EcoLur
On 15 December the first outcomes of “Support to the Reforms of SHPPs through a Dialogue between the Public and The Ministry of Nature Protection of the RA for the Purpose of River Ecosystem Use” project implemented with the support of UNDP-GEF Small Grants program were summarized at “EcoLur” Press Club.
Presenting the outcomes of the implemented works, Inga Zarafyan, Project Coordinator and President of “EcoLur” Informational NGO said, “We have visited 87 SHPPs in 8 regions. Syunik Region is the most densely constructed with SHPPs – 32 SHPP already operate there and 11 SHPPs will soon be put into operation. Vayots Dzor Region takes the second place, which unlike Syunik Region, has rather small territory. The rivers here are overloaded with SHPPs. We have also examined the state of the rivers and eye witnessed that the number of SHPPs at least on four rivers are so high that over 50% of the river was piped. First of all, it refers to the Yeghegis River. The SHPPs constructed on the Yeghegis are individual SHPPs belonging to different owners, but if you look in terms of river overload, it turns out you look at a whole cascade, i.e. the water flows from one SHPP and doesn’t flow back to the river, it directly flows into the pipe of another SHPP. Moreover, two brooklets of the Yeghegis River – Aysas and Karakaya, are overloaded with SHPPs by over 50%.
Tandzut River, Lori Region, is also piped by over 50%, which is impermissible for a river, as the entire ecosystem is destroyed. None of 87 SHPPs we studied has a water-meter, so as we could understand the extent of the environmental flow in the river. Supervision here becomes very hard and uncontrollable.”
As a result of the monitoring we understood that we have a very rich fish reserve, but our SHPPs are constructed in such a manner that the fish can neither pass or spawn. In terms of the fish passway we have three good examples – “Ishkhanasar”, “Sirarpi” HPPs and “Tezh” SHPP, which doesn’t have a dam.
Both the developers and the owners choose locations not on the rivers but on the river springs. We detected four such SHPPs, which are constructed on the springs of the clear water in Sisian Region. We understand that we can lose these springs, which are our health.
Currently SHPPs can’t ensure their projected capacity and production. One month ago we visited Syunik and we saw several SHPPs, which didn’t work, as there was no water in the river, though it was not irrigation season. You can see 6 or 4 turbines in the station, but only 1 or 2 work.
Another problem relates with SHPP equipment: the SHPP operated 1 or 2 years. You can see so poor and old equipment in the stations that it seems the SHPPs have been working for 10 or 20 years. That is people want to get electricity with poor, cheap and non-expedient equipment and to develop renewable energy.”
Inga Zarafyan also said that the project experts are drawing up proposals for SHPP reforms.
Ashot Avalyan, Deputy Head of Staff of Nature Protection Ministry and Project Coordinator of Nature Protection Ministry said that the Nature Protection Ministry has evaluated the works done so far extremely positively, “I can assure you that the Ministry expresses its willingness in future to arrange meeting with SHPP owners CEOs and to pose certain tasks in front of each SHPP after summarizing such huge amounts of information. There are not only SHPPs, which serve as bad examples, but a small number of SHPPs, who do organized business in electricity production in good manner and without causing damage to environment. Each SHPP will be treated individually, and each SHPP will be treated with in positive and negative terms. Even the Nature Protection Minister has promised, if, we will separate SHPPs, which will be issued so-called ‘green’ passports, then we will support them in all governmental bodies to regulate their issues, to help them etc.”
Samvel Pipoyan, Professor at Biology and Teaching Methodology Department, Khachatur Abovyan Armenian State Pedagogical University, Dr. in Biological Sciences, particularly said, “In terms of structure all SHPPs are constructed in a way where fish passways are planned, through which the fish will flow up the river and continue their migration for spawning or feeding.”
85 or 83 fish passways out of studied 87 SHPPs don’t comply with either biological or physical abilities of the fish. Martz River is a very good example - it used to have large reserves of the brown trout. If there are 3 SHPPs on that river and the dam of the first SHPP is in a distance of 3-4 km from the river estuary, it turns out that the fish flows here and can’t flow upper because of the absence of the fish passway. The Dzoraget is a huge river, you can meet at least 14-15 fish species in its lower part and 3-4 fish species in its upper part. A question arises: where 5-6 fish species have disappeared? When I detected the dam of “Dzoraget” HPP, it completely blocks the riverbed and doesn’t have a fish passway, it wasn’t even planned, and now it turns out the fish flows and meets the first dam, where there is no water at all, and they can’t pass the next section anyway. Consequently, if there was any biodiversity in the river, it has or is reaching the zero. The Vorotan River used to have 17-18 fish species, today the river had remained as a nominal concept, it’s a flow going entirely through the pipes, where brown trout of unknown origin is regularly let out, which doesn’t grow because of the absence of any forage.
But the river is not an aquarium, it’s an entire ecosystem. It has mosses, one-cellular animals, different invertebrates - who should care about them? It’s the biggest wealth any country could have. We should have ecosystematic approach and not speak about the protection of one organism.
The material was developed in the frames of “Supporting reforms in the sector of small hydro power plants through enabling a dialogue between civil society and the Ministry of Nature Protection for sustainable use of river ecosystems” supported by UNDP/GEF Small Grants Programme".
December 16, 2015 at 14:35