Hyderabad’s water blues: Lakes, rivers fall prey to urbanisation

WHEN MOHAMMAD Quli Qutab Shah founded Hyderabad on the banks of River Musi in 1591,little did he realise that his dream city would face a drinking water crisis in less than 500years.

River Musi is today an open drain. And the 500-odd lakes that supplied drinking water to thetwin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad have either become sewage dumps or have beenencroached upon, thanks to unplanned urbanisation and industrialisation.

Since both the cities were built on a rocky terrain, the potential for using groundwater islimited. As a result, the cities are dependent on surface water. Perhaps that’s why thefounders of Hyderabad and Secunderabad built the two cities around surface water bodieslike lakes and rivers.

The Hussain Sagar Lake, built in 1562 by Hussain Shah Wali, separates the twin cities. Itwas the first drinking water source for the two cities that are spread over 78,000 hectares.

Most of the tanks in and around the citywere built during the reign of QutubShah (1564-1724 AD). Apart fromHussain Sagar, the two other majordrinking water sources were OsmanaSagar (built in 1913) and Himayat Sagar(1927).

The other important sources of waterwere the Musi and Manjira rivers. RiverMusi, which receives overflows from bothHimayat Sagar and Osman Sagar, is nolonger a water source owing to heavypollution. In fact, River Musi, which oncerecharged aquifers, is now a major causefor concern as it is contaminating thewater table from which handpumps drawwater.

River Manjira, a tributary of RiverGodavari, is still a source of water.

The water from Lake Hussain Sagar is now used for horticultural purposes after treatment.

With the gradual drying up of most sources, the administration has now been forced tospend crores of rupees in trying to tap drinking water from River Krishna, which flows about150 kilometres from the city.

Population

Like other urban cities in India, Hyderabad has witnessed a rapid increase in population.From 1.25 million in 1961 the city's population touched 4.3 million in 1991. Its estimatedpopulation in 2003 was over 6.8 million and the figure is likely to reach 17.7 million by2020.

Source: 1994, project report, Hyderabad UrbanDevelopment Authority, Hyderabad.

Population of Hyderabad

1.2

6.2

8.2

10.2

3.32 2.5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 2021

Po

pu

lati

on

(m

illio

ns)

The rapid increase inpopulation forcedHyderabad Metro WaterSupply and Sewerage(HMWSSB) to search fornew water source tobridge the increasing gapbetween demand andsupply. HMWSSB, whichwas established in 1989,is an autonomous bodythat looks after watersupply and sewagedisposal systems of themetropolitan area of

Hyderabad and the 10 municipalities around the city. The board’s 5,200 qualified andexperienced technical officers, staff and workers, however, have been at a loss in trying tobridge the gap in demand and supply of water.

Increasing waterrequirement

The graphs presented hereare based on projectedfigures. In reality, thesituation is far worse, saysMohammed Abdul Kabeer,manager, EngineeringDepartment, HWMSSB.

“Among the total supply of680 million gallons per day(MLD), 94.5 MLD is fromground water sources. Thisincludes 6,000 hand bores of4.5 inch diameter ranging indepth from 150 to 200 metres and 800 power borewells of 6 inch diameter, ranging in depthfrom 400 to 500 metres,” he says. What is worse, says Kabeer, is that water from most

hand pumps is not potable. Even thiswater is not available during summersas the shallow aquifers go dry. “Amongthe total of 6,800 municipality-ownedborewells in the city, water from 900borewells have been painted red, toindicate that the water is not fit fordrinking.”

Demand, Supply and Gap

722913

1105

1862

2224

545680

1090

1906 1906

177 23315

-44

318

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1991 1994 2001 2011 2021

Source: HMWSSB

in M

illio

n Li

tres

per

day

Demand

Supply

Gap

Increasing Demand and Gap in Hyderabad

721.98

548.1

173.88

803.25

548.1

255.15

869.4

680.4

189

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Demand Supply Gap

Source : HMWSSB

in M

Illio

n lit

res

per

day

2001

2003

2004

According to Kabeer, HMWSSB has given out 2.8 lakh connections and maintains 500 publicstand-posts. This apart, about 300 tankers having a capacity of 5,000 litres each supplywater to slums and government schools covered under government’s free meal scheme atno cost. A network of pipes that supplies water for about three hours on alternative dayscovers about 90 per cent of the city.

Name of water body Maximum(Levels in feet)

Capacity (TMC)Past Present

Osman Sagar 1766.670 3.90 0.503Himayat Sagar 1742.060 30.00 0.465Singur 1698.960 1.500 8.907Manjeera 1650.900 2.967 1.357

The water level in the dams also affects water supply in the city. In June 2003, there was apossibility of revising the provision of water to once in every three days instead of two days.This was due to the drying up of Osmana Sagar and Himayat Sagar reservoirs.

In June 2003, Hyderabad witnessed an unprecedented crisis as the Osman Sagar lake driedup for the first time in 80 years. The demand at that point had shot up from 145 to 162MGD while supply dropped from 130MGD to 120 MGD.

Hyderabad’s water sources

History

After the state of Andhra Pradesh was formed in 1956, schemes for augmenting watersupply to the twin cities were taken up to meet the increased demand. The storage capacityof 45 MGD from Osman Sagar and Himayat Sagar was just sufficient for the population of1.2 million in 1961. For the increasing population, a barrage was constructed in 1965 acrossRiver Manjira. The project, called Manjira Phase I, supplied 15 MGD of water to the twocities. Phase II of the project was completed in 1972 and it added another 30 MGD to thesupply.

By 1991, the combined capacity of Manjira Phase I and II, Himayat Sagar and Osman Sagarwas only about 100 MGD, while the demand for water in the two cities was 160 MGD.Another storage reservoir was built across Manjira near Singur, upstream of the Manjirabarrage.

