is already one such dam, almost the same distance from M-P dam as Vaigai Dam is, on the side of Kerala! That one is the Idukki Dam/Reservoir.
d) Corollary 2 - Pumping water up uses more power (read electricity) than what can be produced by hydro-electric projects. So if Periyar Power Station in Lower Periyar, TN, produces 175MW, while the 'excess' water from M-P dam flows to Vaigai dam, it would require about 75% more power to pump the same amount of water back to M-P dam.
e) Corollary 3 - So, if KL wants to build a new dam - it can be only be between M-P and Idukki (because of (b) as explained); which is already seismic prone as everyone says.
f) Corollary 4 - If such new M-P-I-intermediate (MPIi) Dam is built, KL would have to spend more power (electricity) to transfer same amount of water to TN than it can be produced at MPIi dam or even at Idukki. In effect, it is a done deal - no water, no power to TN.
..contd
g) There is no safe level at 120. At present water is maintained at 136 and has never gone down (except during drought). At 120ft, water cannot flow to TN but can only flow to KL which is downriver. With 136, Vaigai dam is getting adequate water to sustain irrigation. If TN wants to drain more water (as you suggest), being gravity drained network, the only way to increase flow is to increase water height, which is what TN wants (as you suggest).
ReplyDeleteh) Corollary G1 - Some say the whole KL protest is because Idukki reservoir has been installed/designed with a 700MW hydro electric plant. But with present water storage - Idukki is only 20% full - it produces only 1/3rd electricity or so ~ 200MW. If there is no M-P dam, then Idukki can get filled up to full, produce full 735MW which will fullfill all of Kerala's power needs for future. If so, God help TN.
i) Dams can last forever. Within a few hundred kilometers is the Grand Anicut which was built in 02 A.D. - about 1800 years ago. Though I jokingly referred to construction of lime and mortar versus steel and concrete, there is no proof that even with proper maintenance, and reinforcements if required, a brick, lime and mortar construction cannot last. There are dams which have been in existence for 500 years or more.
j) Corollary i1 - Please don't ever say 'dams cannot last' to or in the vicinity of the Dutch. Amsterdam was formed (and is still) by dam across R. Amstel; Rotterdam was formed (and is still) by dam across R. Rotter.
:-D
k) Actually in case of Dams, 'what type' of dam it is, is more important than 'what material' was used in construction. A Gravity Dam of which M-P is is inherently stronger (and hence safer) than any other type (construction) of dam.
l) Corollary k1- A dam is destroyed by broadly - lack of maintenance (which is not the case with M-P dam); faulty design (after almost 120 years no one can say that); natural disasters like earthquakes (dealt with above); and excessive water inflow. A Gravity Dam like M-P is far more likely to withstand an abnormal ingress of water (a slamming effect) than an Arch Dam like Idukki. That is not a 'feeling' or 'sentiment' - it is a hard fact. A Gravity dam has more 'material' and so it is like saying a bigger rock will withstand a flash flood rather than a smaller rock.
0:-)
m) If Idukki is the cause of tremors (as some speculate), then M-P is the Kerala's safety valve. Keep in mind Idukki can store upto 565 feet of water (and is now only about 25% full), just go to that google map and see the size as of today of M-P reservoir/Periyar Lake (lower center) against Idukki (center left) and Vaigai (top right). As of today, as you can easily see, with some check dams between M-P and Idukki, surge of water if M-P breaks can be controlled, and Idukki can easily accommodate 2 or 3 M-P water - 'aaja mere raja'! LOL. But if Idukki breaks, then maybe even God may not be able to help Kerala. May it never happen.
ReplyDeleten) If M-P *and* Idukki break, there will be havoc in Kerala and drought in TN. But there will be no drought in Kerala. Remember Idukki is not full and water is being released from Idukki just to keep the power project going and keep the downstream river in flow. As it is, in Kerala there is no cultivation or farming, only plantations. And plantations don't depend on river or irrigation. They depend on rainfall.
o) KL assures water to TN. Now, even if I am not a madrasi but a neutral, it is hard to believe. There is a 999 year lease, signed by the erstwhile rulers of (part of) Kerala which still stands. There is a Central Water Commission Tribunal ruling which says there is nothing wrong with the Dam and water can be stored till 150+ ft. There is a Supreme Court ruling which says 'to be on the safe side' strengthen the Dam and then raise the water level. If KL doesn't seem to be bound by all these, how can TN trust an assurance now?
