Rebroadcast: Ajaya Dixit Risk and Resilience (Part II): Climate Change and the Future of Nepal’s Development Pathway

[00:00:00] Namaste and Happy Earth Day. Over the year we have collaborated with visionaries

[00:00:05] and experts who have enhanced our discussions and expanded our

[00:00:08] perspectives on environmental sustainability and stewardship. At PEI

[00:00:13] Earth Day 2024 is about expanding the conversation surrounding the

[00:00:18] environment to include and highlight the narrative of climate change, energy

[00:00:22] and sustainable development. So for today's episode we are rebroadcasting a

[00:00:27] conversation between PEI colleague Somitra Nyopani and Ajay Dixit on risk

[00:00:33] and resilience, climate change, loss and damage and the future of Nepal's

[00:00:37] development pathway. The second of a two-part series this discussion

[00:00:41] explores Nepal's ambitious net zero emission goals and the impact of

[00:00:45] climate change on Nepal's water, energy and infrastructural development. They

[00:00:50] also discuss the transboundary nature of the water relationship in the

[00:00:53] region and how climate change can perturb the existing interdependencies.

[00:00:58] We hope you enjoy the conversation.

[00:01:11] Namaste and welcome to PODS by PEI, a policy discussion series brought to

[00:01:16] you by Policy Entrepreneurs Inc. My name is Tadan Kansakar. This episode is

[00:01:22] part two of the conversation between Somitra Nyopani, Executive Director of

[00:01:27] Policy Entrepreneurs and Ajay Dixit. Ajay is the co-founder and advisor at

[00:01:32] the Institute for Social and Environmental Transition, ICED Nepal. He

[00:01:36] is an Ashoka Fellow and a leading voice in Nepal and internationally on

[00:01:40] issues of climate change adaptation, resilience building and disaster risk

[00:01:45] management. In the previous episode Somitra and Ajay discussed the

[00:01:49] outcomes of COP27 and how climate change impacts countries like Nepal and the

[00:01:54] Himalayan region. If you haven't listened to that episode yet, we highly

[00:01:58] recommend that you do so. In this episode Somitra and Ajay discussed

[00:02:02] the plausibility of Nepal reaching its ambitious goal of net zero

[00:02:05] emission by 2045 and the impact of climate change on Nepal's water,

[00:02:10] energy and infrastructural development. They also discussed the

[00:02:14] transboundary nature of water relationship in the region and how

[00:02:17] climate change can perturb the existing interdependencies. We hope you enjoy the

[00:02:22] conversation.

[00:02:25] Welcome back to part two of my discussion with Ajay Dixit. So Ajay, we

[00:02:29] left our earlier discussion on Nepal's policy architecture and climate

[00:02:32] change. Continuing on that discussion, Nepal has set a vision at least

[00:02:37] on paper for a long term strategy for net zero emission by the year

[00:02:40] 2045. What does this actually mean?

[00:02:44] First of all, I think we are part of the global community. Our Prime

[00:02:48] Minister went to Glasgow last year and then of course said by 2045

[00:02:53] Nepal would be net zero. That's in tune with many commitment made

[00:02:58] by many other countries. India has said it will be 2070, China,

[00:03:02] others. The basic idea in a simple term is that how much we emit

[00:03:08] the greenhouse gases through whatever sources within our territory

[00:03:13] would be equal to how much we absorb. That is in a very simple

[00:03:18] terms what net zero means, at least within our territory. So we have

[00:03:22] to... Yes, the commitment has been made. So we are almost end of

[00:03:27] 2022. So 2023 is a month away. So the journey should begin now.

[00:03:34] Journey should get to that end. 2025 should start now.

[00:03:40] So in the sense this means that by 2045 or 2045 we will absorb

[00:03:49] whatever carbon is being emitted in Nepal.

[00:03:52] Yeah, that's the idea. So therefore we have to ask the question,

[00:03:55] okay, what are the sources of carbon? Transportation, deforestation,

[00:04:01] industries, they do generate some livestock, construction

[00:04:06] activities, cooking, heating, whatsoever little that we do. Of

[00:04:12] course, we must emphasize that globally the amount of carbon

[00:04:15] that we emit is minuscule compared to others. That I think

[00:04:19] we should emphasize.

[00:04:21] Reading through the document, even for a low emission country

[00:04:24] like Nepal, and this is a strong message by Nepal and a good

[00:04:29] step forward to say that by 2045 we're going to go to net zero

[00:04:33] emission. No country I think in South Asia has made that

[00:04:37] commitment. But reading through the document, I picked up

[00:04:40] on a few things and started to question the plausibility of

[00:04:43] Nepal meeting this target by 2045. It was quite clear that

[00:04:48] business as usual, as you said, is not going to suffice.

[00:04:52] We have to start now and we are already falling behind. And

[00:04:55] the point that really stuck out for me was that the document

[00:04:58] identified an investment requirement upwards of 200

[00:05:02] billion to meet the 2045 net zero emission. Can you tell

[00:05:07] our audience what is that pathway that is being laid out

[00:05:12] in the long term strategy to reach where we want to?

[00:05:16] We talked about finances in the beginning, Samitra. The

[00:05:20] conversation on climate change has been importance of

[00:05:23] technology, particularly renewable technology from petroleum or

[00:05:27] fossil fuel based to non carbon generating energy sources and

[00:05:31] including in the larger ecosystem. And then that

[00:05:34] developing countries need financial support to make that

[00:05:37] transition. That cannot happen without regular ODI support

[00:05:41] that we get because it is addition, including the impact

[00:05:45] that the climate change incurs on our social political

[00:05:48] landscape. So that's been a conversation of climate

[00:05:52] discourse. Now, this finance is important, but I think

[00:05:55] finances also needs to be there. Finance should help us

[00:05:58] achieve those ends. Let's also look at other impacts of

[00:06:03] emissions that we do. Air pollution, indoor air

[00:06:07] pollution that has strong chassis component, particularly

[00:06:10] for women and children, reliance on biomass for steel

[00:06:15] cooking, import of petroleum, for example, import of

[00:06:19] petroleum for running cars and transportation is keep

[00:06:22] on going. So therefore we also in addition to climate, we

[00:06:25] have other imperatives that demands us to sort of move

[00:06:29] into that trajectory. So where do we begin? So let me

[00:06:33] let me try to share with our listeners one barrier that

[00:06:39] we need to address, say the replacement of liquefied

[00:06:43] petroleum gas by electricity. So this is the energy

[00:06:48] unit that we use to make food at home. Exactly cooking.

[00:06:53] You know, there are extensive policy by Governor of

[00:06:55] Nepal, nine policies which sets out how the transition

[00:06:59] will happen for clean cooking. So everything is fine.

