1 of 31

Review of hydro-economic models (HEMs), and the Teesta Hydro-Economic Model

PhD Research Proposal

Mohammad Abul Hossen (Tuhin)

Principal Supervisor: Professor Jeffery Connor

Co Supervisors: Professor Lin Crase

Dr Faisal Ahammed

Associate Supervisor: Dr Mac Kirby (CSIRO)

1

2 of 31

Introduction

There are more than 260 transboundary rivers in the world
Traversing around 145 countries
These rivers are cause of conflict
Arab and Israel
India and Pakistan
India and China
America and Mexico
Nile, Mekong, Murray Darling, Amu Daria

Management of rivers is important not for economy but also for peace

2

3 of 31

�Hydro-economic models (HEMs)�

HEMs are used to optimize benefits from river basin
HEMs are powerful tools to analyze water scarcity, drought, and water management problems.
More than 300 HEMs have been developed worldwide
Only 25 articles focused on transboundary river water disputes
HEMs cannot resolve water conflicts, they can propose for the options of solution.

��

3

4 of 31

�Objectives of the Review �

Several HEMs reviews have been conducted in the recent past,
There has been no review with a primary focus on the management of transboundary river water disputes, benefit sharing, or trade-offs.
Therefore, this review aimed to look at how HEMs can suggest mitigating water sharing disputes
We reviewed the studies that applied HEMs to Transboundary Rivers and addressed water allocation issues.
Explored what transfers of water between countries and sectors would be required to achieve most benefit from the river basin;
Describe which countries would have to compensate other countries so that no country or sector is left worse off

��

4

5 of 31

5

Name of River Basin	Reference (21 articles)
The Nile	(Whittington et al 2005), (Strzepek et al 2008)
	(Habteyes et al 2015), (Satti et al 2014)
	(Basheer et al 2018), (Jeuland et al 2017)
The Mekong	(Ringler at al 2004), (Ringler at al 2006)
The Amu Daria	(Jalilov et al 2015), ( Bechanov et al 2015)
The Zambezi river	(Tilmat and Kinzelbach 2012)
The Brahmaputra River	(Yang et al 2016)
The Ganges	(Wu et al 2013)
The Euphratis River	(Aytemiz 2001)
The Syr Darya	( Teasley et al 2011), (Cai et al., 2003)
Amu-Syr Darya	(Bekchanov, Ringler & Bhaduri 2015),(Bekchanov, Ringler & Bhaduri 2018), (Cai, McKinney & Lasdon 2002)

Name of rivers that was studied by HEM

6 of 31

�� Study area of the HEMs��

There are many HEMs for the Nile River that evaluate the river basin’s water sharing disputes.�
There are many studies on the Murray-Darling River basin that relate to water sharing.
HEMs are also relatively well developed on rivers between the USA and Canada��

�

6

7 of 31

� �Outcomes/main theme of the HEMs��

The purpose of most HEM studies was to increase/maximize the total benefits in the basin
Some studies estimated economic benefits if the river water can be used in a fully cooperative fashion
Many studies explored the potential for trade-off
Seven papers found potential for trade-off between upstream�hydropower vs downstream irrigation
Four articles found potential trade-offs between instream and offstream water uses
Inter-subcatchment trade-off analysis has also featured in some studies��.��

7

8 of 31

��Economic uses/sectors��

Different models considered different economic sectors
All the models considered the economic use of agriculture
Many models considered hydropower use
18 models considered industry and household��

�

8

9 of 31

�� Dispute Resolution��

Most of the HEMs coordinated management in the operation of the dams/hydraulic structures.
Trade-offs between upstream hydropower vs downstream agriculture�
Many others evaluated�increase irrigation efficiency��

�

9

10 of 31

� ��Limitations/knowledge gap��

All the models have numerous assumptions in calculating benefits
Many relating to lack of data
water quality or sediment transport is not incorporated, nor are groundwater flows incorporated
More spatial and temporal disaggregation, more stakeholder participation, more real data rather than assumption would be beneficial.
Some economic values like benefits due to flood control by dams, environmental benefits due to flow have not been quantified
Did not quantify economic cost due to dams or barrages such as environmental degradation, loss of flora or fauna.��

10

11 of 31

Teesta Hydro-Economic Model

Model Objective

To assess water available for agriculture, hydropower, navigation, domestic and e-flow
Economic value of water for these use
Assess the potential loss and gain for India and Bangladesh if water is shared