Isn't it fishy? If a state signs a 999 lease agreement, and then within 120 years tries to subvert it, how can that state or its politicians can be trusted to keep their words which they utter now?
p) *Feelings* of people shouldn't stand in the way of proof and scientific facts. But then, even the present Govt of TN is going with the 'feelings' of people w.r.t. Koodankulam and wants the Govt of India to assuage 'their' feelings - but then the self same Govt. of TN protests when Govt. of India moves to put in a 'Disaster Management Plan' in the event of M-P Dam breakage.
Personally, I simply don't know what to say. There are facts and there are feelings. Then there is politics.
Whatever, thank you for stimulating my mind. I don't think I'd had to think so deeply about things for a few days now.
:-D
Whew and cheers!
Cheers!
ReplyDeleteSorry if I am taking your time but I am glad to have started this conversation.. have learned much
So the real issue for TN is not only water but also electricity(although the TN politicians never mention this). I think this is a funny problem and shall never be solved unless TN understands that water originates in Kerala.
Have opened up maps to see your point of view specially on the following:
Because of the geography, water less than 120ft cannot be drained; at present water (that is above 120ft till 136ft) is regulated such that water is siphoned out of the reservoir through the canal/tunnel to Vaigai Dam - which was built in 1956(?) to store the 'excess' water. Let's be clear, if M-P stores full capacity - 152 ft (or anywhere above 120 ft), the water is drained to Vaigai dam - is this not what you are talking about?
b) Corollary - A Dam/reservoir cannot be built upstream; an subsequent storage facility can only be built downstream - simple - water flows down, not up!
As far as I can understand from maps and others, there seems to be no reason why water cannot be drained if the height is maintained at 120.. maybe it would need more tunnels or a separate channel? and yes, these reservoirs needs to be built downstream... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mullaperiyar_IA.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam
The dam created a reservoir in a remote gorge of the Periyar river situated 3,000 feet above the sea in dense and malarial jungle, and from the northerly arm of this manmade waterbody, the water flowed first through a deep cutting for about a mile and then through a tunnel, 5704 feet in length and later through another cutting on the other side of the watershed and into a natural ravine
but as you must know, TN is already utilizing enough and more water by way of additional tunnels and it's likes. Else how is TN producing power? You should also remember that the need of the hour (when the lease was signed) was water for irrigation and not for power.
Corollary 1 - so any 'new' dam by Kerala has to be downstream of M-P on the R. Periyar. Wait a minute! There is already one such dam, almost the same distance from M-P dam as Vaigai Dam is, on the side of Kerala! That one is the Idukki Dam/Reservoir.
ReplyDeleteI think the site for the new dam was jointly agreed upon by the two states earlier, but I am unable to get a proper link for the same. And while this new dam is being built, the current one can continue to supply TN with water. And as you mentioned, the Iddukki dam does need water and I read that 5% would be used for this purpose.
The grand anicut or the Kallanai dam cannot be compared to MP.. The Kallanai is made with unhewn stone, 329 m (1,079 ft) long, 20 m (66 ft) wide and only 5.4 m (18 ft) high wheareas MP dam is 53.66 m (176 ft).. and I am sure that the other dams mentioned are just as different.
Your statement...
Isn't it fishy? If a state signs a 999 lease agreement, and then within 120 years tries to subvert it, how can that state or its politicians can be trusted to keep their words which they utter now?
You should understand that this lease agreement was signed during the British days.. India has come a long way since.. havent we? A new dam will give way to a new agreement and this need to be drawn up with mutual trust.
All these years, those living in the vicinity of the dam (both Keralites and Tamils) have trusted the engineers when they assured that the dam is safe... it is the same trust that is to be shown if and when Kerala or a joint team of both the states manages a new dam.
I grew up around this place (but have no other ties at the moment, except the sweet memories)…Grew up seeing both the Keralites and the Tamils.. and at times it is hard to distinguish both. and those in Kerala are well aware that TN needs the water.. they shall never agree if TN is denied water in anyway.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2769566.ece
Yea.. it is complex.. but the govt. at the center needs to do more.. it needs to bring both the states together for talks..