Surface water source and its quality

The surface water sources are Himayat Sagar, Osman Sagar, Manjira barrage and Singurdam. The area covered by surface water bodies is about 400 hectare. The total storagecapacity of these surface water sources is 38 TMC.

Source TMC Designed Capacity in MGD Actual supply in MGDOsman Sagar 3.90 27 17Himayat Sagar 2.967 18 14Singur 30.00 72 72Manjira 1.46 45 45Krishna River Project 5.5 90 83

Quantity of water drawn (source)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

18019

81

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2002

2003

MG

D

Osman Sagar Himayath Sagar Manjira (Ph.I-V)

(Quality of the source water as on 2003; Source: K S Narasapa, deputy general manager,Asifnagar filter bed)

Parameters Permissiblelimit/ Ideal

Raw water Treated water

OsmanSagar

HimayatSagar

Manjira Singur OsmanSagar

HimayatSagar

Manjira Singur

PhysicalParametersColour Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless Colourless ColourlessOdour Odourless Odourless Odourless Odourless Odourless Odourless Odourless Odourless OdourlessTaste Unobjectio

nableUnobjectionable

Unobjectionable

Unobjectionable

Unobjectionable

Unobjectionable

Unobjectionable

Unobjectionable

Unobjectionable

Turbidity asNTU

5 15-1000 20-1000 20-10,000

10-5000 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Ph 7.0 –8.5 8.2- 8.4 8.2-8.4 8.3-8.4 8.3-8.5 8.3-8.4 8.3-8.5 8.2-8.4 8.2-8.4Electricalconductivity inMicro siemens /cm

500 390-410 400-420 480-520 480-420 380-400 380-400 460-480 460-480

ChemicalParametersTDS mg/l – 500 240-300 240-300 240-320 240-320 220-290 230-290 230-300 230-300Total alkalinityas caco3 mg/l

200 140-180 140-180 140-180 140-180 130-160 130-180 130-180 140-180

Total HardnessCaco3 mg/l

300 120-160 120-160 120-160 120-160 120-150 120-150 120-160 120-160

Chloride as CLin mg / lit

250 12-18 12-20 18-24 18-24 12-18 18-24 18-24 20-24

Flouride as F inmg/ lit

1 0.3-0.4 0.30.4 0.4-0.6 0.4-0.5 0.3-0.4 0.3-0.4 0.5-0.6 0.5-0.6

Nitrates as NO3in mg/lit

45 3-5 3-5 4-5 4-5 3-5 3-5 3-5 3-5

Nitrites as No2 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil NilSulphate as So4in mg/l

200 10-50 10-50 20-40 60-120 5-10 5-10 15-30 15-30

Dissovledoxygen

6.0 5.8 6.0 5.8 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.0

Bacteriologicalexamination

28 32 Innumerable

Innumerable

Innumerable

Innumerable

Innumerable

Innumerable

Total MPN countof coliformbacteria / 100ml

240 –570

240- 570 540 -1600

540 -1600

- - - -

Coliform Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

‘Treated water,’ as stated in this table, refers to the quality of the water at the STP outlet.Secondary contamination is not considered but is the primary contributor to the bad qualityof municipal water. “Considering the rise in gastroenteritis cases in the city, residents shouldbe advised to drink boiled water,” says C.K. George, director of health services (quoted fromThe New Indian Express, March 17, 2004). At the same time, the ‘data’ obtained from thewater testing laboratory at Asifnagar filter bed shows how the gastroenteritis problem hasreduced over a period of time.

Gastroenteritis cases reported during the year 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 &2003

Year Jan Feb March April May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total

1998 391 501 690 985 1353 872 926 1053 843 747 435 323 91191999 327 381 495 630 1008 607 493 344 236 255 233 195 52042000 263 285 439 468 499 678 893 348 170 252 237 274 48062001 66 67 74 67 76 82 111 94 82 119 61 64 9632002 49 17 12 4 10 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 962003 3 6 4 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 0 1 28

The accuracy of this data, however, is doubtful. According to a report titled ‘Let water notflow into private hands’ published in The Indian Express, Hyderabad, on March 18, 2004, 45people had died in 2003 (19 in 2002) due to waterborne diseases and 13,473 were admittedas in-patients in 2003 (5,386 in 2002).

Groundwater scenario

The key findings of the Groundwater Estimation Committee (GEC) 1997 that studied therecharge potential of the city are as follows:

� Out of the total area of 100,000 hectares (HUDA area) only 60,000 hectares is suitablefor ground water recharge. The remaining 40,000 hectares consists of hills, dwellings, roadsetc.� Area covered by surface water bodies is about 4000 hectares.� Infiltration factor considered for recharge estimation is 11 per cent� Specific yield of formation is three per cent� Seepage factor for surface water bodies is 0.5 m per year� The cross-sectional area for inflow and out flow of groundwater is considered to be almostequal� The total annual ground water recharge is 73.3 Million Cubic Meter (MCM)� The total ground water draft is 65.7 MCM� Thus, the amount ground water balance is 7.6 MCM� The stage of ground water development is worked out to be 89 per cent and hence thecity falls under the dark category.

Withdrawal of groundwater for domestic and industrial use is in the order of 65 MCM through9,000 public bore wells and 40,000 private bore wells. Since the distribution of ground waterresource and its development is not uniform throughout the area, withdrawal exceeds theannual mean recharge in many areas resulting in situations like continuous decline in waterlevels and well yields, drying of shallow wells and deterioration of ground water quality.

According to Kabeer, groundwater extraction in Hyderabad is in the order of 25 MGDthrough borewells.