[00:07:02] You know, you could we have electricity and then of

[00:07:04] course we could cook. But but then if you go into

[00:07:08] underneath the surface, you come up with number of

[00:07:11] barriers. The first of all is that the majority of

[00:07:16] the consumers use no ampere connections. Is this

[00:07:20] conversation in line with what the government came out

[00:07:23] in the recent budget to subsidize there is induction

[00:07:27] cookers and stuff? There is provision for induction

[00:07:29] cooker subsidies. There are whole kind of commitments

[00:07:33] politically. That's fine. But that underneath the

[00:07:36] structural problem are serious. So the majority of

[00:07:40] the consumers have five ampere connections. And if

[00:07:43] everyone uses cooker at the same time, you know, the

[00:07:47] power is just going to go up. And then we have the

[00:07:50] leadership of Nepal Electricity Authority saying our

[00:07:53] system cannot bear that peak load. So we need

[00:07:57] transformation of the existing transmission and

[00:07:59] distribution system. The wiring system are home from

[00:08:02] five ampere. You have to go to 15 ampere. So

[00:08:05] therefore while the political commitments, the

[00:08:08] policy provisions, et cetera, are welcome. There

[00:08:13] are these barriers that we need to address. For

[00:08:17] example, somebody has to go out of home at 10

[00:08:20] o'clock and his food has to be ready. If the

[00:08:23] electricity doesn't come, of course, the

[00:08:24] reliability is a problem. So the NEA again says

[00:08:29] under this condition, we cannot assure

[00:08:32] reliability. So therefore, you know, much depth

[00:08:36] work is needed. Much depth work is needed to

[00:08:39] identify barriers, the political economy, for

[00:08:42] example, if you will. And then of course, how do

[00:08:46] you improve reliability? How do you improve these

[00:08:48] systems from where we are to where we are?

[00:08:50] Things are improved, but those are those are

[00:08:53] the challenges that we need to think about.

[00:08:55] Just on the issue of cooking. So post budget,

[00:08:59] when the government announced subsidies for

[00:09:01] induction cookers and stuff. So some of us

[00:09:04] were discussing and diagnosing how this would

[00:09:06] be implemented. And as you rightly pointed out,

[00:09:10] the connection that people have at home across

[00:09:12] Nepal, most of those connections will not

[00:09:15] support induction cookers. So the government

[00:09:18] might be distributing that hardware,

[00:09:21] induction cook stoves, but people would not

[00:09:25] be able to actually plug it in and then run

[00:09:27] it to cook food. So our point of interest

[00:09:30] there was maybe the subsidies would have been

[00:09:32] targeted towards rewiring people's homes so

[00:09:35] that they could fetch and start cooking with

[00:09:38] induction cookers. Just on that note, I mean,

[00:09:41] I think it's proven that using electricity

[00:09:44] is cheaper. Absolutely. Yeah, it's cheaper

[00:09:46] than using LPG. Those evidence exists. There

[00:09:49] is a commitment, at least in a sort of a

[00:09:51] political rhetoric, there is a commitment. But

[00:09:54] I think in order to move to that future,

[00:09:57] you rightly pointed out that the targeting

[00:09:59] has to be different. The thinking has to be

[00:10:02] perhaps what you can say outside the box.

[00:10:05] Normal business as usual isn't going to help

[00:10:09] us. So the takeaway here then is, as with

[00:10:11] everything else, even for the long-term

[00:10:14] strategy to reach net zero emission by 2045,

[00:10:18] we've got good things lined up, at least

[00:10:20] on paper, but all of that will come down

[00:10:23] to how it is going to be implemented. And

[00:10:25] I think other important point is to tracking

[00:10:28] some of that. As I said, the journey has to

[00:10:31] begin now. We must be demonstrating that this

[00:10:35] is the emission and this is what we have

[00:10:38] in 2023, in 2024, in 2025. And by that 2030,

[00:10:43] perhaps we need to demonstrate that yes,

[00:10:45] indeed, these other changes do take us to

[00:10:50] the path of attending, achieving net zero

[00:10:53] by 2045. We can't start it in 2035. It's

[00:10:57] just about 23 years left.

[00:11:00] Excellent. Ajay, now I want to move the

[00:11:02] conversation to a topic of interest for

[00:11:06] both of us, water and energy, something

[00:11:08] that we are both invested in.

[00:11:10] And this is kind of also drawing from

[00:11:13] the long-term strategy which identifies

[00:11:16] energy and the transition in energy

[00:11:18] that we just talked about, to be really

[00:11:21] critical in Nepal's development pathway

[00:11:24] and how it deals with climate change.

[00:11:26] But interestingly, Nepal's water

[00:11:28] resources in the context of climate

[00:11:30] change looks like presents both risks

[00:11:33] and opportunities. On one hand, you

[00:11:36] observe increasing incidence of water

[00:11:38] induced disasters, floods, droughts,

[00:11:40] the melting of the Himalayas. At the

[00:11:43] same time, you see a strong policy

[00:11:46] impetus on, especially from the

[00:11:48] government side and significant private

[00:11:50] resource investments also, on

[00:11:53] hydropaste renewable energy

[00:11:54] development and electrification.

[00:11:57] So Nepal's water resource sector comes

[00:11:59] across as being a double-edged sword.

[00:12:02] How do you see this issue in the

[00:12:04] climate discourse?

[00:12:06] This is an interesting question,

[00:12:08] Soumitra. I do a lot of

[00:12:10] conversation with people of different

[00:12:12] disciplines, different sectors.

[00:12:14] I also talk with people who are

[00:12:16] directly involved in these different

[00:12:18] dimensions. I mean, we all do. Clearly,

[00:12:20] in climate change, we say

[00:12:22] mitigation is gas, adaptation is water.

[00:12:26] Because the impact manifests through

[00:12:28] change in the hydrological cycle. The

[00:12:30] energy balance changes because of

[00:12:33] extra gas in the atmosphere, the

[00:12:35] sun's energy, and that has impact on

[00:12:37] the weather system and the

[00:12:40] energy in atmosphere. So the impact

[00:12:43] comes through water, change in the

[00:12:46] hydrological cycle as we know it.

[00:12:50] That's the atmospheric story we

[00:12:53] with. But then, again, hydrology has

[00:12:55] changed because of our own

[00:12:57] interventions. The US United

[00:12:59] States Geological Survey has just

[00:13:01] brought out an image which talks

[00:13:03] about change in the hydrological

[00:13:06] cycle. It's not what used to be 100

[00:13:08] years ago. Having said that, how does

[00:13:11] that impact? How does that change

[00:13:13] manifest? How does that directly

[00:13:16] impact, for example, the hydropower

[00:13:17] project? We need to, again, look at our

[00:13:21] diverse river system. We need to look

[00:13:23] at rivers that come from snow. We need

[00:13:26] to look at rivers that don't come

[00:13:27] from snow because the hydrology of

[00:13:30] these rivers are very, very

[00:13:31] different. Now, one impact would be

[00:13:35] changes in the flow. Less flow, less

[00:13:39] energy. More flow, perhaps more

[00:13:41] energy. But more flow is during the

[00:13:44] monsoon and more flow also means

[00:13:46] floods. More flow also means

[00:13:48] landslides. More flow also means

[00:13:50] damage to the infrastructure, dams and

[00:13:54] barrage and the appurtenance.

[00:13:56] And then, of course, the transmission

[00:13:59] and distribution system. The pylon is

[00:14:01] washed away. The headwork is

[00:14:02] washed away. The system gets

[00:14:04] disrupted. We have this example in

[00:14:06] Bhotikos in 2014, many other

[00:14:09] sites. I've talked with some of the

[00:14:11] developers who have hydropower plants

[00:14:14] in the smaller rivers, in the

[00:14:17] rain-fed rivers. And what they tell

[00:14:19] me is that the energy production or

[00:14:22] the flow of river is not what it

[00:14:24] used to be 20 years ago. So they

[00:14:27] experience lower energy generation. So

[00:14:30] that's the developer story. When you

[00:14:33] go to the regulators, when you go

[00:14:35] to the government agency, they say,

[00:14:38] well, we don't have that evidence.