Do have a look at the following article..have copied an excerpt..
http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl1724/17240420.htm
"For every argument raised by Tamil Nadu in support of its claims, there is counter-argument in Kerala that appears equally plausible. Yet, each time the controversy gets embroiled in extraneous issues, two things stand out: One is Kerala's refusal to acknowledge the genuine need of the farmers in the otherwise drought-prone regions of Tamil Nadu for the waters of the Mullaperiyar; the other is Tamil Nadu's refusal to see that it cannot rely on or continue to expect more and more from the resources of another State to satisfy its own requirements to the detriment of the other State. A solution perhaps lies in acknowledging the two truths, but neither government can afford the political repercussions of such a confession"
But here, the Keralites do know that TN cannot be without water.. and this is a fact... those in Kerala are not looking forward to enjoy the status of the "Dog in the manger"...
But keeping in my mind the politics, specially in Kerala, one would rather have an agreement where the dam is maintained at a safe height of 120, without a new dam. A new dam is going to cost much for Kerala (with the usual corruption etc.) and I am not sure how the state is going to ever make it feasible.. unless more power can be generated at Idukki and TN is also kept happy.
ReplyDeleteWhoo, Whoo! this one is good enough to spin on a blog of its own! LOL
ReplyDelete1) Water/Electricity for TN: Water is the main requirement. As water flows thorough the channel/tunnel at Lower Periyar a hydro electric plant is making electricity. If there is no water from M-P dam, no electricity (from that plant). So electricity generation is a by-product. So no one talks much about it.
2) Drain-able water in M-P Dam: Water can be drained below 120ft; but it can flow only to Kerala - i.e., through the R. Periyar to Idukki and beyond. The channel to take water to TN is located at /above 120ft. Yes deep water channels can be dug (technically yes, but if feasible or not, I don't know), but Kerala is not in the mood to think about it. Seems their 1 point agenda is to dismantle the M-P dam.
3) TN is sitting pretty because, legally, everything is one their side - except for the 'earthquake fear/feeling' of Keralites. TN has the treaty, it has the CWC ruling, it has the SC ruling and a 'pass' in everyone of 30 odd 'tests' to check dam's integrity. How do you beat that?
4) Excess water use by TN: To correct a minor point. TN has the right to fill the dam up to 152+ ft and use the water. But now under a temporary SC restraining order, TN can store water only up to 136ft. So TN is *not* using excessive water or has *not* dug additional tunnels (into the dam/reservoir itself).
5) No Hydro-electric power in Treaty: Another minor point. The proposal for the dam was *approved* by the then Madras Govt. in 1882. Though the treaty itself was signed in 1886, it was being negotiated for more than 2 decades.
Let me insert a footnote here - the World's first ever hydro electric project was commissioned in 1881, yes *only* in 1881. Now, do I have to explain further why electricity was never mentioned in the treaty?
LOL
Plus, being a gravity dam, I don't know whether a hydro electric project on the dam itself is feasible.
6) New Dam Approval: Site for the new dam or even an *approval* for new dam was never given by TN. It is another twisting of words. When the problem came up in late 70s, after Idukki was built, and after earthquakes started, and after Kerala wanted to dismantle the M-P dam - TN naturally said something like, 'Well, if tests prove that M-P is beyond repair, then, in keeping with the treaty, you/we/together can build a new dam, but TN will not fore go its rights to the water'. I too cannot find a link to this.
(contd.)
ReplyDelete7) Grand Anicut: I am sorry to have tried to pull a fast one on you. It is an old sailor's trick to subtly insert/suggest some information/problem/scenario which appear as apparent solution, but aren't in real. Later while I became a shore manager, I found out that it is also a management technique. One resorted to - to see whether the victim comes through and he is good enough. In stories it is termed 'red herring'. I am ashamed to have tried the stunt in a blog of all the places; My apologies.
I am not going to write anything about Grand Anicut in the prevailing climate in India in general and in TN in particular. Being what it is, a slight comment could be taken as offensive, scurrilous or disparaging and may be even drown me in a legal soup. [pun intended]
But what I can and will write is on technical matter about Overhead Tanks and water pipelines which even my 8th fail plumber can understand and cannot take offence with.
Diverting water to another tap/waterline from an existing one is easy - water pressure being less, it is a simple matter of putting up a PVC 'T' joint and slapping up some glue. It will hold. Maintenance and upkeep is easy.
Drilling a new hole to put up a new connection in the OverHead Tank itself is more complicated. It is not a simple job and water pressure being high, is prone to leaks. Maintenance and upkeep needs more care.
