Rainwater Harvesting

Rainwater harvesting is the most important strategy to restore the productivity of

the degraded land and to cope with long dry spells in all the land shaping methods.

From: Biodiversity and Climate Change Adaptation in Tropical Islands, 2018

Related terms:

Rainfall, Recharge, Stormwater, Drought, Groundwater, Irrigation, Runoff

View all Topics

Land Shaping Methods for Climate

Change Adaptation in Coastal and Is-
land Region
Ayyam Velmurugan, ... T. Subramani, in Biodiversity and Climate Change Adaptation
in Tropical Islands, 2018

5.2 Rainwater Harvesting

Rainwater harvesting is the most important strategy to restore the productivity of the
degraded land and to cope with long dry spells in all the land shaping methods. On
the other hand, the quality of the harvested water should be monitored to ensure
its suitability for irrigation and promote fish culture. The salinity of the harvested
rainwater in different land shaping techniques was monitored periodically, which
showed a seasonal fluctuation and positively correlated with the amount of rainfall
(Fig. 21.10).
Figure 21.10. Temporal changes in depth of water harvested and salinity in the
furrows.

The average values of four observational sites (BBF) are depicted in Fig. 21.9 (Velmu-
rugan et al., 2015b). The highest salinity was observed during dry months and it goes
down to lowest value during monsoon months. Salinity of water indicated that it was
very much suitable for irrigation and fish culture. Another aspect of water harvesting
is amount of water stored in the furrow/ponds which should be sufficient enough
to provide supplemental irrigation to at least two crops in a year grown either in the
bunds or nearby areas. In the furrows/ponds nearly 1 m depth of fresh water can be
stored at least for 6 months.

> Read full chapter

Thanking “Rainwater Harvesting” and

Blaming the Rain God
M. Dinesh Kumar, in Water Policy Science and Politics, 2018

9.6 Dealing With Droughts and Floods: Understanding the

Socio-Economic and Institutional Context
“Rainwater harvesting in urban areas” as an idea sounds very appealing, and no
one should be over critical about it. International agencies have been promoting
rooftop rainwater harvesting for urban areas of developing countries where either
formal water supply systems do not exist or the poor people, especially those living
in squatters and slums, are not served by municipal water connections. Often,
examples from developed countries such as Japan, Germany, Thailand, and Australia
are being cited to justify such system for developing countries of Latin America,
Africa, and Asia (see, for instance, UN-HABITAT, n.d.). But such recommendations
are not based on proper analysis of the socioeconomic and institutional setting
in which they work and the situation that exist in the cities of these developing
countries. Unlike the developed countries where the water from roof catchments
is used by households for low-end uses such as car washing and gardening to
save the cost of water, to protect the environment and to comply with the existing
laws (Blackburn et al., 2010; White, 2010 in Australian context), people from poor
countries need water for basic survival including drinking, cooking, and personal
hygiene needs. Therefore, quality of the water from rooftop catchments and its
dependability cannot be compromised.

In that respect, what kind of treatment would be required for the water that comes
from the roof catchments—contaminated with carbon from vehicular emissions
for potability? What is the cost of treatment systems that would be required? Will
simple filtration work for removing the contaminants in the water collected from
rooftops? What should be the size of the tank that can collect all that water, which
can come in a few high-intensity storms? How much it would cost in comparison
with the cost of building public water supply systems? If this fast gushing water
has to be injected underground, what should be the criteria for designing that
recharge system? Obviously, the design of the system is going to involve complex
considerations (runoff intensity, infiltration rate of the soil, aquifer storage space,
etc.), and not simple ones that a local mason can work out and execute. But no
proper thinking has gone into these issues. More importantly, the unpleasant truth
is most of the people living in slums of Indian cities who really need that water do
not have good roof, and for then, rooftop rainwater harvesting does not make any
sense.

In hot and arid tropics, when there is so much uncertainty in the climate, partic-
ularly the magnitude of annual precipitation, which determine the probability of
occurrence of droughts and floods, if we want water security, with reliable supplies
of high-quality water in adequate quantities, the systems that provide that supply
will be complex and also expensive. With a huge population living in a small area
that continues to rise, it will be naive to think of a cheap and simple system (like a
500 l syntax tank) that provides 24 × 7 water supplies. The research that examines the
viability of rainwater harvesting for urban areas of developing countries in semiarid
tropics is conspicuous for its silence on the cost-effectiveness (see Shadeed and
Lange, 2010).
The rainfall does not occur in equal amounts every year, in the same month and
same day, according to our daily demands. As a matter of fact, for Indian monsoon,
everything changes from year to year—its magnitude, intensity, duration, and
pattern (Pisharoty, 1990; Chapter 10, this book). But bourgeois environmentalists
try to produce such twisted view of the reality as a part of a larger narrative to
prove a point that we can manage our water needs without having large reservoirs
(capable of storing high seasonal flows) and distribution systems (Arabindoo, 2011).
The concerns about quality of water, particularly for drinking purpose, have been
not been addressed.

As regards control of urban floods, to capture floodwaters in cities and dispose it

off, we need well-designed drainage systems that can quickly evacuate the runoff f
rom high-intensity storms. Inadequate capacity of the storm water drainage system
appears to be a major reason for the floods in Chennai. In cities such as Chennai,
large rainwater collection tanks, which can store the runoff from roofs, might also
provide flood cushioning to some extent. Simultaneously to reduce the runoff from
other built-up areas, rain gardens will be useful (Dussaillant et al., 2005; Kumar,
2014). If this water is to be stored for future use, we would require a much more
sophisticated system—pavements and built-up areas free from oil, carbon, and
garbage—detention systems for sedimentation, and then systems for filtration and
disinfection and all integrated with a centralized water distribution system so that
heavy investments for treatment of the storm water can be avoided (Kumar, 2014).
For technical and economic efficiency, such systems will have to be large and
centralized.