[00:14:40] You know, we don't have that

[00:14:41] evidence that the flow has really

[00:14:43] gone down. So that evidence has to

[00:14:46] come. So we really can't attribute

[00:14:49] that climate change is having

[00:14:51] impact on hydropower. My question

[00:14:52] to them was, are you considering

[00:14:54] hydropower risk? And they say,

[00:14:57] you know, there is no evidence.

[00:14:58] So the question therefore is, you

[00:14:59] know, we need more evidence. We

[00:15:02] need to look at how the energy

[00:15:05] generation of these plants have, for

[00:15:07] example, changed or not changed in

[00:15:10] last 20 years.

[00:15:12] It's a question on evidence. And

[00:15:15] that was a question that I was

[00:15:16] going to pose to you. You've been

[00:15:18] studying the sector from the

[00:15:20] early 90s or even before that.

[00:15:22] You're an engineer yourself. And

[00:15:25] the evidence, while really scanty

[00:15:27] and probably it's not

[00:15:29] scientifically established to be

[00:15:31] attributed to climate change. But

[00:15:33] there is evidence around projects

[00:15:35] being hung dry in the sense that

[00:15:38] there was a group of 50

[00:15:39] developers that petitioned the

[00:15:41] government that the projects could

[00:15:44] not be operated well due to faulty

[00:15:47] hydrology. Part of that problem

[00:15:50] could be how estimates were done,

[00:15:52] hydrological estimates were done,

[00:15:53] but it could also be the fact that

[00:15:56] the estimates that were done do

[00:15:58] not hold true today. How do you

[00:16:01] see that?

[00:16:03] One of the factors is true. You

[00:16:05] know, as we talked about, you

[00:16:07] know, we have a limited database.

[00:16:09] Some of the rivers are not

[00:16:11] monitored, so we don't have enough

[00:16:14] length data that would give us a

[00:16:17] reliable estimate of what the

[00:16:19] flow would be at different

[00:16:21] probabilities. That's one part.

[00:16:24] Other part is what is the

[00:16:26] link between, for example, those

[00:16:27] who collect flood data, flow data,

[00:16:29] which is the official DHM and these

[00:16:33] hydropower sector, you know, what

[00:16:34] is the interlinkages? What is

[00:16:36] the quality of data that's

[00:16:38] collected? What is the quality of

[00:16:40] design that is collected? The

[00:16:41] technological dimension, for

[00:16:43] example, are there cutting

[00:16:45] corners? Who monitors? Who

[00:16:48] regulates? How do you ensure

[00:16:49] quality? Those are very

[00:16:51] important points that also

[00:16:52] needs to be asked. And this

[00:16:54] particular example that you

[00:16:56] stated, I think, tried to cover

[00:16:59] all those, but there was also

[00:17:00] political dimension that there

[00:17:02] were efforts to scuttle, if

[00:17:04] you will, you know, some of

[00:17:05] the, you know, regulatory

[00:17:06] requirements.

[00:17:07] Well, Aajit, I've done two

[00:17:09] previous episodes on hydropower

[00:17:12] with one with Satish Joshi and

[00:17:14] one with Sagar Prasai. And at

[00:17:17] PEI, we are trying to better

[00:17:19] understand what this means.

[00:17:21] And the line of thought that

[00:17:23] we have been exploring as part

[00:17:25] of our podcast and our own

[00:17:26] research is this reexamination

[00:17:29] of a grand narrative of

[00:17:31] hydroelectric prosperity in

[00:17:32] Nepal. It's been there since

[00:17:34] the very early days and stuff.

[00:17:36] So what I wanted to really

[00:17:38] engage you on is this idea of

[00:17:41] climate change and how big a

[00:17:43] risk it is for that

[00:17:46] hydroelectric prosperity.

[00:17:48] That is why we discussed in

[00:17:49] Nepal. Is this something for

[00:17:51] us to take caution now and

[00:17:54] reorganize ourselves or is

[00:17:57] this too less of a concern at

[00:18:00] the moment and then we just

[00:18:01] keep on rolling as it is?

[00:18:03] You know, we could say, oh,

[00:18:05] this is a lamy. So therefore

[00:18:06] we don't care. All right.

[00:18:07] That could be one approach,

[00:18:08] but I think that's not the

[00:18:09] right approach. If you do

[00:18:11] take that route, maybe 10,

[00:18:13] 15 years from now, we're

[00:18:14] going to be left with lots

[00:18:16] of sort of stranded assets

[00:18:17] in the hills where we build

[00:18:19] these plants and then they

[00:18:21] don't function as designed.

[00:18:23] But I think let me get back

[00:18:25] to the earlier times when

[00:18:28] we started, for example, in

[00:18:30] the 80s. And you rightly said

[00:18:32] we have this grand narrative

[00:18:34] where we think, you know,

[00:18:35] hydropower is the only resource

[00:18:36] that we have that we can

[00:18:38] develop. When we started,

[00:18:42] the idea was that we have so

[00:18:43] much water, you know,

[00:18:44] this Nepal is a water rich

[00:18:46] country and we even go to

[00:18:47] the extent of saying we are

[00:18:49] second to Brazil. You know,

[00:18:51] how did that?

[00:18:52] Clearly, that's not true.

[00:18:53] I don't know why that

[00:18:54] narrative came. You know,

[00:18:55] you would rather be first.

[00:18:56] Why would you be second?

[00:18:58] That's the narrative that

[00:18:59] emerged and everyone said

[00:19:00] we are second to Brazil and

[00:19:01] all that. And then, of course,

[00:19:03] if you look at the early

[00:19:05] conversation, it was all

[00:19:07] about projects. It was all

[00:19:09] about projects developing

[00:19:10] hydropower dam as if they

[00:19:13] were ending themselves.

[00:19:15] Hydropower produces energy,

[00:19:17] hydro energy, and that

[00:19:18] energy is input to the

[00:19:20] production process. You know,

[00:19:22] you use that energy to use

[00:19:24] in manufacturing service

[00:19:26] sector, agriculture, etc.

[00:19:28] That's the trajectory of how

[00:19:29] hydropower developed in

[00:19:31] many, many developed

[00:19:32] countries, you know, United

[00:19:33] States, Canada, others.

[00:19:35] But for us, that became

[00:19:37] the end in itself and we

[00:19:39] never considered hydropower

[00:19:41] to be part of this larger

[00:19:43] socioeconomic transformation

[00:19:44] of the country.

[00:19:45] I'll tell you, two days

[00:19:46] ago there was an

[00:19:47] interesting news. The

[00:19:49] interesting news and the

[00:19:52] title was Slump in Power

[00:19:54] Use Sign of Economic Oase.

[00:19:58] This is for Nepal?

[00:19:59] This is for Nepal.

[00:20:00] All right. We had heard

[00:20:01] that after the monsoon,

[00:20:03] the river flow goes down

[00:20:05] and then of course the

[00:20:06] power plants produce

[00:20:07] less energy. That was

[00:20:09] the conversation till about

[00:20:10] two, three years ago.

[00:20:11] What we hear is because

[00:20:13] the economic activities

[00:20:14] have slowed down, you

[00:20:16] know, there is no

[00:20:17] consumption of energy

[00:20:18] that we have.

[00:20:20] And then you look at,

[00:20:21] okay, what's happening

[00:20:22] in the industrial front?

[00:20:24] And then of course the

[00:20:25] FNCCI and others say

[00:20:27] that the consumer demand

[00:20:29] is not going up.

