Price of neglecting hydropower

HYDROPOWER is regarded as one of the most important sources of energy Pakistan can count on. Despite the presence of a strong base for this form of energy, not enough has been done to tap the precious resource.

Estimates suggest the total identified potential for hydropower is around 45GW out of which only 14 per cent, amounting to nearly 6.5GW, has been exploited so far.

Over the last two decades when the energy demand has grown by nearly 200 per cent, the country has seen an addition of less than 25 per cent to its hydropower base. Failure in timely and sufficient exploitation of hydropower is one of the key causes of the ongoing energy crisis in the country. The government’s traditional approach of overlooking hydropower can lead to devastating consequences, if it is sustained any further.

Before getting into these details, let’s have a look at some of the distinctive advantages of hydropower as a source of energy and how it is being appreciated by the developed countries.

Hydropower is one of the oldest forms of energy mankind has used on a mass scale. Mechanical use of hydropower began thousands of years ago by the Egyptians and Greeks for irrigation and milling of grain. Its use for production of electricity dates back to the 19th century — in 1882 electricity was produced for the first time by the use of hydropower. It is the most versatile source of energy being used in the world. It is renewable, abundant, environmentally friendly and technically mature. It is also regarded as the most economical form of energy.

Hydropower systems are also classified as the most efficient power plants as they can have an operational efficiency of up to 90 per cent. It can be used in an extremely diverse range of sizes and designs — the generation capacity can range from kilowatts (KW) to billions of watts (GW). With an average life span of 50 to 100 years, hydropower projects are long-term investments that can easily be upgraded to take advantage of the latest technologies. Hydropower has the advantage of having long viability and very low operation and maintenance costs. Water from rivers is a domestic resource that is not subject to fluctuations in fuel prices; therefore, hydropower fosters energy independence and security.

A major contributor to world energy supplies, hydropower provides nearly 20 per cent of world total electricity demands and around 90 per cent of the electricity from renewable sources. There are many countries in the world where hydropower plays the predominant role in the electricity supply mix. Norway, for example, produces 99 per cent of its electricity from hydropower while Brazil produces 92 per cent, Iceland 83 per cent, Austria 67 per cent and Canada 70 per cent.

Currently, the largest hydropower system in the world is Itaipu that is housed at the Parana River between Brazil and Paraguay. With an installed capacity of 12.6GW, supported by 1,350 square kilometre of reservoir, and working at a load factor of up to 85 per cent, it annually generates around 100 billion KWh of electricity.

In Pakistan, the developments on the hydropower front are quite disappointing. Largely neglecting hydropower, the country has actually invited trouble in the form of the ongoing energy crisis. There are only five notable hydropower projects in operation: Tarbela, Mangla, Warsak, Chashma and Ghazi Barotha respectively having a capacity of 3478MW, 1000MW, 240MW, 187MW and 1450MW. Even of these, the capacities of the existing three reservoirs based hydropower facilities: Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma are declining due to sedimentation — the live storage capacity of the three reservoirs has been reportedly reduced by about 20 per cent. The growth in hydropower is utterly disproportionate in comparison to that of the energy demand in the country. Over the last two decades, the only meaningful hydropower activity has been the construction of 1450MW Ghazi Barotha project.

A sluggish growth of hydropower has caused its share to plunge in the national electricity supply mix — the contribution made by hydropower in the total electricity generation mix has decreased from 70 per cent in 1960 to 33 per cent in 2007. The massive vacuum created by the failure to develop hydropower has been filled by thermal power that now contributes to nearly 65 per cent of the total electricity demand of the country.

Here it is vital to understand that hydropower is an indigenous and renewable resource while oil (a key player in the thermal power generation) is by and large a foreign one since Pakistan meets nearly 80 per cent of its oil demands through imports. This categorical shift from hydropower to fossil fuels thus implies that the country has seriously compromised its energy security.

In other words, Pakistan has become substantially dependent on other countries to meet its energy requirements. In the wake of the ongoing geopolitical and military conflicts in the world, especially in and around the oil producing regions, the dependency upon foreign energy resources is not an ideal situation to be in.