If the rainwater collection tank is to be built for flood cushioning, what matters is
the cost of the tanks that can smoothen out the flood peaks against the additional
investment required for providing a higher-capacity storm water drainage system
that is capable of disposing off the highest-intensity storm. Such economic analysis
would involve complex hydroeconomic simulation of urban floods using historical
data. If the purpose is the latter (flood control + rainwater collection for domestic
water supply), then the cost of rainwater collection tanks plus treatment system will
have to be compared with the additional cost of providing a higher-capacity storm
water drainage system plus the extra cost of supplying the water through the public
system or the tankers to meet the summer water needs of the dwellings. However,
such analyses to facilitate an informed debate on urban water management are
missing.

> Read full chapter

Adapting to Climate Variability and Re-
ducing Carbon Emissions: Strategies
That Work for India
M. Dinesh Kumar, in Water Policy Science and Politics, 2018

10.7 The Solar Fiasco

After having seen the negative effects of ruthless building of rainwater harvesting
structures in the country side, the new fashion is “solar pumps.” Some researchers
think that growing crops would no longer be profitable for the farmers, and instead,
the farmers in India, who own wells, should now produce “solar crops” (Gulati et al.,
2016; Shah et al., 2016). Shah et al. (2016) proposed that farmers should run their
wells using solar energy and sell the surplus energy to the utilities and that large
government subsidy should be made available for its purchase. The business model
proposed by the team is as follows. The government gives a subsidy of Rs. 40,000
(US $670) for a solar PV system having a power generation capacity of 1 kW, which is
sufficient to replace a connected load of 0.50 kW in the existing power distribution
system. If the farmer has a 5 hp (3.75 kW) electric pump, it will be replaced by a 10 hp
(7.5 kW) solar PV system, and for that, the government subsidy would be Rs. 4 lakh
(US $6700).

The inbuilt assumption is that the farmer would then stop buying electricity from the
utility and would instead also start supplying the surplus electricity (after using it for
running his own pump) to the same utility. The condition to make this model work is
that since the farmer is helping to reduce carbon footprint in agriculture, the utility
should purchase this power at a price 10–12 times higher than the price at which
it now offers electricity to the same farmer (50 paise per kWh). This proposal has
been lapped up by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). The virtues
attached are numerous: reduction in carbon emission from agriculture, reduced
groundwater pumping, reduced energy subsidy, happy farmer, and happy utility.

This is a bizarre idea. With 16 million such pumps (as proposed by its proponents),
the government will have to spend only INR. 6.4 lakh crore (20 times the amount
spent on National Rural Employment Guarantee Act every year), that is, US $100
billion, while the total cost of production and supply of electricity in agriculture
is less than US $9 billion per year. There can’t be a better recipe for ruining the
government finances and emptying our coffers. It is a different matter that a lion’s
share of this money (if at all the government decides to spend) would end up with
the rich farmers, who would go for large-capacity solar PV systems. One doesn’t
need to apply rocket science to say this.
Further, the assumption that the farmers would be able to run his/her motor as and
when needed using a solar PV system is fallacious. The availability of solar energy
required to produce the electricity for running the pump is highly uncertain during
rainy season, due to cloud cover. The minimum requirement for the farmer to make
his energy-production system self-sufficient is to have large-capacity batteries,
which are prohibitively expensive today. If not, he/she would have to depend on the
power supply from the grid. The argument that the utility has to buy power from
the farmers at a rate far higher than the price at which they supply power is not
economic prudence.

Even if for the time being, we assume that the utility agrees to such a power purchase
model, it would require “net metering” (two-way metering). The question is “What
on earth makes one believe that the farmer would become honest overnight not to
tamper with the meters while using power from the grid and also while selling power
to the grid?” As a matter of fact, in this case, there is greater incentive to tamper
with meters. In other words, if we have faith in the farmers, why can’t we just install
meters for every electric pump and supply reliable and high-quality power to the
farmers and charge for it? This way, we can find solution to a few of the problems
facing the groundwater and energy sectors.

Obviously, under both scenarios, monitoring would be required to make sure that
there is no tampering of meters. Hence, it is far more sensible to start metering
electricity consumption in the farm sector to improve electricity-use efficiency
and cut down power consumption in agriculture sector, thereby improving the
financial working of power utilities. Thereby, we can cut down carbon emissions.
For this, we need the political will and not large public funds to spend on subsidies
for unproved technologies like the “solar PV systems for small Indian farms.” The
route, which is suggested now, is expensive, indirect, and nonworkable. On the
contrary, it would lead to further depletion of groundwater, huge burden on the
government exchequer (for subsidizing solar pumps), and dive the power utilities
to total bankruptcy. But the entire agenda seems to be privatization of electricity
generation (leaving it in the hands of rich and influential farmers) and junking of
the power utilities.

To sum up, there are no “wonder drugs” or magical solutions to the problems
facing agriculture, groundwater, and energy sectors. If the excuse for getting rid
of meters for agrowells was “transaction cost,” the same can be a good reason for
the electricity utilities to shy away from “net metering”.3 Also, the solar PV systems
are very expensive, and the widely publicized benefits of producing “clean energy”
are too meager in economic terms to offset the huge capital costs. Solar power
generation could be viable at the “utility level” (with economies of scale), particularly
with sophisticated operation and maintenance, and not at the level of micro farms.
Bassi (2015) shows that even replacing diesel pumps by pumps powered by solar
PV systems is not a viable option, even when we consider the benefits of emission
reduction (Bassi, 2015).