[00:20:31] We can't take a loan.

[00:20:32] Interest rate is a problem.

[00:20:35] So this is a very

[00:20:36] different conversation

[00:20:37] that has emerged

[00:20:38] when you think about energy,

[00:20:40] when you think about

[00:20:41] the idea of prosperity.

[00:20:43] Simply having more energy,

[00:20:45] building more plants

[00:20:47] and having more energy

[00:20:48] is not automatically

[00:20:49] leading you to

[00:20:51] another kind of prosperity

[00:20:52] that we think.

[00:20:53] Cooking in Nepal

[00:20:55] generated hydropower,

[00:20:56] replacing petroleum products

[00:20:57] with hydropower,

[00:20:59] all the rest of it.

[00:21:00] That's not automatically

[00:21:02] going to happen.

[00:21:02] We talked about

[00:21:03] barriers to clean cooking.

[00:21:06] You have similar barriers

[00:21:07] to adoption of

[00:21:09] electric vehicles

[00:21:10] or public transport system.

[00:21:11] Not that it's a clean system.

[00:21:13] Things are happening

[00:21:13] but perhaps not

[00:21:15] on a transformative scale.

[00:21:17] And then of course

[00:21:18] we are now exporting energy

[00:21:20] and we're also importing energy.

[00:21:22] So the landscape of energy

[00:21:23] has become much more complex

[00:21:26] from what we started by saying,

[00:21:27] oh yeah, we'll build projects

[00:21:29] and we generate more energy

[00:21:30] and things will be all hunky-dory.

[00:21:32] No, that's not going to happen.

[00:21:33] So I think there has to be

[00:21:35] a new thinking.

[00:21:36] People have to be

[00:21:37] more engaged

[00:21:39] and looking at

[00:21:39] what's happening

[00:21:40] in the landscape.

[00:21:42] The ministry, DOED,

[00:21:45] the regulator, EOERC,

[00:21:47] IPAN, economist.

[00:21:50] This energy thing

[00:21:51] has to be part of our larger

[00:21:53] economic transformation agenda

[00:21:56] and that conversation.

[00:21:58] And also,

[00:21:59] let's look at the other dimension.

[00:22:02] We are a people exporting country

[00:22:05] if I make it more dramatically.

[00:22:08] 65 lakhs of Nepali youths

[00:22:10] are outside.

[00:22:12] So energy thinking differently

[00:22:14] could create jobs for us.

[00:22:17] Now simply by establishing industry

[00:22:19] is not going to happen.

[00:22:21] It has to be thought through.

[00:22:22] It has to be competitive.

[00:22:23] It has to be linked to the

[00:22:25] global commodity chain.

[00:22:27] What is our comparative advantage?

[00:22:29] You know, what can we do?

[00:22:31] How do we link that?

[00:22:32] These are some very, very

[00:22:33] fundamental questions

[00:22:34] that we need to begin to ask

[00:22:37] if you think about

[00:22:38] this idea of prosperity.

[00:22:40] Let me end by saying this,

[00:22:41] you know,

[00:22:42] of course, hydro is also water.

[00:22:45] If you had simply renewables

[00:22:47] and if you had simply gas

[00:22:49] or coal or others,

[00:22:50] of course, they have their own

[00:22:52] externality,

[00:22:53] but hydro is also water.

[00:22:56] And water has multiple functions

[00:22:58] and multiple use.

[00:23:01] So that's something

[00:23:02] that we also can't forget.

[00:23:04] If I look at one policy,

[00:23:06] there is a provision of

[00:23:07] what we call environmental flow.

[00:23:10] This is maintaining...

[00:23:12] Maintaining minimum flow

[00:23:13] in the river downstream of the dam.

[00:23:16] My research and my conversation

[00:23:18] with a lot of people

[00:23:19] who work in ecology says

[00:23:21] none of the dam maintain that value.

[00:23:23] None of the dam release that water.

[00:23:25] So therefore, Samitra, you know,

[00:23:27] we have to do things differently.

[00:23:30] We have to do things differently

[00:23:31] in designing, in producing,

[00:23:35] in addressing risk,

[00:23:37] in using and addressing

[00:23:39] the other externalities.

[00:23:41] The business as usual just

[00:23:43] will not take us forward.

[00:23:44] Ajay, as you were speaking,

[00:23:45] just another

[00:23:46] tensational thought

[00:23:47] came into my mind

[00:23:49] and I'm thinking out loud here.

[00:23:51] So since history,

[00:23:53] there's been this conversation

[00:23:55] saying that the type of hydropower

[00:23:58] that is dominating in Nepal,

[00:24:00] in a sense we have runoff river projects

[00:24:03] where water is not stored

[00:24:04] and then you just let the river flow

[00:24:06] and then that turns the turbine

[00:24:08] and that has certain limitations

[00:24:10] of seasonality.

[00:24:11] When the river dries up,

[00:24:12] then your production also dries up.

[00:24:14] That kind of created a need

[00:24:16] for building storages,

[00:24:19] which we haven't,

[00:24:20] but there is enough conversation in town

[00:24:22] about how do we really add

[00:24:24] to our energy security

[00:24:26] through building large storages

[00:24:29] that is in conversation of Puri-Kandaki.

[00:24:31] But looking at it

[00:24:32] from a climate change perspective,

[00:24:34] there is already evidence

[00:24:36] that storage projects

[00:24:38] lead to a lot of emission of carbon.

[00:24:41] So in that sense,

[00:24:45] is there a way to rebrand

[00:24:48] what we thought

[00:24:49] was our shortcoming

[00:24:50] in the sense of our river projects

[00:24:52] in some avoided cost principle

[00:24:54] saying that we could have built

[00:24:56] 1200 megawatts of storage plant

[00:24:59] that would emit X amount of methane

[00:25:02] and we've avoided

[00:25:04] that emission of methane

[00:25:06] by replacing it with storage projects

[00:25:08] and then get financing with projects.

[00:25:11] Is that a plausible line of thought?

[00:25:14] That would be a complex mathematics,

[00:25:16] how much we emit

[00:25:17] and how much carbon we replace

[00:25:19] in the induced domain,

[00:25:22] wherever that is,

[00:25:23] might be across the border

[00:25:24] that will be within ourselves.

[00:25:26] But large scale hydropower projects

[00:25:29] have other externalities too.

[00:25:31] They have other risks

[00:25:33] even if you don't consider climate change.

[00:25:35] Number one is the sedimentation.

[00:25:37] I mean, we had one reservoir

[00:25:39] which is Kulikani.

[00:25:40] In 1993, there was a massive cloud burst

[00:25:44] in the river's watershed

[00:25:46] and that brought in almost about

[00:25:48] five million cubic meters of sediment.

[00:25:50] So therefore, that's one.

[00:25:52] Other one, it inundates

[00:25:54] or submerges our valley

[00:25:55] causes involuntary displacement

[00:25:58] and these rivers also produce

[00:25:59] what we call regulated flow

[00:26:01] and there's all these rivers

[00:26:03] flow downstream to India.

[00:26:04] So many of these proposed projects,

[00:26:08] Karnali, Kosi, others

[00:26:11] have been on the sort of

[00:26:12] cooperative agenda of Nepal and India

[00:26:15] for a long time.

[00:26:17] Something that we haven't,

[00:26:19] two countries haven't agreed

[00:26:20] is on the principle of downstream benefits.

[00:26:23] So it becomes a kind of a free rider.

