Shri S.V. Ranganath (IAS Retd.), Board Member – CSTEP, delivered a talk at CSTEP on ‘Water and Future of Bengaluru’, as the first part of a series of lectures that he will be delivering on a range of governance-related issues, February 3, 2016.
2. www.cstep.in
Consumption Trends
2
Year Population
(in lakhs)
Demand
@135
lpcd
Supply after
Leakages in
MLD
Shortage
In
MLD
2001 57 770 458 312
2011 85 1147 559 588
2015 101 1364 884(40%) 480
2030 188 2538 1810(20%) 728
3. www.cstep.in
• 8 lakh households (h/h) covered by BWSSB
• 22 lakh h/h in Bengaluru in 2015
• 65% households in Bengaluru not covered by BWSSB in
2015
• This trend will only increase in the next decade
• Borewells will service this BWSSB non-covered segment
for a long time to come
3
BWSSB’s non-coverage area
*BWSSB: Bangalore Water Supply and Sewage Board
4. www.cstep.in
• Benagluru district has
212 lakes within BDA
areas
• Most of the sewage of
Bengaluru is flowing into
these lakes
• This affects ground water
acquifers and quality of
borewell water
4
Lake Destruction & Water Contamination
49% of this water not potable
49% has unacceptably high
levels of nitrates and
phosphates
19% affected by Escherichia Coli
Studies of Karnataka Institute of Public Health show:
5. www.cstep.in
• Water supply shortage in 2014 750 MLD
Water supply shortage in 2026 1300 MLD
• At least 700-800 MLD of water is supplied by borewells
• About 1250-1300 MLD of sewage is generated.
– Most of it flows into the lakes/storm water drains
– This pollutes ground water/borewell water
• Problem of flooding
5
Summary of Water Problems
6. www.cstep.in
6
Comprehensive Plan
•Coverage of all h/h by 2040 8,600.00
•Construction of STP/TTP 1,300.00
•Restoration of Rajakaluve 10,000.00
•Diverting sewage from lakes 2,000.00
•Cleaning lakes and restoration 15,000.00
•Public education/stakeholder education,
support to NGO
1,000.00
•Contingencies 2,100.00
•Source of available funding: 40,000.00
Prepared by NGOs
Rs. In crores
7. www.cstep.in
7
Source of Water to Bengaluru City
Across the River Yr. of
Commissioning
Optimum Drawl
(MLD)
Assured flow
(MLD)
Arkavathy 1896 36 50
Arkavathy 1933 148 135
Cauvery I Stage 1982 135 135
Cauvery II Stage 1982 135 135
Cauvery III Stage 1982 270 270
Cauvery IV stage-
1st Phase
2004 270 270
Cauvery IV Stage-
2nd phase
2012 500 500
Total 1360
In addition 700-800 MLD from borewells, only about 1000 MLD is pumped every day (average).
9. www.cstep.in
9
Proposed New Water Sources
a) Cauvery River a) Mekedatu
b) BWSSB own storage – reservoir
between Shiva Anicut & Mekedatu
b) Netravathi River Abstraction of water from Netravathi by
construction of dam and tunnel and use
these for storage and tapping (inter
basin transfer)
c) Almatti Dam Almatti Dam (Techno economic feasibility
not ready)
d) Tungabhadra River TB Dam – (Techno economic feasibility not
ready)
All these schemes are not practical
10. www.cstep.in
10
Alternate Water Resources
Integrated Urban Water Resources Management
a) Reduction of UFW
b) Waste water re-use - non potable use
c) Mining - potable use
d) Storm water management - Acquifer storage
reservoir
e) Efficient use of water - Rainwater harvesting
11. www.cstep.in
11
Initiatives to increase availability by 750 MLD
Initiatives Impact
(MLD)
Govt. cost
Rs.Crores
Private Cost
Rs. Crores
1 Decentralise sewage
treatment plants
165-175 500 450
2 Increase Rain water
harvesting
85-90 00 1200-1300
3 Rejuvenate lakes 175-190 430-450 00
4 Utilise tertiary
treated water
70-73 800-850 13-15
5 Stem leakages 250-270 800-1000 00
6 Promote sustainable
use of water
50-75 501 00
Total 750-800 2500-2700 1600-1800
12. www.cstep.in
• Commercial losses recovery requires strict vigilance to
identify unauthorised connections, replacing old water
meters, which are under recording.
• By introducing AMR (automated meter reading) for bulk
high revenue yield installations
• Commercial losses can be brought down easily in 2-3 years
by above measures;
• Physical loss reduction requires use of sophisticated
electronic gadgets to identify underground leaks
• These measures could impact 250-270 MLD.
12
Reducing UFW
13. www.cstep.in
• UFW projects are centered on the efficient use of water,
decreasing the pressure of fresh water resources
• There is often a community component, e.g. increasing the
access of safe water supply to urban poor
• UFW projects allow for tough reforms without steep
increase in domestic prices
• Institutional strengthening, capacity building and
technology transfer are very important components of
reduction in UFW
• Focus on low hanging fruits
13
Reducing UFW
14. www.cstep.in
14
Pricing of Water
• Tariff not revised for several years;
• Reluctance due to the impact on urban poor;
• ISEC study – the poor pay more for water than the middle
class consumers;
• Philosophical question – do the poor have a right of
access to water OR right of access to free water.