Groundwater level

Hyderabad’s groundwater level is depleting rapidly, says T Narashima Reddy, director, StateGroundwater Department. This is because every other house in the city uses a borewell.Since the city has been built on hard rock, the aquifers are shallow, he adds (Source:MWEB)

Groundwater levels are deeper in areas that do not receive (or receive too little) waterthrough the municipal network. The same phenomenon can be observed in heavily built upareas where there is little scope for groundwater recharge, such as areas with multi-storiedapartments and industrial areas.

The Ground Water Department has established 30 observation wells in the metro areaduring 1987 to monitor water level and quality. Under a World Bank-aided hydrologyproject, the department has constructed 14 piezometer wells in the city. Water levels aremeasured in observations wells during January, May, July, August, September and

November. The piezometers are programmed to record or store the water levels at intervalsof six hours.

An analysis of available data indicates that the rise and fall in water level is directly relatedto rainfall and drought. The city received poor rainfall in 1985 and 1986. As a result, therewas a dip in the groundwater levels in 1987. The rainfall was much better between 1987 and1990, and this lead to a rise in the groundwater levels.

Very good rainfall received during 1995 and 1998 resulted in a remarkable rise in watertable. But there has been a decline of water table between 1991 to 1994 and the trend iscontinuing due to deficit rainfall on one hand and overexploitation of groundwater resourceson the other.

Significantly, the analysis of pre-monsoon and post-monsoon water levels indicates agradual reduction in the build up of average post-monsoon water levels since 1987, whichindicates a gradual fall in net ground water recharge except for the years 1995 and 1998,which received good rainfall.

HMWSSB has set up 109 observation wells in seven operation and maintenance divisions.The groundwater levels recorded at these wells in April 2003 was as follows:

� 24 observation wells recorded water level of 20 metres below ground level (mbgl)� 31 observation wells recorded depth between 15 to 20 mbgl� 29 observation wells recorded depth between 10 to 15 mbgl� 10 observation wells were dry

Groundwater quality in the city

The State Groundwater Department collected 155 samples during 1989 to 1999 fromdifferent areas and analysed them. They found that the Nitrate concentration in groundwaterranges from 5.00 milligrams per litre (mg/l) to 522 mg/l. The tolerance limit is 45 mg/l inIndia, while in USA it is less than 10 mg/l. In 80 per cent of the cases, the nitrateconcentration was found to exceed the tolerance limit.

According to the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) the quality of water has beenassessed by analysing 314 samples collected from shallow borewells, three surface water

samples and two seepage water samples. The particulars of the important constituentranges, average ranges and standards set by the Bureau of Indian Standards (ISI) areshown in the table:(Source: Groundwater in Urban Environment of India, CGWB)

Range ISI standardsSl.no ConstituentsMin Max

General RangeDesirable Permissible

1 pH 6.5 8.57 6.9 – 7.7 6.5 – 8.5 No relax2 Electrical conductivity 200 7500 700-3000 750 30003 Total Hardness 70 2780 150-1000 300 6004 Calcium 14 720 50-300 75 2005 Magnesium 3.6 272 10-120 30 1006 Chloride 3.5 1766 50-600 250 10007 Sulphate 4.8 1392 25-450 200 4008 Nitrate 1.2 760 10-300 45 1009 Fluoride 0.17 3.3 0.5 – 1.7 1.0 1.5Except pH and EC all other constituents are expressed in mg/l

Calcium is more than 200 mg/l in areas around Uppal, Golkonda, Yusufguda, Sanath NagarJeedimetla, Bolaram Industrial area, Attapur, Hyderguda village, Sanjeevayya Park,Kattedan, Bhulaxminagar, Nirala nagar, Doctors colony, Siri Nagar, LB Nagar.

The concentration of nitrate in Hyderabad ranges from 1.2 mg/l to 760 mg/l and the generalrange is from 10 mg/l to 300 mg/l. The highest value is recorded in Siri Nagar in L.B. Nagarmunicipality area. This may be due to the SIRIS industry located near by.

A higher concentration of nitrate can be observed in industrial areas such as Bollaram, Alwal,Kattedan and residential areas such as Hyderguda, Athapur, Hayathanagar and SaroorNagar.

Analysis of the groundwater samples collected from the observation wells and other sourcesin the twin cities indicate that the concentration of many of chemical pollutants is higherthan their permissible limits.

Groundwater pollution is acute in most densely populated urban areas, industrial areas andareas adjoining drainage systems. The affected areas include Jeedimetla, Shapurnagar,Qutubullahpur, Balanagar, Uppal, Ramanthapur, Fathenagar, Begumpeta, Secunderabad,Chintal, Alwal, Amberpet, Nallakunta, Chikkadapally, Bollaram, Kachiguda, Lower tank bund,Domalaguda, Himayatnagar, Rajendranagar and Golkonda.

K S Narasapa, deputy general manager, QAT, Asifnagar Filter Bed, says, “Strip test doneusing H2S strips detect the presence of bacteriological contamination in the borewellsindicate that 900 borewells are contaminated. This is mainly due to the seepage of domesticsewage.”

Fluoride and nitrate contamination has also been observed in the city groundwater. Theareas affected have been shown graphically in the water quality map.

According to the State Groundwater Department, the pollution due to industrial effluents andhuman waste has reached alarming situation as nitrates, fluorides and other heavy metalsare present in concentrations exceeding the permissible limits.

Future water source

The city currently gets its water supply from River Krishna, which flows about 150 kilometresaway from the city. The Krishna Water Supply Project, an inter-state tribunal allocating theKrishna waters between Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, has run into roughweather since 1989.