[00:26:26] So that cost will also

[00:26:28] will have to be accounted for.

[00:26:29] We had a huge debate in the 90s

[00:26:32] globally about dams.

[00:26:33] Those debates have kind of subsided

[00:26:36] but then again,

[00:26:37] climate change perhaps offers

[00:26:39] opportunities to revisit those debates.

[00:26:42] The other question is

[00:26:44] we're talking about snow melt.

[00:26:46] We're talking about changes

[00:26:48] in the snow dynamics.

[00:26:49] How does that alter

[00:26:51] the river hydrology as we come down?

[00:26:53] What does it mean for the

[00:26:55] in-visual storage?

[00:26:57] Would drought be exacerbated

[00:27:00] like we have, for example,

[00:27:01] in some of the Western Europe reservoirs?

[00:27:04] Will our reservoirs be empty

[00:27:06] or our reservoirs will be full?

[00:27:08] Those are the questions.

[00:27:09] Perhaps at least we need to begin

[00:27:10] to look at the scenarios

[00:27:13] and then what does a particular scenario

[00:27:16] mean in terms of the risks to investment?

[00:27:19] So those are again, as I said,

[00:27:21] these are not simple questions.

[00:27:23] These are not questions

[00:27:24] that have silver bullet answers

[00:27:26] but these are issues

[00:27:27] that really need to look at studies,

[00:27:31] research, conversation.

[00:27:33] That's the landscape

[00:27:33] we have to go and visit.

[00:27:35] I think very true in a sense.

[00:27:37] I also tend to feel that

[00:27:38] the way we kind of

[00:27:40] build our perspective around

[00:27:42] what kind of energy

[00:27:44] we are to develop

[00:27:45] through our hydropower resources.

[00:27:47] Not being against

[00:27:48] developing hydropower

[00:27:49] but definitely not clean and green

[00:27:52] and climate friendly

[00:27:54] as it is widely publicized.

[00:27:56] I mean, there are inherent risks

[00:27:58] and challenges of building hydropower

[00:28:01] and then we should be more considerate

[00:28:04] and start thinking through

[00:28:06] or at least conversing

[00:28:07] on some of these issues.

[00:28:08] Absolutely.

[00:28:08] I mean, once you complete it,

[00:28:11] once you complete it,

[00:28:12] of course, it has its other costs

[00:28:13] and so on and so forth.

[00:28:15] At least once you build it,

[00:28:16] water is renewable.

[00:28:17] So therefore the generation

[00:28:19] is perhaps carbon neutral

[00:28:21] once you complete that.

[00:28:22] But the construction itself

[00:28:25] is carbon incentive.

[00:28:27] We invest in constructing

[00:28:28] a hydropower project,

[00:28:30] the cement, the rebars,

[00:28:31] everything is based again

[00:28:33] on burning of carbon.

[00:28:35] So therefore, if you take

[00:28:36] a life cycle consideration,

[00:28:38] perhaps the story

[00:28:39] is a little bit different.

[00:28:40] But then again, it's much better than

[00:28:43] if you minimize

[00:28:44] the social environmental externalities.

[00:28:48] If you consider those factors

[00:28:50] into the designing

[00:28:52] and planning process,

[00:28:54] perhaps we could consider

[00:28:55] it to be less polluting

[00:28:57] than the coals and other sources.

[00:29:00] But still, you rightly pointed out

[00:29:03] these are risks.

[00:29:04] These are,

[00:29:05] and we're not talking about

[00:29:06] a few hundred thousand dollars,

[00:29:08] you're talking about

[00:29:09] multi-million dollar investment

[00:29:11] in this project.

[00:29:12] So therefore, some degree of caution

[00:29:14] would be helpful.

[00:29:15] Yeah, just on this note of caution.

[00:29:17] So recent events, including

[00:29:19] the flood in Malamchi

[00:29:20] and how that kind of wiped away

[00:29:23] the intake for the

[00:29:24] Malamchi drinking water project.

[00:29:26] Here before that,

[00:29:27] there was another flood

[00:29:28] in Uttarakhand

[00:29:29] in a hydropower project

[00:29:31] that kind of wiped up

[00:29:32] a lot of that infrastructure.

[00:29:34] The cost element of building

[00:29:36] infrastructure on water resources,

[00:29:39] dams or canals or other stuff.

[00:29:41] That looks to be going

[00:29:43] to be significantly more

[00:29:45] in a climate scenario, right?

[00:29:47] Or at least the thinking needs to change.

[00:29:50] I'm not an engineer.

[00:29:51] You may be best to kind of

[00:29:52] expand on this, but

[00:29:54] what kind of departure

[00:29:55] do you think climate change warrants

[00:29:58] in the current scope

[00:29:59] of how infrastructure is designed

[00:30:01] and built on water resources?

[00:30:03] We tentatively discuss

[00:30:04] some of these aspects,

[00:30:06] Samitra in our earlier sections.

[00:30:09] But then again, you know,

[00:30:10] you could look at Chamoli.

[00:30:11] We all saw the image

[00:30:13] of how that extreme flood came

[00:30:15] and then washed away

[00:30:17] and wiped that whatever

[00:30:19] 400 megawatt system.

[00:30:20] And then, of course, the smaller one.

[00:30:22] We had similar event

[00:30:23] in Pokhara in 2012, I think.

[00:30:26] A section of the, you know,

[00:30:28] Andapurna hill came down

[00:30:29] and then we had a massive

[00:30:31] sort of inland tsunami, if we will.

[00:30:34] And that caused lots of

[00:30:35] downstream devastation.

[00:30:37] We have similar events

[00:30:38] in other parts of the hill.

[00:30:40] So clearly these extreme hazards

[00:30:43] had been part and partial

[00:30:44] of the Himalayan landscape.

[00:30:47] And then, of course, these

[00:30:48] we talked about are fragile areas.

[00:30:51] Our understanding of the science of climate,

[00:30:55] its impact on the landscape is

[00:30:57] we have some macro understanding.

[00:31:00] We know how much rain comes, you know,

[00:31:02] where it falls,

[00:31:03] the seasonality,

[00:31:04] the spatial distribution.

[00:31:06] But we still have much more

[00:31:08] to learn about the micro impacts.

[00:31:10] So therefore these micro impacts

[00:31:12] are where these risks

[00:31:14] become very evident, you know,

[00:31:16] as we saw in Melamchi.

[00:31:18] Yes, this was a huge investment,

[00:31:19] but then it was multiple things

[00:31:22] happening simultaneously.

[00:31:24] Perhaps rainfall, lack of snow,

[00:31:26] earthquake in 2015.

[00:31:29] And then, of course,

[00:31:30] what came down was to just

[00:31:32] that debris flow

[00:31:33] which caused tremendous damage.

[00:31:36] Clearly these are dots,

[00:31:39] you know, these are dots

[00:31:40] that's telling us,

[00:31:41] hey, wait a minute.

[00:31:43] You need to be careful

[00:31:44] that you need to look at

[00:31:45] these different indicators,

[00:31:47] these different responses

[00:31:49] that you see.

[00:31:50] Some of them are natural,

[00:31:51] but then a lot of it is also

[00:31:53] because you have not heeded

[00:31:54] to the specificity,

[00:31:57] the requirement

[00:31:58] or the character of the landscape.

[00:32:01] So that's, I think, is the message.