• Low prices act as a disincentives to use alternate sources;
a) BWWS Water Rs.6/KL,
b) BWSSB bore well Rs.15/KL
c) Rain water harvesting Rs.70/KL
d) Recycled water Rs.40/KL
15. www.cstep.in
Reduction of theft by: Education
Legal action
Prepay measures
Pressure limitation
Flow control
Reduction of Meter errors by Testing
Sizing
Replacement
Reduction of Human Errors by Training
Standardising
Reporting
Auditing
Reduction of Computer errors by Auditing
Checking (ground
Upgrade software
15
Reducing UFW (Commercial Use)
16. www.cstep.in
Strategies
• More efficient leak detection
• Pressure management and level control
• Improved system maintenance, replacement,
rehabilitation
• Improved response time for leak repairs
16
Reducing UFW (Economic Losses)
17. www.cstep.in
• 1300 MLD of sewage is generated
• 721 MLD of sewage treatment capacity exists
• 450 MLD of sewage is treated
• 339 MLD of additional sewage treatment capacity under
construction
• Industrial effluents also discharged without treatment
• All the sewage flows through storm water drains into the
lakes
• Bengaluru lakes are inter connected – one tank being
polluted with sewage or industrial waste will have a
cascading effect on all inter connected tanks
17
Sewage Problem
18. www.cstep.in
Objectives:
1. Achieve zero discharge of raw sewage into drains
2. Conveying sewage to treatment plants
3. Treating sewage to meet standards
4. Improving environment
18
Sewage Management
19. www.cstep.in
Because of:
a) Inadequate carrying capacity
b) Corroded and damaged sewers
c) Sewers with reverse / flat gradiant
d) Sewers not linked to system
e) Sewers not provided in certain areas
f) Sewers connected to drains directly
g) Manholes damaged for irrigation
h) Manholes overflowing due to blockage by the solid wastes
dumped into it
i) Manholes and sewers encroached.
19
Why sewage is flowing into storm water drains
20. www.cstep.in
20
Rainwater Harvesting
• Sec. 72A of BWSSB Act amended in 2009
• Mandatory RWH in all existing building with a floor
area of 2400 sq. feet
• Mandatory RWH in all new buildings with a floor area
of 1200 sq. feet
• Very lukewarm response. Out of 18 lakh properties only
68000 have commenced, only 50000 properties have
completed.
• Effectiveness of pit based system?
• If properly implemented, can contribute 25 MLD
21. www.cstep.in
Water problems of Singapore:
• Lack of natural water resources
• Pollution of water bodies due to flow of untreated sewage;
• Regular Flooding conditions
National programmes
• Reclamation of water
• Rain water harvesting
• Desalination
• Import of water from Johor Malaysia
21
Experience of Singapore
22. www.cstep.in
• In 1992 Phnom Penh Water Supply Authority (PPWSA) was
a war torn utility
• In 2012 PPWSA is Asia’s outstanding public utility;
• Financially and operationally Robust
• Has achieved full cost recovery
• Extremely low level of NRW (6%)
• Focus on organisational excellence, custom oriented
service and an extremely high level of service performance
22
Experience of Phnom Penh
23. www.cstep.in
• Inspirational leadership of EK Soon Chan
• Ability to drive through change
• Sustained efforts and commitment
• Leadership through example
• Focus on responsiveness and self motivation
23
Reasons for PPWSA success
24. www.cstep.in
24
Salient Features of PPWSA
1993 2012
1. Water Losses 72% 5.6%
2. Customer data base 26900 200000
3. Water distribution net work 288 kms 2000 kms
4. Water service coverage 20% 90%
5. Revenue collection ratio n.a. 99%
6. Water quality n.a. WHO standards (95
parameters)
7. Supply duration Once in 2 days 24 hrs/day
25. www.cstep.in
Challenges:
• Rapid urbanisation is outpacing ongoing efforts
• Intervention to ensure self sustenance
• Much more focus on sewage treatment, reduction of NRW
community involvement / ward committees
25
Future Challenges and Actions
26. www.cstep.in
• Need for very high quality leader
• Need for capacity building on a big scale
• Need for more accountability of multiple stake holders like
BWSSB, BBMP, BDA, LDA, KSPCM and other formal and
informal actors.
• Encourage maximum possible reuse and recycling at each
level (city, ward etc.) through stake holder consultation
• Specific legislation could be considered
• Comprehensive engineering plan for Flooding
26
Future Action Points
27. www.cstep.in
• Mandated under 74th Amendment of the Constitution;
• Ward Committees exist, but are completely toothless;
• Ward Committee to be suitably empowered:
a) Should promote sewage treatment plants, promote rain
water harvesting and stem leakages;
b) Have adequate budget allocation / monitor collections
c) Should have adequate powers
d) Capable committee members
e) Transparency and accountability
27
Ward Committees
28. www.cstep.in
a) 25% of potable water is used to flush toilets;
b) Flushing toilet: 9 litres
Half flush 4.5 litres
c) A single load of laundry – 75 litres
d) 10 minute shower with the tap running 90 litres
e) 10 minute shower with the tap off
while using soap / shampoo – 30 litres
f) Brushing Teeth – with tap running 45 litres
for five minutes with glass 0.5 litres
g) Dish washing under a running tap for 5 min. 60 litres
- filled sink 12 litres
28
Consumer Education
Ward Committee can also be used for consumer education.
29. www.cstep.in
1. Water problem in Bengaluru cannot be ignored
2. Inadequate attention of policy makers
3. IT expert committee (Shri Mohandas Pai
Committee) did not give adequate weightage to
this problem
4. Fate of cities which have ignored the water
problem:
a) Fathepur Sikri
b) Vijayapur (Bijapur)
29
Conclusion