Another downside of the shift from hydropower to fossil fuels is the enormous fiscal burden. Reports suggest that over the last three years, due to the steep rise in international oil prices, the petroleum import bill has increased by more than 150 per cent — from around $3bn in 2004 to nearly $8bn in 2007. In the last fiscal year it accounted for nearly a quarter of the total import bills of the country.

Hydropower by far is the most economical source of electricity in Pakistan. On average, electricity production through hydropower in 2006-07 cost US cents 0.5/KWh which is almost 10 per cent of the average cost incurred in electricity generation from thermal power.

The declined share of hydropower in the energy supply mix of Pakistan is thus not a healthy sign. In order to surmount the prevailing energy crisis and to ensure a sustainable energy future multi-fold exploitation of hydropower is imperative. Pakistan must aim at switching the bulk of its electricity base back to hydropower as quickly as possible.

Sufficient resource is there but what is missing is a combination of visionary policies and commitment. There are at least seven potential hydropower projects in GW range collectively holding a capacity of around 20,000 MW. Notwithstanding the initial work in the form of feasibility or pre-feasibility reports that was undertaken on almost all of these potential projects years (and in some cases decades) ago, construction was not undertaken. Some, like Kalabagh, became politically controversial, while others fell victim to a lack of will. Apart from these large-scale reservoir projects there are also a large number of sites for potential medium to small run-of-river projects, in many parts of the country, waiting to be tapped.

The writer is a lecturer in renewable energy at the Glasgow Caledonian University, UK.

dr.m.asif@gmail.com

Principles of leadership

CONSULTATION, cooperation and compromise are words which are a matter of political fashion these days. Joint conferences, mutual declarations and collaborative statements are overwhelming the media channels. History of distrust of political stances and postures has made us sceptical about this complete change of political heart.

While there has been a sense of relief at this rhetoric, there is also an apprehension that this happy merger and union of parties may be too good to be true, and the honeymoon might end as the race for parliamentary power begins.

However, even if these are exaggerated postures of bonhomie between opponents, it is a healthy change of strategy and can yield many beneficial effects for setting up a new direction in the political history of this country.

The leaders of all parties are displaying different leadership styles to leave an impression on the eager and awaiting public of being catalysts of change and saviours of national integrity, sovereignty and unity. Let us look at the leadership styles of each of these leaders and see if their new-found personal vision will be compatible and sustainable in the long run with the public expectations.

Asif Ali Zardari: A man we all love to hate, has all of a sudden become the centrifugal force with gravitational attraction for all parties. Once viewed as the equivalent to the male form of Lady Macbeth who caused the downfall of Benazir, he has emerged as a grieving loving widower bent upon realising his departed wife’s vision. He is playing the role of the healer, the saviour, the unifier.

His rhetoric is full of love and let bygones be bygones. He is opening his arms for all those who want to be part of a national reconciliation effort.

However, in this over accommodating mode that he has gone into therein lies the suspicion of giving way to everybody and everything. His statements of calling the Q League ‘Qatil League’ have already changed into the familiar chant of no problem in collaborating with all and sundry. His stance on restoration of judiciary is evasive and nebulous and his philosophy on working with the president is highly debatable.

It is this excessive acceptance of all good and bad which reveals hollowness in character, which, under different stressful circumstances may turn into compromising on promises and principles. Beware Mr Zardari; do not believe all is fair in war and politics.

Nawaz Sharif: A man who has had a past record of swinging from a liberal to a conservative, Mr Sharif has been very vehement in his defence of the priorities of restoring the constitution and the deposed judges. However he is known to be more emotional and changeable than composed and resolute. His recent change of stance on participating or boycotting the election is a typical Sharif swing from one loud claim to the other.