[00:32:03] And that again takes us back

[00:32:05] to how we plan,

[00:32:07] how we imagine,

[00:32:10] how we design,

[00:32:12] how we regulate,

[00:32:13] how we construct infrastructure

[00:32:16] in the Himalayan region.

[00:32:17] Just a point of interest.

[00:32:19] So something like Melamchi,

[00:32:22] I don't think anybody saw it coming.

[00:32:24] Right? Or you did.

[00:32:26] At least for me,

[00:32:27] I never saw something,

[00:32:28] an event of that nature

[00:32:31] unfolding there.

[00:32:32] So with climate change,

[00:32:34] you'd expected that extreme events,

[00:32:36] different sorts of events

[00:32:38] are going to crop up.

[00:32:39] How do you plan for these events

[00:32:41] when you're building infrastructure,

[00:32:42] thinking about infrastructure?

[00:32:44] If I look at Melamchi,

[00:32:46] in the earlier days,

[00:32:47] there was a lot of debate

[00:32:49] about relevance of that project

[00:32:51] or validity of that project.

[00:32:53] Nobody imagined,

[00:32:54] nobody envisioned

[00:32:55] this particular,

[00:32:57] what do you call?

[00:32:58] A mudslide.

[00:32:59] Mudslide, if you will.

[00:33:01] But there were questions

[00:33:03] about the risk

[00:33:04] that project of this scale entails.

[00:33:06] The 26 kilometer tunnel,

[00:33:08] the reliance on low ideological data,

[00:33:11] the financial risks,

[00:33:13] et cetera, et cetera.

[00:33:15] So perhaps a little bit

[00:33:16] of a review of the history

[00:33:18] of planning of this project

[00:33:20] is necessary.

[00:33:21] It's just not,

[00:33:22] you know, something that happened

[00:33:23] in 2021.

[00:33:25] That should be our guiding entry point.

[00:33:27] You know, you also look at

[00:33:29] the manner these projects

[00:33:31] are conceptualized.

[00:33:32] Who are the, I mean,

[00:33:33] you guys are doing

[00:33:34] this political economy

[00:33:35] of bilateral projects.

[00:33:37] Who are the actors?

[00:33:38] You know, what was the assumption?

[00:33:40] What was the grand narrative

[00:33:42] that kind of defined these projects?

[00:33:45] These are, I think, also important.

[00:33:47] And who funded it?

[00:33:49] How did they really consider

[00:33:52] the potential risks?

[00:33:54] Unimportant questions as we,

[00:33:56] as we impact on

[00:33:58] infrastructure-led

[00:34:00] transformation development in Nepal.

[00:34:02] Because that's in the agenda, right?

[00:34:04] Absolutely.

[00:34:04] I mean, again,

[00:34:06] I do not deny need for infrastructure.

[00:34:10] You need better commuting.

[00:34:11] We need better services.

[00:34:13] So therefore infrastructure are key.

[00:34:15] But the way we design

[00:34:18] and plan have to be different.

[00:34:20] And that needs to look at the risks

[00:34:22] we talked about.

[00:34:23] We need to look at our standards,

[00:34:25] our practices.

[00:34:26] We need to look at our capability,

[00:34:29] how we manage our knowledge.

[00:34:31] We need to look at,

[00:34:33] you know, our rules and regulations.

[00:34:38] You have been listening to Pods by PEI.

[00:34:40] I am Zahdan Khonsakar

[00:34:42] and this is a quick reminder

[00:34:43] to all of you

[00:34:44] to do us a small favor

[00:34:45] by sharing us on social media

[00:34:47] and leave a review on Spotify,

[00:34:49] Apple Podcasts,

[00:34:49] and Google Podcasts

[00:34:51] or wherever you listen to the show.

[00:34:53] Now let's get back to the conversation

[00:34:54] between Samitra and Ajay.

[00:35:00] Moving forward,

[00:35:01] I just want to zoom out from Nepal

[00:35:03] and touch upon climate change

[00:35:06] in the region.

[00:35:07] Primarily so because

[00:35:08] we are discussing water resources

[00:35:10] and Nepal's water resources

[00:35:14] is part of the intricacies

[00:35:16] of South Asia.

[00:35:17] It creates a lot of interdependencies

[00:35:21] so how do you see

[00:35:22] the impact of climate change

[00:35:24] really unfolding

[00:35:26] and expanding these interdependencies

[00:35:28] that are there in the region

[00:35:31] through water resources?

[00:35:33] Clearly there is a link.

[00:35:36] Let's look at snow for example.

[00:35:38] There is already a study

[00:35:41] by Isimone in 2019

[00:35:44] which tells us a scenario

[00:35:46] and that scenario is that

[00:35:48] if the business as usual continues

[00:35:50] that the emission becomes

[00:35:52] plus 2 degree by 2100,

[00:35:55] we're going to see

[00:35:56] one third of the glaciers go.

[00:35:58] That's one scenario.

[00:35:59] Other one is if it's 1.5 degree

[00:36:01] it will be two third,

[00:36:02] one third or two third of the glaciers.

[00:36:05] No, two third, two degrees

[00:36:07] and one third, 1.5 degree.

[00:36:09] So clearly that means

[00:36:11] that the rivers are

[00:36:12] transboundary in nature

[00:36:13] and then of course

[00:36:14] we have the story

[00:36:15] oh the snow-fed river

[00:36:17] goes billions of people

[00:36:19] in the Ganga basin in Nepal, India,

[00:36:20] Bangladesh would be affected

[00:36:22] and that's true.

[00:36:23] We saw that also

[00:36:24] in 2022 floods in Pakistan.

[00:36:27] Of course later on

[00:36:28] it was riverine flood

[00:36:30] but there was gloth.

[00:36:31] There was also floods

[00:36:33] in Baluchistan and Sindh

[00:36:35] area where they don't have

[00:36:37] that kind of floods

[00:36:38] then of course then

[00:36:39] the flood travel in the Indus

[00:36:41] and then you know

[00:36:42] caused this riverine flood.

[00:36:45] So what does it mean for example?

[00:36:47] How do that impact

[00:36:48] translate to downstream?

[00:36:49] And that brings us

[00:36:50] this transboundary element

[00:36:52] centrally in that

[00:36:53] conversation should bring.

[00:36:55] You see Kosi river for example

[00:36:57] does not flow naturally into India.

[00:37:00] We have Kosi baraj.

[00:37:02] We have Kosi baraj

[00:37:03] on which we have a treaty

[00:37:04] that we signed with India in 1954.

[00:37:08] So the impact of change

[00:37:10] in river dynamics

[00:37:11] is going to be mediated

[00:37:13] through that structure

[00:37:15] and that institutional arrangement

[00:37:16] which is the treaty.

[00:37:17] So when we signed that treaty

[00:37:19] climate change was not a concern.

[00:37:21] In fact water management

[00:37:23] even wasn't a concern

[00:37:25] when we signed that treaty.

[00:37:27] So we allocate resource

[00:37:28] I'm sure you looked at

[00:37:30] when you did the West Rafty study.

[00:37:33] We allocate the resource

[00:37:34] between the two neighbors

[00:37:36] between the two countries

[00:37:37] and then the resource management

[00:37:40] is within the territory

[00:37:42] of that individual country.

[00:37:44] There is no joint management you see

[00:37:47] that seems to me is the

[00:37:49] new conversation we need to do

[00:37:51] about transboundary management.

[00:37:53] We do transboundary sharing

[00:37:55] but we don't do transboundary management.