Besides, revenue earnings of the government are largely eroded in paying for administrativeoverheads. There is certainly no money to bring water from the Krishna. So the governmenthas turned to the World Bank for funding. The bank insists that water prices be raised to

make the scheme viable. This would hit the poorer sections. Yet, the government is notcounting on alternatives like improving the lakes and tanks.

In November 2002, HMWSSB initiated the construction of a major water supply project. TheKrishna Water Supply Project will contribute to Hyderabad’s water supply with an extra 1130MLD (270 MGD) by 2021 where the demand is expected to grow to 1820 MLD (400 MGD).

The table below illustrates the different phases of the project.

Phase and Stage Water tapping per year Additional Treated water tobe added per day

Phase I Stage 1 (2002-2004) Stage 2 (2004-2006)

2.75 TMC2.75 TMC

45 MGD45 MGD

Phase II (2006-2010) 5.50 TMC 90 MGDPhase III Stage 1 (2011-2016) Stage 2 (2016-2021)

2.75 TMC2.75 TMC

45 MGD45 MGD

TOTAL 16.50 TMC 270 MGDSource: ‘Elections Speed Up Krishna’s Flow to City,’ The New Indian Express, 4-Jan-2004, Hyderabad

Phase I of the project has been completed. HUDCO had provided Rs 350 crore in December2002 for the project and had approved a bridge loan of Rs 150 crore.

Supply and Demand

45

160191

230 230

400

45

100145 153

187

400

043

774660

00

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1961 1991 2001 2003 2004 2020

MG

D Demand

Supply

Gap

The chart above depicts the growing gap between water supply and demand in the city.Officials hope that with the Krishna Project, the gap will be bridged by 2020.

This is unlikely, as it has been proven that large scale projects are unable to deliver as pertheir design capacity. For example, the first phase of the Krishna project was planned forMarch 2004 but was only able to reach full capacity of 45 MGD in June 2004.

Then, there are maintenance problems as well. HMWS&SB has failed to maintain pipelines,most notably the Osman Sagar pipelines, which are over 80 years old. This leads tosecondary contamination and reduced efficiency. The non-accounted for water (NFW) canreach up to 30 per cent, meaning the actual provision is merely 70 per cent of the stated

figures. Finally, all reservoirs, particularly Osman Sagar and Himayat Sagar are totallydependent on rainfall. In case of deficit rainfall, crises like the one in 2003 are inevitable.

WATER TARIFF AND STRUCTURE (w.e.f. 01-06-2002)

Category

Consumption ofwater in kilo litresper month

Rates inRs. Perkilo litre

1. All water supply connections other than covered by category below(A) where the monthly consumption is 500 kl or less Up to 30 6.00 Above 30 up to 200 10.00

Above 200 25.00(B) where the monthly consumption exceeds 500 kl Entire consumption 25.002. Group HousingMunicipalities, panchayats, local Authorities, cantonmentand housing colonies (other than industrial housingcolonies owned and maintained by industries) and multi-storied residential apartment complexes as defined innote (1) belowIn case of multi-storied residential apartment complexeswhere specific agreements are not entered into, theagreed quantity is deemed to be 30 KL multiplied by thenumber of residential apartments in the complex, as perthe construction plan approved by MCH/Municipality.

Up to the agreedquantityAbove the agreedquantity

6.0025.00

Monthly Minimum Charges for Categories (1) and (2) abovea) Where individual agreements are entered into with the customer for water supply, theminimum charges agreed to in the agreement or the charges applicable to 60% of theagreed quantity.

b) Other cases Rs.90 permonth

WS Connection PipeSize Rs./Month

15mm (1/2") 90.0020mm (3/4") 270.0025mm (1") 600.0040mm (1-1/2") 1500.00

c) In case where the customer's meter is not working formore than 3 months continuously, or if the meter isfound to be removed or if the customer is not allowedfixing of meter by the HMWWSB:

50mm (2") and above 3200.003. Other Services

Tanker of 5 KLCapacity 250.00a) Water supply through tankers

Tanker of 9KLCapacity 350.00

b) Disconnection and Restoration Charges (200+200) 400.00c) Change of Bore 1500.00d) Meter Testing Charges 75.00e) Change of Name 200.00

15mm (1/2") 15.0020mm (3/4") 30.0025mm (1") 50.00

f) Meter Service Charges per month (where the meter isprovided by HMWSSB)

Above 25mm per each5mm of total diameter 15.00

g) Service Charges (Charges for meter reading, billingcollection,etc) Per inch dia per month6.00

Individual Domestic 25.00Apartment Complexes& non-domestic 250.00

Corporate Hospitals &Star Hotels 750.00

h) Charges for clearing sewerage chokages withincustomers premises

Septic Tank Cleaning 750.00Source : HMWSSB, http://www.hyderabadwater.gov.in/Tariff_Conn_Charges.htm#Part1

According to Kabeer, the cost of producing one kilo litre of water from the Krishna Project isRs 20 but the selling cost is less, as shown in the table above.

WATER BODIES OF HYDERABAD

Tradition of Tanks

Hyderabad has a glorious tradition of tanks built by the rulers. The first source of watersupply to Hyderabad was from Lake Hussain Sagar. Named after Hussain Shah Wali, thelake spread over 312 hectares was built in 1562 on the tributary of River Musi. In 1891, aslow-sand filter was set up in Narayanguda, and the lake was used to provide drinkingwater. The water from this lake was sufficient for the people of Hyderabad then.

Most of the tanks in Hyderabad were built by Qutub Shah (1564-1724 AD), and hissuccessor Asaf Jahi (1724-1948 AD). As population grew, two other tanks, Himayat Sagar(built in 1927) and Osaman Sagar (built in 1913) started supplying water to the twin citiesof Hyderabad and Secunderabad, which were constructed to control floods after theinundation of the city in 1908.

