SUBMITTED BY:

SUMIT

SHARMA

GANGA ACTION PLAN

WHY GANGA ACTION PLAN

There is some scientific evidence for the

Ganga river’s high capacity to assimilate

(i.e.biodegrade) a large level of organic

waste input, includingpathogens,

but no river can sustain its self-purifying

power with this kind of over-use,misuse

and abuse of its waters

INITIATIVES

Directed

• The Ganga Action Plan (GAP) originated from the

personal intervention and interest of

our late Prime Minister Mrs Indira Gandhi

• Central Board for the Prevention

and Control of Water Pollution[Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)]

a comprehensive survey of the

situation in 1979.

To give

report

CPCB published two comprehensive

reports which formed the base for

GAP in

Oct 1984

was not

presented to the nation formally due to

assassination of

Smt. Indira Gandhi.

• In Feb 1985, the Central Ganga Authority (CGA)

with the PM as Chairman was formed

• with an initial budget of Rs 350 crore to administer the

cleaning of the Ganga and to restore it to pristine condition

by our late PM Sh. Rajiv

Gandhi.• In June 1985, the Ganga Project Directorate

(GPD) was established as a wing of the

Department of Environment.

• GAP was launched on June 14, 1986 by

Rajiv Gandhi at

Varanasi

Rajiv Gandhi in his inaugural speech said:

“We shall see that the waters of the Ganga

become clean once again…..In the years to

come, not only the Ganga, but all our rivers will be

clean and pure as they werethousands of years

ago”.

Bathing standards

BOD 3 mg/l max.

DO 5 mg/l min.

Total Coliform MPN 10,000/100 ml

Faecal Coliform MPN 2,500/100 ml

According to the designated best use classification of the CPCB, the river has

been classified as under:

1. From origin to Hardwar Class A

2. From Hardwar to confluence with river Roopnarayan in Bengal delta Class

B

3. From Roopnarayan confluence to the Haldi confluence Class

D

4. From Haldi confluence to Bay of Bengal Saline

stretch

• According to official standards, water safe for bathing should not contain more than

500 faecal coliforms per 100ml, yet upstream of Varanasi's ghats the river water

already contains 120 times as much, 60,000 faecal coliform bacteria per 100 ml.

SO THE PROBLEM CAN BE SUMMARISED AS

AS RIVER MOVES FURTHER IT GETS MORE AND MORE

POLLUTED AND

THEREFORE

INDUSTRAL , MEDICAL AND SEWAGE WASTE

SHOULD BE TREATED IN THE BEST POSSBLE WAY

MORE FOCUS ON R&D WORK IN WASTE MANAGEMENT TO

FIND BETTER SOLUTION TO SUCH PROBLEMS

The GAP-I envisaged to intercept, divert and treat 882 mld

(Million litres per day) out of 1340 mld of wastewater, generated in

25 class-I towns in 3 States of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West

Bengal. The NRCD had scheduled the GAP-I for completion by

March 1990, but extended it progressively up to March 2000.

While the GAP-I was still in progress, the CGA decided in

February 1991 to take up the GAP-II, covering the following

pollution abatement works:

(a) On the tributaries of river Ganga, viz. Yamuna, Damodar and

Gomati.

(b) In 25 class-I towns left out in Phase-I.

(c) In the other polluting towns along the river.

• The Ganga Action Plan Phase I has failed on key

counts both quantitatively and qualitatively.

• Quantitative failure : the failure to tap significantly

the discharge of raw domestic sewage and raw

tannery effluents from entering the river waters.

• Qualitative failure : failure of the treatment plants to

treat the tannery effluent and sewage to the desired

and safe levels

FAILURE OF GAP PHASE I

• The GAP I was extended as GAP II from 1993

onwards covering 4 major tributaries of Ganga,

namely, Yamuna, Gomti, Damodar and Mahananda.

• The program was further broad-based in 1995 with

the inclusion of other rivers and renamed as National

River Conservation Plan (NRCP).

• Ganga could not be cleaned but 34 other rivers have

been

taken up for cleaning with the same failed model of

“GAP”.

Failures of GAP II

GAP aimed to tackle 2794 mld of sewage; 882 mld under

the GAP-I and 1912 mld under the GAP-II. The NRCD

records put the estimates of total sewage generation in

towns along river Ganga and its tributaries as 5044 mld.

Delhi alone accounts for 2270 mld. The GAP-II was to tackle

only 20 mld in Delhi, and Delhi Government was to handle

the balance 2250 mld separately from augmentation of its

own available installed capacity.

• Main failure point of was that it was dealing with only a small quantity of waste effluent

• Other reason was that it did nothing for non point sources of pollution

CAUSAS OF POLLUTION

(A) AREAS INFESTED WITH OPEN DEFECATION,

(B) DISPOSAL OF HALF BURNT OR UNBURNT DEAD BODIES AND

(C) RUN-OFF FROM SOLID WASTE AND GARBAGE DUMPS WERE ALSO

TAKEN UP UNDER THE PROGRAMME.

MEASURES DONE

i. Activities for construction and improvement of bathing ghats to provide a clean

and hygienic access to the river were also part of the Action Plan.

ii. Pollution of the river from grossly polluting industries has been monitored and

controlled under the existing Environmental Laws without any public investment

except for a common effluent treatment plant (CETP) at Kanpur.

Effects of pollution in Ganga

Chromium based industrial waste causes

• Threat to biodiversity

• Skin infection caused by polluted water

Why this photo?

because

GAP is not merely based on river GANGA

It also depends on its TRIBUTARIES

• In June 2011, Swami Nigamanand died after

a 73 day fast initiated to raise awareness of

the illegal mining being done in Haridwar and

polluting the river.

• Now swami Dayanand has started anshaan

against the mining practices being done near

Ganga in Haridwar

RECENT WORKS

WHAT CAN BE DONE • Public investment (giving tax benefits)should be promoted.

• People should be given employment in NREGA or there

should be a parallel scheme to clean ganga and generate

employment

• Social activists like Baba Ramdev, Shri Shri Ravishankar are

trying to

aware people and also providing funds to clean GANGA

• Whenever there comes talk about ganga only HINDU

PARTICIPATION is thought and MUSLIMS are not taken into

consideration ,so their participation should be promoted.

QUALITY OF WATERAlthough the river water quality along Kanpur and Varanasi has improved significantly, it

still does not meet the prescribed standard of BOD of 3 mg/l. This is mainly because:

• Only 160 out of 425 mld at Kanpur and about 100 out of 160 mld of sewage at

Varanasi has been taken up for interception and diversion under GAP I.

• The river stretch from Farrukhabad to Varanasi in general and Kanpur in

particular is critical in terms of the availability of the desired minimum flow for

dilution purpose.

The quality of river water quality monitoring leavesThe quality of river water quality

monitoring leaves much to be desired.

• There is lack of transparency and professionalism in this effort.

Impact on health

• According to official standards, water safe for bathing should not contain more than

500 faecal coliforms per 100ml, yet upstream of Varanasi's ghats the river water

already contains 120 times as much, 60,000 faecal coliform bacteria per 100 ml.

We can summarize that at last waste (effluent)

ultimately has to go to the water bodies so we

must try for better technology so that quality of

river water and sea water should not be affected.