[00:37:57] Same with Gandak same with Mahakali

[00:38:01] the Sardar baraj

[00:38:02] and of course Karnali

[00:38:03] we have no agreement

[00:38:04] but there is a baraj

[00:38:06] downstream at Kalaspuri

[00:38:07] which you know is part

[00:38:08] of the larger Indian canal network.

[00:38:11] So what does it mean

[00:38:13] in terms of changing river flow

[00:38:15] changing hydrology

[00:38:17] in this treaty regime

[00:38:19] we haven't really begun

[00:38:20] to do the conversation.

[00:38:22] I'm just currently doing a study

[00:38:24] on the smaller rivers

[00:38:25] you know these seasonal rivers

[00:38:28] and interestingly you see

[00:38:29] when you look at transboundary river

[00:38:31] unlike for example Indus or Ganga

[00:38:34] Nepal has all the rivers

[00:38:37] generally flow from north to south

[00:38:39] and our country is from east to west.

[00:38:42] So we have many river basins

[00:38:44] from east to west.

[00:38:45] We have Kosi and then we have Konkai

[00:38:48] then we have Kosi

[00:38:49] then we have Kamala

[00:38:50] then we come to Bhagmati

[00:38:51] then we go to Gandaki

[00:38:53] then we go to Rapti

[00:38:55] Rapti, Babai, Karnali, Mahakali

[00:38:58] and then we have the smaller rivers

[00:39:00] we have the Tinnau

[00:39:01] and the Banaganga

[00:39:02] and the Mohana

[00:39:03] the Sirsia, the Ratu, the Bearing

[00:39:06] so this amazing diversity you see

[00:39:09] somebody could call it a problem

[00:39:10] but you know we could call it

[00:39:11] an opportunity

[00:39:12] and each of these rivers of course

[00:39:14] are transboundary

[00:39:16] and we have not talked about

[00:39:18] in a meaningful way

[00:39:20] on for example the smaller rivers

[00:39:22] you know the seasonal rivers

[00:39:24] the cumulative impact

[00:39:26] of disasters in these rivers

[00:39:28] is much greater than

[00:39:30] the disaster that these major rivers bring

[00:39:32] but we don't talk

[00:39:34] there is a conversation

[00:39:35] they do talk about it

[00:39:36] they talk about inundation

[00:39:38] in the Tarai

[00:39:39] but interestingly Samitra

[00:39:42] we looked at the 50 years of

[00:39:45] minors between the two governments

[00:39:48] very well kept record

[00:39:50] of the conversation

[00:39:52] they do talk about the floods

[00:39:53] in seasonal rivers

[00:39:55] but the outcome

[00:39:57] the product

[00:39:58] the solution is always embankment

[00:40:02] this is the problem

[00:40:03] we will be embankment

[00:40:04] this is a problem

[00:40:04] we will be embankment

[00:40:05] for 50 years

[00:40:07] that seems to be driven

[00:40:10] by a different political

[00:40:11] it's a different political economy

[00:40:13] it's different orientation

[00:40:14] different sort of you know

[00:40:16] ways you look at the problem

[00:40:18] no talk about for example

[00:40:20] you know livelihoods

[00:40:21] or forecasting

[00:40:23] forget about gender

[00:40:25] it's mostly men

[00:40:27] of the sectoral agencies

[00:40:29] higher level officials

[00:40:32] of the two countries

[00:40:33] mostly engineers

[00:40:35] so it's a pretty fascinating

[00:40:36] sociology that emerges

[00:40:38] you see

[00:40:39] Ajay you've been having

[00:40:40] this conversation

[00:40:41] from the past several decades

[00:40:43] us very recently at PEI

[00:40:46] and clearly even in

[00:40:47] a short span of our engagements

[00:40:49] on the Transponder Discourse

[00:40:52] it's very clear

[00:40:53] that you need collective action

[00:40:54] to resolve some of these issues

[00:40:56] including on climate change

[00:40:58] where do you think

[00:40:59] is the disconnect

[00:41:00] that we're not trying

[00:41:02] to kind of forge collective action

[00:41:04] or work on common goals

[00:41:06] for the region

[00:41:07] not just Nepal and India

[00:41:09] but Nepal, India, Pakistan

[00:41:11] Bangladesh, Bhutan

[00:41:13] why isn't there attraction

[00:41:15] on these common issues?

[00:41:17] Well collective action

[00:41:19] problems are challenging

[00:41:20] isn't it?

[00:41:21] There is always a contradiction

[00:41:22] between individual and you know

[00:41:23] the collective

[00:41:25] perhaps that's how it works

[00:41:27] again if you look at history

[00:41:28] note that we have not collaborated

[00:41:31] we've talked you know

[00:41:31] the Kosi Treaty

[00:41:32] the Gandhak Treaty

[00:41:34] others

[00:41:35] you could look at the

[00:41:36] the way the treaties were done

[00:41:38] the allocation of benefits

[00:41:41] etc.