Manufacturing of solar PV systems itself leaves a lot of carbon footprint. Also, there
are serious concerns about the life of the system itself, particularly for hot and
semiarid to arid climate. All the current calculations of the benefits from solar PV
systems are done on the basis of the assumption that it will have an average life of
25 years. A review of field tests on the performance of solar modules reported from
other parts of the world over the past 40 years shows an average degradation rate
closer to 1% per annum, which is higher than the lower value of 0.5% degradation
rate, necessary to maintain the 25-year warrantee period. More importantly, the
effect of climate on degradation rate of solar cell is not addressed (Jordan and Kurtz,
2012).

> Read full chapter

Recent Droughts in India: Nature’s

Fury or Poor Statecraft?
M. Dinesh Kumar, in Water Policy Science and Politics, 2018

4.6 Conclusions
Dealing with droughts and reducing their impacts need long-term planning. Ideas
like rainwater harvesting do more harm in drought-prone areas. There are no simple
quick fix solutions for drought proofing of large regions. Most of the drought-prone
regions have very low to medium rainfalls and also have very high to high aridity.
They are also characterized by high year-to-year variation in rainfall. Because of
these unique hydrologic characteristics of such regions, when droughts actually
hit, ad hoc measures such as rainwater harvesting will not be effective either for
saving crops from moisture stress or for ensuring drinking water supply in rural and
urban areas. Overemphasis on groundwater as a source of drinking water supply
also increases the exposure of communities to the scarcity resulting from drought
hazards. The widespread problems of groundwater contamination in the forms of
high salinity, fluoride, nitrates, and arsenic also should send a clear warning signal
to the governments of the growing health risks of overdependence on groundwater.

Governments will have two options for such drought-prone regions. It can discour-
age water-intensive economic activities such as irrigated crop production in such
regions. It can also move large urban areas or water-intensive industries out of such
regions through the mechanisms of incentives and disincentives. Such measures
will have huge adverse socioeconomic impacts. If these measures are not possible,
it will have to implement large-scale projects to transfer water from water-abundant
regions to these regions so as to minimize the socioeconomic impacts of such
droughts. One reason why governments engage in the former is that they appear
very cheap and quick to implement. But, what the governments need to worry about
is the long-term socioeconomic impacts of droughts, in terms of poor agricultural
growth, large-scale migration of people from rural areas, and low industrial outputs.

In democratic polity, civil society has an undisputable role. Its participation is essen-
tial to ensure positive developmental outcomes of government decision-making.
There is a lot of stereotyping of the state as the antithesis of a deliberative space.
Although it captures an essential feature of the state, it can also be deeply misleading
(Evans, 2015). As noted by Evans, “effective state structures have always depended on
deliberative spaces that include both key actors within the state apparatus and pow-
erful private interlocutors. In the 21st century, deliberation has become even more
crucial, because the state faces a set of tasks that require bringing in deliberation in
a way that goes well beyond established traditions” (Evans, 2015, p. 51).

The government in its wisdom should choose the people who actually represent
the civil society. Caution needs to be exercised to prevent hijacking of development
discourse by a few influential individuals and groups who are self-serving. Unfor-
tunately, in the past, a section of the academics has been able to influence the
bureaucracy and the political class to buy into their water sector agenda through
persuasive writing and constant lobbying. This happened because of the absence of
effective institutional regimes to bring checks and balances for ensuring quality of
evidence produced by the research that support their agenda. They have also been
able to use the media to their advantage using the rhetoric of “water sector reforms.”
This is failure of statecraft.

> Read full chapter

Infrastructure and Urban Planning

Context for Achieving the Visions of In-
tegrated Urban Water Management and
Water Sensitive Urban Design
Casey Furlong, ... Micah Pendergast, in Approaches to Water Sensitive Urban De-
sign, 2019

16.3.5.3 Alternative water supply in greenfield developments

become cost-competitive to other water supply and drainage options if stormwater
quality and quantity legislation is substantially strengthened (e.g., to require 90%
of additional stormwater produced from developments to be retained). This is
because such a stringent requirement is difficult and expensive to meet without
stormwater-to-potable reuse (Furlong et al., 2017b).

Therefore, there are no substantive barriers to the implementation of nonpotable

third-pipe wastewater or on-site stormwater reuse schemes in greenfield develop-
ments, as many already exist or are in development. There are, however, significant
barriers to the implementation of potable wastewater/stormwater reuse schemes
including the following:

1. The barrier to the implementation of stormwater-to-potable projects is that

they only become cost-competitive (in comparison to other water supply and
drainage infrastructure options) if mandatory stormwater retention targets are
significantly increased; and
2. The barrier to the implementation of both potable wastewater and stormwater
reuse schemes is community perceptions around drinking the treated water,
and thus also political perceptions.