Over the years, some other tanks also came up. Nawab Mir Alam, the prime minister ofNawab Sikandar Jah Bahadur Nizam III, had constructed the Mir Alam tank on the cityoutskirts in 1806. It is the first multiple-arch dam in the world. Today, the tank provides 1million gallons of water per day to the Hyderabad zoo.

Lakes gobbled up

Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) has control over 186,400 hectarescomprising the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secuderabad and 10 peripheral municipalitiesbesides 105 village panchayats. As per the old records, there were as many as 532 lakes.

Sadly, Hyderabad’s heritage of lakes and water bodies has had to suffer much due tourbanisation. Here’s a gist of the state of some of them.

Water body What it is todayMir Jumla Tank Converted to slumMaasaabcheruvu and Ramathpuracheruvu Converted to an affluent colonyYusufguda and Batakammakunta Garbage dumping groundsSahebnagar cheruvuv in HayathnagarMandal

Occupied by influential politicians and layoutsfor HUDA

Gopicheruvu at Gacchi Bowli near oldBombay road

Converted to town ship by Dyon company

Kanchanbagcheruvu Filled up and a hospital has come up.

At last count, Hyderabad had about 400 lakes of which 170 lakes are more than 10 hectares(25 acres) in extent. HUDA has notified these water bodies and has restrained certainactivities. The agency has also collected information on 170 lakes. It has taken up 85 lakesin the first phase and organised collection of baseline data. Based on the above studies,lakes are categorised into two categories. Eighteen threatened (problematic!) lakes havebeen placed under category – I while category – II lists 67 non-problematic lakes.

An environmental survey of waterbodies in and around Hyderabad classified them into threemajor categories: those totally reclaimed and lost forever like the Mir Jumia Tank, Ma SahabTank and Batkamma Kunta; those in progressive stages of degradation and can berehabilitated like Swaroopnagar Lake, Mir Alam Tank and Hussain Sagar; and those that arestill used as sources of drinking water and have recreational potential like Osman Sagar,

Himayat Sagar and Shameerpet lakes. Out of 170 waterbodies identified by HUDA forprotection, most belong to the second category - those in progressive degrees ofdegradation. Persistent efforts to save the lakes have finally made a dent in the form ofcourt interventions, directing the authorities to take appropriate measures.

According to HUDA, a lake conservation programme has been taken up with the assistanceof Royal Netherlands Embassy under the Green Hyderabad Environment Programme (GHEP)and 23 minor lakes have covered under the project. Three major lakes at Swaroopnagar,Safilguda and Langerhouze are in the last phase of development, where state-of-the-artsewage treatment plants will be set up.

170 lakes hold out promise

The total area of the 170 lakes put together comes to around 3,000 hectares and theiraverage depth is about 2.75 metres. The approximate storage capacity these lakes offer is3000 x 10 4 x 2.75 x 10 3 / 10 6 = 82,500 million litres (ML) = 11 per cent of storm waterrunoff.

The daily ground water recharge from 3,000 hectares of lake area works out toapproximately 3000 x 0.076 ML per hectare = 228 million litres per day (MLD)

For a population of six million it works out to 228 x 106 / 6 x 106 = 38 litres per capita perday (LPCD). Even at 50 per cent abstraction of water from ground, it works out to about 20LPCD.

Significance of water bodies

K L Vyas of the Society for Preservation of Environment and Quality of Lakes (SPEQL), pointsout that according to revenue records, there are 679 water bodies within 30-kilometre radiusof the city. Of these, 111 lakes have a surface area of over 10 hectares each. Assuming anaverage depth of 2 metres (some of them go down to 12 metres), their total capacity is164,756,000 cubic metre (m3), which is more than the water that the Krishna Project isexpected to supply. “If all these water bodies are rejuvenated, properly networked andtapped, they can supply water to Hyderabad for at least the next 30 years,” says Vyas.(Source: MWEB)

Some important tanks of Hyderabad

Swaroopnagar Lake: Built in 1793, 4,000 hectares of catchment area (CA), 1100 hectaresof free catchment area, lake area 64 hectares in 1974 and 52 hectares in 1996. Classified astail-end lake of River Musi sub-basin within Krishna basin originally the lake served as a lungspace and recharge of ground water for the surrounding areas and till 1980 it has been usedfor irrigation and fishing needs. In the past two decades it has lost its irrigation commandand has been subjected to urban environmental pressures.

The genesis of ‘Save the Lakes Campaign’ in Hyderabad goes back to 1993 withSwaroopnagar Lake as the flash point. Both the catchment and command area wereconverted into non-agricultural residential zones. In October 1984, the state governmentissued a government order for the ‘abandonment of the lake’ by depleting the full tank levelfrom 31 metres to 29 metres, to facilitate development of residential colonies in the illegallyoccupied peripheral areas of the water body. The lake would have vanished but for theconcern of the then chairperson of the municipal corporation and the corporations of thecity, who, in October 1988, unanimously resolved to save the lake at any cost.

Hussain Sagar Lake: The lake, which lies as a natural division between the twin cities ofHyderabad and Secunderabad, has a history of over 400 years. It was built in 1562 AD,during the reign of Ibrahim Quli Qutb Shah. The construction and the supervision of the lakewas entrusted to Hussain Shah, the son–in–law of Ibrahim Quli Qutb Shah – and thus cameto be known as Hussain Sagar.

In its period of glory, the lake served as one of the primary sources of drinking water for thecity from 1894 to 1930 AD. Discharge of untreated industrial and domestic wastes pollutedthe lake enormously.

The lake receives its inflow from mainly from five nullahs. The natural inflows into the lakeare from a total catchment are of about 24,000 hectares. The average rainfall in a normalyear is about 770 millimetres and the average runoff into the lake is between 28 to 33million cubic metres.

