23 New Dams across Teesta in India will Ruin Bangladesh

[GR!FF!N]

the primary question is, did you use the river for your own irrigation or not? If you did, why cant India?
About Mamta stopping the deal, thats how it works in India(ask lankans), and her concerns should be taken on board before any step. New delhi cant and should not force kolkata.

when Mamata objected that deal many members including Indians dissatisfied with that decision. but I think what she did is better for our own good.why give BD more waters when our own state suffers.India always ended up in the looser side of an water sharing treaty.we gave up 80% of Indus water to Pakistan and we're getting only 20%.but still Pakistan is grumpy on that and they even dragged us to the International court.same goes for Ganga water sharing Treaty with Bangladesh.and why always we've to make a treaty for every transnational river??There are 57 transnational river basins in Asia. Only four of them have treaties covering water sharing; and two of these were signed by India.while other countries are protecting their own water,we're generously(foolishly) giving them away with ultragenerous treaties.and never our neighbours showed any friendly steps to earn that generosity.I just want to take a leaf out of China's books who doesn't have a single treaty with all the neighbours on this matter.
read this........

Why Mamata may be right on Teesta - Analysis - DNA

 

[eastwatch]

the primary question is, did you use the river for your own irrigation or not? If you did, why cant India?
About Mamta stopping the deal, thats how it works in India(ask lankans), and her concerns should be taken on board before any step. New delhi cant and should not force kolkata.

You can certainly irrigate your farm land, but not at the expense of our farming. This is why BD is demanding for an equitable share of the Teesta water. The formula is 20% for the navigability of the river, and 40% each for both the countries. This is fair enough. So, you can use all the 40% of your share to irrigate the land.

 

[my2cents]

post that video buddy,it'll be a great help.

I will try. It has been a while back.

 

[xuxu1457]

China only build 3 dams on Yarlung Zangbo river which has 2000km long in China, then India bala bala, how India did to Bangladesh????

 

[eastwatch]

@eastwatch, you seem to avoid the question. Did bangladesh try to use river water for irrigation using canals or not?

We have built a dam on Teesta that makes the upstream river a lake which extends and passes the border to India. We use this water that was flowing down to the Brahmaputra before the dam was built. But, as this reservoir extends beyond the border, so, it also benefits Indian west Bengal by adding to the supply of irrigation water in Jalpaiguri.

But, unilateral withdrawal by India will make this river dry, and the downstream BD will suffer. This is why the two countries need a solution based on equitable sharing of the water.

By the way, building too many dams is a cause for ecological disaster. Rivers lose their natural course and beauty. There are silt and boulder accumulations because dams always slowdown the speed of flow.

 

[agamdilawari]

You can certainly irrigate your farm land, but not at the expense of our farming. This is why BD is demanding for an equitable share of the Teesta water. The formula is 20% for the navigability of the river, and 40% each for both the countries. This is fair enough. So, you can use all the 40% of your share to irrigate the land.

Dude all bullcrap aside, get one thing very clear. You can never get going with a 50-50 sharing crap with a country 10 times ur size. This is an unwritten but well understood rule of the world. I am not saying that BD or India is guilty here or one of the two hold more responsibility n other sh|t. My point is that you can never make an adversary of the size of India to agree on a treaty with clause of equal sharing of resources when the other nation is of the size of BD.

Call it arrogance or bullying of a bigger sized neighbor but thts the truth. You can try tht with countries like Myanmar but not with India...similarly US won't sign such 50-50 resource sharing agreements with Mexico or China with Mongolia. Live with it or cry for it till eternity and pour ur tears in Teesta instead, tht might help to raise its water levels on ur side then

 

[Roybot]

We have built a dam on Teesta that makes the upstream river a lake which extends and passes the border to India. We use this water that was flowing down to the Brahmaputra before the dam was built. But, as this reservoir extends beyond the border, so, it also benefits Indian west Bengal by adding to the supply of irrigation water in Jalpaiguri. But, unilateral withdrawal by India will make this river dry, and the downstream BD will suffer. This is why the two countries need a solution based on equitable sharing of the water.