> Read full chapter

Sustainable Neighborhood Design in

Tropical Climates
Federico M. Butera, in Urban Energy Transition (Second Edition), 2018

Services:

• Decentralized energy production with renewable energy sources; smart grid

and storage
• Rainwater harvesting, with two differentiates uses, potable water after treat-
ment, direct for non potable (WC flushing, washing machine, plant watering).
• Buildings with dual networks for separating gray and black water and provi-
sions for gray water recycling.
• Biogas production from black water treatment systems and reuse of appro-
priately treated water for irrigation (parks, green spots, street tree lining, and
urban agriculture plots) and aquifer recharging
• Solid waste management at neighborhood scale: domestic organic waste
anaerobic fermentation for biogas production; agriculture residuals and urban
green maintenance wastes composting; wood from tree pruning gasification
for syngas production.
• Biogas sludge (from black water and organic waste anaerobic fermentation)
treatment for use as fertilizer
• Biogas and syngas use to power electricity generators connected to the
mini-grid for contributing to demand-supply matching.

> Read full chapter

WSUD “Best in Class”—Case Studies

From Australia, New Zealand, United
States, Europe, and Asia
Stephen Cook, ... Qian Yu, in Approaches to Water Sensitive Urban Design, 2019

27.2.4.2 Water sensitive urban design approach

A range of WSUD approaches have been adopted by property owners in Germany to
achieve source control of stormwater. Installation of rainwater harvesting systems
by households has been popular. Herrmann and Schmida (2000) reported that
there are more than 100 commercial manufactures of rainwater tanks in Germany,
with the leading manufacturer of prefabricated concrete tanks installing more than
100,000 in Germany over a 10-year period. The majority of these tanks are used
for nonpotable purposes (Zhang et al., 2017). The popularity of rainwater harvesting
systems has also resulted in economic benefits with more than 4000 jobs created
across Germany, as well as saving an estimated 75 GL of drinking water per year
(FAZ, 2006).

Green infrastructure approaches have also been widely adopted in Germany, such as
the replacement of paved car parks with pervious pavements. Germany is considered
to be a world leader in the adoption of green roofs (Vijayaraghavan, 2016), with 10%
of its buildings estimated to have installed green roofs (Saadatian et al., 2013). It is
estimated that more than 10,000 ha of roofs will be “greened” by 2017 (Ansel, 2017).
The direct infiltration of stormwater is now encouraged near the source, where
permission is generally not required for the infiltration of mildly polluted stormwater
(Nickel et al., 2014). However, where the stormwater is from large areas or from
roads with high traffic flows, some municipalities require permits and pretreatment
prior to discharge (Nickel et al., 2014; Niederschlagswasserfreistellungsverordnung,
2014). The imperviousness fee has encouraged the adoption of WSUD approaches
as both public and private land owners seek to minimize their imperviousness fee,
while also achieving flood mitigation and ecological benefits.
> Read full chapter

Conclusions
M. Dinesh Kumar, in Water Policy Science and Politics, 2018

Water resources and agricultural planners in sub-Saharan Africa must draw lessons
out of India’s experience with watershed development and rainwater harvesting
to use these approaches only in areas where rainfall is dependable, aridity is low,
and topography is really conducive. They need to guard themselves against the
euphoria being created by some international development agencies and research
institutes about what rainwater harvesting can achieve in naturally water-scarce and
drought-prone regions. These countries must also tread carefully when it comes to
exploitation of groundwater resources in their territories (Foster et al., 2006; Kumar,
2012). While taking up schemes that promote intensive use of groundwater, due
consideration should be given to sustainable yield of aquifers with data on the same
generated through proper geohydrologic studies. More importantly, technologies
and institutions for the management of this complex resource should be developed
prior to going for large-scale development so that the resource use by the commu-
nities does not pose a governance challenge.

> Read full chapter

Stored water (rainjars and raintanks)

John Pinfold, in Handbook of Water and Wastewater Microbiology, 2003

Although rain tends to be seasonal, rainwater can provide a convenient alternative

water source when rains are abundant. For domestic water consumption, the most
common method of rainwater harvesting is by channelling water from the roof
into a large vessel. This generally entails a zinc sheet or tiled roof with some form
of guttering (however primitive), but people will collect rainwater by any means
available (Fig. 37.1). Grass roofs tend to discolour the water making it less attractive
for drinking purposes but acceptable for certain washing activities. Rainwater is
especially valued as a drinking water source when alternative drinking water sources
are of poor physical (e.g. groundwater salinity) or bacteriological quality (particularly
surface waters).
Fig. 37.1. Rainwater collection from roof to metal drum in rural Uganda.

> Read full chapter

Water Supply
Field Guide to Appropriate Technology, 2003

DISTRIBUTION
Water distribution systems depend on the type of water source used, on the topog-
raphy, and on the provided supply service level. Individual water supplies, such as
rainwater harvesting and shallow groundwater wells equipped with hand pumps,
usually do not need piped supply systems. Treated surface water, however, is normal-
ly distributed by a piped system. A suitable topography often allows the installation
of a gravity system that will improve reliability and supply continuity. Since pumped
water supply schemes depend on a reliable supply of energy and spare parts, they
are very susceptible to temporary standstills. Finally, the service level of water supply
 strongly governs water demand. Water usage increases drastically as the service
improves: public standpost, yard connection, multiple-tap house connection. The
article “Saving and Reusing Water” discusses this increase in consumption with an
increase in convenience. Two pumped systems are shown in Figure 2.

FIGURE 2. Pumped water supply schemes.

Water supply is always interlinked with wastewater disposal. Wastewater disposal

is described in the “Sanitation” article. The health situation of a community newly
supplied with treated water does not necessarily improve, especially if public health
and wastewater disposal issues are neglected. The main components necessary to
significantly improve the public health situation of a community are therefore a
reliable and safe water supply, an adequate waste disposal system, and a compre-
hensive hygiene education program.