His party’s performance in the current election has surprised him as well, and made him go into this mould of being a man who is bent upon changing the history of this country, but the question remains that if he does not get the support of PPP on these two positions that he has taken, would he really have the courage to sacrifice positions of power, or would he once again swing his style from a man who will be the rule maker to a man who is a rule taker. While the upper two prospective leaders have been changing their leadership roles and styles, the following two leaders have maintained their styles in differing situations.

Chaudhry Shujaat: A man who is more known for providing comic relief than actual political sense, he remains an unruffled character who believes that power comes with manipulation and corruption. He resolutely denies any wrongdoing and refuses to fall prey to the wily questions of the media.

It is this stoic and unabashed stance which has led him to represent what is the worst in Pakistani politics, that is, complete disregard of ethics and absolute distaste for the truth. How long his nuisance value can provide political entertainment to the media, is now a question which is increasingly being answered as, not too long.

Pervez Musharraf: If ever there has been a disappointment in the political history of Pakistan, it has been Mr Musharraf. He has been his own undoing. His vision of eradicating corruption and instilling law and justice has been rudely and crudely blown to pieces by his own behaviour. He fails to take responsibility and will fail to save himself from the ultimate disgrace due to this failing.

He has violated the basic principle of leadership by preaching what he does not practise himself and by doing exactly what he claims he has never done.

Take the example of dealing with corruption, cronyism, injustice and spreading democracy. He has gone back on each and every claim he has made. Till today he disclaims responsibility for all the wrongs that beset the nation.

The point is, that if from terrorism to inflation, from corruption to nepotism nothing was his responsibility, then he himself is admitting to his ineffectiveness and ineligibility to handle the very issues his job description requires him to deal with. Thus he is making a case of political redundancy for himself.

But one must give him credit for being consistent in his style of egocentric leadership where he will only see what he wants to see, and live in a make-believe world where all the surveys, media and public opinion are fictitious and petty conspiracies bound to fade out with time. However time is ruthless and it runs out fast for those who do not change their styles with changing tides.

For all those who have gone before, and for all those who are waiting in the wings, a few words of advice. Leadership and sustainable leadership will only survive if it is principle-centred. Go back to the natural laws and you will find that the principle of integrity, equality and equity are the only ways of building up trust, confidence and respect in the eyes, hearts and minds of people.

Whenever the deeds of these leaders do not match their rhetoric they will be writing their own political epitaph. The people of Pakistan have given a golden opportunity to these leaders to learn from their mistakes and reform themselves and help this nation become more disciplined, more united and develop more faith in their own power than be dependent on foreign powers — a revival of the principles of discipline, faith and unity based on the vision of our founder leader are the only true paths to peace and prosperity.

Advising the media

NEEDLESS to say the media plays a great role in not only informing and educating the public about events within the country and abroad and their implications, but also in keeping the morale of the nation high so that the people can face every situation with courage and conviction.

If you keep this in mind, the oft-repeated sermons of the president and prime minister and other government leaders sound like so much hot air that the nation can well do without.

You and I frequently come across reports in which these leaders are reminding newspaper editors of their responsibilities.

However, we never see reports saying that, in their meetings with editors, the latter too reminded the leaders concerned about their duties and obligations and those of their government. Since these are not reported it would appear that the exercise is a one-way flow of sweet nothings, invariably ending in a sumptuous repast fit for a king.

No, it was not a one-way traffic of homilies. The fact is that editors are courteous persons and are accustomed to receiving gratuitous advice from government personalities.

They normally don’t pay attention to what they are being told. They listen of course, for it would be bad manners not to, but they do make some-what muted and half-hearted responses.

However, if they were to start following these wise and gracious homilies about what to print and what to reject, then newspapers would contain nothing but press notes, the weather bulletin and sports news, profusely illustrated with photographs of government personalities performing inane ceremonies.

I suppose the prime minister and the chief ministers and, of course, the president and governors too, are like that in most eastern countries. These chief executives address expostulations and guidelines all the time to all sorts of people — from heads of multinationals to unions of sewage inspectors. They seem to be masters of all subjects. It’s really amazing what office and a little self-confidence can do to a man.

