Abstract
Multiple planned dams in developing countries, mostly for hydropower, are threatening some of the world’s great river systems. Concern over their social and environmental impacts has led to hydropower being excluded from the sustainability term ‘green energy’. Better planning, design and operation of hydropower dams could guide where to build and not to build, and how to mitigate some of their negative impacts. Impact assessments presently done for dams include Cumulative Impact Assessments (CIAs) or similar at the basin level, and Environmental Impact Assessments at the project level. These typically do not detail how the river ecosystem could change and the implications for its dependent social structures. A comprehensive Environmental Flows (EFlows) Assessment does provide this information but is almost always not linked to the other impact assessments. When done at all, it is often rudimentary; rarely basin-wide; and almost always done after major development decisions have already been made. A more effective approach for any basin targeted for hydropower or other large dam development would be to formally and automatically embed the requirement for a basin-wide, detailed EFlows Assessment into a CIA. This should be done at the earliest stage of planning, before dam sites are selected and allocated to developers. The EFlows method adopted matters, as it dictates the scope and flexibility of a study. Rapid one-size-fits-all methods do not provide the detail that governments and other stakeholders need to understand the possible future of their river basins, negotiate and make informed decisions.
Highlights
The global demand for energy is driving an unprecedented surge in dam building to generate hydropower (Zarfl et al, 2015)
In three decades of such work, we have found that comprehensive Environmental Flows (EFlows) Assessments generate a vital portion of the necessary data and understanding for this to happen, providing information that was not available to decision makers until the last decade or so
A Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA; NCEA, 2015), Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA1; International Finance Corporation (IFC), 2013) or similar is done to guide decision-making in these basins, but almost always these postdate the major decisions on number and location of hydropower projects (HPPs), and are relegated to tinkering with an already-laid plan (Meynell et al, 2014)
Summary
The global demand for energy is driving an unprecedented surge in dam building to generate hydropower (Zarfl et al, 2015). A Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA; NCEA, 2015), Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA1; IFC, 2013) or similar is done to guide decision-making in these basins, but almost always these postdate the major decisions on number and location of HPPs, and are relegated to tinkering with an already-laid plan (Meynell et al, 2014) Unless they include a detailed, systematic EFlows Assessment they too run the risk of failing to identify or address key environmental and design challenges related to the river ecosystem and its dependent people. Conservation Assessments (CA) of whole river basins occur, but tend to not be linked to, or necessarily inform, water-resource development plans
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