> Read full chapter

ScienceDirect is Elsevier’s leading information solution for researchers.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V. Terms and conditions apply.
Rainwater Harvesting
Rainwater harvesting is the most important strategy to restore the productivity of
the degraded land and to cope with long dry spells in all the land shaping methods.

From: Biodiversity and Climate Change Adaptation in Tropical Islands, 2018

Related terms:

Rainfall, Recharge, Stormwater, Drought, Groundwater, Irrigation, Runoff

View all Topics

Land Shaping Methods for Climate

Change Adaptation in Coastal and Is-
land Region
Ayyam Velmurugan, ... T. Subramani, in Biodiversity and Climate Change Adaptation
in Tropical Islands, 2018

5.2 Rainwater Harvesting

Rainwater harvesting is the most important strategy to restore the productivity of the
degraded land and to cope with long dry spells in all the land shaping methods. On
the other hand, the quality of the harvested water should be monitored to ensure
its suitability for irrigation and promote fish culture. The salinity of the harvested
rainwater in different land shaping techniques was monitored periodically, which
showed a seasonal fluctuation and positively correlated with the amount of rainfall
(Fig. 21.10).
Figure 21.10. Temporal changes in depth of water harvested and salinity in the
furrows.

The average values of four observational sites (BBF) are depicted in Fig. 21.9 (Velmu-
rugan et al., 2015b). The highest salinity was observed during dry months and it goes
down to lowest value during monsoon months. Salinity of water indicated that it was
very much suitable for irrigation and fish culture. Another aspect of water harvesting
is amount of water stored in the furrow/ponds which should be sufficient enough
to provide supplemental irrigation to at least two crops in a year grown either in the
bunds or nearby areas. In the furrows/ponds nearly 1 m depth of fresh water can be
stored at least for 6 months.

> Read full chapter

Thanking “Rainwater Harvesting” and

Blaming the Rain God
M. Dinesh Kumar, in Water Policy Science and Politics, 2018

9.6 Dealing With Droughts and Floods: Understanding the

Socio-Economic and Institutional Context
“Rainwater harvesting in urban areas” as an idea sounds very appealing, and no
one should be over critical about it. International agencies have been promoting
rooftop rainwater harvesting for urban areas of developing countries where either
formal water supply systems do not exist or the poor people, especially those living
in squatters and slums, are not served by municipal water connections. Often,
examples from developed countries such as Japan, Germany, Thailand, and Australia
are being cited to justify such system for developing countries of Latin America,
Africa, and Asia (see, for instance, UN-HABITAT, n.d.). But such recommendations
are not based on proper analysis of the socioeconomic and institutional setting
in which they work and the situation that exist in the cities of these developing
countries. Unlike the developed countries where the water from roof catchments
is used by households for low-end uses such as car washing and gardening to
save the cost of water, to protect the environment and to comply with the existing
laws (Blackburn et al., 2010; White, 2010 in Australian context), people from poor
countries need water for basic survival including drinking, cooking, and personal
hygiene needs. Therefore, quality of the water from rooftop catchments and its
dependability cannot be compromised.

In that respect, what kind of treatment would be required for the water that comes
from the roof catchments—contaminated with carbon from vehicular emissions
for potability? What is the cost of treatment systems that would be required? Will
simple filtration work for removing the contaminants in the water collected from
rooftops? What should be the size of the tank that can collect all that water, which
can come in a few high-intensity storms? How much it would cost in comparison
with the cost of building public water supply systems? If this fast gushing water
has to be injected underground, what should be the criteria for designing that
recharge system? Obviously, the design of the system is going to involve complex
considerations (runoff intensity, infiltration rate of the soil, aquifer storage space,
etc.), and not simple ones that a local mason can work out and execute. But no
proper thinking has gone into these issues. More importantly, the unpleasant truth
is most of the people living in slums of Indian cities who really need that water do
not have good roof, and for then, rooftop rainwater harvesting does not make any
sense.

In hot and arid tropics, when there is so much uncertainty in the climate, partic-
ularly the magnitude of annual precipitation, which determine the probability of
occurrence of droughts and floods, if we want water security, with reliable supplies
of high-quality water in adequate quantities, the systems that provide that supply
will be complex and also expensive. With a huge population living in a small area
that continues to rise, it will be naive to think of a cheap and simple system (like a
500 l syntax tank) that provides 24 × 7 water supplies. The research that examines the
viability of rainwater harvesting for urban areas of developing countries in semiarid
tropics is conspicuous for its silence on the cost-effectiveness (see Shadeed and
Lange, 2010).
The rainfall does not occur in equal amounts every year, in the same month and
same day, according to our daily demands. As a matter of fact, for Indian monsoon,
everything changes from year to year—its magnitude, intensity, duration, and
pattern (Pisharoty, 1990; Chapter 10, this book). But bourgeois environmentalists
try to produce such twisted view of the reality as a part of a larger narrative to
prove a point that we can manage our water needs without having large reservoirs
(capable of storing high seasonal flows) and distribution systems (Arabindoo, 2011).
The concerns about quality of water, particularly for drinking purpose, have been
not been addressed.

As regards control of urban floods, to capture floodwaters in cities and dispose it

off, we need well-designed drainage systems that can quickly evacuate the runoff f
rom high-intensity storms. Inadequate capacity of the storm water drainage system
appears to be a major reason for the floods in Chennai. In cities such as Chennai,
large rainwater collection tanks, which can store the runoff from roofs, might also
provide flood cushioning to some extent. Simultaneously to reduce the runoff from
other built-up areas, rain gardens will be useful (Dussaillant et al., 2005; Kumar,
2014). If this water is to be stored for future use, we would require a much more
sophisticated system—pavements and built-up areas free from oil, carbon, and
garbage—detention systems for sedimentation, and then systems for filtration and
disinfection and all integrated with a centralized water distribution system so that
heavy investments for treatment of the storm water can be avoided (Kumar, 2014).
For technical and economic efficiency, such systems will have to be large and
centralized.