Statistics of the lake

Volume: 28.6 million cubic metresSurface area: 5.7 million square metresAverage depth: 5.02 metres

Depth variable: 1- 12 metresMaximum optimum level: 514.43 metresNormal operating level: 513.43 metresRoad level (Bund level): 518.16 metres

Total dry whether inflows from different nullahs: 95 MLD

Kukatpally nullah & Yousufguda nullah: 70 MLD (50 MLD domestic, 15 MLD industrial)Picket nullah: 5.7 MLDBanjara Hills nullah: 6.0 MLDBalkapur Channel: 13.3 MLD

Hussain Sagar, which has recently been developed into a tourist centre by the HyderabadUrban Development Authority (HUDA), stinks of sulphur fumes and is extremely filthy. Thequality of water in the lake has gradually deteriorated during the last 20-30 years, mainlydue to the continual ingress of untreated domestic sewage and industrial effluents.

“There are more than 1,000 polluting industries situated in the catchment area of HussainSagar,” says Purushottam Reddy, founder-member of Citizens Against Pollution (CAP), anNGO. Most of the effluents flowing in the lake are from pharmaceutical industries. The lakegets little chance to rejuvenate itself, since a runoff occurs only once a year during the rains,and pollutants flow in throughout the year. Fish-kills have occurred as a result of lack ofdissolved oxygen, endangering the livelihoods of about 200 fisherfolk, who depend on thistank for their livehood. (Source: MWEB)

Lakes in news

Hussainsagar, Swaroopnagar lakes most pollutedOsman Sagar and Himayat Sagar, the two main source of drinking water to the twin citiesare among the cleanest lakes in the world, while Hussain Sagar is the most polluted in theHUDA agglomeration area. Besides Hussainsagar, Swaroopnagar, Hashmatpet lakes arehighly polluted with a massive inflow of sewage. As many as 16 lakes in Patancheruindustrial belt are contaminated with industrial waste.Deccan Chronicle, May 15, 2002

Apex court fiat on pollution falls flatFour years have elapsed since the Supreme Court directed the Andhra Pradesh stategovernment to take up “remediation” of 14 highly polluted lakes located in the Patancheruarea. No concrete action has been taken so far.Deccan Chronicle, July 12 2002

Shamshabad airport poses threat to lakesThe proposed international airport at Shamshabad in Andhra Pradesh poses a threat toHimayat Sagar and Osman Sagar, the two lakes which supply water to the twin cities.Deccan Chronicle, July 20 2002?

Sewage treatment and Waste Management

River Musi, which carries most of the city’s sewage, is in a bad shape. The city has two mainsewage treatment plants – one at Amberpet and the 20 MLD treatment plant on NecklaceRoad. Sewage from the south of Musi is treated at Amerbet treatment plant and dumped inthe river. The sewage from north is treated at the Necklace Road plant.

Sewage treatment plant at Hussain Sagar (Necklace Road)

Inaugurated in May 1998, this plant was designed to treat domestic sewage of 20 millionlitres per day and discharge the treated sewage into the lake. This treatment plant isprovided with 24 hours power supply for effective operation. The sewage treatment processwas designed by Watson, Mumbai and constructed by SACEDE engineers, Chennai, at a costof Rs 6 crore.

Salient features of the project

The five drains, namely Kukatpally nullahs, Picket nullahs, Yusufguda nullahs, Banjaranullahs and Balkapur are channelled away from the lake so that the industrial wastes andother unwanted substances do not contaminate the lakes.Effluents from these drains are diverted to a Duplicate ‘A’ main sewer, which carries them tothe sewage treatment plant.The plant is capable of treating domestic wastes adequately, before discharging them intothe lake.

Sewage treatment plant at Amberpet

A primary treatment plant of 113 MLD capacity exists at Amberpet. This plant carries outscreening and de-gritting. The plant is also equipped with plain sedimentation tanks, sludgedigesters and sludge drying beds.

Characteristics of incoming sewage to the plants

Parameter Present Mg per litrePh 6.74Total Dissolved Solids ( mg/l) 1748Suspended Solids ( mg/l) 500COD ( mg/l) 600BOD ( mg/l) 370Fecal Coliforms 5.6 x 10 MPN / 100 ml

The efficiency of the existing primary treatment plant is as follows

Removal of suspended solids 70 per centRemoval of BOD 30 per centRemoval of COD 20 per cent

Under the Musi River Conservation Project, the Amberpet treatment plant’s capacity will beincreased to 339 MLD and the treated water will be discharged into the river.

River Musi needs conservation

River Musi, a tributary of River Krishna, emerges from Anantagiri Hills near Vikarabad townabout 90 kilometres to the west of Hyderabad. The river flows through part of Pargi,Chevella, Kalwalcol, Palmakol and Golkonda Mandals before it reaches Hyderabad. OsmanSagar reservoir was constructed across the river in 1920 at Gandipet village, upstream ofHyderabad. Musi enters Hyderabad near Rajendranagar, flowing west to east and bifurcatingthe old and new city, which are on the south and north of Musi respectively. It runs about 20kilometres within the city limits and passes downstream through a length of about 150kilometres before joining River Krishna at Wadapally in Nalgonda district.