I am sure you must have noticed, dear reader, how one day a public man is a briefless lawyer or a failure as a progressive farmer (though not a failure as a feudal) and the next moment, when he has been installed in a chair of responsibility, he becomes a specialist on every subject under the sun — from art and culture and the imperatives of self-reliance in industry and agriculture to the intricacies of international relations and the need to learn from China and South Korea.

I don’t know if the news reports covering the above examples do justice to the exhortations of leaders to editors to be prudently selective in reporting, but I am always struck by their contents as they are published.

They usually open with the following words: “The national press should inform the public about the evil designs of terrorists, criminals and anti-state elements so that it becomes aware of the dangers facing the country.”

This must come as a real shock to the editors, and on returning to office they must be pulling up the concerned staff. “When terrorists, criminals and anti-state elements send us their daily programmes, how dare you keep them back from the public?” A sure case of sabotage. (Readers, please don’t accuse me of pulling your leg.)

Let us drop this semantic argument here and go on to the other suggestion of the VIP to the editors. He appeals to them not to publish photographs “which may have a harmful psychological effect on the people.”

Realistic depiction of crime and violence is not supposed to be in the public interest and leaves simple-minded readers in a state of trauma.I too have often wondered about this aspect of pictorial reporting.

Being an old PR hand I know that the central and provincial publicity departments keep newspapers flooded with photographs of genuine public interest, some of them really exciting. Why then do newspapers insist on employing photographers of their own? These johnnies’ contributions only cover the political opposition, demos against the government, women’s fashion shows and so-called cultural activities — all calculated to demolish the morals of the people, and certainly not calculated to boost the public’s morale on which the government leaders lay so much stress.

On the other hand the official photographs supplied to newspapers are wide-ranging, patriotically inspiring and truly morale-boosting.

Look at some of the samples: The outgoing ambassador of Kleptomania paying a farewell cal on the President, an act of diplomacy; the governor and CM of Balochistan receiving the Punjab governor at Quetta airport, depicting national integration; the NWFP minister of public wastage opening a new primary school — a proof of educational development; meeting of the ruling PML(X) addressed by a provincial chief minister, symptomatic of healthy politics. There’s no end to the list.

I don’t know what the editors say to government leaders about their free advice on the national good, because official handouts never tell you what the other party said to the VIP when it called on him.

But if I had been among the editors I would have been deeply moved by the VIP’s obvious sincerity and his simple solutions to public travails. Such men are rare among elected representatives who can reduce apparently complex issues and insoluble problems to their bare essentials. The only thing then left is for the newspapers to follow the proffered advice; and lo and behold! the issues and problems are no longer there.

The nine lives of our top cat

IT is a common myth that a cat has nine lives. A bird’s-eye view of the Top Cat’s public life will reveal how many have been consumed. On Oct 12, 1999 force of arms got him his first life.

The Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) of 2000 stifled the first murmurs of dissent, and he got his second life. The Supreme Court judges who took a fresh oath condoned the constitutional transgression and bestowed a third life on him for ‘three years’.

Still international legitimacy eluded the Top Cat. On Sept 11, 2001 America was attacked and he did a breathtaking 180-degree twirl. Foreign audiences applauded and our Top Cat got his fourth life. The single greatest beneficiary of terrorism the world had ever known. There was now no stopping our nimble performer.

Dictating was fun and time flew by. The three years were coming to an end. A referendum was therefore pulled out from his top hat. In the April (Fool’s) referendum in 2002, every leaf of every tree voted and therefore, a fifth life. Nearly 98 per cent voted ‘yes’ to the question: “Do you want to elect President Gen Pervez Musharraf as president for the next five years for the survival of local government system, restoration of democracy, eradication of extremism and sectarianism and for the accomplishment of Quaid-i-Azam’s concept?”

Rule by force alone wasn’t satisfying enough. He craved legitimacy and yearned for public acclaim and both were contrived for this renowned artist. He proclaimed with bravado: “Let the entire world know that I am not alone.