Such nonsense. Teesta Barrage Project I at Lalmonirhat is atleast 10 KM downstream from India-Bangladesh border. Are you telling me that reservoir of yours runs for 10 KM to the border and then further 10 Km atleast to Jalpaiguri, uphill in a mountainous terrain! You clearly don't understand, geography, physics or basic engineering for that matter, either that or you take us to be nincompoops here.

Just like any other River barrage project the diversion channel drains out the reservoir (refer to the above satellite image). In this case this diversion channel runs for 650 km! Yes you read it right, 650 Km of diversion, irrigation channels!.

Yes an equitable water sharing agreement is needed, but equitable based on the natural command area of the river, not based on artificially enhanced command area using irrigation channels.

85% of Teesta's natural command area falls under Indian territory and only 15% under Bangladesh. If you can make your Barrage and 650 Km of diversion canals unilaterally without consulting India, so can we. Not just that you guys had plans to make Teesta Barrage Project II with another 500 or so Km of irrigation canals!

By the way, building too many dams is a cause for ecological disaster. Rivers lose their natural course and beauty. There are silt and boulder accumulations because dams always slowdown the speed of flow.

I wonder why we hear such arguments only when India embarks on a project. All we heard was awe and appreciation when China made three gorges dam, guess no ecology was disturbed in that project.

Forget about China, what about Bangladesh. North West Bangladesh had always been a dryish area, but with Teesta Barrage Project, Bangladesh managed to change the landscape, was that not upsetting the ecology? Or are we safe to assume to any project undertaken by India is against ecology and whatever Bangladesh does is obviously not!!

Human need always takes precedence over ecology. Our aim should be to keep the damage to a minimum. Otherwise where does one stop, practically anything we do in this world today is against ecology, but I don't see your or the other tree huggers ditching their petrol guzzling car and running to the jungle and living there without any modern, "ecology hurting" amenities.

Bottom line is any water sharing agreement, should be and will be based on natural command area, with 20% of the water being left for the river(which Bangladesh being the lower riparian country will have access to anyways).

Your needs are not more important than ours.

 

[LaBong]

You can certainly irrigate your farm land, but not at the expense of our farming. This is why BD is demanding for an equitable share of the Teesta water. The formula is 20% for the navigability of the river, and 40% each for both the countries. This is fair enough. So, you can use all the 40% of your share to irrigate the land.

Why should we let extra 20 % water to flow into Bangladesh for the navigability, being the lower riparian country you will get to use that 20 percent as well since tista flows into padma. At best we can let 40 percent water to flow into Bangladesh then you decide how much you would use and how will be left for navigability.

Total 40% percent sounds fair since almost 40% of tista flows through Bangladesh. Although this arrangement doesn't give us any advantage of being higher riparian country.

 

[Roybot]

Why should we let extra 20 % water to flow into Bangladesh for the navigability, being the lower riparian country you will get to use that 20 percent as well since tista flows into padma. At best we can let 40 percent water to flow into Bangladesh then you decide how much you would use and how will be left for navigability.

Total 40% percent sounds fair since almost 40% of tista flows through Bangladesh. Although this arrangement doesn't give us any advantage of being higher riparian country.

Although its not fair, but small concessions can be made for friendly countries.

We should stick to our our guns. Indian offer is based on natural command area of Teesta river , "the Indian formula, promoted in meetings of the JEC, has been to leave 10% of the dry season flow to the river, with the remaining 90% split 17% to Bangladesh, 83% to India. This converts to a dry season formula of 10% for the river, 75% for India, 15% for Bangladesh"

Anything more than that is being generous.

 

[GR!FF!N]

China only build 3 dams on Yarlung Zangbo river which has 2000km long in China, then India bala bala, how India did to Bangladesh????

tell me one thing..how many water sharing treaties you've with any countries??and how many dams China built on transnational rivers??try to know the answer,then we'll talk..

