Integrated Dam Assessment Models –

Towards Sustainability of Dams

Desiree Tullos, Bryan Tilt, Phil Brown,

Darrin Magee, and Aaron Wolf

Costs and benefits of dams

“Dams have made an important and significant contribution to human

development, and benefits derived from them have been

considerable…In too many cases an unacceptable and often unnecessary

price has been paid to secure those benefits, especially in social and

environmental terms, by people displaced, by communities downstream,

by taxpayers, and by the natural environment” (WCD 2000)

Dams in, out, and reoperated

Dams out:

Dam removal in America

• Expired permits - Federal Energy Resource Commission (FERC) relicensing hydropower projects at expiration of 30 to 50 year licenses

• Aging dams - 85% of dams in the US will reach the end of their working life by the year 2020 (FEMA 1999)

(Heinz Center 2002)

Endangered salmon in theWillamette River, Oregon

Chinook populations

past (1900) ~300,000

present (2005) ~50,000

Steelhead populations

past (1900) ~200,000

present (2005) ~5,000

Dam removal in America

Impacts of dam removal

• Fate of released sediment?

• Impacts of fisheries?

• Food web interactions?

• Institutional, Legal, Political, and Equity Impacts

• Quality of the Living Environment

Major et al. (2008)

Dams reoperated:

“Environmental Flows”Reoperation of dams to provide the “acceptable

balance between a desired ecosystem condition

and other social and economic needs for water”

(IUCN 2003)

Impacts of environmental flows

– Biophysics:

transport and resorts sediment,

reset habitats, filter exotics

– Socio-economics:

affect water supply, hydropower

generation, recreation

– Geopolitics:

require negotiations among

stakeholders over competing water uses

Image: USGS (2005)

Sustainability of dams

Barrier 1 – Independent evaluation of

impacts

• Environmental Impact Analysis

• Social Impact Analysis

• Cost-Benefit analysis

Barrier 2 - Defining size of dam impact

Large dam definitions

• WCD: height>15m or 5m>height<15m & reservoir>3x106 cubic m

• Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety:Storage capacity > 50 acre-feet

• USACE: hazard based

• Stanley and Doyle 2002: hydraulic residence time

Interdisciplinary Dam Assessment Model

(IDAM)Can we improve the sustainability of

dam design and operation?

IDAM

Biophysical impacts of dams

Biophysical impacts of dams

Gregory et al. (2007)

IDAM: Biophysical impacts of dams

• Biodiversity - Animals and vegetation

• Flooding

• Wildlife and habitat

• Cultural resources

• Recreation

• Spread of disease

• Water quality

• Air quality

Bio

ph

ysic

al in

dic

ato

rs

Geopolitical impacts of dams

Events database example

DATE BASIN COUNTRIESBAR

SCALEEVENT SUMMARY

ISSUE

TYPE

12/5/73 La PlataArgentina--

Paraguay4

PRY and ARG agree to build 1B dam, hydroelectric

projectInfrastructure

1/1/76 Ganges

Bangladesh--

India--United

Nations

-2

Bangladesh lodges a formal protest against India with

the United Nations, which adopts a consensus

statement encouraging the parties to meet urgently, at

the level of minister, to arrive at a settlement.

Quantity

7/3/78 Amazon

Bolivia--Brazil--

Colombia--

Ecuador--

Guyana--Peru--

Suriname--

Venezuela

6 Treaty for Amazonian CooperationEconomic

Development

4/7/95 Jordan Israel--Jordan 4

Pipeline from Israel storage at Beit Zera to Abdullah

Canal (East Ghor Canal) begins delivering water

stipulated in Treaty (20 MCM summer, 10 MCM winter).

The 10 mcm replaces the 10 mcm of desalinated water

stipulated Annex II, Article 2d until desalinization plant

completed

Quantity

6/1/99 SenegalMali--

Mauritania-3

13 people died in communal clashes in 6/99 along

border between Maur. & Mali; conflict started when

herdsmen in Missira-Samoura village in w. Mali, refused

to allow Maur. horseman to use watering hole;

horseman returned w/ some of his clansmen, attacking

village on 6/20/99, causing 2 deaths; in retaliation that

followed, 11 more died.