Behind me are the 140 million people of Pakistan”. Critics quipped that he should have instead said “under me are 140 million people”. All observed that ‘over’ him flew the American bald eagle.

The Top Cat was now invited to the swankiest capitals of the world. The 98 per cent mandate was exhilarating. He was not asked to pack his bags. The curtain was not brought down and calls of ‘encore’ resounded. The 17th Amendment to the Constitution preserved and further extended the referendum result and a wonderful sixth life began. In due course, even this life started to run out.

The parliamentary mice were rounded up. The Boss Cat needed another life. “But, Sir, how can we give you another, brand new, shining five-year life when we can’t give ourselves one?” asked some. “Don’t forget who gave you yours”, was his response and the matter was settled and the deed done. The seventh life began.

However, the Top Cat’s eligibility was challenged before the Supreme Court. It was solemnly ordered that no notification regarding the results be issued until answers to certain constitutional questions were first settled. “What audacity!” our royal Cat complained. He then ripped into the judiciary on Nov 3, 2007. This time the Top Cat brokered no feigned formality; in Napoleonic fashion he crowned himself King — the eighth life began.

The phoenix-like specious Supreme Court vitalised and nourished on a freshly brewed oath, patted the high pedigree Cat with care. With the soothing touch into his veins flowed the ninth life. The Top Cat then took a much deserved nap, yet no sooner did he dream of things silken and beautiful that the nightmare of Feb 18 began. He awoke in a sweat calling for the cavalry, but it was no longer his to summon.

Will his last life be consumed when parliament convenes? Or will he be able to survive by the skin of his teeth? People were expected to confirm what he had been told that he was as popular as stars in a galaxy. Millions cast their votes but forsook him. Yet, his advisers insist that the Top Cat must not relinquish his crown. Having feasted on succulent fare, morsels will not satisfy these advisers. Dexterously they scheme and weave resilient threads of Emergency, PCO and oaths of obedience into khaki cloth. Our Top Cat however is of a different disposition. In a televised broadcast to the nation on (Oct 17, 1999) he wore innocence on his sleeve: “And now I would like to share a prayer that I wrote for myself. ‘Oh Allah, Give me the vision to see and perceive the truth from the false and the wisdom to comprehend the problem and find its solution’.” Amen.

Maternal deaths

IT was Mothers’ Day on Sunday, and in those 24 hours about 1,500 women will have died giving birth, as they do every day of the year. Almost all the deaths will have been in the world’s 75 poorest countries.

Most would have been preventable in more affluent nations. Maternal health is a bald and unforgiving indicator of the state of a country’s medical services — and its civil society. After all, most women give birth. A society that neglects their needs is a society that institutionally discriminates against women.

In a report released on Mothers’ Day, British MPs on the international development select committee have established that the true number of deaths might be 50 per cent higher than the official estimates: perhaps as many as 870,000 women die annually in the days around birth. For every death, another 30 women are reckoned to be left in some way disabled. In sub-Saharan Africa things are actually getting worse.

In development circles there is agreement about what needs to be done. Governments need to make it happen. Slender budgets — and not just in health — fail to reflect women’s needs. In Bangladesh, educating girls has been the key to reducing maternal deaths. Educated young women are more likely to seek antenatal care, and more likely to give birth in clinics.

Rural sub-Saharan Africa presents particular problems. The worldwide shortage of midwives is at its most acute, and scarce clinics are poorly equipped. Most women give birth without skilled assistance, so complications are often detected too late for women to reach distant medical help.

Safe birth is only part of the equation. More than one in 10 maternal deaths is linked to unsafe abortion. Improving access to abortion, and above all to contraception, could, the MPs point out, save thousands of women a year. But the most powerful tool right now is advocacy.

The White Ribbon Alliance campaign for improved facilities aims to force governments to reconsider their priorities. The rate of maternal death will not fall by the 75 per cent demanded by the millennium development goal without a transformation in attitudes. Less progress has been made here than in any of the other goals for 2015 set by the UN. That is not a reason for giving up. It is a reason for shouting louder.

—The Guardian, London