11

12 of 31

�GBM River System�

India, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh share the Ganges–Brahmaputra–Meghna (GBM) system
93% of the GBM basin is located outside Bangladesh (FAO,2011)
But 92% water pass through Bangladesh
Being a downstream country, Bangladesh has no control over rivers

12

Ganges Brahmaputra Meghna (GBM) basin(source Google)

13 of 31

India Bangladesh Water Dispute

54 transboundary rivers between India-Bangladesh (JRC,2017)
25 rivers are affected by water diversion
Diversion is severe in the Teesta
Not sharing hydrological data
Drainage congestion
Ownership of the Islands of border rivers
Bank erosion of border rivers

13

Source: Joint River Commission, Bangladesh

14 of 31

The Teesta Water Dispute

India constructed Gajaldoba barrage in 1985, operation started 1999
Bangladesh constructed Dalia Barrage in 1990 operation started 1998

14

15 of 31

Drought and flood consecutively
Fishermen, boatmen migrated to other areas/professions
21 millions people affected (Islam,2016)
Affecting agriculture, fisheries, navigation and environment
Teesta basin contributes 14% of BD agriculture
Agricultural and fisheries loss is US$ 25 million per year (Haque,2014)

15

Flood

Drought

The Teesta Water Dispute

16 of 31

Simplified Network of Teesta

16

17 of 31

Baseline/Present Condition

Teesta river is mostly used for irrigation, fisheries, hydropower, navigation, and domestic use (Shiliguri municipality)
India has been diverting most water from Gajaldoba since 2000
Water that flows to BD is regenerated from groundwater and inflows from one tributary, the Dharala
BD diverts most water from Dalia
From Dalia to Sundarganj, there is no diversion, river is almost dry

17

18 of 31

18

Agriculture Benefit Calculation

Net revenue is the per hectre profit

Total agricultural benefit for a project is the sum of revenue of all crops

19 of 31

Hydropower Benefit Calculation�

19

IRENA assumes 2.5 % of O & M cost for small hydropower

20 of 31

Fisheries Navigation Benefit

20

21 of 31

Domestic benefit calculation�

21

22 of 31

Environmental Benefit

22

23 of 31

Dredging Benefit

23

24 of 31

Model Outflow vs Observed Outflow for 2008-09

24

25 of 31

25

Scenario Development

Scenario	Water sharing
1(Baseline )	Scenario of 2008-09. 70% for India, 30% for BD, 0% for river flow
2 (Proposed agreement)	40% for India, 40% for BD, 20% for river flow. India will maximize hydropower

26 of 31

Assessment of Economic Value for different scenario

We assessed if 50% water is released from Gajaldoba Barrage
The potential impact was assessed

Potential loss and gain for both BD and India s computed.

26

Potential impact in India	Potential impact in BD
Loss in hydropower, irrigation, domestic use	Gain irrigation, fisheries, navigation, improved environment
Gain fisheries, navigation, improved environment

27 of 31

Result Hydro-Economic Model(Value in US$) �Hydropower loss is 16.25 MWh for 6 months (70.2GWh

27

	Values are in 2019 thousand USD
	Base Scenario (2008-09)		Water Sharing Scenario (2008-09)		Gain for India	Gain for BD
	India	BD	India	BD	Gain for India	Gain for BD
Agriculture	32,555	42,241	32,875	42,311	320	70
Hydropower	5,817	-	1,761	-	- 4,056	-
Domestic	688	-	688	-	-	-
Fisheries	97	1,630	414	1,989	317	359
Navigation	29	194	80	234	51	41
Environment	-	29,968	-	34,078	-	4,110
Dredging	2,385	2,970	3,889	3,833	1,504	862
Total	41,571	77,003	39,707	82,445	- 1,864	5,442
Basin-wide Gain ( if water is shared )						3,578

28 of 31

Comparison of benefit for two scenario

28

29 of 31

Potential for Inter-sectoral trade-off

There is potential for a trade-off between hydropower benefits in India, and other benefits both in India and Bangladesh including agriculture, domestic, environment, fisheries, navigation, and dredging.
The conclusions about trade-offs differ other similar studies where hydropower water use was estimated to be comparatively more beneficial than any other uses.
The reason for this dissimilarity is that hydropower is produced instream in those rivers whereas hydropower is produced off-stream in the Teesta.

29

30 of 31

Recommendations

There is no point of killing a river for 16.25 MW electricity
Bd may offer India −̶ installing solar energy power plant to minimize hydropower loss (22.5MW).

30

31 of 31

31

Thank You

Irrigation