The quality of water in River Musi after entering the city limits of Hyderabad is deterioratingdue to rapid urbanisation and industrialisation. The drainage area of Musi’s stretch flowingthrough Hyderabad city limits includes the entire Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH)area and also part of surrounding municipalities – Secunderabad Cantonment, OsmaniaUniversity, etc. In the MCH area, only 62 per cent is covered by sewage network, withlimited sewage treatment facility of 113 MLD at Amberpet and 20 MLD at Hussain SagarLake. The excess sewage from Amberpet flows to Nallacheruvu beyond Uppal and is beingused to grow para-grass. The other parts of the drainage area of River Musi are not coveredwith regular sewerage networks and sewage treatment facilities. The river is getting pollutedas untreated sewage is finding its way to the river. Studies indicate that the BiochemicalOxygen Demand of the river is in the range of 60 to 117 mg/litre in city limits.

Pollution levels in River Musi within Twin cities(Samples collected in May 2001)

LocationsParametersRiver Musi at theconfluence of RiverMusi and River Esanear Bapughat

River Musi atRajendraNagar RingRoad Bridge

RiverMusinearhighcourt

River Musiat NagoleRing RoadBridge

Pirzadigudoutlet ofNullahCheruvu

pH 7.93 7.61 7.16 7.46 7.3Total DissolvedSolids (mg/l)

680 860 704 1176 1076

Suspendedsolids (mg/l)

204 318 164 92 296

Total Nitrogen(mg/l)

22 32 26 27 52

TotalPhosphates(mg/ l)

5 7 7 6 14

Sulphates(mg/l)

182 171 129 182 222

COD (mg/l) 176 220 268 128 211BOD (mg/l) 72 90 117 60 90

River Musi Conservation Project

A pre-feasibility project report has been prepared for conserving River Musi. The proposal,which pegs the estimated cost at Rs 295 crore, has been forwarded to the Government ofIndia under the National River Action Plan Assistance for funding.

The proposal includes revamping the Sewage Treatment Plant at Amberpet at a cost of Rs105 crore. The project proposes to intercept and divert the dry weather flows from all thestorm water drains and divert them after preliminary treatment like screening and de-gritting to the various proposed Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) for treatment.

If the proposal is accepted, six STPs will be set up in order to take care of the estimatedwaste expected by the year 2005. The treated sewage water will be finally diverted to theriver. The following table indicates the volume of sewage they have to handle by 2005.

Amberpet 339 MldNagole 170 MldNallacheruvu 30 MldZiaguda 20 MldNandimusalaiguda 30 MldHussainsagar 20 MldTotal 609 Mld

RAINWATER HARVESTING

Artificial recharge of ground water in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad, thoughinitiated in the year 1997, has gained momentum in 1998 with the involvement of HMWSSB,MCH and other government organisations.

A rainwater harvesting cell was constituted in HMWSSB to which an officer from StateGround Water Department was deputed to propagate the concept and to provide thenecessary technical guidance. The cell provides technical guidance to the implementingagencies and to the people at large. Citizens interested in implementing rainwaterharvesting methods can contact B Narsing Rao, Assitant Director, Rainwater Harvesting Cell,HMWSSB, Hyderabad, Phone no: 040- 55666358

The government has made it mandatory for all premises on plots over 200 sq m to haverainwater harvesting structures by enacting the Andhra Pradesh Water Land and Tress Act2002 (APWALTA).

Between 1988-2002, HMWSSB, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and residents of thetwin cities had constructed 414,482 rainwater harvesting structures. The evaluation ofrainwater harvesting structures in twin cities indicates a net average groundwater level riseof 4.84 metres in the influent zone of recharge structures, as against the net rise of 2.07metres in the non influent zone during the monsoon period of 2001. This indicates a netincremental rise of 2.77 metres due to additional recharge close to the recharge structures.

Rainwater Harvesting Potential In Hyderabad

Hyderabad receives normal rainfall of 845 millimetres spread on 50 normal rainy days. Ofthese, 658 millimetres accrue from 39 normal days from south-west monsoon and 107 mmis received in five rainy days during north-east monsoon. The climate of the city representsa distinctly dry season combined with moderate annual range of temperature (27.8° C inDecember to 38.7° C in May). Rainfall data for the last 20 years has shown a deviation ofrainfall of –40 per cent to +40 per cent. This shows that droughts are common to Hyderabadcity. The actual rainfall for the year 2002-03 up to the month of April 2003 is 624.2 mm adeficit of 18 per cent. The average 10 years of rainfall pattern in city is given below.

10 years rainfall data in twin cities

4 8 15 22 31

109

186168

195

79

217

0

50

100

150

200

250

Janu

ary

Febru

ary

Mar

ch

April

MayJu

ne

July

Augus

t

Septem

ber

Octo

ber

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

source : State groundwater dept

in m

illim

eter

s

Water Harvesting Potential of Hyderabad

Area of Hyderabad – 780 sq kmAnnual avg. rainfall - 845 mmTotal rainwater falling over the city= 780 x 1000000 x 845= 659100000000 litres= 1805 MLD

Present water supply = 680 MLD

Even if we assume 70 per cent of the area to be developed, 50 per cent of it to be roofedand we collect 70 per cent of the water falling over it, the quantity of rainwater that can beharvested works out to 442 MLD. This is a sizeable quantity compared to water supply totwin cities.

How much water can be harvested in Individual House level

In Hyderabad if you have a rooftop area of 100 sq m, considering the rainfall the annualrainfall as 845 mm or 0.845m, with runoff coefficient factor of 0.80 for rooftop area, thenyou can harvest about 67,600 litres of water. The formula for calculating is as follows:

Runoff =A x R x CA=AreaR=Rainfall in metresC=Runoff coefficient

An exampleA=100 m2R = 845 millimetersC=0.80Runoff = 67,600 liters

Rainy days in Hyderabad

Number of rainy days in Twin city

0.4 0.51.1 1

2.3

7.1

11.410.4

9.9

4

1.40.5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Janu

ary

Febru

ary

Mar

ch

April

MayJu

ne

July

Augus

t

Septem

ber

Octo

ber

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Source : State Groundwater dept

no

. o

f d

ays

Since the city has limited number of rainy days, storing is not an economical option for thecity. Hence recharging aquifers is the only viable option.

