PCJ river basins

Interbasin Water Transfers and Possible Conflicts: PCJ River Basins Case Study

Photo: Folha de Campinas

Source: Guia turístico Piracicaba

Bruna JulianiMd Moudud Hasan

Contents • Piracicaba, Capivari and Jundiaí (PCJ)

River Basins• The Cantareira water supply system

• Conflicts between Cantareira system and

PCJ river basin

• Negotiations between them

• Impact of the Cantareira system on PCJ

basins

• Recommendation

INTERUNIVERSITY PROGRAMME IN WATER RESOURCE ENGINEERING

BackgroundAlthough Brazil is one of the world’s most-endowed countries in terms of waterresources, the distribution does not always follow the population concentration

13% freshwater world’s

5% Brazilian population’s

19% other river basins

81% Amazon River Basin

95% Brazilian population’s


Brazil's Water Management SystemImportant Water policy

➢ Water is a public goods

➢ Water is a finite

resource and has an

economic value

➢ When scarce, drinking

water supply is the

uppermost priority


Study Area

PCJ River Basins

Metropolitan region of São

Paulo

5,985 km²

20 million inhabitants

19% GDP

15,400 km²

5 million inhabitants

7% GDP


The history behind the diversion...

The metropolitan region of São Paulo (MRSP) is the largesturban concentration and industrial complex in Latin America

In the 1950s

MRSP started growing up disorderly

Cantareira system supply was initiated

1966

Transferring waters from 4 dammed tributaries of PCJ RB to Alto Tietê RBThe main use water Alto Tietê is Urban supply


Characteristics of Cantareira system

33 m3/s Cantareira

System

5.0 m3/s D/S to PCJ

45 m3/sDiversion

point

• provides 50% of the water

supply• approximately 9 million

people in MRSP

SABESP: Responsible for the dams, reservoirs and channels of Cantareira system

ANA and DAEE: National and state levels, responsible for operational standards


Major challenges

No compensatory measures were established for riparian users

Later established numerous environmental laws and regulations made this projects much

more complex

Heavy industrial and residential development in PCJ basin during the 1980s generated fierce

debate and major conflicts regarding water use


PCJ River Basins Committee established In 1993

➢ Allocate water

➢ Implement new development projects

➢ Arbitrate conflicts among stakeholders

➢ Impose pollution control restrictions

➢ Establishing the fee mechanisms

PCJ River Basin

Committee: 51

members

State Govern

ment: 17

Municipalities: 17

Civil society:

17


In 2004 : Negotiation supported and supervised by

Valid up-to 2014

Compensatory measures: 7.50 USD/1,000 m3 transferred to another basin

Cantareira system grant 31m³/sec

The diversion to Alto Tiete RB affects the availability of water in PCJ RB.



Socio-economic impacts

• Lack of water that has hampered the functioning of schools, hospitals and businesses• Agriculture has suffered• Economic growth affected

Source:Drought in Brazil. Creative Commons: 2009 The Jacarei river dam is part of São Paulo’s Cantareira system of dams.Photograph: Nelson Almeida/AFP/Getty Images


Source: Agência PCJ

Amount of money collected by water users

● Decreased in collection due to no payment by water user

Participation of users in the collection (%)


Environmental Impacts

➢Environmental problems such as the lack, and low quality of the

water

➢Degradation of the aquatic resources.

➢Increase in the amount of pollution by organic material from

domestic and industrial sewage


Extreme climate events

2014…long period of drought in the southeast Brazil’s summer

Piracicaba River, October 2014

➢ Lower flow rate Piracicaba river

➢ Death fishes

Photos: Molin


Extreme climate events

2014…long period of drought in the southeast Brazil’s summer

After - October 2014

➢ Decreased Cantareira system water delivery capacity

➢ High scarcity risk for MRSP

➢ Part-time water rationing, in many cities

Cantareira system - Before droughtSource: Molin


Institutional Problems

➢ Debates and discussions about the Cantareira System’s grant renewal

➢ Political interests involving water governance


Conclusions and recommendations

➢It would be very difficult to expand the water supply system in the

MRSP because further water transfers from neighboring basins

would impose large political and social costs.

➢Interbasins coordination is necessary to minimize the problem

➢Creation of new financial mechanisms to encourage proper use

➢Brazil needs to reduce the water demand by minimizing water

losses

Backup