If the rainwater collection tank is to be built for flood cushioning, what matters is
the cost of the tanks that can smoothen out the flood peaks against the additional
investment required for providing a higher-capacity storm water drainage system
that is capable of disposing off the highest-intensity storm. Such economic analysis
would involve complex hydroeconomic simulation of urban floods using historical
data. If the purpose is the latter (flood control + rainwater collection for domestic
water supply), then the cost of rainwater collection tanks plus treatment system will
have to be compared with the additional cost of providing a higher-capacity storm
water drainage system plus the extra cost of supplying the water through the public
system or the tankers to meet the summer water needs of the dwellings. However,
such analyses to facilitate an informed debate on urban water management are
missing.

> Read full chapter

Adapting to Climate Variability and Re-
ducing Carbon Emissions: Strategies
That Work for India
M. Dinesh Kumar, in Water Policy Science and Politics, 2018

10.7 The Solar Fiasco

After having seen the negative effects of ruthless building of rainwater harvesting
structures in the country side, the new fashion is “solar pumps.” Some researchers
think that growing crops would no longer be profitable for the farmers, and instead,
the farmers in India, who own wells, should now produce “solar crops” (Gulati et al.,
2016; Shah et al., 2016). Shah et al. (2016) proposed that farmers should run their
wells using solar energy and sell the surplus energy to the utilities and that large
government subsidy should be made available for its purchase. The business model
proposed by the team is as follows. The government gives a subsidy of Rs. 40,000
(US $670) for a solar PV system having a power generation capacity of 1 kW, which is
sufficient to replace a connected load of 0.50 kW in the existing power distribution
system. If the farmer has a 5 hp (3.75 kW) electric pump, it will be replaced by a 10 hp
(7.5 kW) solar PV system, and for that, the government subsidy would be Rs. 4 lakh
(US $6700).

The inbuilt assumption is that the farmer would then stop buying electricity from the
utility and would instead also start supplying the surplus electricity (after using it for
running his own pump) to the same utility. The condition to make this model work is
that since the farmer is helping to reduce carbon footprint in agriculture, the utility
should purchase this power at a price 10–12 times higher than the price at which
it now offers electricity to the same farmer (50 paise per kWh). This proposal has
been lapped up by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). The virtues
attached are numerous: reduction in carbon emission from agriculture, reduced
groundwater pumping, reduced energy subsidy, happy farmer, and happy utility.

This is a bizarre idea. With 16 million such pumps (as proposed by its proponents),
the government will have to spend only INR. 6.4 lakh crore (20 times the amount
spent on National Rural Employment Guarantee Act every year), that is, US $100
billion, while the total cost of production and supply of electricity in agriculture
is less than US $9 billion per year. There can’t be a better recipe for ruining the
government finances and emptying our coffers. It is a different matter that a lion’s
share of this money (if at all the government decides to spend) would end up with
the rich farmers, who would go for large-capacity solar PV systems. One doesn’t
need to apply rocket science to say this.
Further, the assumption that the farmers would be able to run his/her motor as and
when needed using a solar PV system is fallacious. The availability of solar energy
required to produce the electricity for running the pump is highly uncertain during
rainy season, due to cloud cover. The minimum requirement for the farmer to make
his energy-production system self-sufficient is to have large-capacity batteries,
which are prohibitively expensive today. If not, he/she would have to depend on the
power supply from the grid. The argument that the utility has to buy power from
the farmers at a rate far higher than the price at which they supply power is not
economic prudence.

Even if for the time being, we assume that the utility agrees to such a power purchase
model, it would require “net metering” (two-way metering). The question is “What
on earth makes one believe that the farmer would become honest overnight not to
tamper with the meters while using power from the grid and also while selling power
to the grid?” As a matter of fact, in this case, there is greater incentive to tamper
with meters. In other words, if we have faith in the farmers, why can’t we just install
meters for every electric pump and supply reliable and high-quality power to the
farmers and charge for it? This way, we can find solution to a few of the problems
facing the groundwater and energy sectors.

Obviously, under both scenarios, monitoring would be required to make sure that
there is no tampering of meters. Hence, it is far more sensible to start metering
electricity consumption in the farm sector to improve electricity-use efficiency
and cut down power consumption in agriculture sector, thereby improving the
financial working of power utilities. Thereby, we can cut down carbon emissions.
For this, we need the political will and not large public funds to spend on subsidies
for unproved technologies like the “solar PV systems for small Indian farms.” The
route, which is suggested now, is expensive, indirect, and nonworkable. On the
contrary, it would lead to further depletion of groundwater, huge burden on the
government exchequer (for subsidizing solar pumps), and dive the power utilities
to total bankruptcy. But the entire agenda seems to be privatization of electricity
generation (leaving it in the hands of rich and influential farmers) and junking of
the power utilities.

To sum up, there are no “wonder drugs” or magical solutions to the problems
facing agriculture, groundwater, and energy sectors. If the excuse for getting rid
of meters for agrowells was “transaction cost,” the same can be a good reason for
the electricity utilities to shy away from “net metering”.3 Also, the solar PV systems
are very expensive, and the widely publicized benefits of producing “clean energy”
are too meager in economic terms to offset the huge capital costs. Solar power
generation could be viable at the “utility level” (with economies of scale), particularly
with sophisticated operation and maintenance, and not at the level of micro farms.
Bassi (2015) shows that even replacing diesel pumps by pumps powered by solar
PV systems is not a viable option, even when we consider the benefits of emission
reduction (Bassi, 2015).

Manufacturing of solar PV systems itself leaves a lot of carbon footprint. Also, there
are serious concerns about the life of the system itself, particularly for hot and
semiarid to arid climate. All the current calculations of the benefits from solar PV
systems are done on the basis of the assumption that it will have an average life of
25 years. A review of field tests on the performance of solar modules reported from
other parts of the world over the past 40 years shows an average degradation rate
closer to 1% per annum, which is higher than the lower value of 0.5% degradation
rate, necessary to maintain the 25-year warrantee period. More importantly, the
effect of climate on degradation rate of solar cell is not addressed (Jordan and Kurtz,
2012).

> Read full chapter

Recent Droughts in India: Nature’s

Fury or Poor Statecraft?
M. Dinesh Kumar, in Water Policy Science and Politics, 2018

4.6 Conclusions
Dealing with droughts and reducing their impacts need long-term planning. Ideas
like rainwater harvesting do more harm in drought-prone areas. There are no simple
quick fix solutions for drought proofing of large regions. Most of the drought-prone
regions have very low to medium rainfalls and also have very high to high aridity.
They are also characterized by high year-to-year variation in rainfall. Because of
these unique hydrologic characteristics of such regions, when droughts actually
hit, ad hoc measures such as rainwater harvesting will not be effective either for
saving crops from moisture stress or for ensuring drinking water supply in rural and
urban areas. Overemphasis on groundwater as a source of drinking water supply
also increases the exposure of communities to the scarcity resulting from drought
hazards. The widespread problems of groundwater contamination in the forms of
high salinity, fluoride, nitrates, and arsenic also should send a clear warning signal
to the governments of the growing health risks of overdependence on groundwater.

Governments will have two options for such drought-prone regions. It can discour-
age water-intensive economic activities such as irrigated crop production in such
regions. It can also move large urban areas or water-intensive industries out of such
regions through the mechanisms of incentives and disincentives. Such measures
will have huge adverse socioeconomic impacts. If these measures are not possible,
it will have to implement large-scale projects to transfer water from water-abundant
regions to these regions so as to minimize the socioeconomic impacts of such
droughts. One reason why governments engage in the former is that they appear
very cheap and quick to implement. But, what the governments need to worry about
is the long-term socioeconomic impacts of droughts, in terms of poor agricultural
growth, large-scale migration of people from rural areas, and low industrial outputs.

In democratic polity, civil society has an undisputable role. Its participation is essen-
tial to ensure positive developmental outcomes of government decision-making.
There is a lot of stereotyping of the state as the antithesis of a deliberative space.
Although it captures an essential feature of the state, it can also be deeply misleading
(Evans, 2015). As noted by Evans, “effective state structures have always depended on
deliberative spaces that include both key actors within the state apparatus and pow-
erful private interlocutors. In the 21st century, deliberation has become even more
crucial, because the state faces a set of tasks that require bringing in deliberation in
a way that goes well beyond established traditions” (Evans, 2015, p. 51).

The government in its wisdom should choose the people who actually represent
the civil society. Caution needs to be exercised to prevent hijacking of development
discourse by a few influential individuals and groups who are self-serving. Unfor-
tunately, in the past, a section of the academics has been able to influence the
bureaucracy and the political class to buy into their water sector agenda through
persuasive writing and constant lobbying. This happened because of the absence of
effective institutional regimes to bring checks and balances for ensuring quality of
evidence produced by the research that support their agenda. They have also been
able to use the media to their advantage using the rhetoric of “water sector reforms.”
This is failure of statecraft.

> Read full chapter

Infrastructure and Urban Planning

Context for Achieving the Visions of In-
tegrated Urban Water Management and
Water Sensitive Urban Design
Casey Furlong, ... Micah Pendergast, in Approaches to Water Sensitive Urban De-
sign, 2019

16.3.5.3 Alternative water supply in greenfield developments

become cost-competitive to other water supply and drainage options if stormwater
quality and quantity legislation is substantially strengthened (e.g., to require 90%
of additional stormwater produced from developments to be retained). This is
because such a stringent requirement is difficult and expensive to meet without
stormwater-to-potable reuse (Furlong et al., 2017b).

Therefore, there are no substantive barriers to the implementation of nonpotable

third-pipe wastewater or on-site stormwater reuse schemes in greenfield develop-
ments, as many already exist or are in development. There are, however, significant
barriers to the implementation of potable wastewater/stormwater reuse schemes
including the following:

1. The barrier to the implementation of stormwater-to-potable projects is that

they only become cost-competitive (in comparison to other water supply and
drainage infrastructure options) if mandatory stormwater retention targets are
significantly increased; and
2. The barrier to the implementation of both potable wastewater and stormwater
reuse schemes is community perceptions around drinking the treated water,
and thus also political perceptions.

> Read full chapter

Sustainable Neighborhood Design in

Tropical Climates
Federico M. Butera, in Urban Energy Transition (Second Edition), 2018

Services:

• Decentralized energy production with renewable energy sources; smart grid

and storage
• Rainwater harvesting, with two differentiates uses, potable water after treat-
ment, direct for non potable (WC flushing, washing machine, plant watering).
• Buildings with dual networks for separating gray and black water and provi-
sions for gray water recycling.
• Biogas production from black water treatment systems and reuse of appro-
priately treated water for irrigation (parks, green spots, street tree lining, and
urban agriculture plots) and aquifer recharging
• Solid waste management at neighborhood scale: domestic organic waste
anaerobic fermentation for biogas production; agriculture residuals and urban
green maintenance wastes composting; wood from tree pruning gasification
for syngas production.
• Biogas sludge (from black water and organic waste anaerobic fermentation)
treatment for use as fertilizer
• Biogas and syngas use to power electricity generators connected to the
mini-grid for contributing to demand-supply matching.

> Read full chapter

WSUD “Best in Class”—Case Studies

From Australia, New Zealand, United
States, Europe, and Asia
Stephen Cook, ... Qian Yu, in Approaches to Water Sensitive Urban Design, 2019

27.2.4.2 Water sensitive urban design approach

A range of WSUD approaches have been adopted by property owners in Germany to
achieve source control of stormwater. Installation of rainwater harvesting systems
by households has been popular. Herrmann and Schmida (2000) reported that
there are more than 100 commercial manufactures of rainwater tanks in Germany,
with the leading manufacturer of prefabricated concrete tanks installing more than
100,000 in Germany over a 10-year period. The majority of these tanks are used
for nonpotable purposes (Zhang et al., 2017). The popularity of rainwater harvesting
systems has also resulted in economic benefits with more than 4000 jobs created
across Germany, as well as saving an estimated 75 GL of drinking water per year
(FAZ, 2006).

Green infrastructure approaches have also been widely adopted in Germany, such as
the replacement of paved car parks with pervious pavements. Germany is considered
to be a world leader in the adoption of green roofs (Vijayaraghavan, 2016), with 10%
of its buildings estimated to have installed green roofs (Saadatian et al., 2013). It is
estimated that more than 10,000 ha of roofs will be “greened” by 2017 (Ansel, 2017).
The direct infiltration of stormwater is now encouraged near the source, where
permission is generally not required for the infiltration of mildly polluted stormwater
(Nickel et al., 2014). However, where the stormwater is from large areas or from
roads with high traffic flows, some municipalities require permits and pretreatment
prior to discharge (Nickel et al., 2014; Niederschlagswasserfreistellungsverordnung,
2014). The imperviousness fee has encouraged the adoption of WSUD approaches
as both public and private land owners seek to minimize their imperviousness fee,
while also achieving flood mitigation and ecological benefits.
> Read full chapter

Conclusions
M. Dinesh Kumar, in Water Policy Science and Politics, 2018

Water resources and agricultural planners in sub-Saharan Africa must draw lessons
out of India’s experience with watershed development and rainwater harvesting
to use these approaches only in areas where rainfall is dependable, aridity is low,
and topography is really conducive. They need to guard themselves against the
euphoria being created by some international development agencies and research
institutes about what rainwater harvesting can achieve in naturally water-scarce and
drought-prone regions. These countries must also tread carefully when it comes to
exploitation of groundwater resources in their territories (Foster et al., 2006; Kumar,
2012). While taking up schemes that promote intensive use of groundwater, due
consideration should be given to sustainable yield of aquifers with data on the same
generated through proper geohydrologic studies. More importantly, technologies
and institutions for the management of this complex resource should be developed
prior to going for large-scale development so that the resource use by the commu-
nities does not pose a governance challenge.

> Read full chapter

Stored water (rainjars and raintanks)

John Pinfold, in Handbook of Water and Wastewater Microbiology, 2003

Although rain tends to be seasonal, rainwater can provide a convenient alternative

water source when rains are abundant. For domestic water consumption, the most
common method of rainwater harvesting is by channelling water from the roof
into a large vessel. This generally entails a zinc sheet or tiled roof with some form
of guttering (however primitive), but people will collect rainwater by any means
available (Fig. 37.1). Grass roofs tend to discolour the water making it less attractive
for drinking purposes but acceptable for certain washing activities. Rainwater is
especially valued as a drinking water source when alternative drinking water sources
are of poor physical (e.g. groundwater salinity) or bacteriological quality (particularly
surface waters).
Fig. 37.1. Rainwater collection from roof to metal drum in rural Uganda.

> Read full chapter

Water Supply
Field Guide to Appropriate Technology, 2003

DISTRIBUTION
Water distribution systems depend on the type of water source used, on the topog-
raphy, and on the provided supply service level. Individual water supplies, such as
rainwater harvesting and shallow groundwater wells equipped with hand pumps,
usually do not need piped supply systems. Treated surface water, however, is normal-
ly distributed by a piped system. A suitable topography often allows the installation
of a gravity system that will improve reliability and supply continuity. Since pumped
water supply schemes depend on a reliable supply of energy and spare parts, they
are very susceptible to temporary standstills. Finally, the service level of water supply
 strongly governs water demand. Water usage increases drastically as the service
improves: public standpost, yard connection, multiple-tap house connection. The
article “Saving and Reusing Water” discusses this increase in consumption with an
increase in convenience. Two pumped systems are shown in Figure 2.

FIGURE 2. Pumped water supply schemes.

Water supply is always interlinked with wastewater disposal. Wastewater disposal

is described in the “Sanitation” article. The health situation of a community newly
supplied with treated water does not necessarily improve, especially if public health
and wastewater disposal issues are neglected. The main components necessary to
significantly improve the public health situation of a community are therefore a
reliable and safe water supply, an adequate waste disposal system, and a compre-
hensive hygiene education program.

> Read full chapter

ScienceDirect is Elsevier’s leading information solution for researchers.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V. Terms and conditions apply.