Quantity

Basins at risk: working hypothesis

“The likelihood of conflict rises as the rate of change within the basin exceeds the institutional capacity to absorb that change.”

What are indicators?

Basins experiencing sudden physical changes or

lower institutional capacity are more conducive to

disputes:

1. Uncoordinated development: a major project in the absence of a treaty or commission

2. “Internationalized basins”

3. General animosity

Conflict within and among

multiple scales

The smaller the scale, the greater the likelihood of dispute.

Categories of conflict:

•Intrapersonal

•Interpersonal

•Inter-sectoral

•Inter-agency

•Inter-state

•International

Geographic area-based hotspots

1. Sesan

2. Srepok

3. Sekong

4. UMNIP

5. Takeo Prey Veng/Dong Thap-An Giang

6. Tonle Sap

7. Siphandone – Strung Treng

8. Mekong Delta

9. Phnom Penh

10. Mun River

11. Songkhram River

12. Xe Bang Fai `

Preliminary Draft Identification of Environmental Hot Spots in the Lower

Mekong Basin

Note: locations shown are indicative only The map also shows locations of MRC’s Primary Water Quality Monitoring Network and reveals that at most of the identified hot spots monitoring is taking place.

Geo

po

litic

al in

dic

ato

rs

Socio-economic impacts of dams

The social and economic

impacts of dams

• Lessons from the conceptual literature

– International Association for Impact Assessment

– World Commission on Dams

– International Rivers Network

• Lessons from empirical case studies

– Chixoy Dam, Guatemala (Johnston 2004)

– Mohale Dam, Lesotho (Thabane 2000)

– Xiaolangdi Dam, China (Shi et al. 2006)

– Three Gorges Dam, China (Jing 2000, Edmonds 1992)

– Uchangi Dam, India (Phadke 2005)

Case study: Chixoy Dam, Guatemala

• Completed in 1980s with

international funding

• Largely Mayan population

• 3,400 people displaced

– Little financial compensation

– Reduced quantity and quality of

agricultural land

– Agricultural land often distant from

housing

– Lower incomes

– Health problems (poor nutrition,

high infant mortality)

Identifying vulnerabilities

in displacement• Income/production

– Landlessness*

– Joblessness*

– Loss of community resources*

• Material well-being– Homelessness*

– Food insecurity*

• Social capacity– Community disarticulation*

• Health outcomes– Increased morbidity*

– Marginalization and depression*

• Sites of cultural significance

• Potential social unrest

• Loss of future productivity

*Cernea 1999

Image: Yvonne Braun 2007

Socio-economic indicators

IDAM Example

Dam Site #1: 5th order river in Northwestern US• Main stem dam

• 21m high, 820m wide

• 120km2 reservoir

• 88km spawning habitat lost

• 18km dry river bed

• 23MW per year

• Irrigation water for 1,350 hectares of farmland

• 1,000 Native Americans displaced 200km

• Inundation of cultural and anthropological sites

Costs

Benefits

Area=101 Area=91

Dam Site #2: 4th order tributary in Northwestern US• Tributary dam

• 47m high, 120m wide

• 23km2 reservoir.

• 21km spawning habitat lost

• 23MW per year, electricity transmitted further

• Irrigation water for 423 hectares of farmland

• 6km dry river bed downstream.

• No human displacement

• No inundation of cultural or anthropological artifacts

Costs

Benefits

Area=40 Area=50

IDAM in action • Dam removal

• Environmental flows/dam reoperation

• International and generalizable?

* **

*

*

**

*

*

•Apply model to ongoing AIRC efforts

•Detailed work on Lancang/Mekong

•General work on Nu/Salween

•Socioeconomic surveys in both basins