[00:41:41] and there is again

[00:41:43] a hegemonic power at play

[00:41:44] you know the downstream power

[00:41:46] is a hegemonic power

[00:41:48] you know it has

[00:41:49] better clouds

[00:41:51] it is powerful

[00:41:52] it is institutionally

[00:41:55] much more advanced

[00:41:57] economically strong

[00:41:58] you know militarily strong

[00:42:00] so therefore

[00:42:01] this has played into the way

[00:42:02] conversations and treaties

[00:42:04] have been done

[00:42:05] but I think at the fundamental level

[00:42:08] given the challenge that we face

[00:42:09] given the challenge of climate change

[00:42:11] and this is becoming more dominant

[00:42:14] I think somewhere

[00:42:15] we need to begin to look at

[00:42:16] you know the basis of

[00:42:17] why we are doing what we do

[00:42:20] the foundation of the knowledge

[00:42:23] why is it simply

[00:42:24] the physical structure

[00:42:25] that is in our mindset

[00:42:27] why what guides us

[00:42:30] some of the scholars

[00:42:31] you know in South Asia

[00:42:32] we've been studying water

[00:42:34] look back at the contradictions

[00:42:36] of the knowledge system

[00:42:38] we have considered

[00:42:40] rivers only as water

[00:42:42] we don't think about anything else

[00:42:45] we just look at

[00:42:46] the blue flowing water

[00:42:48] we don't consider sediment

[00:42:50] as part of the system

[00:42:51] it's a problem that

[00:42:52] we want to avoid

[00:42:54] whereas sediment

[00:42:54] but is never there in the language

[00:42:56] it's never there in the language

[00:42:57] it's always a footnote

[00:42:58] and then

[00:42:59] a colleague

[00:43:00] a senior colleague

[00:43:01] a friend

[00:43:02] professor Jayanta Bandapadya

[00:43:04] he says

[00:43:05] river is a composite

[00:43:06] of these four elements

[00:43:08] it's water

[00:43:09] it's energy

[00:43:11] it's biodiversity

[00:43:13] and it's sediment

[00:43:14] so you cannot extricate

[00:43:16] these three

[00:43:16] you know you can't take out

[00:43:18] sediment biodiversity

[00:43:19] and energy

[00:43:20] and just focus on

[00:43:21] H2O flowing

[00:43:22] and then use it

[00:43:23] to your ends

[00:43:24] and then assume that

[00:43:25] everything would be nice

[00:43:26] no that's not happened

[00:43:28] so the shift has to begin

[00:43:30] to recognize these as four

[00:43:32] important intrinsic element

[00:43:34] and that begins with

[00:43:36] the knowledge system

[00:43:37] the knowledge system

[00:43:38] is natural science based

[00:43:40] technology guided

[00:43:42] and what we call

[00:43:43] reductionist engineering

[00:43:45] that's the way

[00:43:46] that we move forward

[00:43:47] the stock and flow water

[00:43:48] has to be modified

[00:43:50] that stock and flow water

[00:43:51] would meet hydropower

[00:43:53] to certain extent irrigation

[00:43:54] and then other needs

[00:43:56] it does not consider

[00:43:57] the downstream

[00:43:58] it does not consider

[00:43:59] the ecosystem

[00:44:00] it does not consider

[00:44:01] multiple roles of water

[00:44:03] that's I think is the

[00:44:05] is the challenge

[00:44:06] and we saw that

[00:44:07] so dramatically in

[00:44:09] in Pakistan

[00:44:10] in Indus in 2022

[00:44:12] So just like our previous episode

[00:44:14] when we were discussing

[00:44:15] Roundup on COP27

[00:44:17] and talked about

[00:44:18] the floods in Pakistan

[00:44:19] being really a factor

[00:44:20] that moved the conversation

[00:44:22] towards loss and damage

[00:44:23] in that same vein

[00:44:25] when you're discussing

[00:44:26] water resources in the region

[00:44:28] do you think

[00:44:30] climate change

[00:44:31] is that window of opportunity

[00:44:33] for rethinking

[00:44:35] reformulating

[00:44:37] the conversation

[00:44:38] on water management

[00:44:41] in the region

[00:44:42] I see this particularly

[00:44:44] in reference to

[00:44:46] how India is

[00:44:47] positioning itself

[00:44:49] on the climate discourse

[00:44:50] even in COP27

[00:44:52] it was one of the vocal countries

[00:44:54] I think going out to say that

[00:44:56] there's gonna be

[00:44:58] strong measures

[00:44:58] from their side

[00:44:59] and commitments

[00:45:00] so maybe

[00:45:02] climate change is going to provide

[00:45:03] that language

[00:45:04] for everybody to come together

[00:45:06] do you think so?

[00:45:07] Well let's look at South Asia first

[00:45:09] let's try to look at

[00:45:10] what's the content of South Asia

[00:45:13] India, Pakistan, Nepal

[00:45:15] Afghanistan, Bhutan, Bangladesh

[00:45:17] Sri Lanka and Maldives

[00:45:19] clearly again

[00:45:20] in the climate change discourse

[00:45:22] India is much more

[00:45:23] into the global platform

[00:45:24] in terms of economy

[00:45:26] and mitigation

[00:45:28] it's more on energy

[00:45:29] it's more on

[00:45:30] for example

[00:45:32] decarbonize

[00:45:32] and it's more on

[00:45:34] phasing out fossil fuel

[00:45:36] and coal and others

[00:45:37] and of course

[00:45:38] India is a developing country

[00:45:40] they have a challenge

[00:45:41] like Nepal is a developing country

[00:45:43] so therefore

[00:45:44] perhaps their priority

[00:45:45] is something very different

[00:45:46] from our priority

[00:45:48] on mitigation

[00:45:49] and I think

[00:45:50] my contention is that

[00:45:52] we can talk about

[00:45:53] perhaps energy cooperation

[00:45:55] we can talk about

[00:45:56] other kind of cooperation

[00:45:57] but perhaps not

[00:45:58] from a mitigation perspective

[00:46:00] adaptation is perhaps

[00:46:01] something that we could talk

[00:46:03] because the question of vulnerability

[00:46:05] the question of risk

[00:46:07] these are shared

[00:46:08] these are shared of course

[00:46:09] these then cross boundaries

[00:46:11] these cross boundaries

[00:46:13] political boundaries

[00:46:14] administrative boundaries

[00:46:15] as well as disciplinary boundaries

[00:46:17] so there is I think

[00:46:18] a case for

[00:46:20] a renewed conversation

[00:46:21] and a partnership on areas

[00:46:23] of vulnerability

[00:46:25] adaptation across boundary

[00:46:26] resilience building

[00:46:27] and this larger scheme of things

[00:46:30] but then seems to me

[00:46:32] Bangladesh is much ahead

[00:46:33] in these conversations

[00:46:35] they have positioned themselves

[00:46:36] quite well

[00:46:37] Pakistan became a champion

[00:46:40] in COP 27

[00:46:42] on loss and damage

[00:46:43] and on the climate impacts

[00:46:45] again perhaps

[00:46:47] in the aftermath of the

[00:46:49] 2022 floods

[00:46:51] India is a big country

[00:46:53] is a sort of

[00:46:55] large country

[00:46:56] there are a lot of innovations going on

[00:46:57] in terms of responding to climate change

[00:47:00] those are the areas perhaps where we

[00:47:02] need to begin that conversation

[00:47:04] begin that shared learning process

[00:47:08] and then of course water could be

[00:47:10] a useful entry point

[00:47:13] on that note

[00:47:13] Ajay we end the conversation

[00:47:16] thank you very much

[00:47:17] for this very insightful conversation

[00:47:19] I really enjoyed it

[00:47:20] thank you Samitra

[00:47:21] for this opportunity

[00:47:23] and hope you know

[00:47:24] we tried to cover a large canvas

[00:47:26] but hopefully you know

[00:47:27] we enjoyed it

[00:47:29] and I also enjoyed it

[00:47:30] thank you very much

[00:47:34] Thanks for listening to Pods by PEI

[00:47:36] I hope you enjoyed the second part

[00:47:38] of the conversation

[00:47:39] between Samitra and Ajay

[00:47:40] on the plausibility of Nepal

[00:47:42] reaching its ambitious goal

[00:47:43] of net zero emission by 2045

[00:47:46] and the impact of climate change

[00:47:48] on Nepal's water, energy

[00:47:49] and infrastructural development

[00:47:51] I hope you enjoyed their discussion

[00:47:53] on the transboundary nature

[00:47:54] of water relationship in the region

[00:47:56] and how climate change

[00:47:57] can perturb the existing interdependencies

[00:48:01] Today's episode is part of the conversations

[00:48:03] it was produced by Nirjan Rai

[00:48:05] with support from Sourabh Lama

[00:48:06] and Khushi Hang

[00:48:08] The episode was recorded at PEI studio

[00:48:10] and edited by Nirjan Rai

[00:48:12] Our theme music is courtesy

[00:48:13] of Rohit Shakya from Zindabad

[00:48:16] If you liked today's episode

[00:48:18] please subscribe to our podcast

[00:48:20] also please do us a favor

[00:48:21] by sharing us on social media

[00:48:23] and leaving a review on Spotify

[00:48:25] Apple Podcasts

[00:48:26] Google Podcasts

[00:48:27] or wherever you listen to the show

[00:48:29] For PEI's video-related content

[00:48:31] please search for Policy Entrepreneurs

[00:48:33] on YouTube

[00:48:34] and to catch the latest from us

[00:48:36] on Nepal's policy and politics

[00:48:38] please follow us on Twitter

[00:48:39] at tweet2pei

[00:48:41] That's tweet followed by the number 2

[00:48:43] and PEI

[00:48:45] And on Facebook at Policy Entrepreneurs Inc

[00:48:48] You can also visit pei.center

[00:48:50] to learn more about us

[00:48:52] Thanks once again from me, Tadan

[00:48:54] and we'll see you soon in our next episode