 

[the just]

Dude all bullcrap aside, get one thing very clear. You can never get going with a 50-50 sharing crap with a country 10 times ur size. This is an unwritten but well understood rule of the world. I am not saying that BD or India is guilty here or one of the two hold more responsibility n other sh|t. My point is that you can never make an adversary of the size of India to agree on a treaty with clause of equal sharing of resources when the other nation is of the size of BD.

Call it arrogance or bullying of a bigger sized neighbor but thts the truth. You can try tht with countries like Myanmar but not with India...similarly US won't sign such 50-50 resource sharing agreements with Mexico or China with Mongolia. Live with it or cry for it till eternity and pour ur tears in Teesta instead, tht might help to raise its water levels on ur side then

DADA GIREEEEEEEEEEEE

 

[eastwatch]

Such nonsense. Teesta Barrage Project I at Lalmonirhat is atleast 10 KM downstream from India-Bangladesh border. Are you telling me that reservoir of yours runs for 10 KM to the border and then further 10 Km atleast to Jalpaiguri, uphill in a mountainous terrain! You clearly don't understand, geography, physics or basic engineering for that matter, either that or you take us to be nincompoops here.

Just like any other River barrage project the diversion channel drains out the reservoir (refer to the above satellite image). In this case this diversion channel runs for 650 km! Yes you read it right, 650 Km of diversion, irrigation channels!.

Yes an equitable water sharing agreement is needed, but equitable based on the natural command area of the river, not based on artificially enhanced command area using irrigation channels.

85% of Teesta's natural command area falls under Indian territory and only 15% under Bangladesh. If you can make your Barrage and 650 Km of diversion canals unilaterally without consulting India, so can we. Not just that you guys had plans to make Teesta Barrage Project II with another 500 or so Km of irrigation canals!

Bottom line is any water sharing agreement, should be and will be based on natural command area, with 20% of the water being left for the river(which Bangladesh being the lower riparian country will have access to anyways).

Your needs are not more important than ours.

1) You have to check the effect of our Teesta Barrage on the real-time availability of water in Jalpaiguri. If you have the data for river contour, velocity, width of river etc. you can get the Back Water Curve by computer simulation to know how far the reservoir extends inside India. Check it before you deny what I said.

2) Whatever may be the length, 650 km or more, of diversion canals in our side is not the factor. Factor is how many ACRE-FEET of water is being irrigated in every dry season from the river and barrage system.

3) Calculate the present total available water (Q) by adding the water in the reservoir (Q1) plus the quantity of River Surface Runoff Water (Q2).

4) Now, India has built many dams that will cut off Q2. By India's unilateral action the quantity Q2 will be reduced to a quantity Q3 which is only 15% of Q2, or Q3 becomes only 0.15 x Q2. This is unacceptable.

5) India never protested and never claimed the quantity of water, which you are claiming here, before and when BD built the barrage across Teesta. We spent more than a thousand Crore Taka to build it. Know also it was designed and built fully by our own engineers. Now, a friendly (?) India is practically asking us to dismantle it.

6) In order to avoid friction I propose India built a number of small reservoirs in the upstream that will increase the volume of available water in the dry season, and use it to irrigate the parched Sikkim land and release 20% for navigation and 40% as our due share.

7) This 60% shall be calculated on the present natural volume of available water.

So, talk to your MM Singh and Didi Mamata about this new proposal.

 

[Brahmos_2]

Its our land and we can do whatever we want if you have problem then cry in front of UN still we won't give a flying rat's @ss

That is not a good thought bro. since its a trans-boundary river.

BTW! where were these people when we started construction..?? We invested billions of rupees in this project & its impossible to stop it now.

 

[priti]

i disagree with the title.. that 23 dams will ruin BD.

 

[INDIC]

Why will only Indian dam on tiny Teesta ruin Bangladesh but massive Chinese dams on mighty Brahmaputra won't ruin Bangladesh.