You can make what you want of it. But there are other dams which have been standing for 500 years or more. But concentrating on a contemporary dam of Mullai-Periyar, there is the Theodore Roosevelt Dam, completed in 1911. It was originally built of rubble and masonry, stood 280 ft high - an arch-gravity dam.
In 1996 it was 'encased' in concrete and height raised to 357 ft. Mind you it was 'encased' not dug up and rebuilt. So if we want it, even M-P can be 'encased' and strengthened/reinforced. I think you had asked earlier how can you strength a lime and mortar dam.
LOL - where there is a will, there is a way.
8) 999 year Treaty is Void: Another minor point, which ppl haven't realised - about the Treaty. The Kerala attitude (and even parts of TN in Katcha Theevu matter) is 'let's abrogate the treaty'. This has far reaching consequences. A state (like states within a country or like 'state' which means a country/nation in International Law) cannot say that it will not honour 'old' treaties, just because it 'feels' so or even if it is inconvenient.
If we decide to abrogate such treaties, especially a treaty signed by a Princely state with the British, then India has no legal leg to stand on w.r.t. the 'McMohan Line'- the border between India and China (then Tibet). Because China till date says that Tibet (a part of China now) had no right to sign the Treaty with the British (India).
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers23%5Cpaper2290.html
LOL.
Another footnote: The British gave back 'Hong Kong' to Communist China, after the expiry of 99 year lease - though lots of Hong Kongers 'felt' otherwise. And Britain did not sign the treaty with 'Communist':-P
(contd.)
ReplyDelete9) Central Intervention: Again, there are prickly issues. The Centre can only intervene in a tribunal form, which was done with the CWC (Central Water Commission), which ruled in favour of TN.
Before we go any further, there are constitutional issues involved. Rivers and River waters are state subjects. So is Law & Order, Animal Husbandry, Irrigation, Education etc. Centre cannot wade in and do what it wants in these subjects - if it does, it will be slammed in/by the S.C.
It can only do so if both parties agree - which both did by going to CWC. When decision went against KL, they went to S.C. Now they refuse to even obey S.C.
OTOH, some parts of TN rabidly call for Central Intervention in M-P issue (probably because they are in the home run). But when Centre tries to bring about uniform standards otherwise - like CET for Medicine/Management/Higher Education, or Common Syllabus in Maths/Science, or bring in VAT (earlier) or GST (now), or uniform Policing structure, the same TN protests about Centre meddling in state affairs. TN is not alone, WB and BJP ruled states also protest.
Forget other matters, did you follow the Parliament fracas on LokPal bill. Even a national party - *the* principal opposition party - the BJP, howled when the bill stipulated that 'Lok Ayukthas' have to be formed in every state - calling in Centre meddling in purely state subject. Sorry, it was even worse. The BJP actually said the Parliament - yeah, the Parliament, doesn't have powers to enact a law on a state subject - the termed it as attempt to dismantle the 'Federal' structure.
My Foot!
10) Last minor point: You said that water 'originates' in Kerala and the Hindu article 'resources from another state'. Both need correction. The treaty between the then Madras Presidency and the then Travancore (Princely) state, gave 'all the rights' over 'all the water' of Mullai Periyar *and* its 'catchment area'. So technically, legally, for the next 999 years (minus the ~118 years), the 'resources' are TN's. Kerala a literally go suck its collective thumb. In fact, it is TN's largessee to let water flow down R. Periyar to Idukki.
/don't jump on me/ /I'm just saying the legal position/
And the Kerala which you talk about now was not the one which signed away the waters. The then Madras Presidency included Malabar (in KL now), South Kanara and Nilgiris/Coorg (in Karnataka now). But did not include Kanyakumari (in TN now).
http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/india/presmadras1909.gif
Whew! What a day!
If ordinary individuals like both of us cannot come to an agreement, I do not blame those who are involved in the decision making process :)
ReplyDeletebut one point stands out from your comment...
So technically, legally, for the next 999 years (minus the ~118 years), the 'resources' are TN's. Kerala a literally go suck its collective thumb. In fact, it is TN's largessee to let water flow down R. Periyar to Idukki.
Guess this is one reason Kerala needs to build a new dam.. and if in the process TN joins hands, then we shall have two happy states...
Cheers!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete