Blog

Environmental impact of irrigation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_irrigation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The environmental impacts of irrigation relate to the changes in quantity and quality of soil and water as a result of irrigation and the effects on natural and social conditions in river basins and downstream of an irrigation scheme. The impacts stem from the altered hydrological conditions caused by the installation and operation of the irrigation scheme.

Contents

  • 1 Direct Effects
  • 2 Indirect Effects
  • 3 Adverse impacts
    • 3.1 Reduced river flow
    • 3.2 Increased groundwater recharge, waterlogging, soil salinity
    • 3.3 Reduced downstream river water quality
    • 3.4 Affected downstream water users
    • 3.5 Lost land use opportunities
    • 3.6 Groundwater mining with wells, land subsidence
  • 4 Simulation and prediction
    • 4.1 Case studies
    • 4.2 Reduced downstream drainage and groundwater quality
  • 5 Mitigation of adverse effects
    • 5.1 Delayed environmental impacts
    • 5.2 Potential benefits outweigh the potential disadvantage

 

  1. Direct Effects

An irrigation scheme draws water from groundwater, river or lake and distributes it over an irrigated area. Hydrological, or direct, effects of doing this[1] include reduction in downstream river flow, increased evaporation in the irrigated area, increased level in the water table as groundwater recharge in the area is increased and flow increased in the irrigated area. Likewise, irrigation has had immediate effects on the provision of moisture to the atmosphere, inducing atmospheric instabilities and increasing downwind rainfall,[2] or in other cases has modified the atmospheric circulation, delivering rain to different downwind areas.[3] Increases or decreases in irrigation are a key area of concern in precipitationshedstudies, that examine how significant modifications to the delivery of evaporation to the atmosphere can alter downwind rainfall.[4]

  1. Indirect Effects

Indirect effects are those that have consequences that take longer to develop and may also be longer-lasting. The indirect effects of irrigation include the following:[1]

The indirect effects of waterlogging and soil salination occur directly on the land being irrigated. The ecological and socioeconomic consequences take longer to happen but can be more far-reaching.

Some irrigation schemes use water wells for irrigation. As a result, the overall water level decreases. This may cause water mining, land/soil subsidence, and, along the coast, saltwater intrusion.

Irrigated land area worldwide occupies about 16% of the total agricultural area and the crop yield of irrigated land is roughly 40% of the total yield.[5] In other words, irrigated land produces 2.5 times more product than non-irrigated land. This article will discuss some of the environmental and socioeconomic impacts of irrigation.

  1. Adverse impacts

3.1 Reduced river flow

The reduced downstream river flow may cause:

  • reduced downstream flooding
  • disappearance of ecologically and economically important wetlands or flood forests[6]
  • reduced availability of industrial, municipal, household, and drinking water
  • reduced shipping routes. Water withdrawal poses a serious threat to the Ganges. In India, barrages control all of the tributaries to the Ganges and divert roughly 60 percent of river flow to irrigation[6]
  • reduced fishing opportunities. The Indus River in Pakistan faces scarcity due to over-extraction of water for agriculture. The Indus is inhabited by 25 amphibian species and 147 fish species of which 22 are found nowhere else in the world. It harbors the endangered Indus River dolphin, one of the world’s rarest mammals. Fish populations, the main source of protein and overall life support systems for many communities, are also being threatened[6]
  • reduced discharge into the sea, which may have various consequences like coastal erosion (e.g. in Ghana[7]) and salt water intrusion in delta’s and estuaries (e.g. in Egypt, see Aswan dam). Current water withdrawal from the river Nile for irrigation is so high that, despite its size, in dry periods the river does not reach the sea.[6] The Aral Sea has suffered an “environmental catastrophe” due to the interception of river water for irrigation purposes.

3.2 Increased groundwater recharge, waterlogging, soil salinity

irrigation 1

Looking over the shoulder of a Peruvian farmer in the Huarmey delta at waterlogged and salinised irrigated land with a poor crop stand.
This illustrates an environmental impact of upstream irrigation developments causing an increased flow of groundwater to this lower-lying area, leading to adverse conditions.

Increased groundwater recharge stems from the unavoidable deep percolation losses occurring in the irrigation scheme. The lower the irrigation efficiency, the higher the losses. Although fairly high irrigation efficiencies of 70% or more (i.e. losses of 30% or less) can occur with sophisticated techniques like sprinkler irrigation and drip irrigation, or by precision land-levelling for surface irrigation, in practice the losses are commonly in the order of 40% to 60%. This may cause the following issues:

  • rising water tables
  • increased storage of groundwater that may be used for irrigation, municipal, household and drinking water by pumping from wells
  • waterlogging and drainage problems in villages, agricultural lands, and along roads – with mostly negative consequences. The increased level of the water table can lead to reduced agricultural production.
  • shallow water tables – a sign that the aquifer is unable to cope with the groundwater recharge stemming from the deep percolation losses
  • where water tables are shallow, the irrigation applications are reduced. As a result, the soil is no longer leached and soil salinity problems develop
  • stagnant water tables at the soil surface are known to increase the incidence of water-borne diseases like malaria, filariasis, yellow fever, dengue, and schistosomiasis (Bilharzia) in many areas.[8] Health costs, appraisals of health impacts and mitigation measures are rarely part of irrigation projects, if at all.[9]
  • to mitigate the adverse effects of shallow water tables and soil salinization, some form of watertable control, soil salinity control, drainage and drainage system is needed
  • as drainage water moves through the soil profile it may dissolve nutrients (either fertilizer-based or naturally occurring) such as nitrates, leading to a built up of those nutrients in the ground-water aquifer. High nitrate levels in drinking water can be harmful to humans, particularly infants under 6 months, where it is linked to “blue-baby syndrome” (see Methemoglobinemia).

3.3 Reduced downstream river water quality

Owing to drainage of surface and groundwater in the project area, which waters may be salinized and polluted by agricultural chemicals like biocides and fertilizers, the quality of the river water below the project area can deteriorate, which makes it less fit for industrial, municipal and household use. It may lead to reduced public health.
Polluted river water entering the sea may adversely affect the ecology along the sea shore (see Aswan dam).

3.4 Affected downstream water users

irrigation 2

Water becomes scarce for nomadic pastoralist in Baluchistan due to new irrigation developments

Downstream water users often have no legal water rights and may fall victim of the development of irrigation.

Pastoralists and nomadic tribes may find their land and water resources blocked by new irrigation developments without having a legal recourse.

Flood-recession cropping may be seriously affected by the upstream interception of river water for irrigation purposes.

irrigation 3

Lake Manantali, 477 km², displaced 12,000 people.

3.5 Lost land use opportunities

Irrigation projects may reduce the fishing opportunities of the original population and the grazing opportunities for cattle. The livestock pressure on the remaining lands may increase considerably, because the ousted traditional pastoralist tribes will have to find their subsistence and existence elsewhere, overgrazing may increase, followed by serious soil erosion and the loss of natural resources.[12]
The Manatali reservoir formed by the Manantali dam in Mali intersects the migration routes of nomadic pastoralists and destroyed 43000 ha of savannah, probably leading to overgrazing and erosion elsewhere. Further, the reservoir destroyed 120 km² of forest. The depletion of groundwater aquifers, which is caused by the suppression of the seasonal flood cycle, is damaging the forests downstream of the dam.[13][14]

3.6 Groundwater mining with wells, land subsidence

irrigation 4

Flooding as a consequence of land subsidence

When more groundwater is pumped from wells than replenished, storage of water in the aquifer is being mined. Irrigation from groundwater is no longer sustainable then. The result can be abandoning of irrigated agriculture.
The hundreds of tubewells installed in the state of Uttar Pradesh, India, with World Bank funding have operating periods of 1.4 to 4.7 hours/day, whereas they were designed to operate 16 hours/day[15]
In Baluchistan, Pakistan, the development of tubewell irrigation projects was at the expense of the traditional qanat or karez users[10]
Groundwater-related subsidence[16] of the land due to mining of groundwater occurred in the USA at a rate of 1m for each 13m that the watertable was lowered[17]
Homes at Greens Bayou near Houston, Texas, where 5 to 7 feet of subsidence has occurred, were flooded during a storm in June 1989 as shown in the picture[18]

  1. Simulation and prediction

The effects of irrigation on watertable, soil salinity and salinity of drainage and groundwater, and the effects of mitigative measures can be simulated and predicted using agro-hydro-salinity models like SaltMod and SahysMod[19]

4.1 Case studies

  1. In India 2.189.400 ha have been reported to suffer from waterlogging in irrigation canal commands. Also 3.469.100 ha were reported to be seriously salt affected here,[20][21]
  2. In the Indus Plains in Pakistan, more than 2 million hectares of land is waterlogged.[22] The soil of 13.6 million hectares within the Gross Command Area was surveyed, which revealed that 3.1 million hectares (23%) was saline. 23% of this was in Sindh and 13% in the Punjab.[22] More than 3 million ha of water-logged lands have been provided with tube-wells and drains at the cost of billions of rupees, but the reclamation objectives were only partially achieved.[23] The Asian Development Bank (ADB) states that 38% of the irrigated area is now waterlogged and 14% of the surface is too saline for use[24]
  3. In the Nile delta of Egypt, drainage is being installed in millions of hectares to combat the water-logging resulting from the introduction of massive perennial irrigation after completion of the High Dam at Assuan[25]
  4. In Mexico, 15% of the 3.000.000 ha if irrigable land is salinized and 10% is waterlogged[26]
  5. In Peru some 300.000 ha of the 1.050.000 ha of irrigable land suffers from this problem (see Irrigation in Peru).
  6. Estimates indicate that roughly one-third of the irrigated land in the major irrigation countries is already badly affected by salinity or is expected to become so in the near future. Present estimates for Israel are 13% of the irrigated land, Australia 20%, China 15%, Iraq 50%, Egypt 30%. Irrigation-induced salinity occurs in large and small irrigation systems alike[27]
  7. FAO has estimated that by 1990 about 52 x 106 ha of irrigated land will need to have improved drainage systems installed, much of it subsurface drainage to control salinity[28]

4.2 Reduced downstream drainage and groundwater quality

  • The downstream drainage water quality may deteriorate owing to leaching of salts, nutrients, herbicides and pesticides with high salinity and alkalinity. There is threat of soils converting into saline or alkali soils. This may negatively affect the health of the population at the tail-end of the river basin and downstream of the irrigation scheme, as well as the ecological balance. The Aral Sea, for example, is seriously polluted by drainage water.
  • The downstream quality of the groundwater may deteriorate in a similar way as the downstream drainage water and have similar consequences
  1. Mitigation of adverse effects

Irrigation can have a variety negative impacts on ecology and socioeconomy, which may be mitigated in a number of ways. These include siting the irrigation project on a site which minimises negative impacts.[29] The efficiency of existing projects can be improved and existing degraded croplands can be improved rather than establishing a new irrigation project[29] Developing small-scale, individually owned irrigation systems as an alternative to large-scale, publicly owned and managed schemes.[29] The use of sprinkler irrigation and micro-irrigation systems decrease the risk of waterlogging and erosion.[29] Where practicable, using treated wastewater makes more water available to other users[29] Maintaining flood flows downstream of the dams can ensure that an adequate area is flooded each year, supporting, amongst other objectives, fishery activities.[29]

5.1 Delayed environmental impacts

It takes time for the prediction of how current irrigation schemes will impact the ecology and socioeconomy of a region. By the time predictions have come out, a considerable amount of time and resources may have already been expended in the carrying out of the current project. When that is the case, the project managers will often only change the project if the impact would be considerably more than they had originally expected.[30]

5.2 Potential benefits outweigh the potential disadvantage

Frequently irrigation schemes are seen as extremely necessary for socioeconomic well-being especially in developing countries. One example of this can be demonstrated from a proposal for an irrigation scheme in Malawi.

They saw that the potential positive effects of the irrigation project that was being proposed “outweigh[ed] the potential negative impacts.” They stated that the impacts would mostly “be localized, minimal, short term occurring during the construction and operation phases of the Project.” In order to help alleviate and prevent major environmental impacts, they would use techniques that minimize the potential negative impacts. As far as the region’s socioeconomic well-being, there would be no “displacement and/or resettlement envisioned during the implementation of the Project activities.” The whole reason that they were doing the irrigation project in the first place was “to reduced poverty levels, improved food security through increased and better crop yields, creation of jobs for the local population and youth, increased household income, and sustainable management of land and water.”[31]

In this example, the irrigation project helped not only socioeconomically, but environmentally by “sustainable management of land and water” for the future as well.