RECHARGING AQUIFERS IN HYDERABAD

Rainwater from various catchments can be filtered and diverted to subsoil, but for doing thisthe knowledge of the sub-subsurface geology is essential.

Soil in the cityMost of the soils are residual type, formed due to weathering of granitic rocks and thereforeare of red sandy loams and black silty loams. The thickness of soil is limited to less than onemetre and in certain places may extend up to 2m.

Hydrogeology of the city

Grey and pink granites gneisses underlie the area in and around the twin cities of Hyderabadand Secunderabad. They are, at places, intruded by dolerite, pegmatite and quartz veins.These rocks are generally classified as hard rock and are devoid of primary porosity. Onlysecondary porosity like weathered and fractured zones can store and allow percolation ofgroundwater. The depth of weathered zone ranges up to 15 metres and that of fracturedzone from 15 to 50 metres and at places extends even up to 100 metres.

Areas favourable for rechargeAlluvial deposits along the minor streams are found in areas such as Yellareddyguda,Punjagutta, North of Golconda Gort, Khanapur etc. These areas are generally suitable forrecharge purposes.

Another important landform is deeply weathered pediplain where the thickness of soil zone/weathered zone is more than 10 metres. This unit is found in parts of Musheerabad,Ashoknagar, Towlichowki, Narasingi, Khanapur, Osmansagar, Chinnamangalam, Barakas,

south of Yakutpura, north of Rajendra Nagar, along with River Musi, etc. These areas arehighly favourable for recharge borewells of depth ranging from 35 to 50 metres.

Government initiatives

Neeru-Meeru campaignThe Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) had launched the campaign to promoteconservation and harvesting of rainwater for ground water recharge. In Hyderabad, Neeru-Meeru structures enable a 2.1 per cent rainfall infiltration (one of the highest percentages ofthe state). Under the Neeru-Meeru programme, HUDA has so far constructed 2.31 lakhrainwater harvesting structures involving 31 lakh cmt of earth work by creating 347 lakhcmt additional recharge space.

HUDA has made it mandatory for all the developers to take up rainwater harvestingstructures in all layouts and apartments. So far, 1,283 structures are constructed in layoutsand 52 structures in apartments sanctioned.

Integrated Lake Treatment and conservationDue to lack of long-term infrastructure planning for water supply and waste watermanagement, most lakes in Hyderabad are subjected to highly polluted sewage waterdischarge. Out of 170 lakes notified by HUDA, 87 lakes will be treated and conserved underGreen Hyderabad Environment Programme from 2002-2006.

Government of Andhra Pradesh, 2000, G.O.Ms.No; 350, M.A.:Town and country planning, Urban Development Authority, Municipal Commissioners insistfor facilities and infrastructure for conservation and harvesting rainwater in all layouts andsub division for sanctioning the same.Plots over 300 sq.m. must have RWHAll existing should construct within one year.

State Ground Water Dept’s studies: Key findings on RWH

� Infiltration tests show that rate of infiltration through the dug out pits and trenches are 10times higher that of the infiltration rate that happens naturally in soil.

� The 2,250 recharge structures constructed in the city has provided additional recharge of0.24 MCM which is 0.4 per cent of the average annual natural ground water recharge in thetwin cities. This additional recharge is equivalent to the domestic water requirement of about17,000 persons for 100 days.

� The random survey reveals improvement in borewell yields from 10 per cent to 15 percent, improvement in water level and rejuvenation of defunct shallow borewells, particularlyin residential zones such as Padmasalinagar, Umanagar, Gandhinagar, and Ashoknagar,where a large number of structures were constructed by builders and individuals.

� A rise of water levels of 4.5 to 5 metres during monsoon of 1998 is noticed in areas closeto the recharge structures as against the net average rise of 4.2 metres recorded from theobservation wells for the same period. The net average rise in water levels of observationwells in monsoon of 1998 is higher when compared to the 1997 values whose average is1.2m. This is due to the combined effect of groundwater recharge and betterment in watersupply.

� Recharge structures made in individual houses are maintained but the recharge wells ingovernment departments and in public places are silted with leaves, plastic bags and othersoil wastes. It is suggested that the roof top water from the drain pipes must be collectedand diverted into the recharge structures to prevent silting.

� Areas with rock exposures and shallow basement should be avoided. Areas with shallowwater table of less than 5 metres during summer needed not be considered for taking to ofrecharge structures.

CSE and Rainwater Harvesting in Andhra pradesh

CSE conducted day-long training programmes at six municipalities in Andhra Pradesh(Hyderabad, Kurnool, Tirupathi, Vishakhapatnam, Guntur and Warangal) from June 4 toJune 15, 2003. The programme was taken up after a request from the state government.For more information about this refer to below given link.http://www.rainwaterharvesting.org/events/Events-2003.htm

References

CGWB, 2000, Ground water in Urban Environment of India, Faridabad, India

HMSSB, 2001, Musi River Conservation Project, Foundation stone laying ceremony(brochure).

Prasad, B.N., 2004, State Level Technical workshop for assessment of Run-off, GroundWater Department (Govt of Andhra Pradesh)

Andhra Pradesh Authority, 2002, The Andhra Pradesh Gazette Part IV-B Extraordinary, Act.No 10 of 2002, Hyderabad.

Government of Andhra Pradesh, 2000, G.O.Ms.No;350,M.A.,

India Urban Resource Center, http://www.indiaurbaninfo.com/niua/index.htm

CSE, Dying WisdomCSE, 2001, Making Water Everybody’s Business

*